Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: In 54 years has it ever been proven that CE399 is the bullet found at Parkland?  (Read 32803 times)

Offline John Mytton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4277
Advertisement
While your side relies on some mysterious unknown boogeyman,

Which side would "your side" be? Am I member of some sort of club without knowing it, or are you just simply paranoid?

And what "mysterious unknown boogeyman" do you mean and how can one rely on somebody who is unknown?


we rely on logic and science.

That's only true if you mean by "logic" pure speculation, self serving assumptions, unwarrented leaps of faith and nitpicking evidence.

As for the science.... you don't rely on it. You misrepresent it in every way possible.


1. Who could possibly know how many bullets and fragments would be recovered at the crime scene or in the Limo?
2. Before Connally's surgery was finished and before Kennedy's autopsy, who could possibly know how many bullets were in the two men?
3. Before the two men's injuries were analysed who could possibly know that a whole bullet would fit their injuries?
4. Who could possibly know that their planted bullet needed to be missing a tiny amount of lead?


Silly questions that are completely irrelevant for what's being discussed here, because if the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was never in Parkland Hospital (and it's evidentiary life did indeed begin in the FBI lab in Washington) all four questions asked could be easily answered after the fact.

Although there was talk early on about a bullet having been found on a stretcher at Parkland Hospital, just how long did it take after that before the narrative about CE399 (and the limo fragments) became known in the public domain?

Quote
Which side would "your side" be?

The side that implies that CE399 wasn't at Parkland.

Quote
...all four questions asked could be easily answered after the fact.

Unless your name is Nostradamus the chances of planting at such an early stage only one whole bullet that coincidentally satisfies the above 4 part criteria is pretty slim but somehow according to you "could be easily answered after the fact" which logically can only lead to one question... Without knowing the facts why bother risking planting anything in the first place?

Btw I would love to know the narrative where someone who apparently doesn't even care if a bullet was fired from Oswald's rifle just decides to plant a whole bullet on a random stretcher in some room on another floor at Parkland?, is that logical? or perhaps you have a better alternative?

JohnM

JFK Assassination Forum


Offline Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7444
The side that implies that CE399 wasn't at Parkland.

Unless your name is Nostradamus the chances of planting at such an early stage only one whole bullet that coincidentally satisfies the above 4 part criteria is pretty slim but somehow according to you "could be easily answered after the fact" which logically can only lead to one question... Without knowing the facts why bother risking planting anything in the first place?

Btw I would love to know the narrative where someone who apparently doesn't even care if a bullet was fired from Oswald's rifle just decides to plant a whole bullet on a random stretcher in some room on another floor at Parkland?, is that logical? or perhaps you have a better alternative?

JohnM

The side that implies that CE399 wasn't at Parkland.

Who implies that CE399 wasn't at Parkland?

All that I've done is ask for the evidence that shows the bullet now in evidence as CE399 ever was at Parkland. I can't help it that you can't provide such evidence and wish to rely upon pure assumption!

Unless your name is Nostradamus the chances of planting at such an early stage only one whole bullet that coincidentally satisfies the above 4 part criteria is pretty slim but somehow according to you "could be easily answered after the fact" which logically can only lead to one question... Without knowing the facts why bother risking planting anything in the first place? 

You keep on going on about planting evidence, but nobody else is. 

Btw I would love to know the narrative where someone who apparently doesn't even care if a bullet was fired from Oswald's rifle just decides to plant a whole bullet on a random stretcher in some room on another floor at Parkland?, is that logical? or perhaps you have a better alternative?

Boy. here you go again. You must be really obsessed with this "planting" crap. Why do you keep assuming that a bullet must have been planted?

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10815
Boy. here you go again. You must be really obsessed with this "planting" crap. Why do you keep assuming that a bullet must have been planted?

It's the usual ploy of setting up a false dichotomy and then trying to shift the burden onto you to prove the other side of the false dichotomy or his side just wins by default.

It's the most popular fallacy in the LN arsenal.

The answer is that he cannot show that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was ever at Parkland Hospital.  He's just assuming that it was.

JFK Assassination Forum


Offline Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7444
Let's give this one another try?.  ;)

Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1810
Most evidence, if the only issue with it is a questionable chain of custody, is indeed admissible.  It is then left up to the jury to decide how much weight to give a certain piece of evidence with a questionable chain of custody.

A questionable chain of custody of CE-399 may affect how much weight the jury gives the bullet but a questionable chain, on its own, does not affect it's admissibility.

The single bullet that passed through both Kennedy and Connally and ended up in Connally's thigh must, at some point, be found somewhere.  Even if this bullet was NOT CE-399, it is a must that this bullet would be found by someone somewhere.  No other bullet has ever been found (in Connally's thigh or elsewhere).  Even if you do not believe in the single bullet theory, the fact remains that a bullet lodged itself in Connally's left thigh.

To any conspiracy advocate, especially the original poster of this thread, have you ever seen any evidence put forth which suggests that a bullet, other than CE-399, was found inside Connally's thigh or anywhere else related to the known movements of the bodies of both Kennedy and Connally?

On the night of the assassination and overnight into Saturday morning, the limousine was searched by the FBI.  They were looking for evidence.  Smaller fragments were found but no intact bullet, like 399, was found.  No other bullet has ever been turned in and placed into the record and this circumstantial evidence alone gets 399 admitted into evidence.

It's up to the jury to decide, based on a questionable chain of custody, how much weight to give CE-399 as the bullet found at Parkland.

Also, it is up to the defense, since CE-399 was linked to Oswald's rifle to the exclusion of all other weapons in the world, to convince the jury that CE-399 was NOT the bullet found at the hospital.  Has anyone in this forum (or anywhere else) done so?

JFK Assassination Forum


Offline Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7444
I wonder when this trial is going to be and if jury selection has already begun?..

Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1810
I wonder when this trial is going to be and if jury selection has already begun?..

And I'm wondering if you're ever going to be able to prove that CE-399 was NOT found on Connally's stretcher at Parkland.

It is one thing to question the authenticity of a piece of evidence; any wannabe defense attorney can do that.  It is another thing entirely to actually show that a particular piece of evidence is not authentic.

Keep questioning every piece of evidence, as if you're somehow getting somewhere in an attempt to show that Oswald was not responsible; it's all you do.

There is nothing wrong with questioning the evidence.  So question a piece of evidence, if you want.  I just wish you'd finally make a case for said piece of evidence not being what it is claimed to be.  So far, all I have seen is you doubting the evidence and explaining why you doubt it.  That's all you have; doubts?  Have any proof?
« Last Edit: November 19, 2018, 08:56:01 PM by Bill Brown »

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10815
That's a classic example of the shifting the burden of proof fallacy:

Oh yeah?  Prove that CE399 is not the bullet found at Parkland.

Otherwise, then I guess it just is by default.


JFK Assassination Forum