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

[Bill Chapman]

When someone makes an outstanding claim, the burden of proof is on them to produce that evidence. Seems like you're trying to mock the idea of holding people accountable for their claims, which is what people usually do when they have no evidence. So, it sounds like you're all for people spouting any sort of nonsense without having to answer for it. That's why we have all these conspiracy theories and frauds like Trump claiming anything they want.     

Seems to me your species are the ones claiming conspiracy and an AnyBodyButOswald shooter.

Well?

[Thomas Graves]

Seems to me your species are the ones claiming conspiracy and an AnyBodyButOswald shooter.

Bill,

Correctomundo.

Ironically, Oswald and a Ruskie (or a Cuban) accomplice, although a Conspiracy, would make them especially unhappy.

Me?  I'd settle for a Marxist-Leninist former Marine radar operator and marksman.

-- MWT 

[John Iacoletti]

Your attempts to try each piece of evidence singly, in isolation from the whole of the evidence, is well-known. Lets see you get away with that in a court of law.

This is a common complaint from people who think that several things that don't prove Oswald killed JFK somehow combine to prove that Oswald killed JFK.

[John Iacoletti]

Seems to me your species are the ones claiming conspiracy and an AnyBodyButOswald shooter.

Well?

Actually, you're the one claiming OswaldProbablyDidIt, but are unable to articulate any reason for believing that.

[Richard Smith]

Obviously Oswald would hire Roger Collins and a contrarian to assist in his defense.  They would have snappy rebukes to the evidence like "strawman," "you made that up," and "Oswald's rifle? LOL."  Oswald would then fry faster than one of the Colonel's chickens.  His only hope would be a hung jury in which half the jurors wanted to execute him and the other half would want to execute his defense team.

[John Iacoletti]

Obviously Oswald would hire Roger Collins and a contrarian to assist in his defense.  They would have snappy rebukes to the evidence like "strawman," "you made that up," and "Oswald's rifle? LOL."  Oswald would then fry faster than one of the Colonel's chickens.  His only hope would be a hung jury in which half the jurors wanted to execute him and the other half would want to execute his defense team.

There's a compelling case.  Just make a bunch of false claims, insist you're right and claim victory.

In the "Richard Smith" lexicon, "contrarian" is defined as someone who points out that his false claims are false.

[Bill Chapman]

This is a common complaint from people who think that several things that don't prove Oswald killed JFK somehow combine to prove that Oswald killed JFK.

  Who thinks that? 

[John Iacoletti]

Who thinks that?

The guy who thinks it's a problem to analyze the veracity of each item of purported evidence.