+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 10 of 10

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    63

    Rush to Judgment

    Mark Lane is an attorney who took it upon himself, in the weeks following the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy and his alleged killer Lee Harvey Oswald, to represent Oswald's mother and widow and to try to find any information he could to exonerate Oswald of the president's murder. What he found out is the basis of what I would consider the "original conspiracy theory" -- that Oswald, even if he did pull the trigger, did not act alone in killing JFK. You may have seen or read one of any number of theories about JFK's murder, ranging from the simple and plausible to the wildly complex. What sets Rush to Judgment apart is that Mark Lane doesn't set forth a theory of who he thinks did kill JFK. He doesn't even say that he is 100 percent sure Oswald didn't do it. What he does posit is that the Warren Commission appointed by President Johnson to investigate the assassination was too quick to finger Oswald as the lone assassin and that its investigations were badly handled, including ignoring evidence and witnesses that could have cast doubt on Oswald's guilt. Another thing that sets this book apart is that it was written only two years after JFK's death, and Mark Lane was thus able to attend many of the Warren Commission hearings personally and to interview many of the witnesses himself. Thus, his conclusions are not based on third-party testimony or hearsay, nor are they influenced by the perspectives of history and the "government conspiracy craze." I urge anyone who is interested in American history, government and/or politics to read this book. It's well-written, not difficult to read, and interesting. Lane presents his information in a scholarly and non-inflammatory manner, even though his conclusions are a powerful indictment of some of the most respected figures in our history. I guarantee that Rush to Judgment will raise many questions in your mind.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,115

    Re: Rush to Judgment

    Quote Originally Posted by gazzettee View Post
    Mark Lane is an attorney who took it upon himself, in the weeks following the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy and his alleged killer Lee Harvey Oswald, to represent Oswald's mother and widow and to try to find any information he could to exonerate Oswald of the president's murder. What he found out is the basis of what I would consider the "original conspiracy theory" -- that Oswald, even if he did pull the trigger, did not act alone in killing JFK. You may have seen or read one of any number of theories about JFK's murder, ranging from the simple and plausible to the wildly complex. What sets Rush to Judgment apart is that Mark Lane doesn't set forth a theory of who he thinks did kill JFK. He doesn't even say that he is 100 percent sure Oswald didn't do it. What he does posit is that the Warren Commission appointed by President Johnson to investigate the assassination was too quick to finger Oswald as the lone assassin and that its investigations were badly handled, including ignoring evidence and witnesses that could have cast doubt on Oswald's guilt. Another thing that sets this book apart is that it was written only two years after JFK's death, and Mark Lane was thus able to attend many of the Warren Commission hearings personally and to interview many of the witnesses himself. Thus, his conclusions are not based on third-party testimony or hearsay, nor are they influenced by the perspectives of history and the "government conspiracy craze." I urge anyone who is interested in American history, government and/or politics to read this book. It's well-written, not difficult to read, and interesting. Lane presents his information in a scholarly and non-inflammatory manner, even though his conclusions are a *****ful indictment of some of the most respected figures in our history. I guarantee that Rush to Judgment will raise many questions in your mind.
    " Rush to Judgement " is well written and compelling and also debunked.

    It is based on weak hearsay evidence and in the end not credible. Like all conspiracy theories it is more of a fictional murder mystery which is precisely why people like conspiracy theories they are tantalizing and intriguing but not realistic.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    454

    Re: Rush to Judgment

    That is what you say and what you say means nothing.

    Rush to Judgment debunked the Warren Report. That is why Mark Lane had to be discredited.

    Mark Lane asked a simple question:

    How can a man who was never tried for a murder, a man who was himself murdered just days after the crime in question took place, a man who never had a chance to present his defense -- how can that man be declared a killer for all eternity?

    I have never understood how the conventional wisdom assumes that the right and proper position is to presume the man guilty when he was never and could never be accorded anything resembling due process.

    Once he was killed while in custody of law enforcement, it would seem right and proper under our system to presume the man's innocence -- or at least to leave the matter an open question.
    Last edited by theme; 09-10-2010 at 05:10 AM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,115

    Re: Rush to Judgment

    Quote Originally Posted by theme View Post
    That is what you say and what you say means nothing.

    Rush to Judgment debunked the Warren Report. That is why Mark Lane had to be discredited.

    Mark Lane asked a simple question:

    How can a man who was never tried for a murder, a man who was himself murdered just days after the crime in question took place, a man who never had a chance to present his defense -- how can that man be declared a killer for all eternity?

    I have never understood how the conventional wisdom assumes that the right and proper position is to presume the man guilty when he was never and could never be accorded anything resembling due process.

    Once he was killed while in custody of law enforcement, it would seem right and proper under our system to presume the man's innocence -- or at least to leave the matter an open question.
    By your logic Hitler was an innocent man because he died before being brought to trial.

    Lane debunked nothing he merely presented an alternate theory using weak evidence.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    454

    Re: Rush to Judgment

    Got my copy of Rush to Judgment in the mail today.

    I would suggest that you start reading books more, and trolling the internet less.

    Lane did not theorize - he suggested among other things , that actual witness testimony be used in compiling the report. Imagine that?

    From page 91 - Other Witnesses:

    At the time the shots were fired , there were eight witnesses on the 4th Floor of the Texas School Book Depository, four witnesses on the third floor, two witnesses on the second floor, and three witnesses on the first floor. In addition, there were 12 employees on the steps of the front entrance, and many other persons standing in front of the building.

    There were also numerous witness accross the street, facing the Book Depository Building. Most of these persons were not called by the commission.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,115

    Re: Rush to Judgment

    Quote Originally Posted by theme View Post
    Got my copy of Rush to Judgment in the mail today.

    I would suggest that you start reading books more, and trolling the internet less.

    Lane did not theorize - he suggested among other things , that actual witness testimony be used in compiling the report. Imagine that?

    From page 91 - Other Witnesses:

    At the time the shots were fired , there were eight witnesses on the 4th Floor of the Texas School Book Depository, four witnesses on the third floor, two witnesses on the second floor, and three witnesses on the first floor. In addition, there were 12 employees on the steps of the front entrance, and many other persons standing in front of the building.

    There were also numerous witness accross the street, facing the Book Depository Building. Most of these persons were not called by the commission.
    You forgot the 3 witnesses on the fifth floor only a few feet away directly below Oswald.

    The fact is that most witnesses do not dispute the Warren Commissions findings most in fact support it.

    Lanes main focus is on those who do dispute the conclusion and of course on criticizing the commissions investigation in general.

    One overlooked fact is that Lane had personally argued ( unsuccessfully ) with the Commission to be allowed to represent Oswald as a defense attorney. The fact is Oswald was not on trial and it gives Lane an ax to grind. In fact Lane was a successful defense attorney and his writes like a defense attorney defending a client.

    Not only does he cherry pick witnesses ( as happens with both sides in any trial ) he cherry picks the witness statement which best supports his cause. Such as his chapter devoted to Perrin who gave 3 mutually exclusive accounts. Lane picked the one bested suited to his scenario.

    Yes Lane's attack on the commission was both a brief for the defense ( which he admits ) it was also a weak conspiracy theory

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    454

    Re: Rush to Judgment

    What Lane did was expose countless ommissions of the invalidated Warren Report.

    You are just too stupid to understand that.

    One ommission being:

    "The Commission would appear to have been informed that a most important eyewitness to the event - a railroad employee who thought the shots came from the area behind the fence and who thought he saw a man throw something into the bushes when the President's car had passed.

    However, just after Weitzman gave that information, Commission counsel said, “I think that's all, and Weitzman was dismissed.

    He was not asked for the name or description of the employee. He was not asked if he looked into the bushes or if he found anything there.

    Nothing in the 26 volumes of evidence or the Report indicates that the Commission or its investigators made any effort to locate or identify the railroad employee."
    Last edited by theme; 10-05-2010 at 12:02 PM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,115

    Re: Rush to Judgment

    Quote Originally Posted by theme View Post
    What Lane did was expose countless ommissions of the invalidated Warren Report.

    You are just too stupid to understand that.

    One ommission being:

    "The Commission would appear to have been informed that a most important eyewitness to the event - a railroad employee who thought the shots came from the area behind the fence and who thought he saw a man throw something into the bushes when the President's car had passed.

    However, just after Weitzman gave that information, Commission counsel said, “I think that's all, and Weitzman was dismissed.

    He was not asked for the name or description of the employee. He was not asked if he looked into the bushes or if he found anything there.

    Nothing in the 26 volumes of evidence or the Report indicates that the Commission or its investigators made any effort to locate or identify the railroad employee."
    Lane exposed no omissions.

    Lane was a self serving Defense attorney attempting to further his own career.

    Lee Bowers was behind the fence working for the railroad and looking right at the fence where any one shooting the president would have had to have stood and he saw NOTHING.

    Weitzman was not a Railroad worker he was a deputy constable and one of the ones who found Oswald's rifle

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    454

    Re: Rush to Judgment

    One of the most publicized pieces of evidence originally offered by the police as proof that Oswald fired from the sixth-floor window was the remains of a chicken lunch and an empty soft drink bottle - which, as it turns out, belonged to Bonnie Ray Williams.

    The Commission reported, "Police sources were also responsible for the mistaken notion that the chicken bones found on the sixth floor were the remains of Oswald's lunch. They had in fact been left by another employee who ate his lunch there at least 15 minutes before the assassination."

    Nevertheless, at the time that the "mistaken notion" still related the bag containing the chicken bones to Oswald, The New York Times reported that Gordon Shanklin, the agent in charge of the Dallas FBI office, said the bag bore Oswald's fingerprint and palmprint.


    From Rush To Judgement by Mark Lane page 86.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,115

    Re: Rush to Judgment

    Quote Originally Posted by theme View Post
    One of the most publicized pieces of evidence originally offered by the police as proof that Oswald fired from the sixth-floor window was the remains of a chicken lunch and an empty soft drink bottle - which, as it turns out, belonged to Bonnie Ray Williams.

    The Commission reported, "Police sources were also responsible for the mistaken notion that the chicken bones found on the sixth floor were the remains of Oswald's lunch. They had in fact been left by another employee who ate his lunch there at least 15 minutes before the assassination."

    Nevertheless, at the time that the "mistaken notion" still related the bag containing the chicken bones to Oswald, The New York Times reported that Gordon Shanklin, the agent in charge of the Dallas FBI office, said the bag bore Oswald's fingerprint and palmprint.


    From Rush To Judgement by Mark Lane page 86.
    All of which is irrelevant.

    If it were Williams lunch it does not constitute any evidence refuting the conclusion that Oswald fired from the sixth floor.

    If it were OSwalds lunch, same conclusion.

Similar Threads

  1. Judgment Day - May 21, 2011 - WRONG AGAIN
    By ssjudge in forum Religious Scams
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 07-08-2011, 07:01 AM
  2. A real opportunity: Judgment Recovery
    By tanikwish in forum Work at Home Scams
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 01-13-2010, 10:29 AM
  3. Rush to Judgment
    By brucefan in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 03-07-2009, 09:54 PM
  4. Judgment Recovery
    By blue101 in forum Work at Home Scams
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-02-2009, 11:40 AM
  5. NOVA's Judgment Day: Intelligent Design
    By LogicallyYours in forum Science Scams
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 01-28-2008, 07:15 AM

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
  •