28-05-2014, 04:25 AM
Just saw this challenge: "Name a single piece of WCR evidence that can be authenticated that leads to Oswald's guilt."
Oswald's anomalous behavior after the shooting of JFK would be admissible evidence of "guilt" (though not anything more specific that that). Leaving work early without asking the boss, abortive bus ride that he wastes a perfectly good fare to leave, an "expensive" cab ride (for the thrifty Oswald at least), changing clothes; grabbing either a loaded pistol, or grabbing pistol and ammo (but from where?) and loading the pistol; concealing it, and heading out to a movie theater, striking a cop in the face, pulling a loaded pistol on a cop, resisting arrest, would be admissible evidence of a guilty "state of mind." As far as authenticating it, this stuff was all (allegedly) admitted by Oswald (some of it on live TV), backed up by eyewitnesses, and doesn't seem to be seriously contested by anyone. (This stuff is also completely independent of the Tippet matter, but if he did kill Tippet, that would also be evidence.)
I know this doesn't you very far along in support of any particular theory of the case, but it would be admissible and it would be evidence. In Texas, this is evidence of "guilt", not a great deal of evidence to be sure, but still evidence.
Oswald's anomalous behavior after the shooting of JFK would be admissible evidence of "guilt" (though not anything more specific that that). Leaving work early without asking the boss, abortive bus ride that he wastes a perfectly good fare to leave, an "expensive" cab ride (for the thrifty Oswald at least), changing clothes; grabbing either a loaded pistol, or grabbing pistol and ammo (but from where?) and loading the pistol; concealing it, and heading out to a movie theater, striking a cop in the face, pulling a loaded pistol on a cop, resisting arrest, would be admissible evidence of a guilty "state of mind." As far as authenticating it, this stuff was all (allegedly) admitted by Oswald (some of it on live TV), backed up by eyewitnesses, and doesn't seem to be seriously contested by anyone. (This stuff is also completely independent of the Tippet matter, but if he did kill Tippet, that would also be evidence.)
I know this doesn't you very far along in support of any particular theory of the case, but it would be admissible and it would be evidence. In Texas, this is evidence of "guilt", not a great deal of evidence to be sure, but still evidence.