Deconstructing Bugliosi's "53 pieces of evidence"

[Martin Weidmann]

"All" Martin can find is that Oswald left his rifle at the crime scene!  HA HA HA.  Imagine any other crime in history where the weapon was left at the crime scene and can be linked to an individual who was known to be in building, who fled the scene, shot a police officer, had no credible alibi and then lied to the police about his ownership of the rifle.  What a mystery to solve!  But that is "all" the evidence we have.  There is no HD film of Oswald pulling the trigger or a time machine to prove it.  So it is all just an "assumption" in the contrarian fantasy world!  And it's just an amazing string of bad luck that Oswald was the only TSBD employee who "worked in the building" who left his prints on the SN boxes, left his wedding ring and a large amount of money with his wife, made an unusual visit to the location where his rifle was kept the night before the assassination, carried his lunch in a bag over two feet long, looked exactly like the assassin and Tippit murderer according to several witnesses.  So much bad luck that day!

"All" Martin can find is that Oswald left his rifle at the crime scene!  HA HA HA.

Why am I not surprised that a fool makes an utterly foolish bogus claim?

And btw I never said that "Oswald left his rifle at the crime scene". That's just another thing you've made up.


There is no HD film of Oswald pulling the trigger or a time machine to prove it.  So it is all just an "assumption" in the contrarian fantasy world!

When you have no proof - as you just said - it's not a fantasy to call it an assumption because that's exactly what it is.

Why is it so hard for you to understand that assumptions are not evidence?

[Richard Smith]

"All" Martin can find is that Oswald left his rifle at the crime scene!  HA HA HA.

Why am I not surprised that a fool makes an utterly foolish bogus claim?

And btw I never said that "Oswald left his rifle at the crime scene". That's just another thing you've made up.


There is no HD film of Oswald pulling the trigger or a time machine to prove it.  So it is all just an "assumption" in the contrarian fantasy world!

When you have no proof - as you just said - it's not a fantasy to call it an assumption because that's exactly what it is.

Why is it so hard for you to understand that assumptions are not evidence?

Comedy gold.  Arguing that it is not Oswald's rifle is bad enough.  Arguing that EVEN if it is Oswald's rifle, that it still doesn't prove anything is laughable.  A rifle found at the scene belonging to Oswald is not evidence of his involvement according to our resident Inspector Clouseau.  It is just an "assumption."  HA HA HA.  Maybe that time machine will be invented one day to solve the crime. 

[Bill Chapman]

BRENNAN
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/brennan.htm



Mr. BRENNAN. And I walked over to this retainer wall of this little park pool and jumped up on the top ledge.
Mr. BELIN. You jumped up on the retaining wall?
Mr. BRENNAN. Yes.
Mr. BELIN. Now, I hand you what has been marked as Exhibit 477.
(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 477 for identification.)
Mr. BELIN. I ask you to state if you know what this is.
Mr. BRENNAN. Yes.
Mr. BELIN. Will you please tell the Commission what this is?
Mr. BRENNAN. That is the Book Store at the corner of Houston and Elm.
Mr. BELIN. By the Book Store, you mean the Texas School Book Depository Building?
Mr. BRENNAN. Right.
Mr. BELIN. Now, do you know what
Mr. BRENNAN. That is the retainer wall which I perched on.
Mr. BELIN. All right. This is. the retaining wall on which you perched. I believe that this is actually you sitting on this retaining wall in a picture that we took in Dallas pursuant to your showing us where you were November 22; we took that picture on this past Friday.
Mr. BRENNAN. That is correct.
Mr. BELIN. Which would be the 20th of March. Is that correct?
Mr. BRENNAN. That is correct.
Mr. BELIN. All right. I hand you now what the reporter has marked as Commission Exhibit 478.
(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 478 for identification.)
Mr. BELIN. I ask you to state, if you know, what this is.
Mr. BRENNAN. Yes. That is the retaining wall and myself sitting on it at Houston and Elm.
Mr. BELIN. You remember that the photographer was standing on the front steps of the Texas School Book Depository when that picture was taken On the 20th of March?
Mr. BRENNAN. Yes; I do.
Mr. BELIN. And the camera is pointed in what direction?
Mr. BRENNAN. South.
Representative Ford. Are those the positions where you were sitting on November 22?
Mr. BRENNAN. Yes, sir.
Representative FORD. At about 12
Mr. BRENNAN. From about 12:22 or 12:24 until the time of the assassination.
Representative FORD. In both pictures, that is a true--
Mr. BRENNAN. True location.
Representative FORD. True location of where you were sitting November 22d?
Mr. BRENNAN. Yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN. Mr. Brennan, I am going to hand you a negative, which has been marked as Commission Exhibit 479.
(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 479 for identification.)
Mr. BELIN. This appears to be a negative from a moving picture film. And I will hand you a magnifying glass--the negative has been enlarged. This negative appears to be a picture of the Presidential motorcade on the afternoon of November 22d. I ask you to state if you can find yourself in the crowd in the background in that picture.
Mr. BRENNAN. Yes. I am sitting at the same position as I was in the picture taken Friday, with the exception, I believe, my hand is resting on the wall, and Friday my hand, I believe, was resting on my leg.
Mr. BELIN. Well, your legs in this picture, Exhibit 479, I notice, are not dangling on the front side there, is that correct?
142

Mr. BRENNAN. No.
Mr. BELIN. What were you wearing on November 22d? What clothes were you wearing?
Mr. BRENNAN. Gray khaki work clothes, with a dark gray hard helmet.
Mr. BELIN. Your head here appears to be the highest in the group, a little bit left of center in the upper part of the picture, is that correct?
Mr. BRENNAN. Yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN. Does this scene depict the scene as you recollect it on that day, November 22d?
Mr. BRENNAN. It does.

[Michael Walton]

I've always found it hard to believe that Brennan was able to "clearly" see from 90 feet away looking upward to a very small window with the pane cracked open halfway that he could identify someone, especially when his eyes - like many people there - were focused on the motorcade. We're talking pandemonium here with the cars and cycles going by, the cheering and so on.

[Richard Smith]

I've always found it hard to believe that Brennan was able to "clearly" see from 90 feet away looking upward to a very small window with the pane cracked open halfway that he could identify someone, especially when his eyes - like many people there - were focused on the motorcade. We're talking pandemonium here with the cars and cycles going by, the cheering and so on.

This doesn't seem like a great mystery.  Brennan is standing below on the street, hears gun shots, does the logical thing and looks for the source of the noise and sees Oswald with his rifle.  If there is anything that is surprising, it is that many more witnesses didn't do the same (although others did see the rifle in that window confirming that is the location of the shooter - unless you believe lunatic things like Oswald was firing blanks etc). 

[Jon Banks]

I've always found it hard to believe that Brennan was able to "clearly" see from 90 feet away looking upward to a very small window with the pane cracked open halfway that he could identify someone, especially when his eyes - like many people there - were focused on the motorcade. We're talking pandemonium here with the cars and cycles going by, the cheering and so on.

It's implausible that he would've been able to describe the height or weight of the person in the window from his vantage point.

[Steve M. Galbraith]

This doesn't seem like a great mystery.  Brennan is standing below on the street, hears gun shots, does the logical thing and looks for the source of the noise and sees Oswald with his rifle.  If there is anything that is surprising, it is that many more witnesses didn't do the same (although others did see the rifle in that window confirming that is the location of the shooter - unless you believe lunatic things like Oswald was firing blanks etc).

Brennan runs up to the police during the chaos and tells them about seeing a man with a rifle in the building. Bad luck for Oswald is that he looked like the shooter. And unfortunately the police found a rifle and shells where Brennan says he saw a shooter. And then other witnesses also say they saw a rifle/man in the window.

Brennan sure got lucky that all of this helped his lies out. Meanwhile, more bad luck for poor Oswald.

Or all of this was made up, Brennan was a CIA asset and et cetera, et cetera.

[Martin Weidmann]

Comedy gold.  Arguing that it is not Oswald's rifle is bad enough.  Arguing that EVEN if it is Oswald's rifle, that it still doesn't prove anything is laughable.  A rifle found at the scene belonging to Oswald is not evidence of his involvement according to our resident Inspector Clouseau.  It is just an "assumption."  HA HA HA.  Maybe that time machine will be invented one day to solve the crime.

Arguing that it is not Oswald's rifle is bad enough. Arguing that EVEN if it is Oswald's rifle, that it still doesn't prove anything is laughable.

Why do you continue to insist in showing off just how big of a fool you are. And what do you think to achieve by completely misrepresenting what was actually said?

A rifle found at the scene belonging to Oswald is not evidence of his involvement according to our resident Inspector Clouseau.

More sleight-of-hand BS! And who said that anyway?

It is just an "assumption."

What isn't an assumption, but instead a fact, is that somebody who constantly makes claims he can't support with evidence, who continuously lies, misrepresents what was said and makes up stuff, like Richard constantly does, hasn't even got the beginning of a credible case!