Oswald's lies proves his guilt.

[Walt Cakebread]

?

Define "absolute proof"?



JohnM

Show me something that PROVES that Lee OWNED ( legally owned ) the carcano that was found in the TSBD.    A photo that shows he possessed a carcano that was NOT identical to the TSBD carcano, won't cut it. ....  and when you provide that proof... Then we'll take the next step....

I'll grant you that Lee ordered A carcano from Kleins to use as a photo prop, and to be left behind in the hoax shooting at Walker's .....But was it his money that bought the MO to purchase the rifle??...  There is very good reason to doubt that he bought the money order ....and if it was not he, nor his money, that bought the money order then it was NOT his rifle....

[Walt Cakebread]

While in custody Oswald LIED whenever the rifle was discussed.

1. Oswald lied about owning the rifle.
2. Oswald lied that the backyard photos weren't authentic.
3. Oswald said he never saw the BY photos before but his handwriting was discovered on one.
3. Oswald lied about putting the long package on the back seat of Frazier's car.
4. Oswald told Frazier the long package contained curtain rods but told the Dallas Police that it contained his lunch.
5. Oswald lied about living at Neeley Street, (the location of the incriminating backyard photos)
6. Oswald told Fritz at the time of the assassination he had lunch with Jarman, another lie.
7. Oswald denied that he told Frazier that the reason for his unexpected visit was for curtain rods.





JohnM

Is lying an indication of guilt?    If it is...Then the authorities are guilty, because they piled lie upon lie in the framing of Lee Oswald.

One of the key lies  was presented by Dallas DA Henry Wade..... On SaPersonay 11 /23/63 neither the DPD nor he FBI had found any print on the rifle that had been identified as the print of Lee Oswald   ( that's still true today) But Henry Wade told reporters ( as if it was an after thought)  " Oh, and did I mention that they have found his prints on the gun?"     This was a barefaced lie....   At the time that Wade sucked those reporters in with that lie, nobody had found an identifiable print on the rifle.   

[Walt Cakebread]

Forget about that seven-point list, go with the wedding ring in tea cup and the tilt!

No,  let's NOT forget....  Because Mr Mytton is flat WRONG.....

 Oswald lied that the backyard photos weren't authentic.

Lee couldn't possibly have lied about the back yard PHOTOS ( Plural).....Because at the time Lee was shown A (singular )photo they had not been officially discovered.

Captain Fritz displayed "A" ( singular ) photo to Lee, and lee immediately pronounced it to be fake.  Since CE 133A and CE 133B were officially found in the Paine's garage about an hour AFTER Fritz displayed the photo to Lee we can surmise that the photo that Lee pronounced to be a fake was 133c.     

So Lee DID NOT lie about the PHOTOS being authentic...He said the photo that he was shown was a fake. 

[John Iacoletti]

At the time that Wade sucked those reporters in with that lie, nobody had found an identifiable print on the rifle.   

Or indeed at any time.

[Walt Cakebread]

Hope you have your research down on this one, Walt.

Just an hour off and you could be in trouble. Mr. Iacoletti, you know!

You worked out the time line?

Check it out for yourself.....Read Captain Fritz Report on page 607 of the WR.....

 

[John Mytton]

Forget about that seven-point list, go with the wedding ring in tea cup and the tilt!

Why forget any evidence, you don't solve any murder by ignoring the facts.

And as for the tilt, too bad that's already been scientifically dealt with.



JohnM

[John Mytton]

Sure, is that why you're stuck on #1?

Good for you but it doesn't look like a 36 inch rifle to me....

Sure, is that why you're stuck on #1?

No, but beware of being stuck in number 2!

Good for you but it doesn't look like a 36 inch rifle to me....

Otto, it's a good idea to focus your questions instead of spinning around in riddles so let me guess, since you didn't post or refer to any any photogrammetry evidence which would be beyond your grasp anyway, you must be questioning the Kleins rifle order but when one takes a closer examination of the facts and subsequent timeline we find all is hunky dory A-OK. 

First of all, Oswald placed his order in mid March for a rifle advertised in a February issue and since there was no ad in the March issue the next relevant month must be April.



The April Kleins advertisement shows the same catalogue number as the February issue(C20-T750) so Oswald's coupon which was for C20-T750 was sent according to the stock shown in the April issue.



And the same rifle that Kleins sent to Oswald's PO Box and which Oswald was photographed with ended up on the 6th floor of Oswald's workplace and to top it off, the rifle had Oswald's prints and fibers which matched the arrest shirt. That's some powerful evidence that still after 55 years hasn't been refuted.



JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

“Mytton” still hasn’t learned the difference between evidence and claims/supposition.

“Oswald placed his order”

“Oswald's coupon”

“which was for C20-T750 was sent”

“according to the stock shown in the April issue”

“And the same rifle that Kleins sent to Oswald's PO Box”

“and which Oswald was photographed with”

“the rifle had Oswald's prints”

“and fibers which matched the arrest shirt”

LOL