11-01-2014, 06:38 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-01-2014, 06:55 PM by Marc Ellis.)
I think this is worth a long quote. JDE gives a concise summation of the state of the prosecutor's case from 'Reclaiming Parkland'.
Quote:"So let's add up the prosecutor's case. No witness at Parkland or "Bethesda ever saw the red spot at the cowlick in 1963. No witness who saw the X-rays at Bethesda recalls the 6.5 mm fragment. The autopsists manipulated the scalp from the skull and say the entry bullet hole was well below it. No other corroborating physical evidence on the X-rays jibes with this new location"
"it is important to quote a standard guide to court procedure. 'McCormick on Evidence'.
It reads in part:
[re:] "The principle upon which photographs are most commonly admitted into evidence"
. . a photograph is viewed merely as graphic portrayal of oral testimony, and becomes admissible only when a witness has testified that it is a correct and accurate representation of the relevant facts personally observed by the witness."121
Can one imagine presenting the 6.5 mm fragment in court when the X-ray technicians and autopsists deny its existence?"
Excerpt From: DiEugenio, James. "Reclaiming Parkland." Skyhorse Publishing. iBooks.
This material may be protected by copyright.
Check out this book on the iBookstore: https://itunes.apple.com/us/book/reclaim...0839?mt=11