Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Oswald's lies proves his guilt.  (Read 47805 times)

Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1744
Re: Oswald's lies proves his guilt.
« Reply #24 on: May 01, 2018, 09:17:50 PM »
Advertisement
First of all, LHO didn't have to say anything as that was his right. All these years later not one LNer has provided evidence showing that he waived his right.

Secondly, we can't take anything that the authorities CLAIMED LHO said at face value since there are NO recordings. The authorities could tell us he said anything since there is no way of knowing.

Finally, there is NO supporting evidence for any of the things that you claimed LHO lied about, thus, none of them are facts so the term  "lie" is not appropriate.


Quote
Secondly, we can't take anything that the authorities CLAIMED LHO said at face value since there are NO recordings. The authorities could tell us he said anything since there is no way of knowing.

If the authorities were lying about what Oswald said or did not say in an effort to make him appear guilty, then why not just come out and make the (false) claim that Oswald admitted that he owned the rifle?  Why stop short of that?


JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Oswald's lies proves his guilt.
« Reply #24 on: May 01, 2018, 09:17:50 PM »


Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1744
Re: Oswald's lies proves his guilt.
« Reply #25 on: May 01, 2018, 09:21:06 PM »
Yes I suppose those points are worthy for those not willing to consider a conspiracy I too would question such people on why they believe Oswald's fingerprints were lifted at the morgue onto the rifle

Please explain the process used to extract prints from a dead body at the morgue.

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: Oswald's lies proves his guilt.
« Reply #26 on: May 01, 2018, 09:23:12 PM »
The evidence that he did is that Marina said she saw it, George De Mohrenschildt said he saw it, Jeanne De Mohrenschildt said she saw it,

How does seeing an object tell you anything about who owns it?

Quote
the Waldman exhibits, the Klein's money order, the WC testimony of Klein's Vice President William Waldman,

These tell you nothing about Oswald.

Quote
and Oswald's palm print being on the rifle found on the sixth floor of the TSBD.

No.  A partial palm print identified as Oswald's turned up a week later on an index card.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Oswald's lies proves his guilt.
« Reply #26 on: May 01, 2018, 09:23:12 PM »


Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: Oswald's lies proves his guilt.
« Reply #27 on: May 01, 2018, 09:29:01 PM »
Oswald's lies proves his guilt.

Even if you could show that Oswald told a lie, the only thing that would be proof of is that he told a lie, not murder.

Offline Matt Grantham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 902
Re: Oswald's lies proves his guilt.
« Reply #28 on: May 01, 2018, 09:31:23 PM »
Please explain the process used to extract prints from a dead body at the morgue.

  Take fingertips press onto rifle

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Oswald's lies proves his guilt.
« Reply #28 on: May 01, 2018, 09:31:23 PM »


Offline Matt Grantham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 902
Re: Oswald's lies proves his guilt.
« Reply #29 on: May 01, 2018, 09:38:05 PM »
The evidence that he did is that Marina said she saw it, George De Mohrenschildt said he saw it, Jeanne De Mohrenschildt said she saw it, the backyard photos, the Waldman exhibits, the Klein's money order, the WC testimony of Klein's Vice President William Waldman, and Oswald's palm print being on the rifle found on the sixth floor of the TSBD.

 Is the following incorrect

On November 22nd Lt. Day of the Dallas Police examined the rifle and discovered little evidence of prints except on the metal housing near the trigger, where there were traces of two prints. Then, according to Day, the FBI ordered him not to make a comparison between these prints and Oswald's prints, so he discontinued his work, with no print evidence established.

On November 23rd the rifle was brought to an FBI Laboratory in Washington for inspection. Sebastian Latona examined the rifle that morning and concluded that the print marks on the rifle were insufficient for identification purposes. In fact he stated that it looked like the rifle hadn't even been processed for prints, suggesting that Lt. Day did not carry out any investigations for prints. This prompted FBI Director Hoover to sign a statement confirming that no latent prints of value were lifted from the rifle.

On November 24th Dallas Police Officers were reporting in public interviews that Oswald's prints were not found on the rifle.

Also on Nov 24th, just hours after Oswald was killed the rifle was brought back to Dallas by the FBI, and brought to the funeral home where Oswald's body lay. And according to the funeral home director and the statements from the FBI agents involved, they, the FBI, proceeded to place Oswald's palm print on the rifle (for comparison purposes according to the FBI).

On Nov 26th Lt. Day now claims he found Oswald's palm prints on the rifle on Nov 22nd. This part is the evidence that the WC used ignoring the other confusing and contradictory evidence.

Offline Tim Nickerson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1824
Re: Oswald's lies proves his guilt.
« Reply #30 on: May 01, 2018, 09:43:30 PM »
Is the following incorrect

On November 22nd Lt. Day of the Dallas Police examined the rifle and discovered little evidence of prints except on the metal housing near the trigger, where there were traces of two prints. Then, according to Day, the FBI ordered him not to make a comparison between these prints and Oswald's prints, so he discontinued his work, with no print evidence established.

On November 23rd the rifle was brought to an FBI Laboratory in Washington for inspection. Sebastian Latona examined the rifle that morning and concluded that the print marks on the rifle were insufficient for identification purposes. In fact he stated that it looked like the rifle hadn't even been processed for prints, suggesting that Lt. Day did not carry out any investigations for prints. This prompted FBI Director Hoover to sign a statement confirming that no latent prints of value were lifted from the rifle.

On November 24th Dallas Police Officers were reporting in public interviews that Oswald's prints were not found on the rifle.

Also on Nov 24th, just hours after Oswald was killed the rifle was brought back to Dallas by the FBI, and brought to the funeral home where Oswald's body lay. And according to the funeral home director and the statements from the FBI agents involved, they, the FBI, proceeded to place Oswald's palm print on the rifle (for comparison purposes according to the FBI).

On Nov 26th Lt. Day now claims he found Oswald's palm prints on the rifle on Nov 22nd. This part is the evidence that the WC used ignoring the other confusing and contradictory evidence.

Matt, since you lumped all of those together then the answer to your question is Yes. It is incorrect. I'll expand on it later.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Oswald's lies proves his guilt.
« Reply #30 on: May 01, 2018, 09:43:30 PM »


Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7394
Re: Oswald's lies proves his guilt.
« Reply #31 on: May 01, 2018, 10:35:37 PM »

What is your standard for what constitutes as proof? James Bookhout, Will Fritz, James Hosty, Thomas Kelley, and Harry Holmes all said that Oswald denied owning a rifle.


He probably did deny owning a rifle, but that can't be qualified as a lie if you can't prove conclusively he did own a rifle.

And so we are back to the problematic physical evidence that is so common in this case. You know, the physical evidence I asked about in another thread....