Yes Iacoletti, that's all evidence that Bugliosi would present in court, you know the guy who was a famous and very successful lawyer, who are you again? LOL!
Sorry, your hero worship isn't evidence either.
BTW you keep picking the easy low lying fruit and continuously repeat the above but you still have 45 powerful pieces of evidence that you neglect to address, why???
"Powerful pieces of evidence". LOL. Those are just the most ridiculous. But perhaps you'd like to point out what specific things you think are powerful. Here's my take.
The only items in the whole list of 53 that have any evidentiary value whatsoever in the murder of JFK are:
11. Howard Brennan's eventual identification after his "change of heart".
33. Handwriting on Klein's order coupon and PO box form and partial palm print that showed up at the FBI a week later on a card.
34. Limousine bullet fragments matched to rifle
35. Expended cartridge shells matched to rifle
36. Large brown paper bag with Oswald's prints
37. Palm print and fingerprint in sniper's nest
34, 35 implicate a weapon, not a person. It cannot be proven that the large paper bag was the one Frazier saw or that Oswald carried it into the building or that it was in the sniper's nest when it was first discovered or that it ever contained a rifle. And 37 is not remarkable because he worked there and would be expected to handle boxes.
So we're left with an inconsistent identification from a witness who was influenced by television and newspaper reports, a questionable reappearing partial print, and unscientific and biased analysis of two block letters on a photo of a microfilm copy of a two-inch order coupon.
Is this what you're calling "powerful"?
