Oswald's Fingerprint Evidence

[Jack Trojan]

According to anyone who's honest with themselves.

So now the truth finally comes out! You didn't really care about what the experts would say, only if someone else would quote them for you. At best, that's lazy. More likely, you don't actually care about anything the experts would say; you just want to declare yourself the  winner of your own internet p1$51n6 match, all the while remaining blissfully ignorant of the subject at hand. To bend Dean Wormer around a bit, blind, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life.

"But when push comes to shove, you LNers are all about discrediting and obfuscation, cuz that's all you got."

....so says guy who's loudly trying to discredit the fingerprint evidence. You don't even understand that you are doing exactly what you hate to see others do, and doing it simultaneously as you excoriate others for it. I wouldn't have imagined that you could behave so stupidly, but there it is in black and white. Take a bow, kid, that was quite an achievement!

In the end, it's up to you to show that the fingerprint results are truly anomalous. If you can't, then that's your problem and not ours. More importantly, it's your burden. Don't be a Caprio and demand that others disprove the random assertions that you spew.

Firstly, you need to relax cuz you are taking this way too personally. But thanks for the psychotherapy anyways. So why do you LNers always go there? Because you got nothing.

I'm not trying to win anything here. I am only pointing out anomalies as I see them. Are you so jaded that you accept on faith that it is no big deal that Oswald disassembled the rifle, placed it into the bag, smuggled it into the TSBD, removed it from the bag, reassembled it, fired it at least 3 times, then ditched it without leaving a single print on the rifle? He made it to the 2nd floor in 90 seconds so he didn't have time to wipe off his prints or ditch the gloves.  Do I really need to find some expert to tell me that's par for the course when handling a firearm?

Instead you give me free psychoanalysis re my motives for even starting this thread. Like I continue to say...is that all you LNers got? Sad.

[Jack Trojan]

Show us where I said Oswald was anything more than the prime suspect.

And point out someone, other than the shooter, who knew there was some heavy xxxx about to go down in Dealey Plaza that day. Without that, you have NO conspiracy.


Again, again, and yet again... did you figure out why the investigators ran the paraffin tests on Oswald, even knowing them inadmissible as evidence?

Would you buy ANY name that someone threw out there? Otherwise, what's your xxxx point?

The paraffin tests showed that Oswald had no residue on his face after shooting the mannlicher carcano at least 3 times. How was that possible?

[Bill Chapman]

Would you buy ANY name that someone threw out there? Otherwise, what's your xxxx point?

All you lot have is rumours and speculation. That's the reason none of you will commit to naming anyone.

You lot claim anyone but Oswald so why don't you provide names and at least circumstantial evidence that would supplant --- or at least reasonably challenge --- Oswald's status as prime suspect. 

[Bill Chapman]

Reasonable people everywhere think conspiracy-mongers silly and worthy only of mockery

I don't believe this for a second. You're going to have to provide some proof for this, if you don't want this statement to be considered to be highly unreasonable.

And thanks for confirming my suggestion that you treat this forum as a courtroom rather than as a discussion forum

Where did I confirm that? I can't help it what your "court-of-law feel" is....

You are mocked but won't accept it as mockery. And you definitely treat this forum as a courtroom.

If you ask me.

[Martin Weidmann]

You are mocked but won't accept it as mockery. And you definitely treat this forum as a courtroom.

If you ask me.

You are mocked but won't accept it as mockery.

So, you can not back up your claim.... got it! So much for "reasonable people"

Btw when you restort to mockery, instead of providing evidence and answers, all you are doing is exposing the weakness of your case.

And you definitely treat this forum as a courtroom.

If you ask me.


Nobody asked you.

[Walt Cakebread]

You are mocked but won't accept it as mockery. And you definitely treat this forum as a courtroom.

If you ask me.

you definitely treat this forum as a courtroom.

And what's wrong with that, Chappie? 

As Joe Friday used to say...  Yes Ma'am,... Just the FACTS Ma'am, We're just looking for the FACTS  Ma'am.

 

[Mitch Todd]

Firstly, you need to relax cuz you are taking this way too personally. But thanks for the psychotherapy anyways. So why do you LNers always go there? Because you got nothing.

I'm not the guy taking it personally.

I'm not trying to win anything here.

I didn't say you were. I said you wanted to declare yourself the winner a priori. That's not the same thing as winning. In fact, it's almost always a loss once you look at it honestly.

I am only pointing out anomalies as I see them.

Fundamentally, that's just a variation of the the tired, old "just askin' questions, man" defense. Except you're not really asking questions. You've already already preempted that by broadcasting your conclusion at the beginning of your first post: "The fingerprint evidence against Oswald is a joke. But it is more than that, it is evidence of conspiracy." 

More specifically, you haven't shown that there really are any "anomolies." Nor have you given us any indication that you know enough about the subject so that "as I see them" holds any weight.

Are you so jaded that you accept on faith that it is no big deal that Oswald disassembled the rifle, placed it into the bag, smuggled it into the TSBD, removed it from the bag, reassembled it, fired it at least 3 times, then ditched it without leaving a single print on the rifle? He made it to the 2nd floor in 90 seconds so he didn't have time to wipe off his prints or ditch the gloves.  Do I really need to find some expert to tell me that's par for the course when handling a firearm?

I'm definitely jaded. I've spent decades watching any number of third rate dilettante sleuths confidently jabber well above their pay grade, only to be exposed as duckspeakers, fools, charlatans, and bullspombleprofglidnoctobuns artists the as soon as the real experts show up. Again, Robert Groden is a poster boy here. Sometimes, even people widely considered to be real experts get exposed, too (hello, Michael West!). If you want everyone else to believe that the number of prints are anomalous, then you need to show what would actually be expected based on (say) a survey of other similar cases. Just declaring "it's an anomaly as I see it" isn't going to make any headway outside of your circle of True Believers.

Instead you give me free psychoanalysis re my motives for even starting this thread. Like I continue to say...is that all you LNers got? Sad.

It doesn't take Sigmund Freud's mad skillz to notice the your internal contradictions. When you do things like complain that "...LNers are all about discrediting and obfuscation" at the same time you're trying --kinda lamely-- to discredit the fingerprint evidence, everyone will notice the cognative dissonance rattling around inside your head.

[Jack Trojan]

I'm not the guy taking it personally.

I didn't say you were. I said you wanted to declare yourself the winner a priori. That's not the same thing as winning. In fact, it's almost always a loss once you look at it honestly.

Fundamentally, that's just a variation of the the tired, old "just askin' questions, man" defense. Except you're not really asking questions. You've already already preempted that by broadcasting your conclusion at the beginning of your first post: "The fingerprint evidence against Oswald is a joke. But it is more than that, it is evidence of conspiracy." 

More specifically, you haven't shown that there really are any "anomolies." Nor have you given us any indication that you know enough about the subject so that "as I see them" holds any weight.

I'm definitely jaded. I've spent decades watching any number of third rate dilettante sleuths confidently jabber well above their pay grade, only to be exposed as duckspeakers, fools, charlatans, and bullspombleprofglidnoctobuns artists the as soon as the real experts show up. Again, Robert Groden is a poster boy here. Sometimes, even people widely considered to be real experts get exposed, too (hello, Michael West!). If you want everyone else to believe that the number of prints are anomalous, then you need to show what would actually be expected based on (say) a survey of other similar cases. Just declaring "it's an anomaly as I see it" isn't going to make any headway outside of your circle of True Believers.

It doesn't take Sigmund Freud's mad skillz to notice the your internal contradictions. When you do things like complain that "...LNers are all about discrediting and obfuscation" at the same time you're trying --kinda lamely-- to discredit the fingerprint evidence, everyone will notice the cognative dissonance rattling around inside your head.

Still got nothing, I see. Are you so lacking in common sense that you think that disassembling a rifle, placing it into a paper bag, removing it from the bag, reassembling its parts and firing it at least 3 times and not leaving a single print on the stock, barrel, scope, bolt, trigger, strap, clip and ammo does not constitute an anomaly? Do you really need an expert to confirm that? I'd say you've got a bad case of LNeritis, and you've had it for decades, apparently. But I'm no expert, so what do I know?