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

Dr. Thomas Halle

regarding Max Holland: The Zapruder Film Reconsidered

OK, I'm at about the 3/4 point...and this IDIOT is STILL talking about Oswald as the shooter. FAIL!!! Suspect Oswald was fully exonerated by the nineties (at the LATEST)!!!

 

SOME of the key evidence supporting my claim:

1. Oswald's cheek GSW test: Negative (dispositive evidence that this suspect never fired a rifle on the day in question).

2. Witness testimony (and Altgens-6 photo) demonstrating that he was on the front steps of the TSBD at the time of the shooting.

3. The rifle which was first found was a Mauser (sworn to in a signed affidavit, by a seasoned police officer!!), which mysteriously morphed into the M-C weapon.

4. Reporting of the (clearly fake) "Hidell ID" supposedly found in Oswald's wallet does not appear in the Dallas Police Dept. transcripts (but only in a local Dallas newspaper--so, mostly probably planted)...which destroys the M-C chain of evidence. You probably know that introduced physical evidence, presented in court must demonstrate an intact chain of custody. Incidentally, the evidence in this case was RIFE with "irregularities" such as this.

5. The M-C rifle does NOT match the one in the Zenith Sporting Goods Company ad (different length).

6. No motive: Oswald had nothing against Pres. Kennedy.

7. LO was a terrible shot...and, the supposed murder weapon was in unusually poor shape, with a misaligned scope (mounted on the wrong side of the weapon, meaning the ejected shells would have hit him in the face)!! It also seems to have been missing an ammo clip, meaning EACH SHOT would have required bolt action (requiring even more time for the series of shots).

8. Two women toward the rear of the TSBD saw NO one run down those back stairs (adjacent to where they were working)...just after the shooting.

 9. Dallas Police Chief Curry admitted (in 1964) that his department had NEVER been able to "place" Oswald in that window, and with the supposed Mannlicher-Carcano weapon.

10. A quick examination of the Algens-6 photo reveals that President Kennedy was hit just after the turn onto Elm Street, from Houston. Yet, this was while the view from the supposed "sniper's nest" window was obscured by oak tree foliage. This--ALONE--strongly suggests more than one rifleman (and one or more "other shooter locations").

11. According to witness testimony (and the wounds), there were some ten shots (some from in front, some from the rear) in Dealey Plaza (If you doubt this, remember that the missing shots--ALONE--amounted to at least THREE in number!!)(and additional shots may well have been with silenced weapons). What's more, even in a very conservative scenario (of three hitting shots), a number of witnesses reported that the last two came in, nearly simultaneously (Some even referred to the shots as a "flurry" or "volley" of shots.). This is FAR beyond what ANY single shooter (and that junk, bolt-action carbine) could accomplish)!!!

12. Finally, I'll remind you that--in the American system of jurisprudence--a defense lawyer need not prove his client 100% innocent, merely that which is "beyond a reasonable doubt." Put another way, in this country, a defendant is afforded what is known as the "presumption of innocence." In Oswald's case (had he survived), a reasonably decent attorney would have pretty easily won an acquittal for his client. He may have even succeeded in having the charges dismissed (because of "crappy" (i.e., inadmissible) evidence).