CE 143

[Charles Collins]

Name them. And how would they know what he was “attempting” if he didn’t actually do it?

The problem is trying to pass this off as evidence that he murdered somebody. It’s not.

Which strangely only McDonald heard.

Under normal circumstances, honest cops don’t search, assault, or arrest people for murder without probable cause.

And how would they know what he was “attempting” if he didn’t actually do it?


Once LHO reached down and grabbed the handle of the revolver he was by definition in the process of drawing it. McDonald even stated that he could feel LHO’s hand on the trigger. It is very obvious from these actions what he was attempting to do. You trying to pretend otherwise is just plain nonsense.



Under normal circumstances, honest cops don’t search, assault, or arrest people for murder without probable cause.


These were not normal circumstances. And they had probable cause.

[John Iacoletti]

Yes it does matter!  What possible other intent could make any sense whatsoever. And you excluding or ignoring McDonald’s sworn testimony that confirms LHO was indeed drawing or pulling the revolver is not how to determine whether or not I lied. Get a grip on reality clown!

Your perception of "intent" (or McDonald's) doesn't matter to the claim that Oswald "pulled out a gun".  He either pulled one out or he didn't.

[John Iacoletti]

These were not normal circumstances. And they had probable cause.

Bull.  Looking "funny" to a shoe salesman who saw no crime does not constitute probable cause for anything.

[Charles Collins]

Your perception of "intent" (or McDonald's) doesn't matter to the claim that Oswald "pulled out a gun".  He either pulled one out or he didn't.

He pulled it out and McDonald says that he had his hands on it and was trying to pull it away from him at the same time.

If you want to claim that he didn’t pull it out and call everyone who says otherwise a liar. Then you need to conclusively show that LHO didn’t intend to pull it out. Have at it…

[John Iacoletti]

He pulled it out and McDonald says that he had his hands on it and was trying to pull it away from him at the same time.

That's not what McDonald said at all.

     "I was reaching for his waist and he struck me on the nose with his left hand. With his right hand, he reached to his waist and both
     of our hands were on a pistol that was stuck in his belt under his shirt. We both fell into the seats struggling for the pistol. At this
     time I yelled, "I've got him." Three uniformed officers came to my aid immediately. One on the suspect's left, one to the rear in the
     row behind and one to the front, in the row directly in front of the suspect and I. I managed to get my right hand on the pistol over
     the suspect's hand. I could feel his hand on the trigger. I then got a secure grip on the butt of the pistol. I jerked the pistol and as it
     was clearing the suspect's clothing and grip I heard the snap of the hammer and the pistol crossed over my left check, causing a four
     inch scratch."



The "pistol" didn't "clear the suspect's clothing" until McDonald jerked it out.

If you want to claim that he didn’t pull it out and call everyone who says otherwise a liar. Then you need to conclusively show that LHO didn’t intend to pull it out. Have at it…

No, because intending to do something (even if you could determine "intent") is not the same thing as actually doing it.

[Charles Collins]

That's not what McDonald said at all.

     "I was reaching for his waist and he struck me on the nose with his left hand. With his right hand, he reached to his waist and both
     of our hands were on a pistol that was stuck in his belt under his shirt. We both fell into the seats struggling for the pistol. At this
     time I yelled, "I've got him." Three uniformed officers came to my aid immediately. One on the suspect's left, one to the rear in the
     row behind and one to the front, in the row directly in front of the suspect and I. I managed to get my right hand on the pistol over
     the suspect's hand. I could feel his hand on the trigger. I then got a secure grip on the butt of the pistol. I jerked the pistol and as it
     was clearing the suspect's clothing and grip I heard the snap of the hammer and the pistol crossed over my left check, causing a four
     inch scratch."



The "pistol" didn't "clear the suspect's clothing" until McDonald jerked it out.

No, because intending to do something (even if you could determine "intent") is not the same thing as actually doing it.

The "pistol" didn't "clear the suspect's clothing" until McDonald jerked it out.


So what, do you think LHO was trying to keep the revolver in his belt?



No, because intending to do something (even if you could determine "intent") is not the same thing as actually doing it.


LHO was in the act. That’s not just intent.

[Martin Weidmann]

He pulled it out and McDonald says that he had his hands on it and was trying to pull it away from him at the same time.

If you want to claim that he didn’t pull it out and call everyone who says otherwise a liar. Then you need to conclusively show that LHO didn’t intend to pull it out. Have at it…

The "pistol" didn't "clear the suspect's clothing" until McDonald jerked it out.


So what, do you think LHO was trying to keep the revolver in his belt?

In one post from: "He pulled it out" to "do you think LHO was trying to keep the revolver in his belt?".... Wow

And then he gets upset because I don't respect LNs who will say anything to defend their precious official narrative.

No, because intending to do something (even if you could determine "intent") is not the same thing as actually doing it.

LHO was in the act. That’s not just intent.

Intending to do something requires a decision prior to the act. Being "in the act" makes intention impossible.

[John Iacoletti]

So what, do you think LHO was trying to keep the revolver in his belt?

This is not complicated. If he didn’t pull out a gun, then don’t claim he pulled out a gun.