Famed prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi who successfully prosecuted 105 out of 106 felony jury trials, which included 21 murder convictions, spent two decades researching and writing Reclaiming History.
Now personally I(JohnM) would have left out a few pieces of Vincent's evidence and after watching this video again I see that a couple of overlayed annotations that corrected and clarified my original summations are now missing? but as anyone with a half a brain can see, the evidence is truly overwhelming.
Btw some CT's will bring up the "wedding ring in a teacup" "LOL", in their opinion is not evidence but consider that this significant piece of evidence is only one half of one of Vincent's original 53 which amounts to less than 1% of his total evidence!
JohnM
The evidence is overwhelming?
The evidence for what?
Do you mean the evidence is overwhelming that Oswald was somehow involved in the assassination or that the evidence is overwhelming that Oswald was the actual assassin?
The overwhelming evidence you present equally supports the Patsy model of the assassination as it does the Oswald-Did-It model.
Almost every single piece of evidence regarding who was on the 6th floor before, during and after the assassination points away from Oswald - why have you left this evidence out?
The evidence you have decided to focus on paints one picture, the evidence you decide to leave out paints another.
It is a tactic used by the most ardent Tinfoil-hat-wearing CTer's and it leads to the same result - a skewed and highly biased outlook on the assassination