#1
Conspiracy JFK Forum
Vincent Bugliosi's 53 Reasons... #1 Refuted.
Vincent Bugliosi's 53 Reasons... #1 Refuted.
Vincent Bugliosi, famed prosecutor who put away Charles Manson for the Tate-LaBianca murders, has written what is indisputably the longest book defending the Warren Commission's conclusion that a lone nut, Lee Harvey Oswald, shot JFK. Weighing in at 1,612 pages, and a CD that has an additional 1,159 pages of footnotes, Mr. Bugliosi makes a strong case.
That is, if you don't know the evidence.
Mr. Bugliosi lists 53 reasons that "proved Oswald's guilt," and I'd like to go through them one by one, and show that they do no such thing. Please keep in mind that I've abbreviated most of Bugliosi's points, and lest I be accused of being misleading, I've actually taken the abbreviated list from McAdam's Forum - a Warren Commission Believer compiled this list. I've been careful to expand the point Bugliosi was making on occasion for more accuracy - but I've not shortened any of these...
(1) Oswald always visited Marina in Irving on a Friday. Nov 21 was the first Thursday visit ever.
Background: Oswald and Marina were married, but living apart at the time. Oswald almost always spent the weekends with Marina, but didn't usually visit midweek.
On the day before President Kennedy was assassinated, Oswald went to Irving Texas to visit Marina.
The Warren Commission and Vincent Bugliosi wish to argue that because this was an unique event, it had to be related to Oswald picking up a rifle to kill the President with. (this is, in fact, exactly what Bugliosi asserts.) If Oswald had visited midweek before, this argument loses much of it's force.
And, in fact, Bugliosi is lying about Nov 21st being the 'first Thursday visit ever.' Nor is it the first midweek visit. It's true that such midweek visits weren't common - but it's a lie to state that they never occurred.
Let's examine the evidence that Bugliosi surely knew of:
While this is certainly short of absolute proof of a prior Thursday visit, it's also certainly evidence of one. Evidence that Bugliosi surely knew of, and has not refuted. So he knew he was lying when he tried to make the claim that Nov 21st was the 'first Thursday visit ever.'
Oswald is also known to have gone back to Irving on a Monday, Oct 21, after the birth of his second child. Bugliosi surely knew this from the testimony of witnesses before the Warren Commission.
Lying about the known evidence in order to 'create' evidence for your belief isn't very convincing.
It's CERTAINLY not proof that Oswald murdered JFK.
That is, if you don't know the evidence.
Mr. Bugliosi lists 53 reasons that "proved Oswald's guilt," and I'd like to go through them one by one, and show that they do no such thing. Please keep in mind that I've abbreviated most of Bugliosi's points, and lest I be accused of being misleading, I've actually taken the abbreviated list from McAdam's Forum - a Warren Commission Believer compiled this list. I've been careful to expand the point Bugliosi was making on occasion for more accuracy - but I've not shortened any of these...
(1) Oswald always visited Marina in Irving on a Friday. Nov 21 was the first Thursday visit ever.
Background: Oswald and Marina were married, but living apart at the time. Oswald almost always spent the weekends with Marina, but didn't usually visit midweek.
On the day before President Kennedy was assassinated, Oswald went to Irving Texas to visit Marina.
The Warren Commission and Vincent Bugliosi wish to argue that because this was an unique event, it had to be related to Oswald picking up a rifle to kill the President with. (this is, in fact, exactly what Bugliosi asserts.) If Oswald had visited midweek before, this argument loses much of it's force.
And, in fact, Bugliosi is lying about Nov 21st being the 'first Thursday visit ever.' Nor is it the first midweek visit. It's true that such midweek visits weren't common - but it's a lie to state that they never occurred.
Let's examine the evidence that Bugliosi surely knew of:
Quote:Mrs. Tarrants stated as best as she recalls, on Thursday night, October 31, 1963 LEE HARVEY OSWALD appeared at the cashier's cage and presented the above check to her and requested that it be cashed." (CE 1165 pg 6)
While this is certainly short of absolute proof of a prior Thursday visit, it's also certainly evidence of one. Evidence that Bugliosi surely knew of, and has not refuted. So he knew he was lying when he tried to make the claim that Nov 21st was the 'first Thursday visit ever.'
Oswald is also known to have gone back to Irving on a Monday, Oct 21, after the birth of his second child. Bugliosi surely knew this from the testimony of witnesses before the Warren Commission.
Lying about the known evidence in order to 'create' evidence for your belief isn't very convincing.
It's CERTAINLY not proof that Oswald murdered JFK.
RE: Vincent Bugliosi's 53 Reasons... #1 Refuted.
It hardly matters that Oswald may have visited on mid week days before. So what.
What is interesting and more important is that he was due on the Friday that week and not the Thursday, otherwise Ruth and Marina would not have been surprised.
It is pretty clear that he went deliberately to collect the rifle - or if you believe in a conspiracy, that he went to collect something as part of some pre arranged activity, although for me the curtain rods story is a pile of tripe.
What is interesting and more important is that he was due on the Friday that week and not the Thursday, otherwise Ruth and Marina would not have been surprised.
It is pretty clear that he went deliberately to collect the rifle - or if you believe in a conspiracy, that he went to collect something as part of some pre arranged activity, although for me the curtain rods story is a pile of tripe.
RE: Vincent Bugliosi's 53 Reasons... #1 Refuted.
(10-14-2016, 11:40 AM)Patrick C Wrote: It hardly matters that Oswald may have visited on mid week days before. So what.
Au contraire... if it "hardly matters" - then Bugliosi would have had no reason to lie about it.
But he did... and you refuse to publicly acknowledge that he did.
(10-14-2016, 11:40 AM)Patrick C Wrote: What is interesting and more important is that he was due on the Friday that week and not the Thursday, otherwise Ruth and Marina would not have been surprised.
I predict that you'll never cite for your claim.
As usual...
(10-14-2016, 11:40 AM)Patrick C Wrote: It is pretty clear that he went deliberately to collect the rifle - or if you believe in a conspiracy, that he went to collect something as part of some pre arranged activity, although for me the curtain rods story is a pile of tripe.
Then why did the Warren Commission hide the fact that there WERE curtain rods involved in this case?
It's amusing that you wish to deny that Bugliosi lied about the Thursday visit being the first - and that rather than admit that he lied, you deny that prior Thursday visits would have undercut the argument that you, Bugliosi, and the Warren Commission made.
Looks like you've lost again, Patrick.
RE: Vincent Bugliosi's 53 Reasons... #1 Refuted.
Ben Holmes Wrote:Looks like you've lost again, Patrick.
Naah......Holmes I could wipe the floor with you if I could be bothered. But as DVP and Hank have done it already what is the point....?
You live in a fantasy world......
This post was last modified: 10-16-2016, 04:31 PM by Ben Holmes.
RE: Vincent Bugliosi's 53 Reasons... #1 Refuted.
(10-15-2016, 04:27 PM)Patrick C Wrote:Ben Holmes Wrote:Looks like you've lost again, Patrick.
Naah......Holmes I could wipe the floor with you if I could be bothered. But as DVP and Hank have done it already what is the point....?
You live in a fantasy world......
Yet another claim you can't support.
You've lost again, Patrick!
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)