The following warnings occurred: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Warning [2] A non-numeric value encountered - Line: 499 - File: inc/functions.php PHP 7.4.33 (Linux)
|
Vincent Bugliosi's 53 Reasons... #26 Refuted. - Printable Version +- Forums (http://conspiracyjfkforum.com) +-- Forum: Main JFK Forums (http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/Forum-Main-JFK-Forums) +--- Forum: JFK Conspiracy Main Forum (http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/Forum-JFK-Conspiracy-Main-Forum) +--- Thread: Vincent Bugliosi's 53 Reasons... #26 Refuted. (/Thread-Vincent-Bugliosi-s-53-Reasons-26-Refuted) |
Vincent Bugliosi's 53 Reasons... #26 Refuted. - Ben Holmes - 12-20-2016 (26) The cashier at the theater said that Oswald had "ducked in" to the theater without buying a ticket. I'm amused that Bugliosi now pretends that how a witness describes someone's actions can now be used as evidence that he committed murder. Bugliosi knew better than that. Vincent Bugliosi was an experienced prosecutor - HE KNEW BETTER THAN THAT! The 'action' described is Oswald walking into a theater... the "ducking in" is the opinion of Julia Postal. What Julia Postal thinks of Oswald's actions (even presuming that it is Oswald), cannot possibly be used as evidence against Oswald... and Bugliosi knows this. And, as with many of the other 53 reasons, it has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with guilt or innocence in a murder case. What Bugliosi is guilty of is a circular argument... Oswald is guilty, thus all of his actions must relate and prove that 'guilt'. Watch - as Patrick demonstrates his cowardice... He'll absolutely REFUSE to address this issue. |