"We have developed no evidence"....

[Walt Cakebread]

That's the way the opening sentence of J.E.Hoover's letter to LBJ should read...Because on Sunday November 24, 1963 immediately after the murder of Lee Oswald NO solid evidence had been developed that linked Lee Oswald to the murder of JFK.

But that fact wasn't even considered by Hoover....when he wrote ..." The thing I am concerned about is having something issued so that we can convince the public that Oswald is the real assassin"

On Sunday November 24, 1963 no evidence had been developed in which Hoover could have concluded that Lee Oswald was the "real assassin".    No finger prints had been found on the alleged murder weapon,  the rifle had not been fired to create bullets for ballistic comparison ( It was thought to be unsafe because of the condition of the barrel)  So hoover couldn't have known if the carcano was in fact the murder weapon. 

However, The clairvoyant J.Edgar Hoover had concluded that Lee Oswald was guilty, and he wanted LBJ to issue something so that "we can convince the public that Oswald is the real assassin"[/i]

[Bill Chapman]

That's the way the opening sentence of J.E.Hoover's letter to LBJ should read...Because on Sunday November 24, 1963 immediately after the murder of Lee Oswald NO solid evidence had been developed that linked Lee Oswald to the murder of JFK.

But that fact wasn't even considered by Hoover....when he wrote ..." The thing I am concerned about is having something issued so that we can convince the public that Oswald is the real assassin"

On Sunday November 23, 1963 no evidence had been developed in which Hoover could have concluded that Lee Oswald was the "real assassin".    No finger prints had been found on the alleged murder weapon,  the rifle had not been fired to create bullets for ballistic comparison ( It was thought to be unsafe because of the condition of the barrel)  So hoover couldn't have known if the carcano was in fact the murder weapon. 

However, The clairvoyant J.Edgar Hoover had concluded that Lee Oswald was guilty, and he wanted LBJ to issue something so that "we can convince the public that Oswald is the real assassin"[/i]

One day after the assassination and they hadn't yet fired the rifle. BFD.
Frazier testified that the rifle was (later) fired 60 times by himself and FBI testers.

At that early stage, rumours were the order of the day and kept changing as new information, rumour or not, came in. For instance someone broadcasted that the shooter was on the loose and armed with a rifle LOL

Well, the shooter was on the loose all right, but armed only with his delusions of grandeur, I'm afraid.

You lot want the entire assassination to be decided based on first day information
Investigations to you brainiacs are just 'excuses'

You lot are as children.

[Richard Smith]

Silly.  What difference does the status of the investigation within two days of the assassination matter over fifty years later?  But even at that early point, they had found Oswald's rifle at the crime scene.  He had lied about and provided no explanation for it.  Oswald was a known political kook.  He carried a long package that morning, fled the TSBD within minutes, and was involved in the murder of a police officer less than an hour after the assassination.  His guilt was a slam dunk then.  And it is a slam dunk now.   

[Martin Weidmann]

One day after the assassination and they hadn't yet fired the rifle. BFD.
Frazier testified that the rifle was (later) fired 60 times by himself and FBI testers.

At that early stage, rumours were the order of the day and kept changing as new information, rumour or not, came in. For instance someone broadcasted that the shooter was on the loose and armed with a rifle LOL

Well, the shooter was on the loose all right, but armed only with his delusions of grandeur, I'm afraid.

You lot want the entire assassination to be decided based on first day information
Investigations to you brainiacs are just 'excuses'

You lot are as children.

You lot want the entire assassination to be decided based on first day information
Investigations to you brainiacs are just 'excuses'

You've got that backwards. It was Hoover who decided the assassination on day 1 when he concluded that LHO was the lone gunman.


You lot are as children.

I take that by making such a comment you feel you are acting as a grown up, right?

[Martin Weidmann]

Silly.  What difference does the status of the investigation within two days of the assassination matter over fifty years later?  But even at that early point, they had found Oswald's rifle at the crime scene.  He had lied about and provided no explanation for it.  Oswald was a known political kook.  He carried a long package that morning, fled the TSBD within minutes, and was involved in the murder of a police officer less than an hour after the assassination.  His guilt was a slam dunk then.  And it is a slam dunk now.

His guilt was a slam dunk then.  And it is a slam dunk now.

If you keep telling this to yourself often enough, I am sure the day will come when you actually believe it.

[Walt Cakebread]

Silly.  What difference does the status of the investigation within two days of the assassination matter over fifty years later?  But even at that early point, they had found Oswald's rifle at the crime scene.  He had lied about and provided no explanation for it.  Oswald was a known political kook.  He carried a long package that morning, fled the TSBD within minutes, and was involved in the murder of a police officer less than an hour after the assassination.  His guilt was a slam dunk then.  And it is a slam dunk now.

even at that early point, they had found Oswald's rifle at the crime scene.

Oh really, and HOW?? had they determined that the carcano was owned by Lee Oswald??  Lee said that he didn't own a rifle.  Just HOW?? had they determined that he owned the carcano that was found carefully hidden beneath pallets of boxes of books?

 He carried a long package that morning,

Perhaps he did carry a paper sack, but the witnesses who saw the sack swore under oath that it was too short to have contained the carcano even in the disassembled state.  And Frazier swore that the paper of the sack that Lee carried was LIGHT WEIGHT crinkly paper, and not at all like the heavy weight paper of the sack that the police said they found beneath the SE corner window.

[Bill Chapman]

Silly.  What difference does the status of the investigation within two days of the assassination matter over fifty years later?  But even at that early point, they had found Oswald's rifle at the crime scene.  He had lied about and provided no explanation for it.  Oswald was a known political kook.  He carried a long package that morning, fled the TSBD within minutes, and was involved in the murder of a police officer less than an hour after the assassination.  His guilt was a slam dunk then.  And it is a slam dunk now.

In addition, Dirty Harvey was observed as being rather 'Johnny-on-the-spot', if you will, at both murder scenes; the only person on earth that can lay claim to that somewhat dubious achievement.

Not that I'm going to want to assess him as guilty based solely on his rather fortuitous 'global positioning' that day, but that little gem would arguably serve the prosecution's opening statement rather well, I reckon.

[Rob Caprio]

Fifty-five years later there still is NO supporting evidence for the official theory.