Bugliosi's "Conclusion of No Conspiracy"

[John Mytton]

Yeah we all know it was tucked inside Montgomery?s trousers right John?

No, he was just happy to see you.



JohnM

[Colin Crow]

No, he was just happy to see you.



JohnM

Perhaps you can offer a viable alternative then?

[Steve Howsley]

The bare bones KISS solution is Oswald approaching Troy West during a break asking him politely to make a wrapper for some curtain rods he (Oswald) will pick up in the afternoon.

Sounds reasonable to me. Thanks.


BTW: there is ZERO evidence of Oswald taking tape or paper to Irving.

I'm not surprised. I'd suggest he took a bag to Irving; a bag made that very day. The bag had crease lines indicating that it had been folded over several times resulting in a package easily concealed under a jacket.

[John Mytton]

Perhaps you can offer a viable alternative then?

Are you still going with the window sill was hidden by the paper bag theory? LOL!



JohnM

[Colin Crow]

Are you still going with the window sill was hidden by the paper bag theory? LOL!



JohnM

It was entered into evidence by Montgomery and Johnson at 3.20pm. Along with the chicken lunch sack and bones, the pop bottle, a paper wrapper (that had only ever been sealed at one end) and an empty viceroy packet. Btw the strip was not from the south east window but the one to the west of it.

What is your theory John? How was the strip transported to the crime lab? How many trips did Montgomery and Johnson make? Where was it in the photos of the two?

[Jerry Freeman]

When certain Dallas authorities knew that Kennedy was finished, there was no regret. They were absolutely dedicated to covering it up.
They called Kennedy a communist. Then a 'communist' was accused of the shooting. And that made sense?
Then the thing with Gen Walker...made no sense at all.

[John Mytton]

8. Again in the same vein, if you?re the triggerman for the mob, CIA, Castro, or anyone else in the biggest murder case in American history, what?s more likely? That on the night before the murder, you?re at your home, apartment, or ?safe house? preparing for the following day, and are either meeting with or at least available to your ?handlers? for last-minute instructions or consultation? Or that you?re going to be visiting your wife, who is staying at someone else?s home, and begging her to come back home to you?* Common sense, which Voltaire tells us is not that common, dictates that it?s the former, not the latter.       

It is reasonably clear that when Oswald went to visit his wife and two children the night before Kennedy came to Dallas, it was his intention to get his rifle and assassinate the president the next day?as indicated, what other reason would he have had to go there, for the first time, on a Thursday night? It is equally reasonably clear that this intention of his was not irrevocable but conditional. If Marina was willing to come back to him, a possibility he already knew was faint, he was prepared to forego his plans concerning Kennedy. If Marina, then, had agreed to come back to Oswald on the night before the president came to Dallas, it is almost a certainty the assassination would never have taken place.?       

It is interesting to note that as we saw in the Oswald biography section, Marina herself feels this way. In a narrative written in Russian by Marina at the request of the Warren Commission, and translated by the Commission, she said about the night before the assassination, when her husband virtually begged her to come back to him and she refused to do so, ?Of course, if I had known what was going to happen, I would have agreed without further thought. Perhaps, if Lee was planning anything, he staked everything on a card. That is, if I agreed to his proposal to go with him to Dallas, he would not do what he had planned, and, if I did not, then he would.?20       

Oswald?s entreaty to Marina to come back to him on the night before the assassination virtually precludes, all by itself, the existence of a conspiracy.
RHVB



JohnM

[John Mytton]

9. This book has proved beyond all doubt that Oswald was a highly unreliable, highly disturbed, and emotionally unhinged political fanatic. His own wife, Marina, described him as ?not a very trustworthy [trusting?] person.?21 At the London trial, when I asked Ruth Paine, who knew Oswald very well, ?Do you feel he [Oswald] was the type one would employ to accomplish a serious mission?? she answered, ?No. I would not have employed him for any job. I didn?t see him as stable enough.?       
  ?He was unstable and flighty??       
  ?Yes?He acted from his emotions primarily?rather than working from a set of logical ideas.?22       

To believe that a group of conspirators like the CIA or mob would entrust the biggest murder in American history to Oswald, of all people, is too preposterous a notion for any rational person to harbor in his or her mind for more than a millisecond. How could they possibly have confidence in someone like Oswald to take care of their monumental mission in a way that would involve no problems for them, when he couldn?t even adequately take care of himself (he was living in a virtual closet on November 22, 1963), much less his wife and two children.
RHVB



JohnM