Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Non problematic evidence?  (Read 31229 times)

Offline Tim Nickerson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1824
Re: Non problematic evidence?
« Reply #40 on: May 06, 2018, 04:28:34 AM »
Advertisement
Well, there we have it!

Not one LN can name a single piece of physical evidence against Oswald that isn't problematic. What better way to demonstrate that the case against Oswald is based on mere assumptions rather than actual evidence?

Sheesh Martin, you can't even remember your own OP.

https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,638.0.html

Quote
Can anybody name one piece of physical evidence conclusively tied to Oswald which is of such significance that it beyond reasonable doubt clearly points to his guilt?


JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Non problematic evidence?
« Reply #40 on: May 06, 2018, 04:28:34 AM »



Offline Tim Nickerson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1824
Re: Non problematic evidence?
« Reply #42 on: May 06, 2018, 04:45:32 AM »
Oswald's Carcano rifle found on the sixth floor of the TSBD is evidence against Oswald that isn't problematic. However, would it be enough on it's own to convince a jury of Oswald's guilt? Probably, but there is the slight chance that it would not.  Now, include the shell casings found in the Sniper's nest and the evidence against Oswald becomes conclusive.  Replace the shell casings with the fragments found in the limo or  CE-399 and the case against Oswald is similarly conclusive.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Non problematic evidence?
« Reply #42 on: May 06, 2018, 04:45:32 AM »


Offline Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7444
Re: Non problematic evidence?
« Reply #43 on: May 06, 2018, 04:19:01 PM »
Sheesh Martin, you can't even remember your own OP.

https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,638.0.html

Sheesh Tim, did you miss the header of the OP?

Offline Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7444
Re: Non problematic evidence?
« Reply #44 on: May 06, 2018, 04:25:24 PM »
Oswald's Carcano rifle found on the sixth floor of the TSBD is evidence against Oswald that isn't problematic. However, would it be enough on it's own to convince a jury of Oswald's guilt? Probably, but there is the slight chance that it would not.  Now, include the shell casings found in the Sniper's nest and the evidence against Oswald becomes conclusive.  Replace the shell casings with the fragments found in the limo or  CE-399 and the case against Oswald is similarly conclusive.

Oswald's Carcano rifle found on the sixth floor of the TSBD is evidence against Oswald that isn't problematic.

Oswald's Carcano?..... Really?

Now, include the shell casings found in the Sniper's nest and the evidence against Oswald becomes conclusive.

Nope.. not even by a long shot

Replace the shell casings with the fragments found in the limo or  CE-399 and the case against Oswald is similarly conclusive.

Now I know you are not serious. When you claim that the fragments "found in the limo" and CE-399 are not problematic, you truly have gone off the deep end


« Last Edit: May 06, 2018, 04:29:05 PM by Martin Weidmann »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Non problematic evidence?
« Reply #44 on: May 06, 2018, 04:25:24 PM »


Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10815
Re: Non problematic evidence?
« Reply #45 on: May 10, 2018, 09:47:02 PM »
The shell casings and fragments (if genuine) might implicate a particular rifle, but not a shooter.

Offline Jerry Freeman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3724
Re: Non problematic evidence?
« Reply #46 on: March 21, 2019, 04:51:14 AM »
As your link above mentions, Darrell Tomlinson was the hospital worker who said he found it.

Questions about planting a bullet:

How did the "planters" know to plant a bullet that was only "slightly" damaged if it was to have gone through at least one person the President? And no one else?

How did the "planters" know they could plant that bullet before they knew how many other bullets would be recovered? How could they have known that CE 399 would not be the "extra bullet" that would blow the whole plot? That it wouldn't reveal another shooter?

How did the "planters" know what general size, shape and condition the bullet could be - had to be - before the actual bullets would be found? Before Connally was operated on?  What if a large part of the bullet that hit JFK was found in JFK's neck or upper back, a piece or fragment that was too big to have come from CE 399? What if a large piece was lodged in Connally? What if it had gone through JFK and hit the interior of the car? Or another passenger?

How did the "planters" know before the assassination they could do all of this, i.e, plant that specific bullet with its unique qualities, afterwards? That their actions wouldn't reveal the plot?

And, if CE 399 isn't the bullet that went through JFK, then where IS that bullet? Did it disappear?
Quote
How did the "planters" know to plant a bullet that was only "slightly" damaged if it was to have gone through at least one person the President? And no one else?
Whoever planted that bullet was not concerned with what it was supposed to have inflicted. A bullet that could be definitely linked to the suspected rifle was what was desired.
Quote
How did the "planters" know they could plant that bullet before they knew how many other bullets would be recovered? How could they have known that CE 399 would not be the "extra bullet" that would blow the whole plot? That it wouldn't reveal another shooter?
Same as above. Only that bullet would be found. The fix was in. This is why the body of the president was Shanghai-ed back to DC ASAP.
Quote
How did the "planters" know what general size, shape and condition the bullet could be - had to be - before the actual bullets would be found? Before Connally was operated on?  What if a large part of the bullet that hit JFK was found in JFK's neck or upper back, a piece or fragment that was too big to have come from CE 399? What if a large piece was lodged in Connally? What if it had gone through JFK and hit the interior of the car? Or another passenger?
Asking the same basic question redundantly. The president's dead body received more 'protection' than when he was alive!
Quote
How did the "planters" know before the assassination they could do all of this, i.e, plant that specific bullet with its unique qualities, afterwards? That their actions wouldn't reveal the plot?
The fix was in! Good Grief Charlie Brown!
Quote
And, if CE 399 isn't the bullet that went through JFK, then where IS that bullet? Did it disappear?
No. For all we know there are still bullets in the president's body. They put him in the ground ASAP by orders of LBJ.

Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Re: Non problematic evidence?
« Reply #47 on: March 22, 2019, 03:51:34 PM »
Whoever planted that bullet was not concerned with what it was supposed to have inflicted. A bullet that could be definitely linked to the suspected rifle was what was desired.Same as above. Only that bullet would be found. The fix was in. This is why the body of the president was Shanghai-ed back to DC ASAP. Asking the same basic question redundantly. The president's dead body received more 'protection' than when he was alive!  The fix was in! Good Grief Charlie Brown! No. For all we know there are still bullets in the president's body. They put him in the ground ASAP by orders of LBJ.

Whoever planted that bullet was not concerned with what it was supposed to have inflicted. A bullet that could be definitely linked to the suspected rifle was what was desired.

Jerry, I was unaware until about a week ago the Jessy Curry bought a carcano and then had (Larry Howard) fire it into a bullet trap to duplicate CE 399 ( The magic bullet)    In my mind this is solid proof that Curry KNEW that CE 399 had been created by firing it into a bullet trap....   

Curry  wanted a replica of CE 399 and he knew how to create that replica....   Why didn't Curry have Mr Howard fire into something that simulated the bodies of JFK and JBC??

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Non problematic evidence?
« Reply #47 on: March 22, 2019, 03:51:34 PM »