'lying'*
Says the guy who claimed Oswald's kids were too old to need a babysitter (and thereby falsely attaching a sinister motive to Ruth's presence)
Speaking of lies, there's another one. I never said anything of the kind. Go back to gorillas playing basketball.
And are you declaring this forum a court of law, barrister? It's seems more a forum of public opinion.
As I've said many times before, I've never said I could prove anything here. I've never gotten any further than 'probably'... just the same as the WC's 'probably' and the HSCA's 'likely'... despite your insistence that those bodies somehow had to prove Oswald guilty.
What do you base your "probably" on, then? Or do you feel no need to justify even that?
*According to your interpretation of the evidence, or the actual evidence? You, who tells us what witnesses really saw, or didn't see. We are not impressed.
Says the guy who suggested that Frazier saw something different from what he said but lied about it to cover his ass.
It's really simple. Go to Dealey Plaza, sit where Brennan was. Have a buddy go up to a 6th floor window of the TSBD (you'll have to pick a different window) and crouch down behind a stack of boxes and pretend to fire a rifle down Elm street and see if you can see him from the belt up.
