Tuesday, January 16, 2018

Amy Joyce makes an interesting point, that there is TOO MUCH evidence against Oswald, too much convenient evidence: shells left in the Sniper's Nest, shells left at 10th and Patton (which required emptying the cylinder), a wallet left at the crime scene, a paper trail for ordering the rifle, (when, he easily could have bought a rifle anonymously anywhere in Dallas or Ft. Worth, and a better one than the Carcano). And why, if he was planning to go on a crime spree, would he have posed for the Backyard photos? It's just too much, and not a sign of his guilt, but rather, a sign of his being framed.

Amy Joyce:

Yes, absolutely, there were both curtains and blinds in his room.  It seems his room was quite long, but not very wide.  If you put the two photos up side by side, you can see that they go together and it's all Oswald's room, which indeed had curtains and blinds.

You know Oswald well so I think you will agree with me that Oswald was above-average intelligence and certainly not psychotic (as one would have to be to do what they claim he did).  He was certainly not dumb, yet, only a dumb person (or one wanting to get caught) would leave behind so much evidence; so much of a trail that would otherwise have been easy to avoid or dispose of (or at least made much more difficult to find).   An intelligent person would have snuck the rifle into the building a day or more before the event, and they wouldn't have transported it in an obvious wrap.  He'd have anticipated an intense investigation; of TSBD employees, including himself.  There would be no "bag", no photos of himself with the weapon, no letter(s), no paper trail of the purchase, and no prints (obviously there really wasn't anyway but the presence of any made it look like a set-up).  And he wouldn't allow himself to be seen with the rifle anytime before the shooting (by the window).  That's all elementary stuff, Crime 101, and since Oswald was into spy stories and was a former Marine, he'd have been more aware than the average person regarding what to do and not do.  The evidence and the "story" behind it should make sense, but it doesn't.  There comes a time when an unbiased person, without preconceived notions and ingrained conclusions,  says, "Enough!".  I did after realizing that the chain of evidence was repeatedly broken.  You have done an excellent job of picking apart different aspects of the "story" and pointing out how abnormal and unlikely various scenarios are.  It needs the critical analysis that you and others have given it because that's exactly what would have happened at a trial, had Oswald lived. And, that is what is needed today to determine Oswald's guilt or innocence. It is the right approach.  The Warren Commission Report should hold strong after getting critically examined, but it just falls apart!  

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.