CT's, in court how would you defend Oswald?

[Bill Chapman]

A vast majority of people say a lot of things. You are not saying you are influenced by popularity contests? You also have seen the film of many more people running up the grassy knoll or am I confusing that with a film of NO people running up the street to a building that deals with school books or something???

Why would anyone other than those in law enforcement rush toward a location thought to be that of an armed assassin?

[Martin Weidmann]

Are you under the impression that I'm arguing about my personal conclusions? 

I'm fairly confident that most of the people on this board, most of the time, do not have a clue what it is you are rambling about.

[John Mytton]

You also have seen the film of many more people running up the grassy knoll or am I confusing that with a film of NO people running up the street to a building that deals with school books or something???

Here is a photo not long after the assassination, where did the running people come from?



A little bit later we see a cop running towards the railway overpass but we still see NO one running up the knoll, where are they?



The motorbike cop we saw running towards the railway was followed by the first witnesses and this is NO where near the popular grassy knoll assassin positions?



Here is more people starting to gather, some seem to be moving towards the cop at the railway overpass and still NO one is running up the Knoll steps, where did they come from?



So in conclusion it's obvious that people moved to this end of Elm street because this is where the President was shot and the people who were later running up the steps were not initially that close.

JohnM

[John Mytton]

So it is indeed ignorance…. got it!

I didn't call anybody a liar, but the fallacy is that even if the majority of people say something happened one way, it still does not mean it really happened that way. Ergo;

The corroborated evidence.

81 eyewitnesses out of every 100 eyewitnesses heard 3 shots.



3 shells found in the Sniper's nest.

any appeal to a majority opinion doesn't constitute proof of anything.

Btw it's not up to me to prove anything, all I did was present evidence.

JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

The corroborated evidence.

81 eyewitnesses out of every 100 eyewitnesses heard 3 shots.



3 shells found in the Sniper's nest.



JohnM

3 shells found in the Sniper's nest.

How in the world is that "corroboration"?

Can you say with certainty that no shots were fired from other directions?

Can you show that those three shells were fired that day?

[John Mytton]

3 shells found in the Sniper's nest.

How in the world is that "corroboration"?

Can you say with certainty that no shots were fired from other directions?

Can you show that those three shells were fired that day?

How in the world is that "corroboration"?

3 expended shells along with Norman's recollection directly below is corroborated by 81% of the eyewitnesses.

Just after the President passed by, I heard a shot and several seconds later I heard two more shots. I knew that the shots had come from directly above me, and I could hear the expended cartridges fall to the floor. I also could here the bolt action of the rifle. I saw some dust fall from the ceiling of the fifth floor and I felt sure that whoever had fired the shots was directly above me.

Can you say with certainty that no shots were fired from other directions?

The amount of eyewitnesses who heard shots from more than 1 direction is statistically very low.

Can you show that those three shells were fired that day?

Can you show they weren't fired that day?

JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

3 expended shells along with Norman's recollection directly below is corroborated by 81% of the eyewitnesses.

The amount of eyewitnesses who heard shots from more than 1 direction is statistically very low.

Can you show they weren't fired that day?

JohnM

3 expended shells along with Norman's recollection directly below is corroborated by 81% of the eyewitnesses.

Circular argument.
 
The amount of eyewitnesses who heard shots from more than 1 direction is statistically very low.

Means absolutely nothing. Even if nobody heard shots from another direction, it still does not prove there were no such shots.

Can you show they weren't fired that day?

Don't need to. If you can not prove those three shells were fired that day (and you can't, regardless of what Norman thought he had heard) those shells do not corroborate anything.

[John Mytton]

3 expended shells along with Norman's recollection directly below is corroborated by 81% of the eyewitnesses.

Circular argument.
 
The amount of eyewitnesses who heard shots from more than 1 direction is statistically very low.

Means absolutely nothing. Even if nobody heard shots from another direction, it still does not prove there were no such shots.

Can you show they weren't fired that day?

Don't need to. If you can not prove those three shells were fired that day (and you can't, regardless of what Norman thought he had heard) those shells do not corroborate anything.

Circular argument.

Huh?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning

I keep supplying evidence and you haven't yet explained why it shouldn't be regarded as evidence

Means absolutely nothing. Even if nobody heard shots from another direction, it still does not prove there were no such shots.

Yeah this old chestnut, they're trying to set up a Lone Gunman and they place shooters in other locations, real smart!

Don't need to.

I knew you couldn't, in fact nobody can precisely date an expended shell and the fact that you even asked shows that you need more ballistics education. Try again!

JohnM