CT's, how did Oswald's rifle end up on the 6th floor?

[John Mytton]

Your claim, your burden.

My burden of proof was met when I presented the head of the FBI's seal of approval.

JohnM

[Denis Pointing]

Denis, the point is that even if Aynesworth is as pure as the driven snow, and his memory is completely infallible, this is still hearsay.  It's not necessarily true.

John, you're right, in a court of law Aynesworth's statements wouldn't be accepted, which is exactly why I began my post with "this isn't a courtroom". If we attempt to hold this discussion forum to the same stringent levels of a courtroom, then the next obvious phase is to limit the membership only to those holding a doctorate or degree in law. See where I'm going here? Charles, after due examination and evaluation, has put forward good reasons, at least IMO, as to why he accepts Aynesworth's statements as accurate and true. To automatically dismiss those statements because in a courtroom they would be considered "hearsay" is ridiculous. As a side note, I would be more inclined to believe statements from some people which wouldn't be accepted in court, than some witnesses whose statements would be accepted in court and no, not just the ones that support my POV.

[John Mytton]

Is that supposed to somehow make it true?

So another liar, how how many liars were there John?

JohnM

[John Mytton]

Yeah, that proves Oswald ordered a revolver with a particular serial number.  -giggle-

Yep, Oswald's revolver was sent to Oswald's PO Box number, the same revolver that was exclusively connected to the shells that were seen being discarded by Oswald at the Tippit crime scene and the same revolver that Oswald was arrested with.



JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

So another liar, how how many liars were there John?

You tell me.  Your list is way longer than mine.

https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php?topic=100.0

[John Iacoletti]

My burden of proof was met when I presented the head of the FBI's seal of approval.

You mean the guy who said that we need to convince the public that Oswald is the real assassin?

[John Mytton]

You tell me.  Your list is way longer than mine.

https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php?topic=100.0

After the fact many Americans want to insert themselves into history but that doesn't change the actual evidence.

JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

John, you're right, in a court of law Aynesworth's statements wouldn't be accepted, which is exactly why I began my post with "this isn't a courtroom". If we attempt to hold this discussion forum to the same stringent levels of a courtroom, then the next obvious phase is to limit the membership only to those holding a doctorate or degree in law. See where I'm going here? Charles, after due examination and evaluation, has put forward good reasons, at least IMO, as to why he accepts Aynesworth's statements as accurate and true. To automatically dismiss those statements because in a courtroom they would be considered "hearsay" is ridiculous. As a side note, I would be more inclined to believe statements from some people which wouldn't be accepted in court, than some witnesses whose statements would be accepted in court and no, not just the ones that support my POV.

I think you misunderstand.  The point is that it doesn't matter how trustworthy Aynesworth may or may not be (and besides, "trusted journalist" is meaningless).  In the end, Charles is believing who he wants to believe.  He should at least admit that.  You should examine all of the evidence, including the testimonies of other people, instead of cherry-picking one journalist's 50-year-old recollection of something he was told.