This has all been asked before. Everything has.
"I saw him do it'' witnesses were rounded up were they not? [even if they didn't see anything]..but phony ones were not required or even desirable.
Were they there to watch the parade or gaze at the windows? There was already enough 'evidence'.
"Paine saw the rifle"? She didn't because there was no rifle in her garage. If she said there was anyway..it would have raised too many more questions.
Marina had already told the cops that Oswald bore no animosity toward JFK...so she couldn't very well tell the Commission any differently.
Sorry, you believe Paine and Marina et cetera, et cetera lied and were part of the conspiracy, correct? And they lied to frame Oswald, correct? And you believe the witnesses in the Tippit shooting all lied, correct?
But you don't believe they would lie about the rifle because there was no rifle? And "phony witnesses" were not required to identify Oswald in the sniper's nest?
Really? One of the biggest claims made by the "Oswald didn't do it" crowd is that nobody can place him in the window at the time of shooting. Planting phony witnesses in Dealey Plaza solves that.
Question: When did Marina tell the cops that Oswald bore no animosity towards JFK? I am not aware of that. And why didn't Ruth and Michael said he did? And you believe the DPD were part of the framing. So why didn't they just lie about what she said?
You folks believe all sorts of lies and falsehoods were done; evidence planted, witnesses coerced or planted. And yet these basic failures by the conspirators - to plant witnesses who said they saw Oswald shoot JFK or to coerce Jarman or Norman to say they saw him carry a large package - make no logical sense at all.
It only makes sense if there wasn't a conspiracy to frame Oswald.