Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Up close shot to Tippit's head and no spatter detected on shoes or pants?  (Read 43300 times)

Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Advertisement
I go with the evidence.  In the Tippit case, all of the available evidence points to Oswald.  Feel free to post any evidence which points anywhere other than Oswald.

I go with the evidence.  In the Tippit case, all of the available evidence points to Oswald.


What evidence do you have that the Killer walked to Tippit's body ( That was face down on the street) and shot him in the forehead?

Domingo Benavides  reported no such action by Tippit's killer....Nor did Helen Markham.....
 
« Last Edit: January 23, 2018, 07:27:55 PM by Walt Cakebread »

JFK Assassination Forum


Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10876
I go with the evidence.  In the Tippit case, all of the available evidence points to Oswald.  Feel free to post any evidence which points anywhere other than Oswald.

And by "all the available evidence" you mean an identification by an utter screwball in an unfair lineup.

Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1844
I go with the evidence.  In the Tippit case, all of the available evidence points to Oswald.


What evidence do you have that the Killer walked to Tippit's body ( That was face down on the street) and shot him in the forehead?

Domingo Benavides  reported no such action by Tippit's killer....Nor did Helen Markham.....

Tippit wasn't shot in the forehead.

JFK Assassination Forum


Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1844
I go with the evidence.  In the Tippit case, all of the available evidence points to Oswald.  Feel free to post any evidence which points anywhere other than Oswald.

And by "all the available evidence" you mean an identification by an utter screwball in an unfair lineup.

Again, feel free to post any evidence which points anywhere other than Oswald.  Fair enough?

Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1844
You are playing games again. The issue is whether Reynolds ever identified LHO as the man he saw running after the JDT murder, and until he was shot in the head the answer was no.

This is from my "Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions" series.

Quote on

REYNOLDS was shown a photograph of LEE HARVEY OSWALD, at which time he advised he is of the opinion OSWALD is the person he had followed on the afternoon of November 22, 1963; however, he would hesitate to definitely identify OSWALD as the individual. (FBI Interview with Warren Reynolds on January 21, 1964, Commission Exhibit (CE) 2523, p. 731)

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0381a.htm

Quote off

But, you said that Warren Reynolds said that the man was NOT Lee Oswald.

You lied and misrepresented.  Typical.

JFK Assassination Forum


Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10876
Again, feel free to post any evidence which points anywhere other than Oswald.  Fair enough?

Guilty until proven innocent?

Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1844
Guilty until proven innocent?

Of course not. 

Am I to assume that you cannot post evidence which points somewhere other than Oswald?  If you could, you would.

Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10876
Of course not. 

Am I to assume that you cannot post evidence which points somewhere other than Oswald?  If you could, you would.

So what if I cannot?  How does that prove that Oswald did it?

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/burden-of-proof

JFK Assassination Forum