[Ben Holmes]

(10-29-2016, 10:47 AM)Patrick C Wrote:  

Ben Holmes Wrote:If by itself it doesn't indicate any guilt - why does it suddenly do so when combined with other actions that don't indicate any guilt?

JFK Darwin Award alert......

Congratulations Holmes, that has to be one of the most stupid posts even you have produced....

Obviously if items of circumstancial evidence and or direct witness testimony are added together, they can form the stronger weight of evidence. In isolation they may not have the same stregth.

A legal source states:-

"Different pieces of circumstantial evidence may be required, so that each corroborates the conclusions drawn from the others. Together, they may more strongly support one particular inference over another."

I suggest that if this is how your mind works that you give up sharing your interest in the case with others - your views are clearly founded on logical misconceptions and skewed assimilation.

Socrates said words to the effect that a wise and educated person appreciated what they didn't know. You are the antithesis of that position.

So you publicly admit that non of these 53 items demonstrate any guilt on the part of Lee Harvey Oswald.

My question still remains...