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

I haven't studied the Lincoln assassination to form any opinions, but historically, we know that several people were executed for conspiring with, or at least encouraging John Willkes Booth. One of them was a woman, whom you can see on the far left swinging from the gallows.

That's an eerie picture, isn't it? The two men on the right are wearing suit jackets. That sure isn't prison clothes. So, did they dress themselves? For their execution? "Let's see, what should I wear for this?" 

But, the point is that those 4 swung, and none of them wielded a weapon against Lincoln. 

One of the things that the prosecutor pointed out in the trial yesterday, and I am referring to the young pretty woman, is that in Texas there is something called the "law of parties." She said that what it means is that if you are involved with others in the commission of a violent crime, that even if you just drive the getaway car, that you are subject to the same penalty as those who pulled the triggers. That's the law in Texas. And, Texas is where the JFK assassination happened. 

Do you realize what it means? It means that even if his lawyers succeeded in convincing a jury that Oswald didn't take the fatal shot, that that shot was taken by someone from the Grassy Knoll, that it wouldn't matter. If Oswald was up on the 6th floor shooting at Kennedy, he would still get the death penalty or life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. Remember, this is the President of the United States we're talking about. In addition to everything else, shooting at him is an act of treason. And the Constitution states that the penalty for treason is death. 

So, what it means is that there is absolutely no value to Oswald in arguing about the Single Bullet Theory or the presence of multiple shooters. If Oswald wasn't up on the 6th floor shooting at Kennedy, then none of that analysis has any bearing on him. You think their were 3 shots? You think there were 5 shots? You think there was a shot from the sewer? You think there was a shot from the County Records Building? None of that has any bearing on Oswald if he's innocent. Once you, as his lawyer, establish that he wasn't up on the 6th floor shooting at Kennedy, then you don't have a dog in that fight. That's for other people. And if they raise the issue to you,  you say, 

"Hey, Mofo! I told you. My client had NOTHING to do with it. He was not up on the 6th floor. He was standing in the doorway during the shooting, and he certainly didn't shoot anyone from there; he was unarmed. So, you go argue about that with someone else. With me, his lawyer, you need to provide evidence that my client was up in the Sniper's Nest at 12:30. And, if you don't have that, you don't have shit. And you don't have that."

And hopefully, if you said that, it would make them shut the pluck up about the Single Bullet Theory, the ballistics, the wounds, the bullet fragments, and the like which those idiot defense lawyers devoted 90% of their time to at the trial. 

They were NOT defending Oswald. They were just arguing about the JFK assassination. But, how stupid they were not to realize the irrelevance of it all to Oswald's defense.  

And, the truth is, they just don't give a rat's ass about Oswald. Robert Tanenbaum even admitted it. But, they should never have been allowed to call themselves Oswald's lawyers. 

What we saw yesterday and Thursday was NOTHING at all like what a real trial of Lee Harvey Oswald would have looked like, had he lived, with him sitting in the courtroom.  That trial would truly have been about HIM. It would not have been about conspiracy. 

Realize that a criminal trial always concerns just one person. There's only one defendant. And in a crime with more than one perpetrator, each perp gets his or her own trial. 

With Oswald, the only issue is whether he was up in the Sniper's Nest at the 6th floor window shooting at Kennedy. It didn't matter if his shots hit Kennedy. It didn't matter if there were other shooters. It only mattered whether he was up in the Sniper's nest at the 6th floor window shooting at Kennedy. His lawyers only had to prove that he wasn't up there. That's all they had to do. They didn't have to do anything else.  

Hey, if he was up there, he was toast. Because of the "law of parties" in the state of Texas, he'd fry- regardless if there was a shooter on the Grassy Knoll. And I don't doubt that there was a shooter on the Grassy Knoll, but I am smart enough to realize that it is no value to Oswald to advance that. Oswald was not up in the Sniper's Nest; he shot no one; and he did not conspire with anyone to shoot anyone. That's the case for the defense. That's what they are going to bat for, if they are sincere, which these lawyers weren't.  

Ironically, in the mock trial, the lawyers' roles were reversed. The defense was really prosecuting. They were prosecuting the official story of the JFK assassination. And the prosecution was the defense, for they were defending the official story. The official story was what was on trial; not Oswald.

If the result of that pitiful performance was 5 out of 11 jurors voting to acquit, imagine what a real defense of Oswald would do. A real defense, with good lawyers, not those clowns, would surely result in his acquittal. And that's the hopeful message to retain from this whole awful experience.