Reasonable doubts about Lee Harvey Oswald

[David Josephs]

Mr. Savastano (Mister?) CAS: Yes, Mister.

P.Dragoo :No, Lee Oswald's "involvement" was as patsy; there is no indication he was aware of any "murderous plot"--until he was the accused.

And, no, the "true issue" is not "whether he alone killed President Kennedy"--for he killed no one, not the president, not the policeman.

CAS: I appreciate the clarification, however the reason I constructed it as it is was because of the following reasons.

Until repeated verified evidence from both the official record and independent sources confirm that Oswald did not have anything to do with the plot it seem premature to rule him out utterly in my opinion. I would be willing to review whatever evidence you have, being new I have not seen everything here. I think he is a patsy as you do, however a patsy is part of a plot.

I appreciate the feedback, however I believe their is much to be considered before any full judgement can be rendered.

"evidence.... that Oswald did not have anything to do with the plot" sounds eerily like GUILTY until you prove your innocence... which is not how it's done.

Except of course in the process of the FBI, the media and the Warren Commission...

On 4/27/64 there was a question as to whether the shooting could have happened as agreed upon... no one had yet visited the site of the murder - 5 months later - but they did see the Zfilm, Nix and Moorman Redlich writes Rankin a memo... which in my mind explains both your and their POV in regards to solving the case:

Our intention is not to establish the
point with complete accuracy, but merely to substantiate the
hypothesis which underlies the conclusions that Oswald was the sole
assassin.

The HYPOTHESIS which UNDERLIES the CONCLUSIONS.... {sigh}

the accusers, you?, must offer any evidence of Oswald's guilt or involvement... Repeated, verified, AUTHENTICATED evidence of the guilt of one Lee HARVEY Oswald of any crime, involvement, conspiracy, whatever you want to throw at him... from whatever source you wish to offer....

INNOCENT until proven guilty Mr. S. - Not condemned to be guilty DESPITE of the evidence.

Mr. S... we've been down these roads and they all end with HARVEY dead, JFK dead, and a massive conspiracy/cover-up/deniability that continues to this day.... With people like DVP clinging to the ARGUMENT to give the discussion validity...

Discussing Oswald's involvement in a deep politics context, the possibilities are numerous... was he a patriotic hero, falling on his sword at the command of his country... "acting" the patsy all along as his role dictated... a stooge with illusions of helping his country as they positioned the pawn... Tosh's abort team member.... LEE and HARVEY....

each a layer of the same onion... each leading back to a small handful who had the resources and influence...

requiring to prove someone DIDN'T do something remains a tactic by those who cannot prove "someone" DID in the first place.
and wont be used with effectiveness here

DJ