+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Maryferrel.org

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    253

    Maryferrel.org

    Mary Ferrell Foundation - preserving the legacy

    Home/JFK Assassination/Evidence/The Case Against Oswald






    Contents

    Photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald from August 1963, when he was arrested in New Orleans following a "scuffle" with Carlos Bringuier.
    The following is an exceedingly brief summary of the main points in the case for Oswald as the lone assassin, and brief rebuttals of those arguments:
    1. Oswald’s rifle was found near the "sniper's nest" in the Book Depository building, and a bullet involved in the shooting had markings proving it was fired from that rifle. But this bullet was found on a stretcher in Parkland Hospital under circumstances that suggest it was planted. The rifle also may have been planted – the story that Oswald carried the rifle into a building inside a paper bag has many problems. Further, a paraffin test on Oswald's cheek came out negative, indicating he hadn't fired a rifle that day.
    2. Oswald was present on the sixth floor around the time of the shooting, and was even spotted in the window. The Warren Commissioner's "star witness" Howard Brennan didn't identify Oswald at a police lineup, and evidence indicates he could not have been the source for the description of Oswald that went out over police radio. No other eyewitnesses put him in the window, and there is contradictory testimony about Oswald's whereabouts including multiple witnesses placing him on a lower floor.
    3. Medical evidence showed that all bullets striking the motorcade came from behind. The medical evidence is too tangled a tale to summarize, but there is much evidence for a shot from the front. The single-bullet theory required by the lone assassin scenario is beyond credibility.
    4. Oswald’s flight from the crime scene indicates involvement, and his murder of Dallas Police officer Tippit proves his capacity for violence. Testimony suggests that Oswald aided a journalist to a telephone while exiting the building, hardly the behavior of a crazed killer in flight. The evidence that Oswald killed Tippit is hardly ironclad, and has problems of its own.
    5. Since no one could have known that the motorcade would pass by the Book Depository building when Oswald got his job there in October 1963, no conspiracy could have placed him there. Dealey Plaza is a central access point to highways, and there are few locations in Dallas suitable for a Presidential visit; Commissioner McCloy himself argued that the building was likely to be along any route. And the "coffee klatch" account of how Oswald got the job may not be the full story. Further, a sophisticated plot would arrange for multiple possible "patsies," and indeed there are indications this may have been the case - Gilberto Lopez is one such example.
    6. Oswald was a sociopathic loner and malcontent, and thus had no associates who would have aided him in the crime. Lee Harvey Oswald remains enigmatic, and evidence of his many contacts has emerged over the years. He certainly wasn't the two-dimensional figure depicted by the Warren Commission. Oswald's defection to the Soviet Union and later pro-Castro activities are indicative of an intelligence operative building a "legend," and several of his associates were later revealed to be intelligence-connected.
    7. Jack Ruby did not "rub out" Oswald. The timing of his entry to the police basement was pure luck and could not have been planned, since Oswald was supposed to have been moved earlier. And it makes no sense to silence Oswald--then someone would have to silence Ruby. The timing of Ruby's entry simply needed the help of key Dallas police insiders; this appears to be exactly what happened. The "infinite chain of people to be silenced" argument is silly--some people can be trusted to keep their mouths shut more than others.

    RESOURCES:

    Essays
    A Reply to Students' Questions, by Dr. Grover B. Proctor, Jr.
    Primary Sources: Theory - Oswald the Lone Gunman, by Spartacus Educational.
    Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald? Conspiracy - Cases For and Against, by PBS.
    The Railroading of Lee Harvey Oswald, by Ian Griggs.
    A Review of Gerald Posner, Case Closed: Lee Harvey Oswald and the Assassination of JFK, by Peter Dale Scott.





    Documents
    Warren Report, Chapter IV: The Assassin.
    Warren Report, Appendix XII: Speculation and Rumors.

    Comments On This Page



    Related Starting Points




    Retrieved from "http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.php/The_Case_Against_Oswald"

    © Mary Ferrell Foundation. All Rights Reserved. |Press Room |Our Policies| Contact Us|Site Map

  2. #2
    Jafo is offline Always Right, Seldom Agreed With. User Rank
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    64

    Re: Maryferrel.org

    Not YOU again!!!!

    Don't you ever get tired of this silliness? Shouldn't you be in a hollow tree somewhere teaching other elves how to make cookies?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,115

    Re: Maryferrel.org

    Quote Originally Posted by eflteacher View Post
    Mary Ferrell Foundation - preserving the legacy

    Home/JFK Assassination/Evidence/The Case Against Oswald






    Contents
    Photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald from August 1963, when he was arrested in New Orleans following a "scuffle" with Carlos Bringuier.
    The following is an exceedingly brief summary of the main points in the case for Oswald as the lone assassin, and brief rebuttals of those arguments:
    1. Oswald’s rifle was found near the "sniper's nest" in the Book Depository building, and a bullet involved in the shooting had markings proving it was fired from that rifle. But this bullet was found on a stretcher in Parkland Hospital under circumstances that suggest it was planted. The rifle also may have been planted – the story that Oswald carried the rifle into a building inside a paper bag has many problems. Further, a paraffin test on Oswald's cheek came out negative, indicating he hadn't fired a rifle that day.
    2. Oswald was present on the sixth floor around the time of the shooting, and was even spotted in the window. The Warren Commissioner's "star witness" Howard Brennan didn't identify Oswald at a police lineup, and evidence indicates he could not have been the source for the description of Oswald that went out over police radio. No other eyewitnesses put him in the window, and there is contradictory testimony about Oswald's whereabouts including multiple witnesses placing him on a lower floor.
    3. Medical evidence showed that all bullets striking the motorcade came from behind. The medical evidence is too tangled a tale to summarize, but there is much evidence for a shot from the front. The single-bullet theory required by the lone assassin scenario is beyond credibility.
    4. Oswald’s flight from the crime scene indicates involvement, and his murder of Dallas Police officer Tippit proves his capacity for violence. Testimony suggests that Oswald aided a journalist to a telephone while exiting the building, hardly the behavior of a crazed killer in flight. The evidence that Oswald killed Tippit is hardly ironclad, and has problems of its own.
    5. Since no one could have known that the motorcade would pass by the Book Depository building when Oswald got his job there in October 1963, no conspiracy could have placed him there. Dealey Plaza is a central access point to highways, and there are few locations in Dallas suitable for a Presidential visit; Commissioner McCloy himself argued that the building was likely to be along any route. And the "coffee klatch" account of how Oswald got the job may not be the full story. Further, a sophisticated plot would arrange for multiple possible "patsies," and indeed there are indications this may have been the case - Gilberto Lopez is one such example.
    6. Oswald was a sociopathic loner and malcontent, and thus had no associates who would have aided him in the crime. Lee Harvey Oswald remains enigmatic, and evidence of his many contacts has emerged over the years. He certainly wasn't the two-dimensional figure depicted by the Warren Commission. Oswald's defection to the Soviet Union and later pro-Castro activities are indicative of an intelligence operative building a "legend," and several of his associates were later revealed to be intelligence-connected.
    7. Jack Ruby did not "rub out" Oswald. The timing of his entry to the police basement was pure luck and could not have been planned, since Oswald was supposed to have been moved earlier. And it makes no sense to silence Oswald--then someone would have to silence Ruby. The timing of Ruby's entry simply needed the help of key Dallas police insiders; this appears to be exactly what happened. The "infinite chain of people to be silenced" argument is silly--some people can be trusted to keep their mouths shut more than others.

    RESOURCES:

    Essays
    A Reply to Students' Questions, by Dr. Grover B. Proctor, Jr.
    Primary Sources: Theory - Oswald the Lone Gunman, by Spartacus Educational.
    Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald? Conspiracy - Cases For and Against, by PBS.
    The Railroading of Lee Harvey Oswald, by Ian Griggs.
    A Review of Gerald Posner, Case Closed: Lee Harvey Oswald and the Assassination of JFK, by Peter Dale Scott.





    Documents
    Warren Report, Chapter IV: The Assassin.
    Warren Report, Appendix XII: Speculation and Rumors.

    Comments On This Page

    Related Starting Points


    Retrieved from "http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.php/The_Case_Against_Oswald"

    © Mary Ferrell Foundation. All Rights Reserved. |Press Room |Our Policies|Contact Us Contact Us|Site Map
    These are nothing more than the same myths and fallacies which you have tried in the past but which have been debunked , the only difference is another source.

    This source is merely yet another wacko conspiracy nut.

    But never the less here are the facts.

    1. there are no circumstances in finding the bullet which suggest it was planted and it proven through ballistics and chemical tests to have been fired through Oswald's rifle. It is not unusual for bullets which have passed through multiple obstacles ( two bodies and a wrist in this case ) to slow down so that they barely penetrate the skin. In such a case it is quite common for bullets to just fall out of the wound such as on a stretcher.

    2. There is no evidence whatsoever that the rifle was planted nor is there any problem with his using the paper bag to carry it in. The paper bag had fibers on it which were matched to the blanket he used to cover the rifle up while storing it in Ruth Paine's garage.

    3. The so called controversy behind the parafin test is a sleight of hand lie on the part of conspiracy nuts to trick the weak minded. A paraffin test can determine IF someone fired a weapon very recently but it cannot prove that some one did NOT fire a weapon. These tests were well known by law enforcement to be unreliable. They only work part of the time and merely rubbing ones skin or washing or changing clothes can ruin the effectiveness of these tests.

    So the first point in favor of Oswald acting alone is solid and un-refuted by these conspiracy nut claims

    1.There are no witnesses placing Oswald on a lower floor until AFTER the shooting was there some mystery about the source of the police description which went out over the police radio since any number of TSBD employees could have provided it.

    2 the fact that no one saw him means only that no one looked closely at the building and/or he simply stayed in the shadows. WOW no mystery there.

    3. However his prints were on the boxes in a manner indicating he arranged the into the nest and his rifle and spent brass from the rifle were found there.

    The second point remains intact with no conflicting evidence.

    1.There is no solid medical evidence or any other reliable evidence suggesting that the shots came from in front. Some nuts such as elfteacher lie about the autopsy evidence being faked but of course not a shred of proof supports that lie. The support for the shots coming from in front are a small minority of mainly unreliable EARWITNESSES who claimed they heard the shots coming from in front of Kennedy. These few witnesses are proven wrong by the vast majority who heard them coming from the TSBD. And of course by witnesses elsewhere who saw no shooter despite the fact that they would have been standing next to one on the knoll.

    2. the only people believing that the single bullet explanation lacks credibility are the uneducated who know little about firearms of ballistics it is in in fact a very normal explanation for a normal bullets typical performance.

    SO the third point is unchallenged.

    2. there is no evidence Oswald helped a reporter as claimed nor is the fact that he shot Tibbet in question the claim that it is less than iron clad is a lie.

    So the fourth point is un - touched

    1. Oswald got his job at the TSBD before anyone even knew where Kennedy would have his lunch meeting at . The secret Service advance team scouted multiple locations and settled on the Trade Mart building after Oswald was working in the TSBD. The claim that Dealey plaza is a hub that they would have gone through anyoway is a lie as any glance at a street map of Dallas in 1963 would prove. had the advance team made a different choice they would have taken any of scores of routes to reach a different destination which would have required hundreds of patsies if there were one.

    The fifth point is iron clad proof of no conspiracy. It requires a LUDICROUS claim that the secret service was in on it. Furthermore sucha sophisticated plot is unworkable since such conspiracies are impossible to keep secret , someone always talks.

    1. The sociopathic , uneducated loner description of Oswald is spot on with no conflicting evidence. There has never been so much as a hint that he had some connection with Government agencies beyond a mundane military enlistment. Emigrating to russia was odd but not indicative of anything except that he was an odd nutcase. None of his associates were ever shown to be intelligence connected as claimed and the idea that it was all an elaborate scheme is spy novel fiction.

    SO Mary Ferrel fails to challenge the sixth point.

    1. The precise timing of Oswald's movements and locations before being shot by Ruby are well established. Oswald himself took some control over the timing when he asked for a change of clothes and was granted it. He screwed around for a few minutes deciding on what outfit would look best for the cameras and this action determined the timing of his exit into the garage. In addition we have even ore precise knowledge of Ruby's locations and movements before he shot Oswald. This is established by a receipt he had in his pocket which placed him at a western union telegraph office only minutes before entering the police garage. the point is that it was luck that the two men met OR Oswald intentionally delayed because he knew he had to meet Ruby at a certain time to be killed , which is of course preposterous.

    SO once again all seven points are rock solid and you and Ferrell have failed to refute them.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    253

    Re: Maryferrel.org

    The Mary Ferrel organization believes that Oswald fired some of the shots.

    With your knee jerk reaction, you have once again demonstrated how little you know about this case.

    This organization is very restrained in their opinion on the matter.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,115

    Re: Maryferrel.org

    Quote Originally Posted by eflteacher View Post
    The Mary Ferrel organization believes that Oswald fired some of the shots.

    With your knee jerk reaction, you have once again demonstrated how little you know about this case.

    This organization is very restrained in their opinion on the matter.
    I have demonstrated n fact that I know more about this case than you.

    Every point which they state an opinion on was proven wrong using facts so it is you having the knee jerk reaction not I.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    253

    Re: Maryferrel.org

    Quote Originally Posted by Soupnazi630 View Post
    I have demonstrated n fact that I know more about this case than you.

    Every point which they state an opinion on was proven wrong using facts so it is you having the knee jerk reaction not I.
    Where are your "facts."

    Name them.

    Where is the fingerprint on the rifle?

    Positive Parafin?

    Chain of Custody?
    Last edited by eflteacher; 09-07-2009 at 10:44 PM.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,115

    Re: Maryferrel.org

    Quote Originally Posted by eflteacher View Post
    Where are your "facts."

    Name them.

    Where is the fingerprint on the rifle?

    Positive Parafin?

    Chain of Custody?
    I have answered you repeatedly and given you facts. You just spin your wheels and go in circles.

    One more time.

    Oswald likely wiped down the rifle as he moved to hide it. Why would he do this? Because he had time to do so and he knew like most know that fingerprints are a strong source of evidence.

    He did not however wipe down the unfired round nor the spent brass. His prints were found on both. He also had no time to detail clean the entire rifle which is why his print was found on the underside of the barrel.

    Parafin tests are irrelevant not just in this case but in most criminal cases.

    Paraffin tests NEVER prove that someone did NOT fire a weapon. They either SUGGEST that someone did fire a weapon or they prove nothing one way or the other and this was a well known fact to professional law enforcement agencies. These tests can show a positive reaction to many common household chemicals but on the other hand they will not show any results if someone has washed their hands or changed clothes etc. The point to these tests is to help the authorities identify suspects not to prove a case.

    The chain of custody was documented and maintained that is fact. We have been over this before and as usual you only present circular arguments and questions. Then of course ignore the answers. The reason is you have no evidence of any kind to support your claim and yes such claims need proof.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    253

    Re: Maryferrel.org

    Oswald prints were not found anywhere. You are a liar.

    Only a palmprint ( placed post-mortum) was ever found.

    This is a clear cut and obvious case of someone being framed and you are buying it hook, line and sinker. You are a fool.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    253

    Re: Maryferrel.org

    Quote Originally Posted by Soupnazi630 View Post

    Parafin tests are irrelevant not just in this case but in most criminal cases.

    Paraffin tests NEVER prove that someone did NOT fire a weapon. They either SUGGEST that someone did fire a weapon or they prove nothing one way or the other and this was a well known fact to professional law enforcement agencies. These tests can show a positive reaction to many common household chemicals but on the other hand they will not show any results if someone has washed their hands or changed clothes etc. The point to these tests is to help the authorities identify suspects not to prove a case.
    You say that now, but Chief Curry did not say this in the aftermath of the shooting.

    That is the point, scrotum breath, pay attention.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    253

    Re: Maryferrel.org

    Quote Originally Posted by Soupnazi630 View Post
    The chain of custody was documented and maintained that is fact. We have been over this before and as usual you only present circular arguments and questions. Then of course ignore the answers. The reason is you have no evidence of any kind to support your claim and yes such claims need proof.
    Again , let me make something clear; the government and the Dallas Police are suspects in this case. They controlled the evidence.

    Therefore, there is no chain of custody.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,115

    Re: Maryferrel.org

    Quote Originally Posted by eflteacher View Post
    Again , let me make something clear; the government and the Dallas Police are suspects in this case. They controlled the evidence.

    Therefore, there is no chain of custody.
    No they are not suspects at all you simply demand that they be suspect because otherwise your conspiracy theory hols no water.

    Sorry but your methods like the methods of all conspiracy fools , ignores logic and evidence.

    You do not create a theory then make up facts to fit it which is what you are doing.

    You follow the known evidence and build a picture of what happened based on the evidence.

    The chain of custody is as valid as any criminal case that is fact they dutifully maintined the chain.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •