That's the Earl Warren.
At the Garrison trial, Garrison never attempted to question the validity of the rifle and revolver as evidence. So why would you?
Because I am no prosecutor with a trial strategy. I just want to try to find out what really happened. And I do question the validity of the revolver. I also have my doubts about the rifle but there, at least, is a possibility that Oswald did in fact order the rifle, although that does not mean he owned it.
Simple question; how often in your lifetime have you heard a story where one individual did some other individual a favor by buying or ordering a weapon because the person who wanted it couldn't buy one himself?
Or is it your contention that we live in a perfect world where these kind of things don't happen?
