Another long winded post by MTG in which he tries to make up with quantity what his posts lack in quality. I have things to do today and I have no intention of spending an hour or more going over the same well trodden ground again. I'll suffice with just a few comments.
I don't claim to be and never have been unbiased regarding the question of whether Oswald acted alone. For most of the past 62+ years I have believed that Oswald acted alone. There were a few years in the 1980s in which my bias had shifted to the conspiracy side, but even during that period, I never doubted that Oswald had fired the kill shot from the TSBD sniper's nest. I soon came to the realization that the evidence for conspiracy was mostly bogus and uncompelling and have firmly believed since the late 1980s that Oswald had indeed acted alone. While I still allow for a sliver of theoretical possibility that Oswald could have had one or a few co-conspirators for which there is no compelling evidence. If he had even a single accomplice, that would constitute a conspiracy. If that con-conspirator had escaped justice, the body of evidence would look pretty much the same as if Oswald had acted alone. I don't believe for a minute that is the case, but logically I cannot rule it out.
There is one exception to my position that there is no evidence of a conspiracy and that is the acoustic findings of BBN. While that evidence is controversial and disputed, it would probably be admissible had the case gone to trial and it had been discovered much earlier than it had been. It wouldn't have helped Oswald's cause much because whether he acted alone or as part of a conspiracy, in the eyes of the law, he would still be guilty of murder one and likely sentenced to death. I doubt very much if that sentence would have been carried out before SCOTUS invalidated all death penalty statutes in the early 1970s and commuted the sentences of all death row inmates to life in prison. Oswald might still be living out his final years in the Texas penitentiary as his 87th birthday approached.
As far as the acoustic evidence goes, there are arguments both for an against its credibility. It comes down to which set of scientists one chooses to believe. I look at that evidence the way a juror would at trial when presented with conflicting expert testimony. A juror does not have to be knowledgeable in highly technical areas to make a judgement about which side has presented the more compelling arguments. Having served on four juries, I know that judges instruct jurors to make up their minds as to which witnesses are more credible. In making such judgements, one of the ways jurors can determine which side has made the more compelling case is to look at the body of evidence as a whole to determine which side's arguments best fits the body of evidence as a whole. In the case of the acoustic evidence, that's an easy call. There simply is no corroborating evidence to support the conclusion that a shot was fired from the GK. No eyewitnesses. No recovered bullets or shells other than those fired by Oswald's rifle. No wounds suffered by either victim which could have been caused by a shot from the front right of them. There are good arguments that the recording is not even from Dealey Plaza during the shooting. There is crosstalk from the other channel which suggests the recording was made about a minute after the shooting. Dale Myers has put together photographic evidence that shows the motorcycle believed to have had the stuck open microphone could not have been where BBN determined it was during the shooting which BBN's own analysis said it needed to be for their findings to be valid. In short, the preponderance of evidence clearly indicates to me the Dictabelt recording does not indicate gunshots fired in Dealey Plaza at the time JFK was assassinated.
