1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. ALT.CONSPIRACY.JFK

  • Can a woman testify against her husband?

    From John Corbett@21:1/5 to All on Wed Jul 26 03:52:53 2023
    Gil has said that Marina could not have been called to testify against Lee. Well, yes and no. Spousal privilege only applies to communications between husband and wife. It does not apply to things Marina observed. For example,
    she could have testified to taking the backyard photos. She probably wouldn't have been allowed to testify that he told her he tried to shoot Walker. The latter is not essential to the case against Oswald in the JFK
    assassination.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Gil Jesus@21:1/5 to John Corbett on Wed Jul 26 04:45:25 2023
    On Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 6:52:54 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
    Gil has said that Marina could not have been called to testify against Lee. Well, yes and no. Spousal privilege only applies to communications between husband and wife. It does not apply to things Marina observed. For example, she could have testified to taking the backyard photos. She probably wouldn't have been allowed to testify that he told her he tried to shoot Walker. The latter is not essential to the case against Oswald in the JFK
    assassination.

    As usual, you have it wrong. That's only after he was dead.

    Had he lived and the case gone to trial, Marina would NOT be able to testify against her husband.
    Read it from your own documents.

    https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/mosk.jpg

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mark Ulrik@21:1/5 to All on Wed Jul 26 04:42:38 2023
    onsdag den 26. juli 2023 kl. 12.52.54 UTC+2 skrev John Corbett:
    Gil has said that Marina could not have been called to testify against Lee. Well, yes and no. Spousal privilege only applies to communications between husband and wife. It does not apply to things Marina observed. For example, she could have testified to taking the backyard photos. She probably wouldn't have been allowed to testify that he told her he tried to shoot Walker. The latter is not essential to the case against Oswald in the JFK
    assassination.

    I hate to say it, but this is probably one of the rare instances where Gil is correct. The spousal privilege rule has changed a lot since 1963.

    https://www.hg.org/legal-articles/the-historical-journey-of-the-spousal-privilege-27312

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ben Holmes@21:1/5 to geowright1963@gmail.com on Wed Jul 26 06:45:16 2023
    On Wed, 26 Jul 2023 03:52:53 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett <geowright1963@gmail.com> wrote:

    Gil has said that Marina could not have been called to testify against Lee. >Well, yes and no. Spousal privilege only applies to communications between >husband and wife. It does not apply to things Marina observed. For example, >she could have testified to taking the backyard photos. She probably wouldn't have been allowed to testify that he told her he tried to shoot Walker. The latter is not essential to the case against Oswald in the JFK
    assassination.

    I find it amusing that as always, you refuse to cite any authority
    outside of your own wacky opinion.

    Quite the coward, aren't you?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Corbett@21:1/5 to Gil Jesus on Wed Jul 26 14:12:51 2023
    On Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 7:45:27 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
    On Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 6:52:54 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
    Gil has said that Marina could not have been called to testify against Lee.
    Well, yes and no. Spousal privilege only applies to communications between husband and wife. It does not apply to things Marina observed. For example,
    she could have testified to taking the backyard photos. She probably wouldn't have been allowed to testify that he told her he tried to shoot Walker. The latter is not essential to the case against Oswald in the JFK
    assassination.
    As usual, you have it wrong. That's only after he was dead.

    Had he lived and the case gone to trial, Marina would NOT be able to testify against her husband.
    Read it from your own documents.

    How did these get to be my documents?

    https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/mosk.jpg

    OK, Gil, that's one for you. I was looking at the more current statute. However, it is a moot point
    since Oswald was never put on trial and never will be. There is no reason we should ignore
    Marina's sworn testimony to the WC, given under the penalty of perjury. It is relevant to the
    question of whether Oswald tried to kill Walker which demonstrates he had the mindset of a
    political assassin. Anyone interested in the truth of the JFK assassination would not ignore
    this evidence. On the other hand, someone trying to invent excuses not to look at evidence
    that incriminates Oswald, would use the Texas statute at the time to ignore her testimony.
    You demonstrate once again you have no interest in determining the truth but only to try to
    exonerate Oswald on technicalities. It's not working.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ben Holmes@21:1/5 to geowright1963@gmail.com on Wed Jul 26 14:24:57 2023
    On Wed, 26 Jul 2023 14:12:51 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett <geowright1963@gmail.com> wrote:

    On Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 7:45:27?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
    On Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 6:52:54?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
    Gil has said that Marina could not have been called to testify against Lee. >>> Well, yes and no. Spousal privilege only applies to communications between >>> husband and wife. It does not apply to things Marina observed. For example, >>> she could have testified to taking the backyard photos. She probably wouldn't have been allowed to testify that he told her he tried to shoot Walker. The latter is not essential to the case against Oswald in the JFK
    assassination.
    As usual, you have it wrong. That's only after he was dead.

    Had he lived and the case gone to trial, Marina would NOT be able to testify against her husband.
    Read it from your own documents.

    How did these get to be my documents?

    https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/mosk.jpg

    OK, Gil, that's one for you...

    Then take your spanking and stop trying to justify your lies...

    Lies deleted.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bud@21:1/5 to Gil Jesus on Wed Jul 26 14:47:01 2023
    On Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 7:45:27 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
    On Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 6:52:54 AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
    Gil has said that Marina could not have been called to testify against Lee.
    Well, yes and no. Spousal privilege only applies to communications between husband and wife. It does not apply to things Marina observed. For example,
    she could have testified to taking the backyard photos. She probably wouldn't have been allowed to testify that he told her he tried to shoot Walker. The latter is not essential to the case against Oswald in the JFK
    assassination.
    As usual, you have it wrong. That's only after he was dead.

    Had he lived and the case gone to trial, Marina would NOT be able to testify against her husband.

    When Marina took the cops to the Paine`s garage where she thought her husband stored a rifle, would this be admissible?

    Read it from your own documents.

    https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/mosk.jpg

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bud@21:1/5 to Ben Holmes on Wed Jul 26 15:57:46 2023
    On Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 6:27:46 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
    On Wed, 26 Jul 2023 14:47:01 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
    wrote:

    On Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 7:45:27?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
    On Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 6:52:54?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
    Gil has said that Marina could not have been called to testify against Lee.
    Well, yes and no. Spousal privilege only applies to communications between
    husband and wife. It does not apply to things Marina observed. For example,
    she could have testified to taking the backyard photos. She probably wouldn't have been allowed to testify that he told her he tried to shoot Walker. The latter is not essential to the case against Oswald in the JFK
    assassination.
    As usual, you have it wrong. That's only after he was dead.

    Had he lived and the case gone to trial, Marina would NOT be able to testify against her husband.

    When Marina took the cops to the Paine`s garage where she thought her husband stored a rifle, would this be admissible?
    It would not have been admissible if Marina were a stranger to Oswald.

    Hot air you will never back up.

    And it's a good thing that naked opinion not supported by actual
    knowledge isn't admissible. Otherwise, you'd be arrested. It's my
    *opinion* that you're a child molester.

    It`s my opinion you fuck you mother`s corpse in the ass.

    But that has nothing to do with the question I asked Gil.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ben Holmes@21:1/5 to All on Wed Jul 26 15:27:41 2023
    On Wed, 26 Jul 2023 14:47:01 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirslick@fast.net>
    wrote:

    On Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 7:45:27?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
    On Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 6:52:54?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
    Gil has said that Marina could not have been called to testify against Lee. >>> Well, yes and no. Spousal privilege only applies to communications between >>> husband and wife. It does not apply to things Marina observed. For example, >>> she could have testified to taking the backyard photos. She probably wouldn't have been allowed to testify that he told her he tried to shoot Walker. The latter is not essential to the case against Oswald in the JFK
    assassination.
    As usual, you have it wrong. That's only after he was dead.

    Had he lived and the case gone to trial, Marina would NOT be able to testify against her husband.

    When Marina took the cops to the Paine`s garage where she thought her husband stored a rifle, would this be admissible?

    It would not have been admissible if Marina were a stranger to Oswald.

    And it's a good thing that naked opinion not supported by actual
    knowledge isn't admissible. Otherwise, you'd be arrested. It's my
    *opinion* that you're a child molester.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From recipient.x@gmail.com@21:1/5 to Mark Ulrik on Thu Jul 27 17:16:22 2023
    On Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 6:42:40 AM UTC-5, Mark Ulrik wrote:
    onsdag den 26. juli 2023 kl. 12.52.54 UTC+2 skrev John Corbett:
    Gil has said that Marina could not have been called to testify against Lee.
    Well, yes and no. Spousal privilege only applies to communications between husband and wife. It does not apply to things Marina observed. For example,
    she could have testified to taking the backyard photos. She probably wouldn't have been allowed to testify that he told her he tried to shoot Walker. The latter is not essential to the case against Oswald in the JFK
    assassination.
    I hate to say it, but this is probably one of the rare instances where Gil is correct. The spousal privilege rule has changed a lot since 1963.

    https://www.hg.org/legal-articles/the-historical-journey-of-the-spousal-privilege-27312

    The spousal privilege attested to in the article is limited to communications between husband and wife. This would not prevent Marina from testifying to things like (for instance) as to whether the rifle in evidence was the rifle she saw in the Paine's
    garage.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ben Holmes@21:1/5 to All on Thu Aug 3 07:00:28 2023
    On Wed, 26 Jul 2023 15:57:46 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirslick@fast.net>
    wrote:

    On Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 6:27:46?PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
    On Wed, 26 Jul 2023 14:47:01 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
    wrote:

    On Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 7:45:27?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
    On Wednesday, July 26, 2023 at 6:52:54?AM UTC-4, John Corbett wrote:
    Gil has said that Marina could not have been called to testify against Lee.
    Well, yes and no. Spousal privilege only applies to communications between
    husband and wife. It does not apply to things Marina observed. For example,
    she could have testified to taking the backyard photos. She probably wouldn't have been allowed to testify that he told her he tried to shoot Walker. The latter is not essential to the case against Oswald in the JFK
    assassination.
    As usual, you have it wrong. That's only after he was dead.

    Had he lived and the case gone to trial, Marina would NOT be able to testify against her husband.

    When Marina took the cops to the Paine`s garage where she thought her husband stored a rifle, would this be admissible?
    It would not have been admissible if Marina were a stranger to Oswald.

    Hot air you will never back up.


    Did so immediately below, by analogy.

    It's **YOUR** claim that will never be cited for.


    And it's a good thing that naked opinion not supported by actual
    knowledge isn't admissible. Otherwise, you'd be arrested. It's my
    *opinion* that you're a child molester.

    It`s my opinion...


    And that, in a nutshell, is the problem.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)