Here we go again. Yet another example of how you misrepresent the evidence.
Oswald ordered the rifle.
Unscientific and biased handwriting "analysis" of two block letters on a photocopy of a microfilm copy of a two-inch order coupon from microfilm that is "missing". And even that doesn't tell you which specific rifle that coupon was for.
Oswald was photographed with the rifle.
Still never proven.
Oswald's prints were on the rifle.
No, there were some trigger guard prints that were useless for identification purposes and one partial palmprint that showed up a week later on an index card.
Oswald's rifle was found at his work.
That's not evidence of ownership at all. It was found at a place where lots of people worked.
Btw we know that you will do a point by point try refutation but this time stick to your guns and don't allude to any body else's involvement.
Yes, because you continually misrepresent or lie about the evidence. And I
haven't "alluded" to anything. That's
your fantasy. You can't prove your case, so you try to turn it around and shift the burden to something you just made up.
