Another one for the LN trolls to cry about.to accept the evidence as an exhibit.
In a normal criminal trial, the prosecution would be required to establish an item as evidence BEFORE a judge would allow it to be submitted as an exhibit.
Before a chain of possession could be established, the item would have to be identified by the first witness who came in contact with it in order to establish its relevant to the case. After such identification, the prosecution would then ask the court
But in this case, although the Warren Commission's agenda was to present the evidence in such a way that Oswald "would have convicted at trial", it did not follow normal judicial protocol.
Instead, it accepted items as exhibits without so much as an identification from the person who found them. This could not have been an oversight, because they did this time and time again.
Among those items which were accepted WITHOUT identification from the people who found them were:
Commission Exhibit 139 - the C2766 rifle was never identified by the person who found it ( Dallas Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone ) as the rifle he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 162 - the "tannish grey" jacket found under a car in a parking lot a block from the Tippit murder scene was never identified by the person who reported it found ( Off. J.T. Griffin ) as the jacket he reported.
Commission Exhibit 399 - was never identified by the person who found it ( Darrell Tomlinson ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibits 543, 544 and 545 - the three 6.5 rifle shells were never identified by the person who found them ( Dallas Deputy Luke Mooney ) as the shells he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 573 - the "Walker Bullet" was never identified by the person who found it ( B.G. Norvell ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibit 594 - the four shells found at the Tippit murder scene were never identified by the witnesses who found them ( Domingo Benavides and Barbara and Virginia Davis ) as the shells they found.
All of these items were accepted by the Warren Commission as Exhibits without any established chain of possession or positive identifcation from the people who found them.
Had this case gone to criminal trial, without the positive identifcation from the people who found them, none of these items would have been admitted as evidence.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 7:45:17?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:court to accept the evidence as an exhibit.
Another one for the LN trolls to cry about.
In a normal criminal trial, the prosecution would be required to establish an item as evidence BEFORE a judge would allow it to be submitted as an exhibit.
Before a chain of possession could be established, the item would have to be identified by the first witness who came in contact with it in order to establish its relevant to the case. After such identification, the prosecution would then ask the
But in this case, although the Warren Commission's agenda was to present the evidence in such a way that Oswald "would have convicted at trial", it did not follow normal judicial protocol.
Instead, it accepted items as exhibits without so much as an identification from the person who found them. This could not have been an oversight, because they did this time and time again.
Among those items which were accepted WITHOUT identification from the people who found them were:
Commission Exhibit 139 - the C2766 rifle was never identified by the person who found it ( Dallas Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone ) as the rifle he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 162 - the "tannish grey" jacket found under a car in a parking lot a block from the Tippit murder scene was never identified by the person who reported it found ( Off. J.T. Griffin ) as the jacket he reported.
Commission Exhibit 399 - was never identified by the person who found it ( Darrell Tomlinson ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibits 543, 544 and 545 - the three 6.5 rifle shells were never identified by the person who found them ( Dallas Deputy Luke Mooney ) as the shells he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 573 - the "Walker Bullet" was never identified by the person who found it ( B.G. Norvell ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibit 594 - the four shells found at the Tippit murder scene were never identified by the witnesses who found them ( Domingo Benavides and Barbara and Virginia Davis ) as the shells they found.
All of these items were accepted by the Warren Commission as Exhibits without any established chain of possession or positive identifcation from the people who found them.
Had this case gone to criminal trial, without the positive identifcation from the people who found them, none of these items would have been admitted as evidence.
Gil continues to make asinine excuses for disregarding the evidence
that proves conclusively Oswald assassinated JFK
He knows little about the rules of evidence ...
Another one for the LN trolls to cry about.to accept the evidence as an exhibit.
In a normal criminal trial, the prosecution would be required to establish an item as evidence BEFORE a judge would allow it to be submitted as an exhibit.
Before a chain of possession could be established, the item would have to be identified by the first witness who came in contact with it in order to establish its relevant to the case. After such identification, the prosecution would then ask the court
But in this case, although the Warren Commission's agenda was to present the evidence in such a way that Oswald "would have convicted at trial", it did not follow normal judicial protocol.
Instead, it accepted items as exhibits without so much as an identification from the person who found them. This could not have been an oversight, because they did this time and time again.
Among those items which were accepted WITHOUT identification from the people who found them were:
Commission Exhibit 139 - the C2766 rifle was never identified by the person who found it ( Dallas Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone ) as the rifle he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 162 - the "tannish grey" jacket found under a car in a parking lot a block from the Tippit murder scene was never identified by the person who reported it found ( Off. J.T. Griffin ) as the jacket he reported.
Commission Exhibit 399 - was never identified by the person who found it ( Darrell Tomlinson ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibits 543, 544 and 545 - the three 6.5 rifle shells were never identified by the person who found them ( Dallas Deputy Luke Mooney ) as the shells he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 573 - the "Walker Bullet" was never identified by the person who found it ( B.G. Norvell ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibit 594 - the four shells found at the Tippit murder scene were never identified by the witnesses who found them ( Domingo Benavides and Barbara and Virginia Davis ) as the shells they found.
All of these items were accepted by the Warren Commission as Exhibits without any established chain of possession or positive identifcation from the people who found them.
Had this case gone to criminal trial, without the positive identifcation from the people who found them, none of these items would have been admitted as evidence.
On Tue, 11 Jul 2023 06:20:16 -0700 (PDT), John Corbettcourt to accept the evidence as an exhibit.
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 7:45:17?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
Another one for the LN trolls to cry about.
In a normal criminal trial, the prosecution would be required to establish an item as evidence BEFORE a judge would allow it to be submitted as an exhibit.
Before a chain of possession could be established, the item would have to be identified by the first witness who came in contact with it in order to establish its relevant to the case. After such identification, the prosecution would then ask the
But in this case, although the Warren Commission's agenda was to present the evidence in such a way that Oswald "would have convicted at trial", it did not follow normal judicial protocol.
Instead, it accepted items as exhibits without so much as an identification from the person who found them. This could not have been an oversight, because they did this time and time again.
Among those items which were accepted WITHOUT identification from the people who found them were:
Commission Exhibit 139 - the C2766 rifle was never identified by the person who found it ( Dallas Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone ) as the rifle he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 162 - the "tannish grey" jacket found under a car in a parking lot a block from the Tippit murder scene was never identified by the person who reported it found ( Off. J.T. Griffin ) as the jacket he reported.
Commission Exhibit 399 - was never identified by the person who found it ( Darrell Tomlinson ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibits 543, 544 and 545 - the three 6.5 rifle shells were never identified by the person who found them ( Dallas Deputy Luke Mooney ) as the shells he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 573 - the "Walker Bullet" was never identified by the person who found it ( B.G. Norvell ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibit 594 - the four shells found at the Tippit murder scene were never identified by the witnesses who found them ( Domingo Benavides and Barbara and Virginia Davis ) as the shells they found.
All of these items were accepted by the Warren Commission as Exhibits without any established chain of possession or positive identifcation from the people who found them.
Had this case gone to criminal trial, without the positive identifcation from the people who found them, none of these items would have been admitted as evidence.
Gil continues to make asinine excuses for disregarding the evidenceCorbutt continues to ignore and make asinine excuses to contradict
American law.
that proves conclusively Oswald assassinated JFK
Most of America disagrees with your wacky assertion...
He knows little about the rules of evidence ...
Prove it. Give us a citation...
But you won't ... you're a coward.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 6:45:17?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:court to accept the evidence as an exhibit.
Another one for the LN trolls to cry about.
In a normal criminal trial, the prosecution would be required to establish an item as evidence BEFORE a judge would allow it to be submitted as an exhibit.
Before a chain of possession could be established, the item would have to be identified by the first witness who came in contact with it in order to establish its relevant to the case. After such identification, the prosecution would then ask the
But in this case, although the Warren Commission's agenda was to present the evidence in such a way that Oswald "would have convicted at trial", it did not follow normal judicial protocol.
Instead, it accepted items as exhibits without so much as an identification from the person who found them. This could not have been an oversight, because they did this time and time again.
Among those items which were accepted WITHOUT identification from the people who found them were:
Commission Exhibit 139 - the C2766 rifle was never identified by the person who found it ( Dallas Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone ) as the rifle he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 162 - the "tannish grey" jacket found under a car in a parking lot a block from the Tippit murder scene was never identified by the person who reported it found ( Off. J.T. Griffin ) as the jacket he reported.
Commission Exhibit 399 - was never identified by the person who found it ( Darrell Tomlinson ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibits 543, 544 and 545 - the three 6.5 rifle shells were never identified by the person who found them ( Dallas Deputy Luke Mooney ) as the shells he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 573 - the "Walker Bullet" was never identified by the person who found it ( B.G. Norvell ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibit 594 - the four shells found at the Tippit murder scene were never identified by the witnesses who found them ( Domingo Benavides and Barbara and Virginia Davis ) as the shells they found.
All of these items were accepted by the Warren Commission as Exhibits without any established chain of possession or positive identifcation from the people who found them.
Had this case gone to criminal trial, without the positive identifcation from the people who found them, none of these items would have been admitted as evidence.
All of the items would've been allowed into evidence...
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 7:45:17 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:court to accept the evidence as an exhibit.
Another one for the LN trolls to cry about.
In a normal criminal trial, the prosecution would be required to establish an item as evidence BEFORE a judge would allow it to be submitted as an exhibit.
Before a chain of possession could be established, the item would have to be identified by the first witness who came in contact with it in order to establish its relevant to the case. After such identification, the prosecution would then ask the
But in this case, although the Warren Commission's agenda was to present the evidence in such a way that Oswald "would have convicted at trial", it did not follow normal judicial protocol.
Instead, it accepted items as exhibits without so much as an identification from the person who found them. This could not have been an oversight, because they did this time and time again.
Among those items which were accepted WITHOUT identification from the people who found them were:
Commission Exhibit 139 - the C2766 rifle was never identified by the person who found it ( Dallas Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone ) as the rifle he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 162 - the "tannish grey" jacket found under a car in a parking lot a block from the Tippit murder scene was never identified by the person who reported it found ( Off. J.T. Griffin ) as the jacket he reported.
Commission Exhibit 399 - was never identified by the person who found it ( Darrell Tomlinson ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibits 543, 544 and 545 - the three 6.5 rifle shells were never identified by the person who found them ( Dallas Deputy Luke Mooney ) as the shells he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 573 - the "Walker Bullet" was never identified by the person who found it ( B.G. Norvell ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibit 594 - the four shells found at the Tippit murder scene were never identified by the witnesses who found them ( Domingo Benavides and Barbara and Virginia Davis ) as the shells they found.
All of these items were accepted by the Warren Commission as Exhibits without any established chain of possession or positive identifcation from the people who found them.
Had this case gone to criminal trial, without the positive identifcation from the people who found them, none of these items would have been admitted as evidence.Gil continues to make asinine excuses for disregarding the evidence that proves conclusively
Oswald assassinated JFK. He knows little about the rules of evidence and pretends to be an
expert.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 6:45:17 AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:court to accept the evidence as an exhibit.
Another one for the LN trolls to cry about.
In a normal criminal trial, the prosecution would be required to establish an item as evidence BEFORE a judge would allow it to be submitted as an exhibit.
Before a chain of possession could be established, the item would have to be identified by the first witness who came in contact with it in order to establish its relevant to the case. After such identification, the prosecution would then ask the
But in this case, although the Warren Commission's agenda was to present the evidence in such a way that Oswald "would have convicted at trial", it did not follow normal judicial protocol.
Instead, it accepted items as exhibits without so much as an identification from the person who found them. This could not have been an oversight, because they did this time and time again.
Among those items which were accepted WITHOUT identification from the people who found them were:
Commission Exhibit 139 - the C2766 rifle was never identified by the person who found it ( Dallas Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone ) as the rifle he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 162 - the "tannish grey" jacket found under a car in a parking lot a block from the Tippit murder scene was never identified by the person who reported it found ( Off. J.T. Griffin ) as the jacket he reported.
Commission Exhibit 399 - was never identified by the person who found it ( Darrell Tomlinson ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibits 543, 544 and 545 - the three 6.5 rifle shells were never identified by the person who found them ( Dallas Deputy Luke Mooney ) as the shells he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 573 - the "Walker Bullet" was never identified by the person who found it ( B.G. Norvell ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibit 594 - the four shells found at the Tippit murder scene were never identified by the witnesses who found them ( Domingo Benavides and Barbara and Virginia Davis ) as the shells they found.
All of these items were accepted by the Warren Commission as Exhibits without any established chain of possession or positive identifcation from the people who found them.
Had this case gone to criminal trial, without the positive identifcation from the people who found them, none of these items would have been admitted as evidence.
All of the items would've been allowed into evidence and Oswald's "Johnny Cochrane" would've been allowed to attack it as he saw fit to do so. The jury would weigh what was presented and decide.
On Tue, 11 Jul 2023 07:39:18 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
All of the items would've been allowed into evidence...
When did you get your law degree?
Another one for the LN trolls to cry about.
In a normal criminal trial, the prosecution would be required to establish an item as evidence BEFORE a judge would allow it to be submitted as an exhibit.
Before a chain of possession could be established, the item would have to be identified by the first witness who came in contact with it in order to establish its relevant to the case.
After such identification, the prosecution would then ask the court to accept the evidence as an exhibit.
But in this case, although the Warren Commission's agenda was to present the evidence in such a way that Oswald "would have convicted at trial", it did not follow normal judicial protocol.
Instead, it accepted items as exhibits without so much as an identification from the person who found them. This could not have been an oversight, because they did this time and time again.
Among those items which were accepted WITHOUT identification from the people who found them were:
Commission Exhibit 139 - the C2766 rifle was never identified by the person who found it ( Dallas Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone ) as the rifle he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 162 - the "tannish grey" jacket found under a car in a parking lot a block from the Tippit murder scene was never identified by the person who reported it found ( Off. J.T. Griffin ) as the jacket he reported.
Commission Exhibit 399 - was never identified by the person who found it ( Darrell Tomlinson ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibits 543, 544 and 545 - the three 6.5 rifle shells were never identified by the person who found them ( Dallas Deputy Luke Mooney ) as the shells he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 573 - the "Walker Bullet" was never identified by the person who found it ( B.G. Norvell ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibit 594 - the four shells found at the Tippit murder scene were never identified by the witnesses who found them ( Domingo Benavides and Barbara and Virginia Davis ) as the shells they found.
All of these items were accepted by the Warren Commission as Exhibits without any established chain of possession or positive identifcation from the people who found them.
Had this case gone to criminal trial, without the positive identifcation from the people who found them, none of these items would have been admitted as evidence.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 10:39:19 AM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:court to accept the evidence as an exhibit.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 6:45:17 AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
Another one for the LN trolls to cry about.
In a normal criminal trial, the prosecution would be required to establish an item as evidence BEFORE a judge would allow it to be submitted as an exhibit.
Before a chain of possession could be established, the item would have to be identified by the first witness who came in contact with it in order to establish its relevant to the case. After such identification, the prosecution would then ask the
But in this case, although the Warren Commission's agenda was to present the evidence in such a way that Oswald "would have convicted at trial", it did not follow normal judicial protocol.
Instead, it accepted items as exhibits without so much as an identification from the person who found them. This could not have been an oversight, because they did this time and time again.
Among those items which were accepted WITHOUT identification from the people who found them were:
Commission Exhibit 139 - the C2766 rifle was never identified by the person who found it ( Dallas Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone ) as the rifle he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 162 - the "tannish grey" jacket found under a car in a parking lot a block from the Tippit murder scene was never identified by the person who reported it found ( Off. J.T. Griffin ) as the jacket he reported.
Commission Exhibit 399 - was never identified by the person who found it ( Darrell Tomlinson ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibits 543, 544 and 545 - the three 6.5 rifle shells were never identified by the person who found them ( Dallas Deputy Luke Mooney ) as the shells he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 573 - the "Walker Bullet" was never identified by the person who found it ( B.G. Norvell ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibit 594 - the four shells found at the Tippit murder scene were never identified by the witnesses who found them ( Domingo Benavides and Barbara and Virginia Davis ) as the shells they found.
All of these items were accepted by the Warren Commission as Exhibits without any established chain of possession or positive identifcation from the people who found them.
Had this case gone to criminal trial, without the positive identifcation from the people who found them, none of these items would have been admitted as evidence.
All of the items would've been allowed into evidence and Oswald's "Johnny Cochrane" would've been allowed to attack it as he saw fit to do so. The jury would weigh what was presented and decide.
As usual, you haven't refuted one single thing that I've listed.
No citations
No documents
No testimony
No exhibits
No witness videos
You do no research on your own, preferring to take the lazy way out and fall back on the conclusions of the Warren Report.
What you DO post are comments, speculation, opinion and insults.
A person can gain NO KNOWLEDGE from your posts.
.johnny must be rolling over in his grave.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 11:19:59 AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Tue, 11 Jul 2023 07:39:18 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
All of the items would've been allowed into evidence...
When did you get your law degree?
He got it at the Josef Stalin School of Law.
This case would have never made it to trial by today's standards.
NEVER.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 10:36:21 AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:court to accept the evidence as an exhibit.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 10:39:19 AM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 6:45:17 AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
Another one for the LN trolls to cry about.
In a normal criminal trial, the prosecution would be required to establish an item as evidence BEFORE a judge would allow it to be submitted as an exhibit.
Before a chain of possession could be established, the item would have to be identified by the first witness who came in contact with it in order to establish its relevant to the case. After such identification, the prosecution would then ask the
trial. Your claim, your burden to carry. Carry it.But in this case, although the Warren Commission's agenda was to present the evidence in such a way that Oswald "would have convicted at trial", it did not follow normal judicial protocol.
Instead, it accepted items as exhibits without so much as an identification from the person who found them. This could not have been an oversight, because they did this time and time again.
Among those items which were accepted WITHOUT identification from the people who found them were:
Commission Exhibit 139 - the C2766 rifle was never identified by the person who found it ( Dallas Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone ) as the rifle he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 162 - the "tannish grey" jacket found under a car in a parking lot a block from the Tippit murder scene was never identified by the person who reported it found ( Off. J.T. Griffin ) as the jacket he reported.
Commission Exhibit 399 - was never identified by the person who found it ( Darrell Tomlinson ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibits 543, 544 and 545 - the three 6.5 rifle shells were never identified by the person who found them ( Dallas Deputy Luke Mooney ) as the shells he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 573 - the "Walker Bullet" was never identified by the person who found it ( B.G. Norvell ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibit 594 - the four shells found at the Tippit murder scene were never identified by the witnesses who found them ( Domingo Benavides and Barbara and Virginia Davis ) as the shells they found.
All of these items were accepted by the Warren Commission as Exhibits without any established chain of possession or positive identifcation from the people who found them.
Had this case gone to criminal trial, without the positive identifcation from the people who found them, none of these items would have been admitted as evidence.
All of the items would've been allowed into evidence and Oswald's "Johnny Cochrane" would've been allowed to attack it as he saw fit to do so. The jury would weigh what was presented and decide.
As usual, you haven't refuted one single thing that I've listed....to your satisfaction, an impossible hurdle to clear. You are shifting the burden. Provide statements from those who arrested Oswald, investigated the homicides, etc. who agree that all of the evidence you listed wouldn't be allowed into a criminal
No citations
Fringe reset. Stop acting like we need to constantly go back to 11/22/63. Ample citations have been provided but you accept nothing.
No documents
Fringe reset. Endlessly provided, but never to your satisfaction. Make a positive case and stop asking us to address your nit-picks.
No testimony
Fringe reset. Endlessly testimony has been linked to and sent your way. You don't like it or accept it.
No exhibits
Fringe reset. You are aware of all of the major exhibits and even gave exhibit numbers above that you don't accept. What exhibits would you accept?
No witness videos
Fringe reset. Plenty of witness videos, interviews, etc. have been provided over the years. You disagree with them.
You do no research on your own, preferring to take the lazy way out and fall back on the conclusions of the Warren Report.You "research" on your own yet cannot tell us ANYTHING about who did it, how it happened, etc. You're as useful as tits on a bull.
What you DO post are comments, speculation, opinion and insults.Welcome to Usenet. Send your research here:
https://www.jfklibrary.org/
A person can gain NO KNOWLEDGE from your posts.Says the guy who's been "researching" this for decades yet has no clue about what happened.
.johnny must be rolling over in his grave.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 10:36:21 AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:court to accept the evidence as an exhibit.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 10:39:19 AM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 6:45:17 AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
Another one for the LN trolls to cry about.
In a normal criminal trial, the prosecution would be required to establish an item as evidence BEFORE a judge would allow it to be submitted as an exhibit.
Before a chain of possession could be established, the item would have to be identified by the first witness who came in contact with it in order to establish its relevant to the case. After such identification, the prosecution would then ask the
trial. Your claim, your burden to carry. Carry it.But in this case, although the Warren Commission's agenda was to present the evidence in such a way that Oswald "would have convicted at trial", it did not follow normal judicial protocol.
Instead, it accepted items as exhibits without so much as an identification from the person who found them. This could not have been an oversight, because they did this time and time again.
Among those items which were accepted WITHOUT identification from the people who found them were:
Commission Exhibit 139 - the C2766 rifle was never identified by the person who found it ( Dallas Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone ) as the rifle he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 162 - the "tannish grey" jacket found under a car in a parking lot a block from the Tippit murder scene was never identified by the person who reported it found ( Off. J.T. Griffin ) as the jacket he reported.
Commission Exhibit 399 - was never identified by the person who found it ( Darrell Tomlinson ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibits 543, 544 and 545 - the three 6.5 rifle shells were never identified by the person who found them ( Dallas Deputy Luke Mooney ) as the shells he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 573 - the "Walker Bullet" was never identified by the person who found it ( B.G. Norvell ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibit 594 - the four shells found at the Tippit murder scene were never identified by the witnesses who found them ( Domingo Benavides and Barbara and Virginia Davis ) as the shells they found.
All of these items were accepted by the Warren Commission as Exhibits without any established chain of possession or positive identifcation from the people who found them.
Had this case gone to criminal trial, without the positive identifcation from the people who found them, none of these items would have been admitted as evidence.
All of the items would've been allowed into evidence and Oswald's "Johnny Cochrane" would've been allowed to attack it as he saw fit to do so. The jury would weigh what was presented and decide.
As usual, you haven't refuted one single thing that I've listed....to your satisfaction, an impossible hurdle to clear. You are shifting the burden. Provide statements from those who arrested Oswald, investigated the homicides, etc. who agree that all of the evidence you listed wouldn't be allowed into a criminal
No citations
Fringe reset. Stop acting like we need to constantly go back to 11/22/63. Ample citations have been provided but you accept nothing.
No documents
Fringe reset. Endlessly provided, but never to your satisfaction. Make a positive case and stop asking us to address your nit-picks.
No testimony
Fringe reset. Endlessly testimony has been linked to and sent your way. You don't like it or accept it.
No exhibits
Fringe reset. You are aware of all of the major exhibits and even gave exhibit numbers above that you don't accept. What exhibits would you accept?
No witness videos
Fringe reset. Plenty of witness videos, interviews, etc. have been provided over the years. You disagree with them.
You do no research on your own, preferring to take the lazy way out and fall back on the conclusions of the Warren Report.You "research" on your own yet cannot tell us ANYTHING about who did it, how it happened, etc. You're as useful as tits on a bull.
What you DO post are comments, speculation, opinion and insults.Welcome to Usenet. Send your research here:
https://www.jfklibrary.org/
A person can gain NO KNOWLEDGE from your posts.Says the guy who's been "researching" this for decades yet has no clue about what happened.
.johnny must be rolling over in his grave.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 6:45:17 AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:court to accept the evidence as an exhibit.
Another one for the LN trolls to cry about.
In a normal criminal trial, the prosecution would be required to establish an item as evidence BEFORE a judge would allow it to be submitted as an exhibit.
Before a chain of possession could be established, the item would have to be identified by the first witness who came in contact with it in order to establish its relevant to the case. After such identification, the prosecution would then ask the
But in this case, although the Warren Commission's agenda was to present the evidence in such a way that Oswald "would have convicted at trial", it did not follow normal judicial protocol.
Instead, it accepted items as exhibits without so much as an identification from the person who found them. This could not have been an oversight, because they did this time and time again.
Among those items which were accepted WITHOUT identification from the people who found them were:
Commission Exhibit 139 - the C2766 rifle was never identified by the person who found it ( Dallas Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone ) as the rifle he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 162 - the "tannish grey" jacket found under a car in a parking lot a block from the Tippit murder scene was never identified by the person who reported it found ( Off. J.T. Griffin ) as the jacket he reported.
Commission Exhibit 399 - was never identified by the person who found it ( Darrell Tomlinson ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibits 543, 544 and 545 - the three 6.5 rifle shells were never identified by the person who found them ( Dallas Deputy Luke Mooney ) as the shells he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 573 - the "Walker Bullet" was never identified by the person who found it ( B.G. Norvell ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibit 594 - the four shells found at the Tippit murder scene were never identified by the witnesses who found them ( Domingo Benavides and Barbara and Virginia Davis ) as the shells they found.
All of these items were accepted by the Warren Commission as Exhibits without any established chain of possession or positive identifcation from the people who found them.
Had this case gone to criminal trial, without the positive identifcation from the people who found them, none of these items would have been admitted as evidence.All of the items would've been allowed into evidence and Oswald's "Johnny Cochrane" would've been allowed to attack it as he saw fit to do so. The jury would weigh what was presented and decide.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 9:20:18 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:court to accept the evidence as an exhibit.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 7:45:17 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
Another one for the LN trolls to cry about.
In a normal criminal trial, the prosecution would be required to establish an item as evidence BEFORE a judge would allow it to be submitted as an exhibit.
Before a chain of possession could be established, the item would have to be identified by the first witness who came in contact with it in order to establish its relevant to the case. After such identification, the prosecution would then ask the
But in this case, although the Warren Commission's agenda was to present the evidence in such a way that Oswald "would have convicted at trial", it did not follow normal judicial protocol.
Instead, it accepted items as exhibits without so much as an identification from the person who found them. This could not have been an oversight, because they did this time and time again.
Among those items which were accepted WITHOUT identification from the people who found them were:
Commission Exhibit 139 - the C2766 rifle was never identified by the person who found it ( Dallas Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone ) as the rifle he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 162 - the "tannish grey" jacket found under a car in a parking lot a block from the Tippit murder scene was never identified by the person who reported it found ( Off. J.T. Griffin ) as the jacket he reported.
Commission Exhibit 399 - was never identified by the person who found it ( Darrell Tomlinson ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibits 543, 544 and 545 - the three 6.5 rifle shells were never identified by the person who found them ( Dallas Deputy Luke Mooney ) as the shells he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 573 - the "Walker Bullet" was never identified by the person who found it ( B.G. Norvell ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibit 594 - the four shells found at the Tippit murder scene were never identified by the witnesses who found them ( Domingo Benavides and Barbara and Virginia Davis ) as the shells they found.
All of these items were accepted by the Warren Commission as Exhibits without any established chain of possession or positive identifcation from the people who found them.
As usual, you haven't refuted one single thing that I've listed.Had this case gone to criminal trial, without the positive identifcation from the people who found them, none of these items would have been admitted as evidence.Gil continues to make asinine excuses for disregarding the evidence that proves conclusively
Oswald assassinated JFK. He knows little about the rules of evidence and pretends to be an
expert.
No citations
No documents
No testimony
No exhibits
No witness videos
You do no research on your own, preferring to take the lazy way out and fall back on the conclusions of the Warren Report.
What you DO post are comments, speculation, opinion and insults.
A person can gain NO KNOWLEDGE from your posts.
.johnny must be rolling over in his grave.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 11:19:59 AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Tue, 11 Jul 2023 07:39:18 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
All of the items would've been allowed into evidence...
When did you get your law degree?He got it at the Josef Stalin School of Law.
This case would have never made it to trial by today's standards.
NEVER.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 11:41:47 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 11:19:59 AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Tue, 11 Jul 2023 07:39:18 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
All of the items would've been allowed into evidence...
When did you get your law degree?He got it at the Josef Stalin School of Law.
This case would have never made it to trial by today's standards.
NEVER.Gil thinks he's a modern day Clarence Darrow.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 11:41:47?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 11:19:59?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Tue, 11 Jul 2023 07:39:18 -0700 (PDT), Chuck SchuylerHe got it at the Josef Stalin School of Law.
All of the items would've been allowed into evidence...
When did you get your law degree?
This case would have never made it to trial by today's standards.
NEVER.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 5:02:17 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:person to sets eyes on it, it is the officer who collects the evidence. That person will mark it in some way, or put the evidence in a evidence bag and mark that. This starts the chain of custody, not the first person who sees it or even touches it. It
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 11:41:47 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 11:19:59 AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Tue, 11 Jul 2023 07:39:18 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
All of the items would've been allowed into evidence...
When did you get your law degree?He got it at the Josef Stalin School of Law.
This case would have never made it to trial by today's standards.
He is an idiot with this nonsense. He wrote this...NEVER.Gil thinks he's a modern day Clarence Darrow.
"Before a chain of possession could be established, the item would have to be identified by the first witness who came in contact with it in order to establish its relevant to the case."
This is wrong in just about every way it can be wrong.
For starters, it is chain of custody, not chain of possession. "custody" in this case means law enforcement having control of the evidence. How the hell could they vouch for anything before they had possession and control of it? And it isn`t the first
In the JFK case it was Day who was the person who controlled and processed the evidence on the 6th floor. At 10th and Patton it was other cops.them. If Benavides wandered off, never to be seen again then by Gil reasoning the evidence would have to be disregarded. The cops have to be able to vouch for chain of custody *after* they get control of the evidence, not before. He also seems to think
There are a lot of ways Gil`s ideas can be shown to be stupid, here`s a few. Benavides collected shells and 10th and Patton and gave them to cops at the scene. But the cops would never know how many people handled them before they got possession of
One definition....person designated to handle it and for which it was never unaccounted. Although it is a lengthy process, it is required for evidence to be relevant in the court. The continuity of possession of evidence or custody of evidence and its movement and
The chain of custody is the most critical process of evidence documentation. It is a must to assure the court of law that the evidence is authentic, i.e., it is the same evidence seized at the crime scene. It was, at all times, in the custody of a
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK551677/
"at the scene of a crime or from a person".
Also...
"The chain of custody proves the integrity of a piece of evidence.[1] A paper trail is maintained so that the persons who had charge of the evidence at any given time can be known quickly and summoned to testify during the trial if required."
It is the people who took control of the evidence and are in charge of it who are relevant. With the shells in the SN, Luke Mooney never took control of them so he is irrelevant to the chain of custody.
Also...
"The chain of custody needs to document every transmission from the moment the evidence is collected, from one person to another, to establish that nobody else could have accessed or possessed that evidence without authorization."
Clearly they are talking about collection by law enforcement.
Gil also seems to thing that the average person can make a positive identification of a hunk of lead they had previously. The police mark it, that is only way to be sure it is the same piece of lead.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 10:41:47?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 11:19:59?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Tue, 11 Jul 2023 07:39:18 -0700 (PDT), Chuck Schuyler
All of the items would've been allowed into evidence...
When did you get your law degree?
He got it at the Josef Stalin School of Law.
This case would have never made it to trial by today's standards.
NEVER.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 11:35:52?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:court to accept the evidence as an exhibit.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 9:20:18?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 7:45:17?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
Another one for the LN trolls to cry about.
In a normal criminal trial, the prosecution would be required to establish an item as evidence BEFORE a judge would allow it to be submitted as an exhibit.
Before a chain of possession could be established, the item would have to be identified by the first witness who came in contact with it in order to establish its relevant to the case. After such identification, the prosecution would then ask the
As usual, you haven't refuted one single thing that I've listed.Gil continues to make asinine excuses for disregarding the evidence that proves conclusively
But in this case, although the Warren Commission's agenda was to present the evidence in such a way that Oswald "would have convicted at trial", it did not follow normal judicial protocol.
Instead, it accepted items as exhibits without so much as an identification from the person who found them. This could not have been an oversight, because they did this time and time again.
Among those items which were accepted WITHOUT identification from the people who found them were:
Commission Exhibit 139 - the C2766 rifle was never identified by the person who found it ( Dallas Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone ) as the rifle he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 162 - the "tannish grey" jacket found under a car in a parking lot a block from the Tippit murder scene was never identified by the person who reported it found ( Off. J.T. Griffin ) as the jacket he reported.
Commission Exhibit 399 - was never identified by the person who found it ( Darrell Tomlinson ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibits 543, 544 and 545 - the three 6.5 rifle shells were never identified by the person who found them ( Dallas Deputy Luke Mooney ) as the shells he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 573 - the "Walker Bullet" was never identified by the person who found it ( B.G. Norvell ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibit 594 - the four shells found at the Tippit murder scene were never identified by the witnesses who found them ( Domingo Benavides and Barbara and Virginia Davis ) as the shells they found.
All of these items were accepted by the Warren Commission as Exhibits without any established chain of possession or positive identifcation from the people who found them.
Had this case gone to criminal trial, without the positive identifcation from the people who found them, none of these items would have been admitted as evidence.
Oswald assassinated JFK. He knows little about the rules of evidence and pretends to be an
expert.
I have no obligation to refute your baseless assertions.
You are the one claiming all of this
damning evidence of Oswald's guilt wouldn't have been accepted into evidence. And on what
do you base this assertion. Nothing but your own layman's opinion.
No citations
No documents
No testimony
No exhibits
No witness videos
You do no research on your own, preferring to take the lazy way out and fall back on the conclusions of the Warren Report.
What you DO post are comments, speculation, opinion and insults.
Says a person who has just...
A person can gain NO KNOWLEDGE from your posts.
.johnny must be rolling over in his grave.
Your OP claimed the forensic evidence would not have been allowed in court.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 6:11:02?PM UTC-4, Bud wrote:...
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 5:02:17?PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 11:41:47?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 11:19:59?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:Gil thinks he's a modern day Clarence Darrow.
On Tue, 11 Jul 2023 07:39:18 -0700 (PDT), Chuck SchuylerHe got it at the Josef Stalin School of Law.
All of the items would've been allowed into evidence...
When did you get your law degree?
This case would have never made it to trial by today's standards.
NEVER.
person designated to handle it and for which it was never unaccounted. Although it is a lengthy process, it is required for evidence to be relevant in the court. The continuity of possession of evidence or custody of evidence and its movement andOne definition....
The chain of custody is the most critical process of evidence documentation. It is a must to assure the court of law that the evidence is authentic, i.e., it is the same evidence seized at the crime scene. It was, at all times, in the custody of a
...
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK551677/
Gil's feeble attempt ...
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 10:39:19?AM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:court to accept the evidence as an exhibit.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 6:45:17?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
Another one for the LN trolls to cry about.
In a normal criminal trial, the prosecution would be required to establish an item as evidence BEFORE a judge would allow it to be submitted as an exhibit.
Before a chain of possession could be established, the item would have to be identified by the first witness who came in contact with it in order to establish its relevant to the case. After such identification, the prosecution would then ask the
But in this case, although the Warren Commission's agenda was to present the evidence in such a way that Oswald "would have convicted at trial", it did not follow normal judicial protocol.
Instead, it accepted items as exhibits without so much as an identification from the person who found them. This could not have been an oversight, because they did this time and time again.
Among those items which were accepted WITHOUT identification from the people who found them were:
Commission Exhibit 139 - the C2766 rifle was never identified by the person who found it ( Dallas Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone ) as the rifle he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 162 - the "tannish grey" jacket found under a car in a parking lot a block from the Tippit murder scene was never identified by the person who reported it found ( Off. J.T. Griffin ) as the jacket he reported.
Commission Exhibit 399 - was never identified by the person who found it ( Darrell Tomlinson ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibits 543, 544 and 545 - the three 6.5 rifle shells were never identified by the person who found them ( Dallas Deputy Luke Mooney ) as the shells he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 573 - the "Walker Bullet" was never identified by the person who found it ( B.G. Norvell ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibit 594 - the four shells found at the Tippit murder scene were never identified by the witnesses who found them ( Domingo Benavides and Barbara and Virginia Davis ) as the shells they found.
All of these items were accepted by the Warren Commission as Exhibits without any established chain of possession or positive identifcation from the people who found them.
Had this case gone to criminal trial, without the positive identifcation from the people who found them, none of these items would have been admitted as evidence.
All of the items would've been allowed into evidence and Oswald's "Johnny Cochrane" would've been allowed to attack it as he saw fit to do so. The jury would weigh what was presented and decide.
As usual, you haven't refuted one single thing that I've listed.
No citations
No documents
No testimony
No exhibits
No witness videos
You do no research on your own, preferring to take the lazy way out and fall back on the conclusions of the Warren Report.
What you DO post are comments, speculation, opinion and insults.
A person can gain NO KNOWLEDGE from your posts.
.johnny must be rolling over in his grave.
On Tue, 11 Jul 2023 15:38:25 -0700 (PDT), John Corbettperson designated to handle it and for which it was never unaccounted. Although it is a lengthy process, it is required for evidence to be relevant in the court. The continuity of possession of evidence or custody of evidence and its movement and
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 6:11:02?PM UTC-4, Bud wrote:...
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 5:02:17?PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 11:41:47?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 11:19:59?AM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:Gil thinks he's a modern day Clarence Darrow.
On Tue, 11 Jul 2023 07:39:18 -0700 (PDT), Chuck SchuylerHe got it at the Josef Stalin School of Law.
All of the items would've been allowed into evidence...
When did you get your law degree?
This case would have never made it to trial by today's standards.
NEVER.
One definition....
The chain of custody is the most critical process of evidence documentation. It is a must to assure the court of law that the evidence is authentic, i.e., it is the same evidence seized at the crime scene. It was, at all times, in the custody of a
...
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK551677/
Gil's feeble attempt ...
Not "feeble" at all - Even Chickenshit cited in support of what Gil so clearly showed.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 10:36:21?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:court to accept the evidence as an exhibit.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 10:39:19?AM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 6:45:17?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
Another one for the LN trolls to cry about.
In a normal criminal trial, the prosecution would be required to establish an item as evidence BEFORE a judge would allow it to be submitted as an exhibit.
Before a chain of possession could be established, the item would have to be identified by the first witness who came in contact with it in order to establish its relevant to the case. After such identification, the prosecution would then ask the
But in this case, although the Warren Commission's agenda was to present the evidence in such a way that Oswald "would have convicted at trial", it did not follow normal judicial protocol.
Instead, it accepted items as exhibits without so much as an identification from the person who found them. This could not have been an oversight, because they did this time and time again.
Among those items which were accepted WITHOUT identification from the people who found them were:
Commission Exhibit 139 - the C2766 rifle was never identified by the person who found it ( Dallas Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone ) as the rifle he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 162 - the "tannish grey" jacket found under a car in a parking lot a block from the Tippit murder scene was never identified by the person who reported it found ( Off. J.T. Griffin ) as the jacket he reported.
Commission Exhibit 399 - was never identified by the person who found it ( Darrell Tomlinson ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibits 543, 544 and 545 - the three 6.5 rifle shells were never identified by the person who found them ( Dallas Deputy Luke Mooney ) as the shells he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 573 - the "Walker Bullet" was never identified by the person who found it ( B.G. Norvell ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibit 594 - the four shells found at the Tippit murder scene were never identified by the witnesses who found them ( Domingo Benavides and Barbara and Virginia Davis ) as the shells they found.
All of these items were accepted by the Warren Commission as Exhibits without any established chain of possession or positive identifcation from the people who found them.
Had this case gone to criminal trial, without the positive identifcation from the people who found them, none of these items would have been admitted as evidence.
All of the items would've been allowed into evidence and Oswald's "Johnny Cochrane" would've been allowed to attack it as he saw fit to do so. The jury would weigh what was presented and decide.
As usual, you haven't refuted one single thing that I've listed.
...to your satisfaction...
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 10:39:19?AM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:court to accept the evidence as an exhibit.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 6:45:17?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
Another one for the LN trolls to cry about.
In a normal criminal trial, the prosecution would be required to establish an item as evidence BEFORE a judge would allow it to be submitted as an exhibit.
Before a chain of possession could be established, the item would have to be identified by the first witness who came in contact with it in order to establish its relevant to the case. After such identification, the prosecution would then ask the
All of the items would've been allowed into evidence and Oswald's "Johnny Cochrane" would've been allowed to attack it as he saw fit to do so. The jury would weigh what was presented and decide.
But in this case, although the Warren Commission's agenda was to present the evidence in such a way that Oswald "would have convicted at trial", it did not follow normal judicial protocol.
Instead, it accepted items as exhibits without so much as an identification from the person who found them. This could not have been an oversight, because they did this time and time again.
Among those items which were accepted WITHOUT identification from the people who found them were:
Commission Exhibit 139 - the C2766 rifle was never identified by the person who found it ( Dallas Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone ) as the rifle he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 162 - the "tannish grey" jacket found under a car in a parking lot a block from the Tippit murder scene was never identified by the person who reported it found ( Off. J.T. Griffin ) as the jacket he reported.
Commission Exhibit 399 - was never identified by the person who found it ( Darrell Tomlinson ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibits 543, 544 and 545 - the three 6.5 rifle shells were never identified by the person who found them ( Dallas Deputy Luke Mooney ) as the shells he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 573 - the "Walker Bullet" was never identified by the person who found it ( B.G. Norvell ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibit 594 - the four shells found at the Tippit murder scene were never identified by the witnesses who found them ( Domingo Benavides and Barbara and Virginia Davis ) as the shells they found.
All of these items were accepted by the Warren Commission as Exhibits without any established chain of possession or positive identifcation from the people who found them.
Had this case gone to criminal trial, without the positive identifcation from the people who found them, none of these items would have been admitted as evidence.
One of the country's best trial lawyers, Gerry Spence, was unable to convince a jury...
One of the country's best trial lawyers, Gerry Spence, was unable to convince a jury in a mock
trial of Oswald's innocence.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 4:50:30 PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
One of the country's best trial lawyers, Gerry Spence, was unable to convince a jury in a mockYou mean the Gary Spence who had a blowup of Oswald's picture in the defendant's chair ?
trial of Oswald's innocence.
THAT Gary Spence ?
What a fucking joke his defense was.
He had NO IDEA about the evidence in the case.
Kinda like you.
He is an idiot with this nonsense. He wrote this...
"Before a chain of possession could be established, the item would have to be identified by the first witness who came in contact with it in order to establish its relevant to the case."
This is wrong in just about every way it can be wrong.
For starters, it is chain of custody, not chain of possession.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 6:11:02 PM UTC-4, Bud wrote:
He is an idiot with this nonsense. He wrote this...
"Before a chain of possession could be established, the item would have to be identified by the first witness who came in contact with it in order to establish its relevant to the case."
This is wrong in just about every way it can be wrong.
For starters, it is chain of custody, not chain of possession.Does that mean all of the time I've been calling you an asshole, you're really an anus ?
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 4:50:30?PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
One of the country's best trial lawyers, Gerry Spence, was unable to convince a jury in a mock
trial of Oswald's innocence.
You mean the Gary Spence who had a blowup of Oswald's picture in the defendant's chair ?
THAT Gary Spence ?
What a fucking joke his defense was.
He had NO IDEA about the evidence in the case.
Kinda like you.
On Wednesday, July 12, 2023 at 5:16:59?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 4:50:30?PM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
One of the country's best trial lawyers, Gerry Spence, was unable to convince a jury in a mockYou mean the Gary Spence who had a blowup of Oswald's picture in the defendant's chair ?
trial of Oswald's innocence.
THAT Gary Spence ?
What a fucking joke his defense was.
He had NO IDEA about the evidence in the case.
Kinda like you.
I'm sure you would have give Oswald a much better defense given your vast legal training.
Just because Gerry Spence never lost a criminal case in his many years both as a prosecutor
and defense attorney is no reason to believe he was competent.
Another one for the LN trolls to cry about.to accept the evidence as an exhibit.
In a normal criminal trial, the prosecution would be required to establish an item as evidence BEFORE a judge would allow it to be submitted as an exhibit.
Before a chain of possession could be established, the item would have to be identified by the first witness who came in contact with it in order to establish its relevant to the case. After such identification, the prosecution would then ask the court
But in this case, although the Warren Commission's agenda was to present the evidence in such a way that Oswald "would have convicted at trial", it did not follow normal judicial protocol.
Instead, it accepted items as exhibits without so much as an identification from the person who found them. This could not have been an oversight, because they did this time and time again.
Among those items which were accepted WITHOUT identification from the people who found them were:
Commission Exhibit 139 - the C2766 rifle was never identified by the person who found it ( Dallas Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone ) as the rifle he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 162 - the "tannish grey" jacket found under a car in a parking lot a block from the Tippit murder scene was never identified by the person who reported it found ( Off. J.T. Griffin ) as the jacket he reported.
Commission Exhibit 399 - was never identified by the person who found it ( Darrell Tomlinson ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibits 543, 544 and 545 - the three 6.5 rifle shells were never identified by the person who found them ( Dallas Deputy Luke Mooney ) as the shells he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 573 - the "Walker Bullet" was never identified by the person who found it ( B.G. Norvell ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibit 594 - the four shells found at the Tippit murder scene were never identified by the witnesses who found them ( Domingo Benavides and Barbara and Virginia Davis ) as the shells they found.
All of these items were accepted by the Warren Commission as Exhibits without any established chain of possession or positive identifcation from the people who found them.
Had this case gone to criminal trial, without the positive identifcation from the people who found them, none of these items would have been admitted as evidence.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 7:45:17 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:court to accept the evidence as an exhibit.
Another one for the LN trolls to cry about.
In a normal criminal trial, the prosecution would be required to establish an item as evidence BEFORE a judge would allow it to be submitted as an exhibit.
Before a chain of possession could be established, the item would have to be identified by the first witness who came in contact with it in order to establish its relevant to the case. After such identification, the prosecution would then ask the
entitled “FEDERAL RULES”.But in this case, although the Warren Commission's agenda was to present the evidence in such a way that Oswald "would have convicted at trial", it did not follow normal judicial protocol.
Instead, it accepted items as exhibits without so much as an identification from the person who found them. This could not have been an oversight, because they did this time and time again.
Among those items which were accepted WITHOUT identification from the people who found them were:
Commission Exhibit 139 - the C2766 rifle was never identified by the person who found it ( Dallas Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone ) as the rifle he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 162 - the "tannish grey" jacket found under a car in a parking lot a block from the Tippit murder scene was never identified by the person who reported it found ( Off. J.T. Griffin ) as the jacket he reported.
Commission Exhibit 399 - was never identified by the person who found it ( Darrell Tomlinson ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibits 543, 544 and 545 - the three 6.5 rifle shells were never identified by the person who found them ( Dallas Deputy Luke Mooney ) as the shells he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 573 - the "Walker Bullet" was never identified by the person who found it ( B.G. Norvell ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibit 594 - the four shells found at the Tippit murder scene were never identified by the witnesses who found them ( Domingo Benavides and Barbara and Virginia Davis ) as the shells they found.
All of these items were accepted by the Warren Commission as Exhibits without any established chain of possession or positive identifcation from the people who found them.
Had this case gone to criminal trial, without the positive identifcation from the people who found them, none of these items would have been admitted as evidence.You are wrong. You don’t know the law. Allow me to educate you.
See this link: https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1308&context=faculty_publications
Please see page number two, in the section entitled “WITNESS UNCERTAINTY”.
Please read it carefully, particularly these words: “… lack of certitude does not preclude admissibility.”
The failure of a witness to positively identify an item does not render that item inadmissible - the item is admissible and the jury gets to decide how much weight to put on the item. For further on this issue, see page number, six, in the section
Please read the entire document. Familiarize yourself with it. There are plenty of trials where your claims are contrary to the rulings cited in the above link.
On Wednesday, July 12, 2023 at 10:00:51 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:court to accept the evidence as an exhibit.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 7:45:17 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
Another one for the LN trolls to cry about.
In a normal criminal trial, the prosecution would be required to establish an item as evidence BEFORE a judge would allow it to be submitted as an exhibit.
Before a chain of possession could be established, the item would have to be identified by the first witness who came in contact with it in order to establish its relevant to the case. After such identification, the prosecution would then ask the
entitled “FEDERAL RULES”.But in this case, although the Warren Commission's agenda was to present the evidence in such a way that Oswald "would have convicted at trial", it did not follow normal judicial protocol.
Instead, it accepted items as exhibits without so much as an identification from the person who found them. This could not have been an oversight, because they did this time and time again.
Among those items which were accepted WITHOUT identification from the people who found them were:
Commission Exhibit 139 - the C2766 rifle was never identified by the person who found it ( Dallas Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone ) as the rifle he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 162 - the "tannish grey" jacket found under a car in a parking lot a block from the Tippit murder scene was never identified by the person who reported it found ( Off. J.T. Griffin ) as the jacket he reported.
Commission Exhibit 399 - was never identified by the person who found it ( Darrell Tomlinson ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibits 543, 544 and 545 - the three 6.5 rifle shells were never identified by the person who found them ( Dallas Deputy Luke Mooney ) as the shells he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 573 - the "Walker Bullet" was never identified by the person who found it ( B.G. Norvell ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibit 594 - the four shells found at the Tippit murder scene were never identified by the witnesses who found them ( Domingo Benavides and Barbara and Virginia Davis ) as the shells they found.
All of these items were accepted by the Warren Commission as Exhibits without any established chain of possession or positive identifcation from the people who found them.
Had this case gone to criminal trial, without the positive identifcation from the people who found them, none of these items would have been admitted as evidence.You are wrong. You don’t know the law. Allow me to educate you.
See this link: https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1308&context=faculty_publications
Please see page number two, in the section entitled “WITNESS UNCERTAINTY”.
Please read it carefully, particularly these words: “… lack of certitude does not preclude admissibility.”
The failure of a witness to positively identify an item does not render that item inadmissible - the item is admissible and the jury gets to decide how much weight to put on the item. For further on this issue, see page number, six, in the section
Please read the entire document. Familiarize yourself with it. There are plenty of trials where your claims are contrary to the rulings cited in the above link.Wonderfully hilarious how the Nutter Retards are now praising uncertain witnesses!
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 7:45:17?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:court to accept the evidence as an exhibit.
Another one for the LN trolls to cry about.
In a normal criminal trial, the prosecution would be required to establish an item as evidence BEFORE a judge would allow it to be submitted as an exhibit.
Before a chain of possession could be established, the item would have to be identified by the first witness who came in contact with it in order to establish its relevant to the case. After such identification, the prosecution would then ask the
But in this case, although the Warren Commission's agenda was to present the evidence in such a way that Oswald "would have convicted at trial", it did not follow normal judicial protocol.
Instead, it accepted items as exhibits without so much as an identification from the person who found them. This could not have been an oversight, because they did this time and time again.
Among those items which were accepted WITHOUT identification from the people who found them were:
Commission Exhibit 139 - the C2766 rifle was never identified by the person who found it ( Dallas Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone ) as the rifle he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 162 - the "tannish grey" jacket found under a car in a parking lot a block from the Tippit murder scene was never identified by the person who reported it found ( Off. J.T. Griffin ) as the jacket he reported.
Commission Exhibit 399 - was never identified by the person who found it ( Darrell Tomlinson ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibits 543, 544 and 545 - the three 6.5 rifle shells were never identified by the person who found them ( Dallas Deputy Luke Mooney ) as the shells he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 573 - the "Walker Bullet" was never identified by the person who found it ( B.G. Norvell ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibit 594 - the four shells found at the Tippit murder scene were never identified by the witnesses who found them ( Domingo Benavides and Barbara and Virginia Davis ) as the shells they found.
All of these items were accepted by the Warren Commission as Exhibits without any established chain of possession or positive identifcation from the people who found them.
Had this case gone to criminal trial, without the positive identifcation from the people who found them, none of these items would have been admitted as evidence.
You are wrong.
LNs have never relied on witnesses to establish facts. Witnesses are notoriously unreliable.
That doesn't mean they are always right nor always wrong. It means when a witness tells us
something, we need to corroborate their account through other evidence.
In the case of the
Tippit murder, the eyewitness testimony and the forensic evidence dovetail neatly.
The only
conclusion that can be drawn from that combination of evidence is that Oswald murdered
Tippit. If there was another plausible explanation for that evidence, someone would have
come up with one by now.
On Wednesday, July 12, 2023 at 10:00:51 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:court to accept the evidence as an exhibit.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 7:45:17 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
Another one for the LN trolls to cry about.
In a normal criminal trial, the prosecution would be required to establish an item as evidence BEFORE a judge would allow it to be submitted as an exhibit.
Before a chain of possession could be established, the item would have to be identified by the first witness who came in contact with it in order to establish its relevant to the case. After such identification, the prosecution would then ask the
entitled “FEDERAL RULES”.But in this case, although the Warren Commission's agenda was to present the evidence in such a way that Oswald "would have convicted at trial", it did not follow normal judicial protocol.
Instead, it accepted items as exhibits without so much as an identification from the person who found them. This could not have been an oversight, because they did this time and time again.
Among those items which were accepted WITHOUT identification from the people who found them were:
Commission Exhibit 139 - the C2766 rifle was never identified by the person who found it ( Dallas Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone ) as the rifle he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 162 - the "tannish grey" jacket found under a car in a parking lot a block from the Tippit murder scene was never identified by the person who reported it found ( Off. J.T. Griffin ) as the jacket he reported.
Commission Exhibit 399 - was never identified by the person who found it ( Darrell Tomlinson ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibits 543, 544 and 545 - the three 6.5 rifle shells were never identified by the person who found them ( Dallas Deputy Luke Mooney ) as the shells he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 573 - the "Walker Bullet" was never identified by the person who found it ( B.G. Norvell ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibit 594 - the four shells found at the Tippit murder scene were never identified by the witnesses who found them ( Domingo Benavides and Barbara and Virginia Davis ) as the shells they found.
All of these items were accepted by the Warren Commission as Exhibits without any established chain of possession or positive identifcation from the people who found them.
Had this case gone to criminal trial, without the positive identifcation from the people who found them, none of these items would have been admitted as evidence.You are wrong. You don’t know the law. Allow me to educate you.
See this link: https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1308&context=faculty_publications
Please see page number two, in the section entitled “WITNESS UNCERTAINTY”.
Please read it carefully, particularly these words: “… lack of certitude does not preclude admissibility.”
The failure of a witness to positively identify an item does not render that item inadmissible - the item is admissible and the jury gets to decide how much weight to put on the item. For further on this issue, see page number, six, in the section
Please read the entire document. Familiarize yourself with it. There are plenty of trials where your claims are contrary to the rulings cited in the above link.Wonderfully hilarious how the Nutter Retards are now praising uncertain witnesses!
On Wed, 12 Jul 2023 19:00:49 -0700 (PDT), Hank Sienzantcourt to accept the evidence as an exhibit.
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 7:45:17?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
Another one for the LN trolls to cry about.
In a normal criminal trial, the prosecution would be required to establish an item as evidence BEFORE a judge would allow it to be submitted as an exhibit.
Before a chain of possession could be established, the item would have to be identified by the first witness who came in contact with it in order to establish its relevant to the case. After such identification, the prosecution would then ask the
But in this case, although the Warren Commission's agenda was to present the evidence in such a way that Oswald "would have convicted at trial", it did not follow normal judicial protocol.
Instead, it accepted items as exhibits without so much as an identification from the person who found them. This could not have been an oversight, because they did this time and time again.
Among those items which were accepted WITHOUT identification from the people who found them were:
Commission Exhibit 139 - the C2766 rifle was never identified by the person who found it ( Dallas Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone ) as the rifle he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 162 - the "tannish grey" jacket found under a car in a parking lot a block from the Tippit murder scene was never identified by the person who reported it found ( Off. J.T. Griffin ) as the jacket he reported.
Commission Exhibit 399 - was never identified by the person who found it ( Darrell Tomlinson ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibits 543, 544 and 545 - the three 6.5 rifle shells were never identified by the person who found them ( Dallas Deputy Luke Mooney ) as the shells he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 573 - the "Walker Bullet" was never identified by the person who found it ( B.G. Norvell ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibit 594 - the four shells found at the Tippit murder scene were never identified by the witnesses who found them ( Domingo Benavides and Barbara and Virginia Davis ) as the shells they found.
All of these items were accepted by the Warren Commission as Exhibits without any established chain of possession or positive identifcation from the people who found them.
Had this case gone to criminal trial, without the positive identifcation from the people who found them, none of these items would have been admitted as evidence.
You are wrong.And you're a liar. Anyone believing a liar who claims someone is
"wrong" would be a moron.
On Wednesday, July 12, 2023 at 10:24:24 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:court to accept the evidence as an exhibit.
On Wednesday, July 12, 2023 at 10:00:51 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 7:45:17 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
Another one for the LN trolls to cry about.
In a normal criminal trial, the prosecution would be required to establish an item as evidence BEFORE a judge would allow it to be submitted as an exhibit.
Before a chain of possession could be established, the item would have to be identified by the first witness who came in contact with it in order to establish its relevant to the case. After such identification, the prosecution would then ask the
entitled “FEDERAL RULES”.But in this case, although the Warren Commission's agenda was to present the evidence in such a way that Oswald "would have convicted at trial", it did not follow normal judicial protocol.
Instead, it accepted items as exhibits without so much as an identification from the person who found them. This could not have been an oversight, because they did this time and time again.
Among those items which were accepted WITHOUT identification from the people who found them were:
Commission Exhibit 139 - the C2766 rifle was never identified by the person who found it ( Dallas Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone ) as the rifle he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 162 - the "tannish grey" jacket found under a car in a parking lot a block from the Tippit murder scene was never identified by the person who reported it found ( Off. J.T. Griffin ) as the jacket he reported.
Commission Exhibit 399 - was never identified by the person who found it ( Darrell Tomlinson ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibits 543, 544 and 545 - the three 6.5 rifle shells were never identified by the person who found them ( Dallas Deputy Luke Mooney ) as the shells he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 573 - the "Walker Bullet" was never identified by the person who found it ( B.G. Norvell ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibit 594 - the four shells found at the Tippit murder scene were never identified by the witnesses who found them ( Domingo Benavides and Barbara and Virginia Davis ) as the shells they found.
All of these items were accepted by the Warren Commission as Exhibits without any established chain of possession or positive identifcation from the people who found them.
Had this case gone to criminal trial, without the positive identifcation from the people who found them, none of these items would have been admitted as evidence.You are wrong. You don’t know the law. Allow me to educate you.
See this link: https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1308&context=faculty_publications
Please see page number two, in the section entitled “WITNESS UNCERTAINTY”.
Please read it carefully, particularly these words: “… lack of certitude does not preclude admissibility.”
The failure of a witness to positively identify an item does not render that item inadmissible - the item is admissible and the jury gets to decide how much weight to put on the item. For further on this issue, see page number, six, in the section
typically overstate the requirements for admissibility and Gil echoed those overstatements here. As my link points out, even when there is questions about concerning Chain of Custody, the item(s) are admissible, and the jury gets to decide how muchStraw man argument. That’s not what I said. I attempted to educate Gil Jesus on the law concerning admissibility of evidence. He is apparently getting his “facts” directly from conspiracy books, rather than from law books. Conspiracy booksPlease read the entire document. Familiarize yourself with it. There are plenty of trials where your claims are contrary to the rulings cited in the above link.Wonderfully hilarious how the Nutter Retards are now praising uncertain witnesses!
And of course, you ignored the point of my post entirely.
On Thursday, July 13, 2023 at 3:04:31 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:the court to accept the evidence as an exhibit.
On Wednesday, July 12, 2023 at 10:24:24 PM UTC-4, Sky Throne 19efppp wrote:
On Wednesday, July 12, 2023 at 10:00:51 PM UTC-4, Hank Sienzant wrote:
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 7:45:17 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
Another one for the LN trolls to cry about.
In a normal criminal trial, the prosecution would be required to establish an item as evidence BEFORE a judge would allow it to be submitted as an exhibit.
Before a chain of possession could be established, the item would have to be identified by the first witness who came in contact with it in order to establish its relevant to the case. After such identification, the prosecution would then ask
section entitled “FEDERAL RULES”.But in this case, although the Warren Commission's agenda was to present the evidence in such a way that Oswald "would have convicted at trial", it did not follow normal judicial protocol.
Instead, it accepted items as exhibits without so much as an identification from the person who found them. This could not have been an oversight, because they did this time and time again.
Among those items which were accepted WITHOUT identification from the people who found them were:
Commission Exhibit 139 - the C2766 rifle was never identified by the person who found it ( Dallas Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone ) as the rifle he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 162 - the "tannish grey" jacket found under a car in a parking lot a block from the Tippit murder scene was never identified by the person who reported it found ( Off. J.T. Griffin ) as the jacket he reported.
Commission Exhibit 399 - was never identified by the person who found it ( Darrell Tomlinson ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibits 543, 544 and 545 - the three 6.5 rifle shells were never identified by the person who found them ( Dallas Deputy Luke Mooney ) as the shells he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 573 - the "Walker Bullet" was never identified by the person who found it ( B.G. Norvell ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibit 594 - the four shells found at the Tippit murder scene were never identified by the witnesses who found them ( Domingo Benavides and Barbara and Virginia Davis ) as the shells they found.
All of these items were accepted by the Warren Commission as Exhibits without any established chain of possession or positive identifcation from the people who found them.
Had this case gone to criminal trial, without the positive identifcation from the people who found them, none of these items would have been admitted as evidence.You are wrong. You don’t know the law. Allow me to educate you.
See this link: https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1308&context=faculty_publications
Please see page number two, in the section entitled “WITNESS UNCERTAINTY”.
Please read it carefully, particularly these words: “… lack of certitude does not preclude admissibility.”
The failure of a witness to positively identify an item does not render that item inadmissible - the item is admissible and the jury gets to decide how much weight to put on the item. For further on this issue, see page number, six, in the
typically overstate the requirements for admissibility and Gil echoed those overstatements here. As my link points out, even when there is questions about concerning Chain of Custody, the item(s) are admissible, and the jury gets to decide how muchStraw man argument. That’s not what I said. I attempted to educate Gil Jesus on the law concerning admissibility of evidence. He is apparently getting his “facts” directly from conspiracy books, rather than from law books. Conspiracy booksPlease read the entire document. Familiarize yourself with it. There are plenty of trials where your claims are contrary to the rulings cited in the above link.Wonderfully hilarious how the Nutter Retards are now praising uncertain witnesses!
won't tell us whether or not he believe Jack Tatum.And of course, you ignored the point of my post entirely.Well, of course! If a witness is sure that a bag is tow feet, then he must be mistaken. But if he's not sure if he found that shell, then he must have found it. Hank credits witnesses who support his wacky theory, and nothing else matters. And he still
Straw man argument. Thats not what I said. I attempted to educate
Gil Jesus ...
You are wrong.
And you're a liar. Anyone believing a liar who claims someone is
"wrong" would be a moron.
Funny.
In both cases, physical evidence helps us determine the credibility of a witness.
The bag was found...
In the case of the shells, they were taken into custody by the cops
on the scene and placed into evidence.
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 6:58:49?PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:court to accept the evidence as an exhibit.
On Tue, 11 Jul 2023 08:36:19 -0700 (PDT), Gil Jesus
<gjjma...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 10:39:19?AM UTC-4, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Tuesday, July 11, 2023 at 6:45:17?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
Another one for the LN trolls to cry about.
In a normal criminal trial, the prosecution would be required to establish an item as evidence BEFORE a judge would allow it to be submitted as an exhibit.
Before a chain of possession could be established, the item would have to be identified by the first witness who came in contact with it in order to establish its relevant to the case. After such identification, the prosecution would then ask the
You must thank Chickenshit - he cited in support of your assertions...
But in this case, although the Warren Commission's agenda was to present the evidence in such a way that Oswald "would have convicted at trial", it did not follow normal judicial protocol.
Instead, it accepted items as exhibits without so much as an identification from the person who found them. This could not have been an oversight, because they did this time and time again.
Among those items which were accepted WITHOUT identification from the people who found them were:
Commission Exhibit 139 - the C2766 rifle was never identified by the person who found it ( Dallas Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone ) as the rifle he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 162 - the "tannish grey" jacket found under a car in a parking lot a block from the Tippit murder scene was never identified by the person who reported it found ( Off. J.T. Griffin ) as the jacket he reported.
Commission Exhibit 399 - was never identified by the person who found it ( Darrell Tomlinson ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibits 543, 544 and 545 - the three 6.5 rifle shells were never identified by the person who found them ( Dallas Deputy Luke Mooney ) as the shells he found on the sixth floor.
Commission Exhibit 573 - the "Walker Bullet" was never identified by the person who found it ( B.G. Norvell ) as the bullet he found.
Commission Exhibit 594 - the four shells found at the Tippit murder scene were never identified by the witnesses who found them ( Domingo Benavides and Barbara and Virginia Davis ) as the shells they found.
All of these items were accepted by the Warren Commission as Exhibits without any established chain of possession or positive identifcation from the people who found them.
Had this case gone to criminal trial, without the positive identifcation from the people who found them, none of these items would have been admitted as evidence.
All of the items would've been allowed into evidence and Oswald's "Johnny Cochrane" would've been allowed to attack it as he saw fit to do so. The jury would weigh what was presented and decide.
As usual, you haven't refuted one single thing that I've listed.
No citations
No documents
No testimony
No exhibits
No witness videos
You do no research on your own, preferring to take the lazy way out and fall back on the conclusions of the Warren Report.
What you DO post are comments, speculation, opinion and insults.
A person can gain NO KNOWLEDGE from your posts.
.johnny must be rolling over in his grave.
By ...
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 107:52:25 |
| Calls: | 6,662 |
| Calls today: | 4 |
| Files: | 12,209 |
| Messages: | 5,335,499 |