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

Oh, what a failure! The last segment of today's trial involved medical witnesses for the defense: Cyril Wecht, David Mantik, and Michael Chesser, all doctors. The name Oswald didn't come up. It wasn't about him. It was about whether there were multiple shooters and a shot from the front. 

What good does that do Oswald? Even if they proved it, he could still be "a" shooter. He'd still get the death penalty, even if there were other shooters. I thought this was about proving his innocence not that there was a conspiracy. But, that's all these defense lawyers care about; proving conspiracy, not Oswald's innocence. 

Cyril Wecht has said many times over the years that there had to be another shooter "besides Oswald." He is not even an advocate of Oswald's innocence. David Mantik talked about the x-rays. Gary Aguilar talked about Kennedy's brain being stolen, and an x-ray of another brain being "substituted" for his. What does any of this have to do with Oswald's innocence?

This entire day has been Bob Tannenbaum. I had it wrong. I thought he was going to be the sidekick to Larry Schnapf and Bill Simpich, but they might as well have stayed home today. Maybe it will be different tomorrow, but Tannenbaum has already set the direction of the defense, which is to prove conspiracy, not Oswald innocence. I have never seen anything like this before in my life, of lawyers being so indifferent to their client, not in real life, and not in courtroom dramas. 

Tannenbaum has his final witness of the day on now, another medical witness, Dr. Clifford Spiegelman, who is testifying about the dictaphone evidence- again. Not only does the jury look bored and disinterested, but so, apparently, is the livestream audience. It shows you how many people are watching, and earlier it was 38, and now, it's 29.  And these are people who, like me, shelled out $75 to watch this. And yet, 9 of them have decided that it's not interesting enough to watch. And of the 29, I wonder how many are tapping their feet and looking at their wristwatch. Their thoughts: "Is this thing almost over? What a waste of $75."

Again: there is nothing about this dictaphone evidence that wasn't known in 1979 when the HSCA issued their final report. Yet, no one in law enforcement did anything but yawn. What makes Tannenbaum think that a 2017 jury is going to be any less bored?

The Single Bullet Theory has already been ridiculed on Seinfeld, and everyone had a good laugh. Do you remember The Magic Loogie? 

   
If people could laugh about it then, in 1992, how is a jury going to get worked up about it in 2017? And what good is it? Tannenbaum is saying there were 5 shots. There may have been more, but so what? How does it help Oswald? How does it get him out of the 6th floor window?

They just don't care. Oswald's lawyers just don't care about him. 

Even Gerry Spence did better than this defending Oswald in 1984. much better. At least he talked about Oswald. But, even he lost. And when I say lost, I mean that the jury unanimously convicted Oswald. 

I'm sure glad this trial is just 2 days because this is painful to watch.  Only 1 day to go, thank God.