Mock LHO trial today

[Tracy Riddle]

The Spence/Bugliosi charade was just terrible. Spence stipulated all the physical evidence instead of challenging the chain of possession. A very bad start. Then they didn't take testimony from enough witnesses, and Spence didn't ask them the right questions. And Bugliosi is a much more dramatic stage performer than Spence, which leaves a huge impact on the jury.

[Charles Drago]

The doubt expressed by a hung jury is precisely the condition upon which the success of the on-going cover-up is predicated. The killers of JFK do not send their bought-and-paid-for pundits and writers -- accessories to murder -- to end the LN/conspiracy debate, but only to prolong it. Indefinitely.

Doubt is the Sponsors' guarantee of continued dominance. Not to mention survival.

Certainty -- even in support of the LN lie -- is too dangerous a precedent. Minority control of the majority succeeds only if the latter are kept at each others' throats -- intellectually as well as literally.

[Phil Dragoo]

A competent defense would:

Disallow much, even most, though not all, the physical evidence: inadmissable due to lack of chain of possession, et cetera;

Shred such witnesses as Brennan who saw the shooter standing up, Markham who couldn't identify Oswald, Benevidez and Reynolds who changed testimony after gunfire, et cetera;

Explode the Walker claim (two men who then drove off, different bullet per Walker, et cetera);

Destroy the Tippit case with Clemmons v Markham--and a Reynolds and Benevidez in witness protection, immunized--plus the outrageous automatic v revolver eyewitness and ballistic evidence;

Introduce Vickie Adams and Sandra Styles (and friends) v Lovelady and Shelley--memory/perjury issues resolved;

And of course a trial by ordeal would have revealed Patrick Dean's arrangement for Jack Ruby's entrance;

As a coda, pursue the fifty cases in Belzer-Wayne Hit List--

Stipulate any witness for the prosecution is incompetent or complicit and therefore a hostile witness.

Craig was hounded unto death.

And yet Helms and Specter and Dulles and Ford, all died in their beds.

Perhaps if we petition, or another FOIA suit.

One more march oughta do it.

If it please the court

How did the man who never owned the weapon use it without GSR though AEC Oak Ridge found all seven who fired it presented with such residue.

How did the shooter wound the president in front if firing from behind--enter as evidence Groden's 81 to impeach all the Bethesda autopsy record, photos, x-rays, testimony.

Exhume Connally and weigh the fragments--

Wecht and Fiester and Aguilar and Mantik and Cranor et al to explode the state's only argument: the single bullet theory.

At the defense table, Jim DiEugenio is countering every Bugliosi claim and destroying it in detail.

Charles will present the Evica evidence, assistance by Gil Jesus, disputing the state's claim of ownership of the weapon.

Ruth Paine will be dealt with over three days of questioning.

Surely John Newman will vaporize the Mexico City provocation.

John Armstrong on vibes.

James Douglass will present the opening argument.

Richard Belzer will close.

We'll give Dawn a staff of twenty-five and the floor of an office building with fifty lines and she can run the discovery and witness preparation.

This is that show where we tell the government it has absolutely no case.

Divert a river through the Justice Department and it's Miller Time.

[Frankie Vegas]

This maybe of interest. Of the twelve jurors, nine voted guilty, three voted not guilty. Of the three voting not guilty, one was Gary Mack...

[Charles Drago]

Mack got through jury selection?

The game ... it goes on and on and on ...

[Don Jeffries]

When this program first aired on Showtime in 1986, there were several indications it was a typical msm disinfo product. First, the selection of Gerry Spence as Oswald's attorney. I've liked what Spence has had to say on other issues, but he was woeful here; very limited knowledge of the case, to the extent that he kept referring to J.D. Tippit as "Tibbits." And, has been noted, his defense was the kind patsies from Bruno Richard Hauptman to Sirhan Sirhan to Timothy Mcveigh have typically received. None of the strongest indicators of conspiracy were touched upon. But there was a lot of dramatic posturing by Spence, holding Oswald's photo in front of him.

The "experts" chosen to discuss the trial, while we awaited the verdict with bated breath, were Alan Dershowitz, Ramsey Clark, and I believe Jack Anderson, I may have that wrong, but that's what I remember. At any rate, there wasn't a "conspiracy theorist" among them. Shockingly, they all thought the evidence against Oswald was "overwhelming," and were there to prepare the audience for the predetermined "guilty" verdict. They made a mistake, however, by permitting the public to call a 900 number to register their own vote. When the results came in as we might expect, with some 89% voting Oswald "not guilty," host Edwin Newman stuttered and stammered to try to explain why the jury's verdict might well be different (as if he didn't already know).

When this program was rebroadcast a few years later, a few key changes were made. First, Geraldo Rivera was the host, assuring that it would all be presented in as lurid and sensational a style as possible. Secondly, they still let the audience vote, but added a third choice, one of "guilty as part of a conspiracy." This subtle change did the trick, as the audience voted for that option instead of "not guilty." Geraldo still didn't seem that happy; I believe he was in the midst of converting officially into his staunch lone-nutter stance.

The program is interesting, in that it does include the real witnesses, but very predictable in the way the material is presented. Still, most here would probably find it mildly interesting.

[Frankie Vegas]

I must admit. I still watch Dr Cyril Wecht's testimony on the old mock trial. He wipes the floor with Bugliousi.

I also think Spence is a poor lawyer in this case. At times I actually cringe for him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tos1YD5CjU

[Magda Hassan]

The Bug was just a rude bully really with little to use. Cyril Wecht was straight and true.

[Dawn Meredith]

Mack got through jury selection?

The game ... it goes on and on and on ...

I saw Frankie's post to this effect on facebook.
It is a game to them. A deadly game, all preparation for the final nail on 11/22/13.
In what universe would a defense attorney not STRIKE Gary Mack?
Yet he votes" not guilty!!
Theatre of the absurd.

Dawn

[Charles Drago]

Mack got through jury selection?

The game ... it goes on and on and on ...

I saw Frankie's post to this effect on facebook.
It is a game to them. A deadly game, all preparation for the final nail on 11/22/13.
In what universe would a defense attorney not STRIKE Gary Mack?
Yet he votes" not guilty!!
Theatre of the absurd.

Dawn

That's "Theater of the INTENTIONALLY Absurd."

Cognitive dissonance. Doppelgangers within a single entity. "CT" credentials renewed.

Operation Matryoshka.