Author Topic: The $25,000 JFK Challenge  (Read 90018 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Barry Krusch

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 760
Re: The $25,000 JFK Challenge (Acceptances To Date: 0)
« Reply #84 on: May 07, 2012, 07:24:58 PM »
Below please find a draft of the mini-challenge rules. Comments welcome.

JFK Mini-Challenge Rules
(Draft only, subject to future revision)

1.   DRAFT STATUS: This is a draft version of the rules. The final rules will be determined by the parties, to be incorporated in a contract to be respectively signed by the parties.
2.   NAME DESIGNATION: The party initiating the action shall be known as the “Challenger,” the party to respond to the action shall be known as the “Defender.”
3.   SUBJECT MATTER OF THE ARBITRATION: Impossible: The Case Against Lee Harvey Oswald, Volume One, Proposition One, Element One, Reason 1 (converted to a sub-element).
4.   NUMBER OF ACTIONS: The Defender will only respond to one action at a time.
5.   ARBITRATOR: Arbitration will be handled by the American Arbitration Association (AAA) [www.adr.org].
6.   ARBITRATION TYPE: Documents-only.
7.   NUMBER OF ARBITRATORS: One.
8.   ARBITRATION SELECTION PROCESS: Arbitrator to be assigned at random by the AAA.
9.   QUALIFICATION: To accept the Mini-Challenge, you have to have provided proof that you have downloaded Volume One, and certify that you have read Chapter 9 of that Volume.
10.   AWARD AMOUNT: $500, to be awarded to the prevailing party.
11.   FILING FEES: Filing fees and all arbitration costs to be initially split by the parties, subject to ultimate reimbursement.
12.   FILING FEE PROCEDURE: Challenger will pay the entire filing fee upfront.
13.   ARBITRATION COST REIMBURSEMENT: The prevailing party will be reimbursed for all costs by the other party.
14.   ESCROW ACCOUNT: All amounts to be awarded, including the award amount and arbitration costs, will be placed into escrow account by the parties prior to submitting materials to the Arbitrator.
15.   NOTIFICATION: A party will begin the Mini-challenge process by initially notifying Defender through e-mail, later certified mail. Challenger to respond in kind.
16.   DOCUMENT SET: The Arbitrator will be provided with the following document set: 1) a print out of Chapter 9, and 2) any rebuttals and counter-rebuttals prepared by the parties. No other materials are to be provided to the Arbitrator.
17.   DOCUMENT PROTOCOL: The content of rebuttals and counter-rebuttals must have probative value related to the subject matter. All evidence must be footnoted, with a screen capture provided for each documented fact, in the same style found in Volumes One through Three. Parties to agree on length of rebuttals and counter-rebuttals.
18.   ARBITRATOR THRESHOLD: The arbitrator will assign a numerical confidence level from 0% to 100% to the sub-element, based exclusively on the document set. The Arbitrator is not to be provided the Reasonable Doubt threshold by either party.
19.   CONFIDENCE LEVEL THRESHOLD: The confidence level threshold is 95%. For the Challenger to prevail, the Arbitrator must assign a confidence level of 95% or greater to the sub-element.
20.   COPYRIGHT AND PUBLICATION: Both parties agree to make all rebuttals and counter-rebuttals available for public view.
21.   ENFORCEMENT: All clauses required to make the action enforceable will be included by the parties’ attorneys.

Offline Barry Krusch

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 760
Re: The $25,000 JFK Challenge (Acceptances To Date: 0)
« Reply #85 on: May 08, 2012, 12:28:41 PM »
I wake up to . . . no acceptances! What gives!!

Offline Andrew Mason

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2118
Re: The $25,000 JFK Challenge (Acceptances To Date: 0)
« Reply #86 on: May 08, 2012, 08:57:32 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I am still working on the base rules to be included in Volume Three, but as of this writing, here is the essential concept:

1) The Case Against Lee Harvey Oswald is divided up into propositions and elements.
2) For the case to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, which is the standard in the United States, each element has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt (with nuances described in Volume Two).
3) Thus, to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt, each arbitrator of twelve total arbitrators (making a virtual jury) must assign a confidence level to each element that is greater than the reasonable doubt standard.
4) The challenge is this: if I give a copy of the book is an arbitrator, with worksheets to be filled out related to the confidence level for the elements, it is my claim that a jury of twelve arbitrators would never find Oswald guilty, based on the evidence I have provided, and based on any possible counter-rebuttals (with my counter-replies) provided by those who accept the challenge.
Barry, this is not the way a case against anyone is made. You don't artificially break a case down into arbitrary facts each of which has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The only thing that a jury would have to be convinced of at the end of the trial beyond a reasonable doubt is that Oswald committed an unlawful act with the intention of killing JFK. They don't have to be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that there were three shots, or that the three shells in the TSBD were from Oswald's gun, that he pulled the trigger, that he was seen in the SN by Howard Brennan, etc.

The jury could convict Oswald on the simple facts that he was there, that his gun was there, that his gun was used to fire the shots, and that he left the building within minutes of the assassination and that he killed Tippit and pulled his gun and said "Well, its over now" and tried to shoot his arresting officers in the Texas Theater.  That is all you need. And the jury does not have to be convinced on each of those facts beyond a reasonable doubt individually. A jury can have doubt on each fact individually. It is only on the ultimate conclusion - by fitting all the individual pieces together - that they need have no reasonable doubt.

Offline Barry Krusch

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 760
Re: The $25,000 JFK Challenge (Acceptances To Date: 0)
« Reply #87 on: May 08, 2012, 09:42:08 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Barry, this is not the way a case against anyone is made. You don't artificially break a case down into arbitrary facts each of which has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The only thing that a jury would have to be convinced of at the end of the trial beyond a reasonable doubt is that Oswald committed an unlawful act with the intention of killing JFK. They don't have to be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that there were three shots, or that the three shells in the TSBD were from Oswald's gun, that he pulled the trigger, that he was seen in the SN by Howard Brennan, etc.

The jury could convict Oswald on the simple facts that he was there, that his gun was there, that his gun was used to fire the shots, and that he left the building within minutes of the assassination and that he killed Tippit and pulled his gun and said "Well, its over now" and tried to shoot his arresting officers in the Texas Theater.  That is all you need. And the jury does not have to be convinced on each of those facts beyond a reasonable doubt individually. A jury can have doubt on each fact individually. It is only on the ultimate conclusion - by fitting all the individual pieces together - that they need have no reasonable doubt.

You told me you were nearly 100% convinced of this element, and that I deficiently reported the evidence. I challenge you to prove it before an arbitrator.

Offline Andrew Mason

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2118
Re: The $25,000 JFK Challenge (Acceptances To Date: 0)
« Reply #88 on: May 09, 2012, 12:57:31 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You told me you were nearly 100% convinced of this element, and that I deficiently reported the evidence. I challenge you to prove it before an arbitrator.
But you do not prove this element by itself. You lead evidence and the jury puts it together to determine whether they are satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt about the ultimate question.  I am not interested in proving this is an arbitrator. No one is.

The title of your book is not: "Impossible: the case that three shells were found in the Sniper's Nest". I don't really care whether 3 shells were or were not found in the SN. There is abundant evidence that three shells were found, but that is not why I am satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that Oswald is guilty. I am satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt because of the existence of many, many independent pieces of evidence that simply do not fit together or make any sense at all if Oswald was not involved in the assassination.

Offline Lee Johnson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 423
Re: The $25,000 JFK Challenge (Acceptances To Date: 0)
« Reply #89 on: May 09, 2012, 02:20:53 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
But you do not prove this element by itself. You lead evidence and the jury puts it together to determine whether they are satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt about the ultimate question.  I am not interested in proving this is an arbitrator. No one is.

The title of your book is not: "Impossible: the case that three shells were found in the Sniper's Nest". I don't really care whether 3 shells were or were not found in the SN. There is abundant evidence that three shells were found, but that is not why I am satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that Oswald is guilty. I am satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt because of the existence of many, many independent pieces of evidence that simply do not fit together or make any sense at all if Oswald was not involved in the assassination.

 :thumbsup2:

Roger Collins

  • Guest
Re: The $25,000 JFK Challenge (Acceptances To Date: 0)
« Reply #90 on: May 09, 2012, 02:51:17 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
But you do not prove this element by itself. You lead evidence and the jury puts it together to determine whether they are satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt about the ultimate question.  I am not interested in proving this is an arbitrator. No one is.

The title of your book is not: "Impossible: the case that three shells were found in the Sniper's Nest". I don't really care whether 3 shells were or were not found in the SN. There is abundant evidence that three shells were found, but that is not why I am satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that Oswald is guilty. I am satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt because of the existence of many, many independent pieces of evidence that simply do not fit together or make any sense at all if Oswald was not involved in the assassination.


Too bad the pieces of evidence don't add up......