Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald? | FRONTLINE

[David Von Pein]

It’s what people like DVP trot out as “evidence” when they don’t have actual evidence.

And the above quote by John is one of the things that CTers love to do when they decide to pretend there's no "actual evidence" at all against that poor sapling named Oswald.

John knows there's more than enough "actual evidence" to hang Oswald 20 times over (for TWO murders). But the CT gene inside him won't let him type it on his keyboard.

And John also knows full well that Oswald's own actions on 11/21 and 11/22 would have convicted him if he had made it to trial too. But, again, John's CT gene won't allow him to admit the obvious.

[Martin Weidmann]

And the above quote by John is one of the things that CTers love to do when they decide to pretend there's no "actual evidence" at all against that poor sapling named Oswald.

John knows there's more than enough "actual evidence" to hang Oswald 20 times over (for TWO murders). But the CT gene inside him won't let him type it on his keyboard.

And John also knows full well that Oswald's own actions on 11/21 and 11/22 would have convicted him if he had made it to trial too. But, again, John's CT gene won't allow him to admit the obvious.

John knows there's more than enough "actual evidence" to hang Oswald 20 times over (for TWO murders).

Anything can be called evidence, and very often is, but that doesn't mean it's conclusive or actual proof of anything.

And John also knows full well that Oswald's own actions on 11/21 and 11/22 would have convicted him if he had made it to trial too.


Amazing stupidity! Let's examine the facts of "Oswald's own actions" on 11/21 and 11/22. On 11/21 he went to work as normal, asked Frazier for a ride to Irving, went to Irving to visit his wife and kids and stayed the night. The next morning, he walks over to Frazier's home, for the ride back to the TSBD, where he worked normally that morning.

Those are the undisputed facts and none of it would have resulted in a conviction at trial.

Everything that happened between Kennedy's killing, at 12:30, and Oswald's arrest at the Texas Theater are allegations based on speculation and highly questionable evidence and witness testimony. The only really established fact is the arrest at the Texas Theater. Everything else would be scrutinized (imo much of it succesfully) by the defense.

To claim that Oswald would have been convicted based on his actions on 11/21 and 11/22 is just plain ridiculous and extremely naive.

[Walt Cakebread]

And the above quote by John is one of the things that CTers love to do when they decide to pretend there's no "actual evidence" at all against that poor sapling named Oswald.

John knows there's more than enough "actual evidence" to hang Oswald 20 times over (for TWO murders). But the CT gene inside him won't let him type it on his keyboard.

And John also knows full well that Oswald's own actions on 11/21 and 11/22 would have convicted him if he had made it to trial too. But, again, John's CT gene won't allow him to admit the obvious.

John also knows full well that Oswald's own actions on 11/21 and 11/22 would have convicted him if he had made it to trial

That's utter nonsense and it exhibits a total disregard of the fact that Lee told Captain Fritz that he was in the first floor lunchroom at the time President Kennedy passed by the TSBD.   Lee said that he had seen Jarman and Norman walk by the lunchroom as he sat there eating his lunch.  When Jarman and Norman confirmed that they had in fact walked by the lunchroom at 12:27 Fritz knew that they would never be able to convict Lee Oswald, and he knew that the noose was tightening around his neck.  He knew that their only recourse was to eliminate Oswald.

[David Von Pein]

Everything that happened between Kennedy's killing, at 12:30, and Oswald's arrest at the Texas Theater are allegations based on speculation and highly questionable evidence and witness testimony. The only really established fact is the arrest at the Texas Theater. Everything else would be scrutinized (imo much of it succesfully) by the defense.

To claim that Oswald would have been convicted based on his actions on 11/21 and 11/22 is just plain ridiculous and extremely naive.

It's absolutely incredible that anybody who has studied the evidence connected with the JFK and Tippit murders, even a conspiracy theorist named Martin Weidmann, could actually say (and believe) the things I just quoted above.

Martin apparently thinks that the things Lee Oswald did on both November 21st and 22nd were just ordinary things that Oswald did every day -- things such as:

....Taking a bulky package to work with him and lying (twice) to Buell Frazier about the contents of that package.

....Walking several blocks east of the TSBD just minutes after a Presidential assassination in order to catch a bus.

....Getting off the bus just a few minutes after boarding it and then getting into a taxicab to take him to his roominghouse.

....And then having the cab driver take him three blocks beyond his real destination, so that he'll have to backtrack the three-block distance on foot.

....Dashing in and out of his room on Beckley in order to grab his .38 revolver.

....Murdering a Dallas police officer about 15 minutes after hurriedly leaving his roominghouse.

....Sneaking into the Texas Theater without buying the cheap ticket.

....Fighting with the police and attempting to shoot one of them in the theater after merely being told to "get on your feet" by Officer McDonald.

....Making multiple provably false statements to the police after his arrest.

Just a ho-hum Friday in the dull life of Lee Harvey Oswald.

Right, Martin?

Martin will very likely now go into "None Of That Stuff You Just Talked About Can Possibly Be Verified And Confirmed By Anybody Because I Think Everybody In Dallas Was Trying To Pin The Murders On Only Oswald" mode.

And 'round and 'round we go. (Yet again.)

Still More:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/everything-oswald-did-says-guilt.html

[Martin Weidmann]

It's absolutely incredible that anybody who has studied the evidence connected with the JFK and Tippit murders, even a conspiracy theorist named Martin Weidmann, could actually say (and believe) the things I just quoted above.

Martin apparently thinks that the things Lee Oswald did on both November 21st and 22nd were just ordinary things that Oswald did every day -- things such as:

....Taking a bulky package to work with him and lying (twice) to Buell Frazier about the contents of that package.

....Walking several blocks east of the TSBD just minutes after a Presidential assassination in order to catch a bus.

....Getting off the bus just a few minutes after boarding it and then getting into a taxicab to take him to his roominghouse.

....And then having the cab driver take him three blocks beyond his real destination, so that he'll have to backtrack the three-block distance on foot.

....Dashing in and out of his room on Beckley in order to grab his .38 revolver.

....Murdering a Dallas police officer about 15 minutes after hurriedly leaving his roominghouse.

....Sneaking into the Texas Theater without buying the cheap ticket.

....Fighting with the police and attempting to shoot one of them in the theater after merely being told to "get on your feet" by Officer McDonald.

....Making multiple provably false statements to the police after his arrest.

Just a ho-hum Friday in the dull life of Lee Harvey Oswald.

Right, Martin?

Martin will very likely now go into "None Of That Stuff You Just Talked About Can Possibly Be Verified And Confirmed By Anybody Because I Think Everybody In Dallas Was Trying To Pin The Murders On Only Oswald" mode.

And 'round and 'round we go. (Yet again.)

Still More:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/everything-oswald-did-says-guilt.html

....Taking a bulky package to work with him and lying (twice) to Buell Frazier about the contents of that package.

And, if true, that would be evidence of what, exactly?

....Walking several blocks east of the TSBD just minutes after a Presidential assassination in order to catch a bus.

Speculation. Nobody saw him walking anywhere. And again, what is this evidence of, exactly?

....Getting off the bus just a few minutes after boarding it and then getting into a taxicab to take him to his roominghouse.

Cool story. Again, what is this evidence of, exactly?

....And then having the cab driver take him three blocks beyond his real destination, so that he'll have to backtrack the three-block distance on foot.

Wow, that's conclusive proof of........... just give me a minute, I'll think of something.

....Dashing in and out of his room on Beckley in order to grab his .38 revolver.

Wow, dashing in and out of his room is somehow evidence of guilt? And how in the world do you even know he grabbed a revolver?

....Murdering a Dallas police officer about 15 minutes after hurriedly leaving his roominghouse.

Actually the Dallas police officer was already murdered before Oswald could have gotten there, if he ever did get there.
You are assuming "facts" that are not proven to prove a "fact" that you can not prove.

....Sneaking into the Texas Theater without buying the cheap ticket.

Oh yeah, that does it. That would absolutely ensure a conviction for two murders at trial.

....Fighting with the police and attempting to shoot one of them in the theater after merely being told to "get on your feet" by Officer McDonald.

Excuse me. The police were also fighting with him, were they not? And where do you get the silly notion he attempted to shoot an officer? He was never charged with attemped murder.... Go figure. Exaggerate much, drama queen?

....Making multiple provably false statements to the police after his arrest.

What "provable false statements" would that be? Show me the verbatim record of what Oswald actually told the police, before you start making such hollow pathetic claims.

All this BS is exactly what I was talking about when I said;

Everything that happened between Kennedy's killing, at 12:30, and Oswald's arrest at the Texas Theater are allegations based on speculation and highly questionable evidence and witness testimony. The only really established fact is the arrest at the Texas Theater. Everything else would be scrutinized (imo much of it succesfully) by the defense.

You repeating all that BS, for most of which you haven't got a shred of conclusive evidence, doesn't alter that fact.

Martin will very likely now go into "None Of That Stuff You Just Talked About Can Possibly Be Verified And Confirmed By Anybody Because I Think Everybody In Dallas Was Trying To Pin The Murders On Only Oswald" mode.

Pathetic! Martin will actually say that you should really try to make a compelling factual case against Oswald instead of being preoccupied about what I would say.

And btw

It's absolutely incredible that anybody who has studied the evidence connected with the JFK and Tippit murders, even a conspiracy theorist named Martin Weidmann, could actually say (and believe) the things I just quoted above.

I have studied the evidence, which is exactly why I can say what I am saying. To return to my earlier point; you can call anything you like "evidence" but that doesn't mean it's actually proof of anything. I'm sorry if you don't understand that.

[David Von Pein]

What a surprise. CTer Martin is just like all other JFK conspiracy theorists --- a total failure at math. (Particularly addition.)

Let's have a look at another CTer who garnered an F- in the subject of "Adding Things Up":

[Bill Chapman]

John knows there's more than enough "actual evidence" to hang Oswald 20 times over (for TWO murders).

Anything can be called evidence, and very often is, but that doesn't mean it's conclusive or actual proof of anything.

And John also knows full well that Oswald's own actions on 11/21 and 11/22 would have convicted him if he had made it to trial too.


Amazing stupidity! Let's examine the facts of "Oswald's own actions" on 11/21 and 11/22. On 11/21 he went to work as normal, asked Frazier for a ride to Irving, went to Irving to visit his wife and kids and stayed the night. The next morning, he walks over to Frazier's home, for the ride back to the TSBD, where he worked normally that morning.

Those are the undisputed facts and none of it would have resulted in a conviction at trial.

Everything that happened between Kennedy's killing, at 12:30, and Oswald's arrest at the Texas Theater are allegations based on speculation and highly questionable evidence and witness testimony. The only really established fact is the arrest at the Texas Theater. Everything else would be scrutinized (imo much of it succesfully) by the defense.

To claim that Oswald would have been convicted based on his actions on 11/21 and 11/22 is just plain ridiculous and extremely naive.

Let's examine the facts of "Oswald's own actions" on 11/21 and 11/22. On 11/21 he went to work as normal, asked Frazier for a ride to Irving, went to Irving to visit his wife and kids and stayed the night. The next morning, he walks over to Frazier's home, for the ride back to the TSBD, where he worked normally that morning.

Lets see what Oswald did 'normally' on 21/22

Asked Frazier for a ride to Irving
_ Normally done on a Friday
_ Cites his need for curtain rods from Ruth's garage: Not normal
_ Does not call Ruth to ask for her permission to visit: Not normal

Went to Irving to visit his wife and kids and stayed the night
_ So far, so good. Uh, oh: Morning comes, Oswald buggers off after
   leaving money & wedding ring behind: Not normal

The next morning, he walks over to Frazier's home, for the ride back to the TSBD, where he worked normally that morning.
_Puts sizeable bag in his ride rather than politely wait for Buell. Putting sizeable bags in people's cars: Not  normal.
_Walks ever faster ahead of Buell towards TSBD: Not normal
_Shots fired. Not normal.

Conclusion: Not a normal 21/22 for Oswald


billchapman

[John Iacoletti]

And the above quote by John is one of the things that CTers love to do when they decide to pretend there's no "actual evidence" at all against that poor sapling named Oswald.

John knows there's more than enough "actual evidence" to hang Oswald 20 times over (for TWO murders). But the CT gene inside him won't let him type it on his keyboard.

And John also knows full well that Oswald's own actions on 11/21 and 11/22 would have convicted him if he had made it to trial too. But, again, John's CT gene won't allow him to admit the obvious.

Is this posturing supposed to prove something?