Oswald in the doorway: the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, by Ralph Cinque

There is some discussion of my idea of holding a mock trial of Lee Harvey Oswald in Austin. Some just want to ridicule, but some raise practical issues and potential problems. For instance, the witnesses. There are fewer today than there were in 1984 at the mock trial held in England with Bugliosi and Spence. That's true, and there is nothing that can be done about it. Then, it was raised that of the remaining witnesses, you can't force any of them to participate. And that's true too. But, that wouldn't be a problem for me. And that's because I already know of witnesses that I would and could call and whom I know would participate, and I know I could win with those witnesses alone. I know I could make the case, convincingly, for Oswald's innocence with those witnesses alone.

And, that particular problem would be greater for the other side. Take Buell Frazier. Let's say that he refused to participate. He traveled all the way to England for the 1984 mock trial, but let's say he refused to come to Austin for this mock trial.

Well, he would be a witness for the prosecution, not the defense. He would be brought in to testify that it was Lovelady in the doorway, and that Oswald brought a long bag to work on 11/22. And even though he insists that the bag was only 24 inches, not the required 35, he is still a prosecution witness. They get around that by saying that it's something that is easy to be mistaken about.

But, you know, I presume, that I would be basing 90% of my defense of Oswald on his presence in the doorway during the shooting. So, if the prosecution can't get Frazier to come in and look at the Altgens photo and say that Doorman is Lovelady, then it's their case that suffers, not mine. And, if they do get him to come in and say that, then, he'll have to submit to my cross-examination, and I would go harder on him than any lawyer or policeman and FBI agent ever went on him. I would treat him, as they say, as a hostile witness. And in the end, I believe I could overturn his testimony about Lovelady and discredit him.

So, my hope would be that Frazier does show up, that he does make his spiel about Lovelady being Doorway Man, and then, I would demolish him over it. I would crucify him. And, I know exactly how I would do it.

So frankly, I think it would be to my advantage either way; whether Frazier shows up or doesn't show up.  And the same is true of Ruth Paine and Michael Paine. If they show up, they will have to be cross-examined by me.  

Anyway, it's doable. We could have a mock trial. They're doing it in Houston in November 2017, so why couldn't we do it in Austin in, say, November 2016? 

And again, I would be the defense attorney. Any takers?