Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: Lee Oswald The Cop Killer  (Read 101642 times)

Offline Howard Gee

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 343
Re: Lee Oswald The Cop Killer
« Reply #620 on: June 17, 2018, 02:43:21 PM »
Saint Oz and OJ have something in common.

They're both double murderers.

Online Mike Orr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 309
Re: Lee Oswald The Cop Killer
« Reply #621 on: June 17, 2018, 02:52:52 PM »
The Paraffin test on Oswald showed his hands tested positive and his right cheek tested negative which was proof he had not fired a rifle that day, and his hands would have tested positive because he dealt with moving boxes of books . The bottom line is that Oswald would have made a hell of a shot from the break room . Case Closed

Offline Howard Gee

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 343
Re: Lee Oswald The Cop Killer
« Reply #622 on: June 17, 2018, 03:28:47 PM »
The Paraffin test on Oswald showed his hands tested positive and his right cheek tested negative which was proof he had not fired a rifle that day, and his hands would have tested positive because he dealt with moving boxes of books . The bottom line is that Oswald would have made a hell of a shot from the break room . Case Closed

Paraffin tests aren't known for their reliability and Saint Oz could have washed his smirking face before he murdered JDT. So there goes your claim that the paraffin test is proof of innocence.

On the other hand, Saint Oz's prints were found on the rifle used to murder JFK.

The droolers either have to claim that someone else used C2766 in the assassination or that the print and ballistic evidence was faked.

It would have been a helluva shot from the break room. Not so much from the 6th floor sniper's nest though.

OSWALD: PRESIDENTIAL ASSASSIN AND COP KILLER

Online Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4008
Re: Lee Oswald The Cop Killer
« Reply #623 on: June 17, 2018, 04:09:24 PM »
Paraffin tests aren't known for their reliability and Saint Oz could have washed his smirking face before he murdered JDT. So there goes your claim that the paraffin test is proof of innocence.

On the other hand, Saint Oz's prints were found on the rifle used to murder JFK.

The droolers either have to claim that someone else used C2766 in the assassination or that the print and ballistic evidence was faked.

It would have been a helluva shot from the break room. Not so much from the 6th floor sniper's nest though.

OSWALD: PRESIDENTIAL ASSASSIN AND COP KILLER

The droolers either have to claim that someone else used C2766 in the assassination or that the print and ballistic evidence was faked.

There's not a shred of doubt that the evidence was faked..... The Carcano wasn't even fired that day.   There is ample photographic evidence that reveals the evidence photos are fake.....They are NOT genuine in situ photos of the alleged "crime scene".    Many of the DPD police officers testified that the did in fact "reconstruct " the scenes for the fake photo taking.....

Offline Mitch Todd

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 402
Re: Lee Oswald The Cop Killer
« Reply #624 on: June 17, 2018, 06:07:45 PM »
I'm not really trying trying pick a fight. All I did was ask you a question. You answered it, and gave away maybe more than you intended.


Only in your delusion mind

No delusions at all. You really did give up more than you maybe wanted to.


What it comes down to is, you don't really know what the "official" (for lack of a better term) standard would be for weighing chain of evidence issues. 

Stop acting stupid? there isn't a official standard. It doesn?t exist! The bar is beyond a reasonable doubt and that is different for each individual.

Oh, but I've been assured there is, and by someone who actually knows for sure. It's not a concisely-written thing like you'll find from ISO or ANSI or an IETF RFC, but made up of guidelines and appellate (and maybe even Supreme) court decisions. Oh, and it's tied into admissibility.


Just don't expect others to hop to beat of your own presumption.

There never was a presumption on my part, but I'll let you get on to hop to beat of Tim's beat.

You presumed that "there isn't a official standard. It doesn?t exist!" That is totally wrong. So much for "never."

Offline Mitch Todd

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 402
Re: Lee Oswald The Cop Killer
« Reply #625 on: June 17, 2018, 06:43:58 PM »
The OJ trial? Wow Martin. Your desperation slip is showing.

If anything is showing it is your inability to respond with anything of substance. There is nothing desperate about showing you an actual case which destroys your argument. The point I made was clear. In the OJ trial, the judge admitted the gloves and the jury concluded that they actually did not prove the prosecutors claim. One of the ways the evidence was discredited by the defense was by challenging the chain of custody! And that kinda destroys your argument, but I doubt you will ever see or admit that

The defense's convinced the jury with two arguments against the gloves: 1) the gloves --famously-- didn't fit OJ's hand, and 2) that OJ was supposed to have cut one of his fingers during the murder, but there were no holes, tears, cuts, or other openings in the gloves that would correspond to the injury. That is, they were the wrong gloves. Neither of those issues have to do with chain of custody.

Offline Tim Nickerson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1653
Re: Lee Oswald The Cop Killer
« Reply #626 on: June 17, 2018, 06:50:39 PM »
Herbert used to have the actual original Police radio broadcast tape of the sequence.

I wouldn't 100% know if it was fully authentic and unaltered but he seemed to think it was
and at the time I found other instances of it all saying it was the unaltered one from day one 1963.

Herbert never ever had the actual original Police radio broadcast tape of the sequence.

Offline Tim Nickerson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1653
Re: Lee Oswald The Cop Killer
« Reply #627 on: June 17, 2018, 06:51:46 PM »
Unfortunately, none of the shells in question meet that requirement.

The Davis shells do. But even if they didn't it wouldn't matter since their having been made readily identifiable by Dhority and Doughty did away with the need for a chain of custody.

Offline Tim Nickerson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1653
Re: Lee Oswald The Cop Killer
« Reply #628 on: June 17, 2018, 06:56:16 PM »
You talk out of 2 sides of your mouth...LOL
you really should pay more attention to what you write...

Michael, you have difficulty grasping even simple concepts. You should try harder.

Quote
first you said...[/i]...will rarely, if ever? --- :D

What's so funny?

Quote
Now you say it MUST be authenticated...and there is more than one way to do that?

Go ahead demonstrate some examples of authenticating evidence without CoE
Real evidence must be relevant, material, and authentic before a judge will permit its use in a trial.

funny part is you left this out of your original quote...
The process whereby a lawyer establishes these basic prerequisites is called laying a foundation, accomplished by calling witnesses who establish the item's chain of custody.     https://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-procedure/real-and-demonstrative-evidence.html

"The easiest and usually the least troublesome way to authenticate real evidence is by the testimony of a witness who can identify a unique object in court. For example, the curator of a museum may be able to testify that he is familiar with, say, Picasso's "Dames de Avignon" and that what has been marked as exhibit so-and-so is in fact that unfortunate painting. It is important to remember, however, that many more mundane objects may be amenable to this kind of identification. A unique contract, or one that has been signed, may be authenticated by a person who is familiar with the document or its signatures. A ring may have an inscription by which it can be identified. Even a manufactured object, like a wallet, may be identifiable by its owner after years of use have given it a unique personality.

The second method--identification in court of an object that has been made unique, is extremely useful since it sometimes allows a lawyer or client to avoid the pitfalls of proving a chain of custody by exercising some forethought. If a witness who can establish an object's relevance to the case marks it with his signature, initials, or another mark that will allow him to testify that he can tell it from all other objects of its kind, that witness will be allowed to identify the object in court and thus to authenticate it. Often, if a member of the lawyer's staff or another person early in the chain of custody marks the evidence, big problems can be avoided if a later link in the chain turns out to be missing.

The third and least desirable way to authenticate real evidence is by establishing a chain of custody. Establishing a chain of custody requires that the whereabouts of the evidence at all times since the evidence was involved in the events at issue be established by competent testimony."


https://corporate.findlaw.com/litigation-disputes/summary-of-the-rules-of-evidence.html

Offline Tim Nickerson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1653
Re: Lee Oswald The Cop Killer
« Reply #629 on: June 17, 2018, 06:57:06 PM »
The marks on the shells were?

On the inside rims of the shells.

 

Mobile View