11-03-2017, 09:11 PM
The Murphy mob are attacking Bill Miller for the intolerable suggestion that Oswald had a Coke in his hand in the lunchroom. If you read the testimony the Coke claim had several sources, from the Hosty/Bookhout FBI report, the Fritz Notes, and Mrs Reid. It is not a deal-breaker as far as credibility to claim Oswald had a Coke in his hand. He probably did claim this.
If you look at how the Murphy mob is using this attack on Miller they are trying to destroy him and his entire offerings through this one claim. The whole time the claim itself is probably true. It is obvious that they reason they do this is because of their awareness of how dangerous the Coke claim is to their Murphy theory. It shows corroborating evidence for Oswald being in the lunchroom (or Domino Room) during the shooting and also being there for the Baker confrontation.
Meanwhile the hyper demanding for proof on this somewhat irrelevant evidence is being used to avoid Miller's good evidence that the Murphy mob is obviously using the Coke claim to avoid addressing. Another thing Kamp conspicuously avoids is answering why the authorities would insert a claim into testimony that would only help exonerate Oswald? If Oswald were buying and drinking a Coke he would 1) Have a motive and reasonable explanation for being in the lunchroom. 2) The time it would have taken to purchase the Coke would push him past the point of possibility for the Warren Commission timeline of running down from the 6th floor. If the authorities had fabricated and inserted the Coke claim they would be very unlikely to add something that would only help refute their official story. Also, we have evidence that the authorities tried to get rid of the Coke claim after they realized it conflicted with their timeline. We have Baker crossing out and initialing the correction on his affidavit where he crosses out "drinking a Coke" with his pen. So technically we have Kamp and the Murphy mob joining those doing the cover up in their removal of the Coke evidence.
Kamp ignores all this because his approach involves aggressive demands for strict evidence while ignoring all I've written above. Is Miller really the one who has committed the research offense here?
If you look at how the Murphy mob is using this attack on Miller they are trying to destroy him and his entire offerings through this one claim. The whole time the claim itself is probably true. It is obvious that they reason they do this is because of their awareness of how dangerous the Coke claim is to their Murphy theory. It shows corroborating evidence for Oswald being in the lunchroom (or Domino Room) during the shooting and also being there for the Baker confrontation.
Meanwhile the hyper demanding for proof on this somewhat irrelevant evidence is being used to avoid Miller's good evidence that the Murphy mob is obviously using the Coke claim to avoid addressing. Another thing Kamp conspicuously avoids is answering why the authorities would insert a claim into testimony that would only help exonerate Oswald? If Oswald were buying and drinking a Coke he would 1) Have a motive and reasonable explanation for being in the lunchroom. 2) The time it would have taken to purchase the Coke would push him past the point of possibility for the Warren Commission timeline of running down from the 6th floor. If the authorities had fabricated and inserted the Coke claim they would be very unlikely to add something that would only help refute their official story. Also, we have evidence that the authorities tried to get rid of the Coke claim after they realized it conflicted with their timeline. We have Baker crossing out and initialing the correction on his affidavit where he crosses out "drinking a Coke" with his pen. So technically we have Kamp and the Murphy mob joining those doing the cover up in their removal of the Coke evidence.
Kamp ignores all this because his approach involves aggressive demands for strict evidence while ignoring all I've written above. Is Miller really the one who has committed the research offense here?