Let's try one last time. Do you accept that Oswald had the same two types of ammo when he was arrested that were used to kill Tippit or not? These are mutually exclusive options. You can't argue that you do not accept this as a fact but that you are not suggesting that the evidence was manipulated. The DPD indicates that they recovered a pistol and ammo from Oswald after his arrest. You cannot suggest that a different pistol or ammo was entered into evidence and deny that you are suggesting the evidence was manipulated. Both cannot be true.
And imagine the narrative behind this fantasy where the DPD switch the pistol and plant the ammo. The DPD decide, for some unspecified reason, to frame Oswald for the Tippit murder right from the beginning. Why they do this is left completely unaddressed. They not only frame Oswald for the crime, but they must decide to let the guilty person go free. They must know who this guilty person is since they somehow acquire his pistol and switch it for the one that Oswald (bad luck again) has decided to carry to the movie. Again, why the DPD decide to frame Oswald and allow the known guilty party to walk away is left unaddressed in this fantasy. It is just so because there was a brief delay in logging the evidence. But Martin/Roger denies he is a CTer. He is just suggesting the evidence has been planted of manipulated for some inexplicable reason never is addressed because it is "possible."
Do you accept that Oswald had the same two types of ammo when he was arrested that were used to kill Tippit or not?Did he? I know they claimed he had bullets on him, but they only "found" them after searching him several times, which seems a bit odd to me.
These are mutually exclusive options. You can't argue that you do not accept this as a fact but that you are not suggesting that the evidence was manipulated. I have not argued either. I don't know.
The DPD indicates that they recovered a pistol and ammo from Oswald after his arrest. Yes, they also indicated that Oswald had not passed the paraffin test and that they had found a credit card and a driver's license in Oswald's wallet, so what's your point.
You cannot suggest that a different pistol or ammo was entered into evidence and deny that you are suggesting the evidence was manipulated. Both cannot be true. Oh there is no doubt in my mind at all that (some) evidence was manipulated. It is actually a documented fact that it happened. I just can not say for sure which evidence was manipulated and which isn't. Hill having some officers in the DPD lunchroom initial the revolver, he said belonged to Oswald, when they were not even present at the arrest, doesn't inspire a great deal of confidence. The FBI showing a BY photo to Michael Paine on Friday evening when they were not officially found until the second search (with warrent this time) of Saturday afternoon. And what of the fact that Fritz picked up the shells in the snipers nest before they were photographed in situ and then threw them back and then there was the moving boxes fiasco and let's not forget Lt Day who allegedly found a palmprint of Oswald on the MC rifle and somehow "forgot" to tell anybody about it for a week!
And imagine the narrative behind this fantasy where the DPD switch the pistol and plant the ammo. The DPD decide, for some unspecified reason, to frame Oswald for the Tippit murder right from the beginning. Why they do this is left completely unaddressed. Ever heard of a drop gun? Please don't tell me these things don't happen in law enforcement, because that would only show how far removed you are from reaility. And you can't figure out why they would do it (if they did it)? Really? Just use your imagination (you're normally pretty good at that) and I am sure you'll think of something. And btw who said that the entire DPD would decide to frame Oswald? You don't think a few well placed individuals could do it?
Like Westbrook, a personnel officer for crying out loud, who shows up at the, for him, strangest places and does the strangest things. For instance, at the Tippit crime scene where he is seen on video handling a wallet and where he asks FBI Barrett if he knows either Oswald or Hidell. And then he shows up at the parking lot where an undentified officer shows him a jacket, which he claims he gave to another unidentified officer, only to end up having a gray jacket a couple of hours later, which has initials marked on it from men who never were in the chain of custody. I don't know what is going on with this guy, but it has nothing to do with normal police procedure or routine.
They not only frame Oswald for the crime, but they must decide to let the guilty person go free. Isn't that exactly what Hoover did, when he declared Oswald the only guilty person and focussed only on "proving" that?
They must know who this guilty person is since they somehow acquire his pistol and switch it for the one that Oswald (bad luck again) has decided to carry to the movie. Again, why the DPD decide to frame Oswald and allow the known guilty party to walk away is left unaddressed in this fantasy. I have no I idea if they did it, who inside the DPD did it and why they did and I guess I will never know. All anyone can do is scrutinize the actions of all the law enforcement officers.
It is just so because there was a brief delay in logging the evidence.This stupidity has already been debunked. I'm not going to explain it to you again.
He is just suggesting the evidence has been planted of manipulated for some inexplicable reason never is addressed because it is "possible." Finally you've got something right. Well nearly... because I am not suggesting evidence was in fact planted or manipulated, I am merely saying it is possible. That you don't understand this, because you for some idiotic reason seem to think it's impossible, is your problem. There is no doubt in my mind that you are desperate to get something from me that you can attack, but I am not going to do you that favor. You stick by making up strawman arguments. You're good at that!