CD87 p92 - SS tells us the rifle Kleins shipped to Hidell was a 91(T)roop (S)pecial carbine

[David Josephs]

Just saw thischallenge: "Name a single piece of WCR evidence that can be authenticatedthat leads to Oswald's guilt."


Oswald's anomalous behavior after the shooting of JFK would be admissibleevidence of "guilt" (though not anything more specific that that).Leaving work early without asking the boss, abortive bus ride that he wastes aperfectly good fare to leave, an "expensive" cab ride (for thethrifty Oswald at least), changing clothes; grabbing either a loaded pistol, orgrabbing pistol and ammo (but from where?) and loading the pistol; concealingit, and heading out to a movie theater, striking a cop in the face, pulling aloaded pistol on a cop, resisting arrest, would be admissible evidence ofa guilty "state of mind." As far as authenticating it, this stuff wasall (allegedly) admitted by Oswald (some of it on live TV), backed up byeyewitnesses, and doesn't seem to be seriously contested by anyone. (This stuffis 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 ofthe case, but it would be admissible and it would be evidence. In Texas, thisis evidence of "guilt", not a great deal of evidence to be sure, butstill evidence.

An interesting POV Drew... yet somewhat confusing to me.

In America, where it's suppose to be "Innocent until proven guilty" you'd offer us "anomalous behavior" as EVIDENCE ??
and then when pressed - and by your own admission, AUTHENTICATION of said events has not only been non-existent, but most of these are proven in the opposite!



Leaving work early without asking the boss,
by that token Charles Givens is guilty as well

abortive bus ride that he wastes a perfectly good fare to leave,
it has been proven that Oswald was not on that bus... the transfer is not authenticated as used or given to Oswald that day... (btw - Drew, if he changed his shirt at home, are you claiming he also took the transfer from the WORK SHIRT and put it in his ARREST SHIRT? - that would make for an interesting presentation of evidence in a court of law...)

According to Kelley's notes, Oswald said he rode the bus all the way tothe theater… According to FRITZ's notes he says he took the bus to a stop near his home… and only when Fritz brings up a taxi cab do the notes literally QUOTE OSWALD as changing his mind…
Drew are you aware of the discovery processwith that transfer and the bullets?


[ATTACH=CONFIG]6035[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]6036[/ATTACH]

an "expensive" cab ride (for the thrifty Oswald at least),
Whaley was the substitute cab driver afterit was found that Darrly Click - as mentioned by Wade - did not exist.

Wade said, "He then the bus, he asked thebus driver to stop, got off at a stop, caught a taxicab driver, Darryl Click I don't have his exact place and went to his home in Oak Cliff, changed his clothes hurriedly, and left." On Nov. 27, it was conceded that "Darryl Click" did not drive a taxicab in which Oswald was a passenger. When "Darryl Click"disappeared from the case, "William Whaley" appeared as the man who drove Oswald, not home, but at least in that general direction http://22november1963.org.uk/mark-lane-oswald-arguments-11-15

changing clothes;
Wow, now there's a guilty man if ever I saw one! Drew, Oswald did indeedchange his shirt. Which means that Bledsoe's bus ID could not be correct as she id's the ARREST shirt with tornbuttons and a hole in the elbow. The shirt and pants he wore were found in his dresser and is listed on the inventroy of items taken from Beckley…. Just not photographed or inventoried.

grabbing either a loaded pistol, orgrabbing pistol and ammo (but from where?) and loading the pistol; concealingit, and heading out to a movie theater, FRITZ Said that Oswald said, HOLMES Said that Oswald said… No transcript and notes well after the fact… Mark Lane would have a field day with that incourt. Furthermore, Balcony or Lower level?

striking a cop in the face, according to the DPD

pulling a loaded pistol on a cop,
according to the DPD there is testimony from those there that the arm that had the pistol was in a short sleeve shirt… and there is NO EVIDENCE thatc an be authenticated that Oswald and the Seaport pistol he supposedly had and is in evidence were EVER connected. In fact it can be proven that the SEAPORT SHIPMENT was a fraud created by the FBI.

resisting arrest,
yes, he definitely fought back according to those in the theater… have you read the evidence of those in the theater BEFORE the DPD arrives and what Oswald did?

would be admissible evidence of aguilty "state of mind."
I have to disagree with you here again Drew. The WCR could find no motive and dismissed that as inconsequential. "State of mind" does not prove guilt unless it supports actual evidence, authenticated evidence that it was possible for the person to have committed the crime. There is no such authenticated evidence.

"A lawyer establishes the evidence's competence by showing thatit really is what it is supposed to be. Establishing that real or otherevidence is what it purports to be is called authentication"


Admissible evidence
Definition
Evidence thatis formally presented before the trier of fact (i.e., the judge or jury) to consider in deciding the case. Thetrial court judge determines whether or not the evidence may be proffered. Tobe admissible in court, the evidence must be relevant (i.e., material and having probative value) and not outweighed bycountervailing considerations (e.g.,the evidence is unfairly prejudicial, confusing, a waste of time, privileged,or based on hearsay). Also termed competentevidence; proper evidence;legal evidence. http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/admissible_evidence


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 beseriously contested by anyone. (This stuff is also completely independent ofthe Tippet matter, but if he did kill Tippet, that would also be evidence.)
Do you hear yourself Drew? "If Oswald killed Tippit, that would be evidence that he killed Kennedy" you sound like Arlen Specter here… "If a shot exists the throat Dr. Perry, after being shot from behind, would that be considered an exit' wound?"

Had this gone to court the defense would have ripped this case to shreds…which is why Bugliosi had to STAGE the trial with woefully inadequate defense.
You might find this interesting Drew: "The WC, the Truth and Arlen Specter"http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/WCTandAS.html

And then there is this memo in April 1964... which literally blows me away and to me is MUCH more important than the Katzenbach memo in illustrating the conspiracy to frame Oswald.

April 27, 1064 Redlich to Rankin: Excerpts
Wehave not yet examined the assassination scene to determine
whetherthe assassin in fact could have shot the President prior to
frame190. We could locate the position on theground which
correspondsto this frame and it would then be our intent to establish
byphotography that the assassin would have fired the first shot at the
Presidentprior to this point. Our intention is not to establish the
point withcomplete accuracy, but merely to substantiate the
hypothesiswhich underlies the conclusions that Oswald was the sole
assassin.
…
I should add that the facts which wenow have in our
possession,submitted to us in separate reports from the FBI and
SecretService, are totally incorrect and, ifleft uncorrected, will
presenta completely misleading picture.

Commission Doc #1 isthe FBI report which becomes without change the BACKBONE of the WCR while WCD 298 is THE FBI EXPLANATION OF THE EVENT which, after offered to the WCbecomes a single WCR exhibit, #879, that neither shows or explains the entire point of the Document: three shots,three hits, last hit at the foot of the steps 60 frames after 313. CE879 was all that could be offered from the entriety of WCD298... I urge EVERYONE to read thru the detailed analysis of the crime in this doc and the testimony of one FBI agent LEO GAUTHIER, the man in charge of creating this exhibit.


[ATTACH=CONFIG]6034[/ATTACH]

WCD #5 is from the SSand contains the statements of every SS agent there along with their analysis and conclusions
Page 30 of the SS document describes the break from SS SOP would you call the 120 degree turn onto Elm admissible evidence of anomalous activity ? Traveling 12-15 mph (actually 2-8mph) is also anomalous for the SS. As was the motorcade vehicle sequence, the protection onthe back of the limo, the removal of motorcycles, etc, etc…

https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/docset/getList.do?docSetId=1008

Drew, what bothers me most is the discussion of "state of mind" evidence when the real evidenceoffered has not only been NOT authenticated, but proven to be fraudulent whilebeing specifically mentioned in a WCR lawyer's memo to the lead lawyer… andsummarily dismissed as inconsequential… The "evidence and reports" need to be FIXED asap…. And not by independent investigation but by the same agencies that are lying to begin with!

The REPORT AND EVIDENCE gathered and presented by the FBI and SS needs correcting … and we can spend time discussing anything butthe actual fraudulent evidence…

and,if left uncorrected, will
present a completely misleading picture.

It may well be that this project should be undertaken by the
FBI andSecret Service with our assistance instead of being done as a
staffproject. The important thing is that the project be undertaken
expeditiously.

IOW let's let the Foxes tell us who ate the chickens…. ::face.palm::