Conspiracy of the Three Stooges

[John Mytton]

I don't think we're in court.  Your contrived list isn't evidence that Oswald owned that rifle in or out of court.

I don't think we're in court.

Then why are you so focused on only overturning the mountain of evidence against Oswald?

Your contrived list isn't evidence that Oswald owned that rifle in or out of court.

Let me correct that for you

"Your irrefutable list isn't evidence to me that Oswald owned that rifle in or out of court."

JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

It's a more than just 2 block letters, a lot more.

I see some arrows and testimony that mentions (for the order blank itself) only a letter A, a letter D (which by the way is different on the envelope), and a letter x.  So, my bad -- unscientific and biased handwriting "analysis" of three block letters on a photocopy of a microfilm copy of a two-inch order coupon.  From microfilm that is conveniently "missing".

Edit: actually if you read it again, it's ambiguous but it looks like he's only referring to the envelope when he talks about the "A", "D", and "x".

[John Iacoletti]

Then why are you so focused on only overturning the mountain of evidence against Oswald?

False claims and rhetoric that isn't actually evidence don't need to be "overturned".  They need to be discarded.

[John Mytton]

Sorry, that doesn't show that Oswald ordered the rifle.

Sorry, that doesn't show that Oswald possessed the rifle.

Sorry, that doesn't show that Oswald's prints were on the rifle.

Will "Mytton" ever tell the truth about the evidence?

Again with the worthless personal opinion, either you can refute my powerful evidence or you can't and so far it's clear to all that your presentation of refutation is severely lacking.

JohnM

[John Mytton]

I see some arrows and testimony that mentions (for the order blank itself) only a letter A, a letter D (which by the way is different on the envelope), and a letter x.  So, my bad -- unscientific and biased handwriting "analysis" of three block letters on a photocopy of a microfilm copy of a two-inch order coupon.  From microfilm that is conveniently "missing".

So, my bad

You've been corrected on this on numerous occasions yet you still persist with the 2 letter nonsense, but that defines what you are Iacoletti, Dishonest.

JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

Again with the worthless personal opinion, either you can refute my powerful evidence or you can't and so far it's clear to all that your presentation of refutation is severely lacking.

I hate to break the news to you, but adding pictures that don't actually demonstrate what you are claiming is not "powerful evidence" of anything.  It's dishonesty.

 

[John Iacoletti]

You've been corrected on this on numerous occasions yet you still persist with the 2 letter nonsense, but that defines what you are Iacoletti, Dishonest.

See my edit.  He's conflating the order coupon and the envelope.

[John Mytton]

I hate to break the news to you, but adding pictures that don't actually demonstrate what you are claiming is not "powerful evidence" of anything.  It's dishonesty.

 

You've truly lost it John, how is presenting a long list of corroborated evidence being dishonest?

If you want you can present the same evidence to an acknowledged expert and we can see where that takes us but you must learn that your personal opinion means nothing.

JohnM