10-04-2014, 02:17 PM
From Criminal Defense attorney (here in Austin) Drew Phipps. (He is waiting for his posting account to be activated. May need Maggie for that.)
I have no doubt that any neophyte prosecutor would have been able to get a conviction on Oswald's first trial, with or without a great deal of evidence. Even if a Dallas DA had tried Oswald on the original indictment (alleging a Commie conspiracy) AFTER the Warren Commission concluded that he acted alone, a Texas jury would have strung him up. No halfway competent Texas prosecutor would have presented the case like it was presented to the Warren Commission. That is not surprising as the WC wasn't an adversary proceeding with cross examination, etc. And Henry Wade was an excellent prosecutor. He would have ignored the Warren Commission, gone with the conspiracy angle, and gotten a conviction with JHO as an accomplice before the fact, if not as the actual shooter. (IMHO, there is pretty convincing evidence that this was actually the case.)
Pretending like the Warren Commission is a criminal transcript (for appellate review purposes) I have no doubt that almost any criminal lawyer could have won a new trial for Oswald (assuming a prosecutor did what the WC did). There were so many chain of custody problems alone that issue would have merited a new trial. As we have seen in the recent ballistics posts by Bob, there are grave doubts about the gun, the ballistic evidence, even its relevance and admissibility. The eyewitness evidence linking Oswald to the shooting is entirely suspect...One guy, who couldn't ID Oswald in a line up mere hours after the shooting. And there would have been a great many credible witnesses testifying (unwillingly I would guess), including DPD Marion Baker, that Oswald was elsewhere. Add that to a bad autopsy, conflicting medical testimony, lack of visible prints at the scene, witnesses changing stories, number of shots, grassy knoll, FBI/CIA evidence withholding, etc., and that is the perfect recipe for a case that bounces around the appellate courts for years, being retried once or twice (each time with a Texas jury that can't wait to vote) and finally ends up unresolved after Oswald dies in prison an old man awaiting a second or third trial or whatever.
So the answer to your question is yes, he would have been able to win an appeal, or habeas action after his trial, and gotten a second, third, or fourth trial. And also no...he would never have a free man.
Attorney Drew Phipps.
I have no doubt that any neophyte prosecutor would have been able to get a conviction on Oswald's first trial, with or without a great deal of evidence. Even if a Dallas DA had tried Oswald on the original indictment (alleging a Commie conspiracy) AFTER the Warren Commission concluded that he acted alone, a Texas jury would have strung him up. No halfway competent Texas prosecutor would have presented the case like it was presented to the Warren Commission. That is not surprising as the WC wasn't an adversary proceeding with cross examination, etc. And Henry Wade was an excellent prosecutor. He would have ignored the Warren Commission, gone with the conspiracy angle, and gotten a conviction with JHO as an accomplice before the fact, if not as the actual shooter. (IMHO, there is pretty convincing evidence that this was actually the case.)
Pretending like the Warren Commission is a criminal transcript (for appellate review purposes) I have no doubt that almost any criminal lawyer could have won a new trial for Oswald (assuming a prosecutor did what the WC did). There were so many chain of custody problems alone that issue would have merited a new trial. As we have seen in the recent ballistics posts by Bob, there are grave doubts about the gun, the ballistic evidence, even its relevance and admissibility. The eyewitness evidence linking Oswald to the shooting is entirely suspect...One guy, who couldn't ID Oswald in a line up mere hours after the shooting. And there would have been a great many credible witnesses testifying (unwillingly I would guess), including DPD Marion Baker, that Oswald was elsewhere. Add that to a bad autopsy, conflicting medical testimony, lack of visible prints at the scene, witnesses changing stories, number of shots, grassy knoll, FBI/CIA evidence withholding, etc., and that is the perfect recipe for a case that bounces around the appellate courts for years, being retried once or twice (each time with a Texas jury that can't wait to vote) and finally ends up unresolved after Oswald dies in prison an old man awaiting a second or third trial or whatever.
So the answer to your question is yes, he would have been able to win an appeal, or habeas action after his trial, and gotten a second, third, or fourth trial. And also no...he would never have a free man.
Attorney Drew Phipps.