CT's, in court how would you defend Oswald?

[Peter Kleinschmidt]

No one saw anyone bring a rifle into the TSBD.  Yet it was there.  So we know that someone did.  Oswald was in the process of committing a crime.  He took measures to avoid being seen carrying a rifle into the building.  Like wrapping it up in a paper bag and then hiding it.  You appear to be suggesting that unless a witness had x-ray vision then it can't be proven that Oswald carried the rifle.  Absurd. How do we know it was him?  He carried a long package into work that morning then lied about it.  A long bag was found next to the SN with his prints. The rifle found in the building had the same serial number as the one ordered under an alias that Oswald used.  It was sent to his PO Box.  His prints were on that rifle.  It can't be linked to any other person.  He is pictured holding it.  His wife confirms he owned a rifle and that it was stored in the Paine's garage.  There is no accounting for that rifle except as the one found in the TSBD.  It is a slam dunk.  Difficult to understand how there could possibly be anymore evidence than exists to link Oswald to the rifle.

Difficult to understand how there could possibly be anymore evidence than exists to link Oswald to the rifle

If you did not have everything backward you wouldn't confuse yourself.  Don't bring up things you can't prove and then whine about people not having x-ray vision.

Because he didn't do it, it is hard for any reasonable person to understand what it is you are looking at that makes you think he did do it.

[John Iacoletti]

Not only Fritz, Holmes corroborates Fritz's testimony.

That’s not a corroboration. Fritz and Holmes had two different accounts.

[John Iacoletti]

No worries on the 22nd, Frazier's affidavit said Oswald still had the package under his arm as he entered the back door at the Loading dock.

And since he later said that he couldn’t actually see it, then he just assumed it was there.

Btw the scenario that after they arrived at the TSBD, Oswald took the package and hid it as soon as he could,

That’s a nice scenario. Too bad there’s no evidence for it.

which ironically is exactly what he did at Frazier's house, indicates that Oswald had something to hide therefore this new narrative just makes your client look even more guilty! Congrats!

He hid a package at Frazier’s house? News to me!

Admit it, as far as you’re concerned, anything Oswald did would indicate guilt in your eyes.

[John Iacoletti]

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/frazierb4.htm
 A 24 inch bag that contained a 40 inch rifle. That is 10 pounds of stuff in a 5 pound bag and Oswald must have hid it in a 2 pound cubbyhole. Speculate away there----

Whatever it takes...

[John Iacoletti]

“Mytton” logic:

Frazier didn’t pay much attention, therefore a rifle was in the bag.

[Bill Chapman]

Whatever it takes...

...to defend Oswald

[Peter Kleinschmidt]

Please don't breed

At all? Or like rabbits?

It doesn't matter, I shoot blanks

[John Iacoletti]

...to defend Oswald

All that takes is you being unable to prove your case.