What evidence do you have that the .38 cal shells currently in evidence are the same shells found at the Tippit murder scene ?
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 3:56:44 AM UTC-6, Gil Jesus wrote:Instead of answering the question, Chucky would rather argue about the rules of the game.
What evidence do you have that the .38 cal shells currently in evidence are the same shells found at the Tippit murder scene ?This is number 5 on the list I had the other day when I answered all your questions in one fell swoop:
Shifting the burden of proof. Answered, but not to your satisfaction. You'll claim it wasn't answered, but it was.
Fix your questions. Do not shift the burden of proof.
This is number 5 on the list I had the other day when I answered all your questions in one fell swoop:
This is number 5 on the list I had the other day when I answered all your questions in one fell swoop:
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 7:48:00 AM UTC-5, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 3:56:44 AM UTC-6, Gil Jesus wrote:
What evidence do you have that the .38 cal shells currently in evidence are the same shells found at the Tippit murder scene ?This is number 5 on the list I had the other day when I answered all your questions in one fell swoop:
Shifting the burden of proof. Answered, but not to your satisfaction. You'll claim it wasn't answered, but it was.
Fix your questions. Do not shift the burden of proof.
Instead of answering the question, Chucky would rather argue about the rules of the game.
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 6:53:10 AM UTC-6, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:I'm not playing your game.
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 7:48:00 AM UTC-5, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 3:56:44 AM UTC-6, Gil Jesus wrote:
What evidence do you have that the .38 cal shells currently in evidence are the same shells found at the Tippit murder scene ?This is number 5 on the list I had the other day when I answered all your questions in one fell swoop:
Shifting the burden of proof. Answered, but not to your satisfaction. You'll claim it wasn't answered, but it was.
Fix your questions. Do not shift the burden of proof.
Instead of answering the question, Chucky would rather argue about the rules of the game.The "rules of the game" isn't an artificial construct.
You claim Oswald shot at JFK's motorcade from the grassy knoll and hustled back inside the TSBD. Your claim, your burden. Gil implies the .38 shells found at the Tippit murder scene might have been swapped out or planted. Gil's claim, Gil's burden.
One side has presented it's case, BUT NOT TO YOUR SATISFACTION. No need to play endless games of Fetch the Stick.
Show the proof for your collective claims.
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 7:48:00 AM UTC-5, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
This is number 5 on the list I had the other day when I answered all your questions in one fell swoop:
I asked for your evidence.
Not your stupid comments.
And because you're such a coward to answer questions ( you ran from 39 of the 40 ) and a goddamned liar, you force me to prove it.
You never answered question # 5, you're a liar.
And Question # 5 didn't have anything to do with the FOUR shells. It had to do with ONE of the shells.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/VjttIkBvjRY/m/sxAGerRsBAAJ
Now answer the question, asshole: what evidence do you have that the four shells were fired at 10th and Patton ?
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 9:12:27 AM UTC-5, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 6:53:10 AM UTC-6, NoTrueFlags Here wrote:
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 7:48:00 AM UTC-5, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 3:56:44 AM UTC-6, Gil Jesus wrote:
What evidence do you have that the .38 cal shells currently in evidence are the same shells found at the Tippit murder scene ?This is number 5 on the list I had the other day when I answered all your questions in one fell swoop:
Shifting the burden of proof. Answered, but not to your satisfaction. You'll claim it wasn't answered, but it was.
Fix your questions. Do not shift the burden of proof.
Instead of answering the question, Chucky would rather argue about the rules of the game.The "rules of the game" isn't an artificial construct.
You claim Oswald shot at JFK's motorcade from the grassy knoll and hustled back inside the TSBD. Your claim, your burden. Gil implies the .38 shells found at the Tippit murder scene might have been swapped out or planted. Gil's claim, Gil's burden.
One side has presented it's case, BUT NOT TO YOUR SATISFACTION. No need to play endless games of Fetch the Stick.
Show the proof for your collective claims.
I'm not playing your game.
You claim Oswald shot at JFK's motorcade from the grassy knoll and
hustled back inside the TSBD. Your claim, your burden. Gil implies the
.38 shells found at the Tippit murder scene might have been swapped
out or planted. Gil's claim, Gil's burden.
One side has presented it's case, BUT NOT TO YOUR SATISFACTION.
On Thu, 9 Nov 2023 06:23:30 -0800 (PST), Chuck Schuyler <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 7:00:54?AM UTC-6, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 7:48:00?AM UTC-5, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
This is number 5 on the list I had the other day when I answered all your questions in one fell swoop:
I asked for your evidence.
Not necessary for me to supply "evidence" because you haven'testablished anything nefarious,
IT'S YOUR ORIGINAL CLAIM!!!
It's your burden. Carry your burden coward!
nor have you stated what evidence you would accept,
ANY EVIDENCE YOU'RE CAPABLE OF SUPPLYING.
(But you can't... can you?)
nor am I making a claim separate than what is historically
accepted, and we do not put dead suspects on trial, Johnny Cochrane.
There is no "history" accepting anything, doing anything, thinking
anything.
Most of America rejects your claims.
Not your stupid comments.
And because you're such a coward to answer questions ( you ran from 39 of the 40 ) and a goddamned liar, you force me to prove it.
You never answered question # 5, you're a liar.
And Question # 5 didn't have anything to do with the FOUR shells. It had to do with ONE of the shells.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/VjttIkBvjRY/m/sxAGerRsBAAJ
This question still fits ...
You've just been proven a liar, and you still whine?
No moron, it's never "shifting the burden" to ask someone to support
what they believe. It's ALWAYS your burden to support what you
believe.
You basicly deny having ANY BURDEN AT ALL. And that's simply
cowardice.
Whining is what you and Gil do.
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 10:39:26 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
No moron, it's never "shifting the burden" to ask someone to support
what they believe. It's ALWAYS your burden to support what you
believe.
You basicly deny having ANY BURDEN AT ALL. And that's simplyAbsolutely. That's one asshole who refuses to answer the question.
cowardice.
If he had already answered it, he should have no problem repeating that answer.
A simple copy-and-paste would to the trick.
But he continues to duck and dodge the question instead.
There are ways to show if those shells were fired at 10th and Patton.
Acting as a proxy for the Warren Commission, I asked him to see his evidence.
He refuses to show it, claiming he has no burden to do so.
He has a burden to PROVE what he says is true and what he supports ( the Warren Commission case ).
By refusing to show his evidence, he proves that he cannot defend the very "evidence" he supports.
Yes, he's a coward AND a liar.
A real LOSER.
Beware. He's probably got some land in Florida he'll sell you.
ROFLMAO
What evidence do you have that the .38 cal shells currently in evidence are the same shells found at the Tippit murder scene ?
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 11:42:39 AM UTC-5, Bud wrote:
The case evidence is available online, look it up yourself.Oh good, another asshole who can't answer. That's two.
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 11:42:39 AM UTC-5, Bud wrote:
The case evidence is available online, look it up yourself.Oh good, another asshole who can't answer. That's two.
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 10:46:51 AM UTC-6, Gil Jesus wrote:documented, yet you refuse to accept it---*if* you are even aware of it. But let me help you with some related thoughts on case evidence, logic, and reason:
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 11:42:39 AM UTC-5, Bud wrote:If I ever have a loved one who is murdered, I pray no one on the jury takes the kind of logic you apply towards this case. The evidence that supports why we can be confident that the .38 shells are actually properly matched to LHO's pistol is well
The case evidence is available online, look it up yourself.Oh good, another asshole who can't answer. That's two.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------repost---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
May 4, 2023, 2:19:16 PM
Good. I once had a favored post covering this:
"Many CT’s who deny Oswald killed Tippit will point to the failure
to conclusively match the bullets recovered from Tippit to his weapon to
the exclusion of all other weapons in the world. But several facts are missed in that:
1) At least one reviewer (Joseph Nichol) believed he could match one of them.
2) It can be safely assumed that none of the test shots fired from the gun could be conclusively matched either. This is because the .38 barrel
had been modified to accept the slightly smaller (yet longer) .38
Special ammunition. Yet *accept* is the key word, because the barrel
would have still been slightly larger, thus causing the smaller .38
Special rounds to wobble as they came down the barrel, ensuring a
unique scoring pattern on each one.
3) The shells ejected at the scene (as found and as seen by witnesses who later ID’d Oswald) could all be matched to Oswald’s
pistol to the exclusion of all other weapons in the world.
4) The class characteristics 5 lands and groves with a right twist were
the same. And the bullets also displayed many similar microscopic
scratches.
5) The Tippit bullets showed signs of gas erosion, caused by escaping propellant slipping between the bullet's surface and the inside of the barrel of the gun; also consistent with the weapon Oswald owned.
6) Oswald was in possession of this very weapon at the time of his arrest. An arrest made not very far from the crime scene and because Oswald was observed acting suspiciously before ducking into the theater without
paying.
7) Since the very weapon Oswald had purchased and was in possession of at the time of his arrest was modified in such a way as to produce the
very kind of variable scoring patterns observed in 2) and fit the
profile of the other noted points and the available witness testimony,
I say that the murder weapon and the shooter *have* been matched to the exclusion of all guns and persons in the world! (Or at least DFW at the time.)"
3) The shells ejected at the scene ( as found and as seen by witnesses who later ID’d Oswald ) could all be matched to Oswald’s pistol to the exclusion of all other weapons in the world.
Watch as Gil handwaves away everything you mentioned. That`s the silly game.
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 2:09:18 PM UTC-5, Bud wrote:
Watch as Gil handwaves away everything you mentioned. That`s the silly game.Don't worry, if I'm looking for any shit out of you, I'll squeeze your head. That's the Gilly game.
ROFLMAO
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 12:50:33 PM UTC-5, BT George wrote:
First of all, the topic isn't the bullets, it's the empty shells.
I believe the shells were fired from the handgun because they displayed a bulging common with a .38 special round.
They also contained the impression of the weapon's firing pin and the breech face. ( 7 HSCA 407-408 )
3) The shells ejected at the scene ( as found and as seen by witnesses who later ID’d Oswald ) could all be matched to Oswald’s pistol to the exclusion of all other weapons in the world.
And how many of those witnesses identified the shells currently in evidence as the shells they found ?
You don't have to name them, just give us a number.
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 10:39:26 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
No moron, it's never "shifting the burden" to ask someone to support
what they believe. It's ALWAYS your burden to support what you
believe.
You basicly deny having ANY BURDEN AT ALL. And that's simply
cowardice.
Absolutely.
That's one asshole who refuses to answer the question.
If he had already answered it, he should have no problem repeating that answer.
A simple copy-and-paste would to the trick.
But he continues to duck and dodge the question instead.
There are ways to show if those shells were fired at 10th and Patton.
Acting as a proxy for the Warren Commission, I asked him to see his evidence.
He refuses to show it, claiming he has no burden to do so.
He has a burden to PROVE what he says is true and what he supports ( the Warren Commission case ).
By refusing to show his evidence, he proves that he cannot defend the very "evidence" he supports.
Yes, he's a coward AND a liar.
A real LOSER.
Beware. He's probably got some land in Florida he'll sell you.
ROFLMAO
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 10:09:24?AM UTC-6, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 10:39:26?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
No moron, it's never "shifting the burden" to ask someone to support
what they believe. It's ALWAYS your burden to support what you
believe.
You basicly deny having ANY BURDEN AT ALL. And that's simply
cowardice.
Absolutely.
That's one asshole who refuses to answer the question.
Except I did, I'm an asshole. You don't like my answers.
If he had already answered it, he should have no problem repeating that answer.
A simple copy-and-paste would to the trick.
But he continues to duck and dodge the question instead.
There are ways to show if those shells were fired at 10th and Patton.
Acting as a proxy for the Warren Commission, I asked him to see his evidence.
I am specifically NOT standing in as a proxy for the WC.
He refuses to show it, claiming he has no burden to do so.
He has a burden to PROVE what he says is true and what he supports ( the Warren Commission case ).
By refusing to show his evidence, he proves that he cannot defend the very "evidence" he supports.
I have no evidence nor burden to defend anything.
Yes, he's a coward AND a liar.
A real LOSER.
Beware. He's probably got some land in Florida he'll sell you.
ROFLMAO
On Thu, 9 Nov 2023 12:34:22 -0800 (PST), Chuck Schuyler <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 10:09:24?AM UTC-6, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 10:39:26?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
No moron, it's never "shifting the burden" to ask someone to support
what they believe. It's ALWAYS your burden to support what you
believe.
You basicly deny having ANY BURDEN AT ALL. And that's simply
cowardice.
Logical fallacy deleted.Absolutely.
That's one asshole who refuses to answer the question.
Except I did, I'm an asshole. You don't like my answers.
Lying can't convince people.
Except I did, asshole. You don't like my answers.
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 7:07:38 PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Thu, 9 Nov 2023 12:34:22 -0800 (PST), Chuck Schuyler <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 10:09:24?AM UTC-6, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 10:39:26?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote: >>> No moron, it's never "shifting the burden" to ask someone to support >>> what they believe. It's ALWAYS your burden to support what you
believe.
You basicly deny having ANY BURDEN AT ALL. And that's simply
cowardice.
Logical fallacy deleted.Absolutely.
That's one asshole who refuses to answer the question.
Except I did, I'm an asshole. You don't like my answers.
Lying can't convince people.These people are liars and deceivers. They can't answer a simple question honestly because they're not honest people.
This yutz says he's already answered a question that I'm asking for the first time.
What a lying piece of shit.
What evidence do you have that the .38 cal shells currently in evidence are the same shells found at the Tippit murder scene ?
I answered it, but NOT TO YOUR SATISFACTION.
You want to handle this like a court case, then follow the law. The shells are admissible.
Why don't you provide an explanation for your hobby point?
You need to provide the evidence the evidence is not legit, not just assume it and ask us to prove otherwise.
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 9:20:55 PM UTC-5, Hank Sienzant wrote:
You need to provide the evidence the evidence is not legit, not just assume it and ask us to prove otherwise.LOL...I'm sorry, I thought in America it was the burden of the prosecution to prove its case and part of that
involved proving the evidence is authentic.
Let me ask you this, Hank:
Was any chain-of-custody forms were ever filled out for the shells currently in evidence ?
Were the shells photographed as found, being that there were police photographers present at the scene ?
Did the persons who found the shells identify the shells currently in evidence as the shells they found ?
Did the police officer who marked two shells given to him identify ANY of the shells currently in evidence as the shells he marked ?
Whose Initials appear on two of the shells that do not correspond to anyone known to have been in the chain of custody ?
Do the shells match in number and manufacturer the bullets that were removed from Off. Tippit’s body ?
Were the shells originally identified by police as .38 specials ?
Do the shells contain corrosion consistent with having been in a gunbelt or a bullet slide ?
It's all here for you and your asshole pals to cry about:
https://gil-jesus.com/the-tippit-shells/
A buffet of nothingburgers.
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 6:32:57?PM UTC-6, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 7:07:38?PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Thu, 9 Nov 2023 12:34:22 -0800 (PST), Chuck SchuylerThese people are liars and deceivers. They can't answer a simple question honestly because they're not honest people.
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 10:09:24?AM UTC-6, Gil Jesus wrote:Logical fallacy deleted.
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 10:39:26?AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote: >>>>>> No moron, it's never "shifting the burden" to ask someone to support >>>>>> what they believe. It's ALWAYS your burden to support what you
believe.
You basicly deny having ANY BURDEN AT ALL. And that's simply
cowardice.
Absolutely.
That's one asshole who refuses to answer the question.
Except I did, I'm an asshole. You don't like my answers.
Lying can't convince people.
This yutz says he's already answered a question that I'm asking for the first time.
What a lying piece of shit.
The Tippit shells question?
I answered it, but NOT TO YOUR SATISFACTION.
Why don't you provide an explanation for your hobby point?
On Friday, November 10, 2023 at 6:42:01 AM UTC-5, Bud wrote:
< typical loser responses from a typical loser >
A buffet of nothingburgers.
The only nothingburger here is your mother, because one of her contributions to the world was you.
She must be proud of your ignorance and stupidity.
Were you the stupidest dumbfuck in your family, or were all her kids born without brains ?
Here's the link where I "refuse to show" the evidence Bud is "chickenshit" to look at :
https://gil-jesus.com/the-tippit-shells/
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 8:36:46?PM UTC-5, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
Why don't you provide an explanation for your hobby point?
My explanation is that you're a goddamned liar.
I posted only three questions of the 40 about the Tippit shells. And none of them was the topic of this thread.
QUESTION # 1. noted that the two Remington Peters shells had the initials "RD" and one Western shell contained the intials either "DC" or "DO" and
asked, Whose initials are these ? Where do they fit in in the chain of custody ? Why aren't they mentioned in that chain ?
QUESTION # 5. asked who found shell Q-75, Benavides or Virginia Davis ?
QUESTION # 11. asked which was the shell in the chain of custody between Benavides, Poe and Barnes, Q-74 or Q-77 ?
You replied to NONE of them. In fact, you only responded to ONE question of the 40 and that was question # 6, having to do with threats against the President.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/Cq3ejSQ5hEw
And you never answered one of the three questions about the shells, to my liking or not.
PERIOD.
On Friday, November 10, 2023 at 6:42:01 AM UTC-5, Bud wrote:
< typical loser responses from a typical loser >
A buffet of nothingburgers.
The only nothingburger here is your mother, because one of her contributions to the world was you.
She must be proud of your ignorance and stupidity.
Were you the stupidest dumbfuck in your family, or were all her kids born without brains ?
Here's the link where I "refuse to show" the evidence Bud is "chickenshit" to look at :
https://gil-jesus.com/the-tippit-shells/
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 9:20:55 PM UTC-5, Hank Sienzant wrote:
You want to handle this like a court case, then follow the law. The shells are admissible.
Who said anything about admissibility ?
Your reading comprehension is lacking.
The question is:
What proof do you have that the .38 cal shells currently in evidence are the same shells found at the Tippit murder scene ?
Try to keep up, oh "more knowledgeable" one.
On Friday, November 10, 2023 at 6:31:50?AM UTC-6, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Friday, November 10, 2023 at 6:42:01?AM UTC-5, Bud wrote:
< typical loser responses from a typical loser >
A buffet of nothingburgers.
The only nothingburger here is your mother, because one of her contributions to the world was you.
She must be proud of your ignorance and stupidity.
Were you the stupidest dumbfuck in your family, or were all her kids born without brains ?
Here's the link where I "refuse to show" the evidence Bud is "chickenshit" to look at :
https://gil-jesus.com/the-tippit-shells/
What is this "evidence" of?
On Friday, November 10, 2023 at 3:28:25?AM UTC-6, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 9:20:55?PM UTC-5, Hank Sienzant wrote:
You want to handle this like a court case, then follow the law. The shells are admissible.
Who said anything about admissibility ?
You.
Your reading comprehension is lacking.
The question is:
What proof do you have that the .38 cal shells currently in evidence are the same shells found at the Tippit murder scene ?
Fringe reset. He just answered you.
Try to keep up, oh "more knowledgeable" one.
Try to make a positive case in favor of something instead of asking us to play Fetch the Stick.
What evidence do you have that the .38 cal shells currently in evidence are the same shells found at the Tippit murder scene ?
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 4:56:44 AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
What evidence do you have that the .38 cal shells currently in evidence are the same shells found at the Tippit murder scene ?
Still waiting to see your evidence, WC supporters.
On Fri, 10 Nov 2023 12:55:24 -0800 (PST), Chuck Schuyler <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, November 10, 2023 at 3:28:25?AM UTC-6, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 9:20:55?PM UTC-5, Hank Sienzant wrote:
You want to handle this like a court case, then follow the law. The shells are admissible.
Who said anything about admissibility ?
You.Quote & cite the post you're quoting from.
But you won't.
You're a coward...
Your reading comprehension is lacking.
The question is:
What proof do you have that the .38 cal shells currently in evidence are the same shells found at the Tippit murder scene ?
Fringe reset. He just answered you.Quote the answer that actually answers the question.
But you can't... you're merely lying again.
Try to keep up, oh "more knowledgeable" one.
Try to make a positive case in favor of something instead of asking us to play Fetch the Stick.This is, of course, something *YOU* refuse to do.
Why is that, coward?
What evidence do you have that the .38 cal shells currently in evidence are the same shells found at the Tippit murder scene ?
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 9:20:55 PM UTC-5, Hank Sienzant wrote:
You want to handle this like a court case, then follow the law. The shells are admissible.Who said anything about admissibility ?
Your reading comprehension is lacking.
The question is:
What proof do you have that the .38 cal shells currently in evidence are the same shells found at the Tippit murder scene ?
Try to keep up, oh "more knowledgeable" one.
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 12:50:33 PM UTC-5, BT George wrote:
First of all, the topic isn't the bullets, it's the empty shells.
I believe the shells were fired from the handgun because they displayed a bulging common with a .38 special round.
They also contained the impression of the weapon's firing pin and the breech face. ( 7 HSCA 407-408 )
3) The shells ejected at the scene ( as found and as seen by witnesses who later ID’d Oswald ) could all be matched to Oswald’s pistol to the exclusion of all other weapons in the world.
And how many of those witnesses identified the shells currently in evidence as the shells they found ?
You don't have to name them, just give us a number.
On Fri, 10 Nov 2023 12:57:07 -0800 (PST), Chuck Schuyler ><chuckschuyler123@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, November 10, 2023 at 6:31:50?AM UTC-6, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Friday, November 10, 2023 at 6:42:01?AM UTC-5, Bud wrote:
< typical loser responses from a typical loser >
A buffet of nothingburgers.
The only nothingburger here is your mother, because one of her contributions to the world was you.
She must be proud of your ignorance and stupidity.
Were you the stupidest dumbfuck in your family, or were all her kids born without brains ?
Here's the link where I "refuse to show" the evidence Bud is "chickenshit" to look at :
https://gil-jesus.com/the-tippit-shells/
What is this "evidence" of?
Tut tut tut, coward. Is there any "evidence" listed in that cite?
You're clearly too stupid to figure this out.
Wrong on both counts.
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 9:20:55 PM UTC-5, Hank Sienzant wrote:
You need to provide the evidence the evidence is not legit, not just assume it and ask us to prove otherwise.LOL...I'm sorry, I thought in America it was the burden of the prosecution to prove its case and part of that
involved proving the evidence is authentic.
Let me ask you this, Hank:
Was any chain-of-custody forms were ever filled out for the shells currently in evidence ?
Were the shells photographed as found, being that there were police photographers present at the scene ?
Did the persons who found the shells identify the shells currently in evidence as the shells they found ?
Did the police officer who marked two shells given to him identify ANY of the shells currently in evidence as the shells he marked ?
Whose Initials appear on two of the shells that do not correspond to anyone known to have been in the chain of custody ?
Do the shells match in number and manufacturer the bullets that were removed from Off. Tippit’s body ?
Were the shells originally identified by police as .38 specials ?
Do the shells contain corrosion consistent with having been in a gunbelt or a bullet slide ?
It's all here for you and your asshole pals to cry about:
https://gil-jesus.com/the-tippit-shells/
On Friday, November 10, 2023 at 3:16:22?PM UTC-6, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Fri, 10 Nov 2023 12:55:24 -0800 (PST), Chuck Schuyler
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, November 10, 2023 at 3:28:25?AM UTC-6, Gil Jesus wrote:Quote & cite the post you're quoting from.
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 9:20:55?PM UTC-5, Hank Sienzant wrote: >>>
You want to handle this like a court case, then follow the law. The shells are admissible.
Who said anything about admissibility ?
You.
But you won't.
You're a coward...
Quote the answer that actually answers the question.Your reading comprehension is lacking.
The question is:
What proof do you have that the .38 cal shells currently in evidence are the same shells found at the Tippit murder scene ?
Fringe reset. He just answered you.
But you can't... you're merely lying again.
This is, of course, something *YOU* refuse to do.Try to keep up, oh "more knowledgeable" one.
Try to make a positive case in favor of something instead of asking us to play Fetch the Stick.
Why is that, coward?
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 4:56:44?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
What evidence do you have that the .38 cal shells currently in evidence are the same shells found at the Tippit murder scene ?
Still waiting to see your evidence, WC supporters.
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 9:20:55 PM UTC-5, Hank Sienzant wrote:
You want to handle this like a court case, then follow the law. The shells are admissible.Who said anything about admissibility ?
Your reading comprehension is lacking.
The question is:
What proof do you have that the .38 cal shells currently in evidence are the same shells found at the Tippit murder scene ?
Try to keep up, oh "more knowledgeable" one.
On Sun, 12 Nov 2023 08:41:24 -0800 (PST), Chuck Schuyler <chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, November 10, 2023 at 3:16:22?PM UTC-6, Ben Holmes wrote:Non-response deleted.
On Fri, 10 Nov 2023 12:55:24 -0800 (PST), Chuck Schuyler
<chucksch...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, November 10, 2023 at 3:28:25?AM UTC-6, Gil Jesus wrote:Quote & cite the post you're quoting from.
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 9:20:55?PM UTC-5, Hank Sienzant wrote: >>>
You want to handle this like a court case, then follow the law. The shells are admissible.
Who said anything about admissibility ?
You.
Chuckles was unable to admit that he couldn't
do it.
Chuckles is happy to help me prove his cowardice.But you won't.
You're a coward...
Dead silence. Chuckles just got spanked.Quote the answer that actually answers the question.Your reading comprehension is lacking.
The question is:
What proof do you have that the .38 cal shells currently in evidence are the same shells found at the Tippit murder scene ?
Fringe reset. He just answered you.
But you can't... you're merely lying again.
Well, to be honest, since I already answered the question, I can'tThis is, of course, something *YOU* refuse to do.Try to keep up, oh "more knowledgeable" one.
Try to make a positive case in favor of something instead of asking us to play Fetch the Stick.
Why is that, coward?
blame the coward for refusing to answer...
On Friday, November 10, 2023 at 5:17:54 AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Thursday, November 9, 2023 at 9:20:55 PM UTC-5, Hank Sienzant wrote:
You need to provide the evidence the evidence is not legit, not just assume it and ask us to prove otherwise.LOL...I'm sorry, I thought in America it was the burden of the prosecution to prove its case and part of that
involved proving the evidence is authentic.
Wrong on both counts.
A. I’m not the prosecution. There is no prosecution. Oswald is dead.
B. Evidence can be excepted and it’s up to the jury to determine how much weed to give it even if there is no acceptable evidence trail.
You want to handle this like a court case, then follow the law. The shells are admissible.Who said anything about admissibility ?
101. You do not know this? I thought you had claimed experience in law enforcement.Let me ask you this, Hank:
Was any chain-of-custody forms were ever filled out for the shells currently in evidence ?You have not shown the DPD used such forms in 1963. You haven’t shown anyone used such forms in 1963.
Were the shells photographed as found, being that there were police photographers present at the scene ?No, because they were picked up by civilians and turned over to the police. Evidence photos cannot be re-creations. Once the evidence is picked up and removed from the crime scene, it should not be replaced into the crime scene - that is criminology
Furthermore additional bullets were recovered from Oswald that matched those two brands. The Warren Commission explained all this.Did the persons who found the shells identify the shells currently in evidence as the shells they found ?No, because they were picked up by civilians and turned over to the police. The civilians did not mark the shells in any way. Nor is there an obligation for civilians to mark them in any way for identification later. You do not know this either?
Did the police officer who marked two shells given to him identify ANY of the shells currently in evidence as the shells he marked ?He waffled on whether he identified them with markings or not at the time he was provided them. You are begging the question by presuming he marked them in your begged question.
Since you appear to not know this, let me quote for you:
— quote —
Mr. BALL. Domingo told you who was running across the lawn?
Mr. POE. A man, white man.
Mr. BALL. What was he doing?
Mr. POE. He was unloading his pistol as he run.
Mr. BALL. And what did he say?
Mr. POE. He said he picked the two hulls up.
Mr. BALL. Did he hand you the hulls?
Mr. POE. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Did you put any markings on the hulls?
Mr. POE. I couldn't swear to it; no, sir.
Mr. BALL. What did you do with the hulls?
Mr. POE. I turned the hulls into the crime lab, which was at the scene.
— unquote —
What part of “I couldn’t swear to it; no, sir” did you not understand?
Like conspiracy theorists everywhere, you pretend the evidence says one thing when it says something else entirely.
Whose Initials appear on two of the shells that do not correspond to anyone known to have been in the chain of custody ?You tell me. Tell me what you make of this.
Do the shells match in number and manufacturer the bullets that were removed from Off. Tippit’s body ?Yes, within reason. Some witnesses heard as many as five shots, yet only four shells were recovered. Only four bullets were recovered. The two brands of shells matched the two brands of bullets, but there was not a one to one correspondence.
You don’t know this either?and the fourth bullet by Remington-Peters, but only two of the four discarded cartridge cases found on the lawn at 10th Street and Patton Avenue were of Winchester-Western manufacture.581 Therefore, one cartridge case of this type was not recovered. And
— quote —
The examination and testimony of the experts enabled the Commission to conclude that five shots may have been fired, even though only four bullets were recovered. Three of the bullets recovered from Tippit's body were manufactured by Winchester-Western,
— unquote —
Were the shells originally identified by police as .38 specials ?This is your argument. But you presented no evidence here to establish that.
Do the shells contain corrosion consistent with having been in a gunbelt or a bullet slide ?This is your argument. But you presented no evidence here to establish that.
It's all here for you and your asshole pals to cry about:
https://gil-jesus.com/the-tippit-shells/I do not rebut links. If you don’t care to present the evidence here, I don’t care to rebut the evidence that is not here.
Shifting the burden of proof.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 125:58:12 |
| Calls: | 6,663 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 12,212 |
| Messages: | 5,334,951 |