From: sirslick@fast.net   
      
   On Wednesday, December 13, 2023 at 6:13:33 AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:   
   > On Tuesday, December 12, 2023 at 11:06:26 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:    
   > > On Tue, 12 Dec 2023 05:57:29 -0800 (PST), JE Corbett    
   > >  wrote:    
   > >    
   > > >On Tuesday, December 12, 2023 at 6:57:42?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:    
   > > >> It's called an eyewitness account and it becomes evidence when it's   
   corroborated by other witnesses like the ones I've already listed.    
   > > >    
   > > >It's evidence but eyewitness evidence doesn't establish anything as a   
   fact because eyewitnesses frequently get things    
   > > >wrong.    
   > > No, you're lying again. In your opinion, and the opinion of ALL    
   > > believers in this forum, EVERY SINGLE EYEWITNESS GOT THINGS WRONG.   
   > Buell Wesley Frazier was wrong.    
      
     You look at the information the provided incorrectly. He guessed at a   
   length, they didn`t state one.   
      
   > Linnie Mae Randle was wrong.    
      
     You look at the information incorrectly. She guessed at a length, she didn`t   
   state one.   
      
   > The witnesses who said there were more than three shots were all wrong.    
      
     If they were right than you are calling a whole bunch of other witnesses   
   wrong.   
      
     I guess it is ok when you call witnesses wrong.   
      
   > The witnesses who saw smoke on the knoll were all wrong.    
      
     Says who? The question is whether it was gunsmoke.   
      
   > The witnesses who claimed that at least one shot was fired from behind the   
   picket fence were all wrong.    
      
     Who saw a shooter there?   
      
   > The witnesses who saw the limo slow down or stop on Elm St. during the   
   shooting sequence were all wrong.    
        
     The limo did change speeds. So what?   
      
   > The Parkland medical staff who saw an entry wound in the throat were all   
   wrong.    
      
     They did no examination to make such a determination, nor did they have the   
   expertise to do so.   
      
   > The Parkland medical staff that saw a gaping wound in the back of the head   
   were all wrong.    
      
     It was on the side.   
      
   > The deputies who reported finding a 7.65 Mauser in the TSBD were all wrong.    
      
     There is film of the rifle found. It isn`t a Mauser.   
      
   > The deputy who found the three spent shells on the sixth floor and could not   
   identify the shells in evidence as the shells he found was wrong.    
      
     You refuse how they could make a positive identification if they didn`t mark   
   them.   
      
   > The police who described the Tippit murder weapon and the shells found at   
   the scene as an automatics were all wrong.    
      
     Only one did that I`m aware of. And him being wrong is much less fantastic   
   than any other possibility.   
      
   > The police that were present at the time the white discarded jacket was   
   found were all wrong.    
      
     About what?   
      
   > The FBI and Secret Service, who concluded that Kennedy and Connally were hit   
   by separate shots were both wrong.    
      
     The FBI hadn`t even looked at the autopsy report when they produced their   
   conclusions.    
      
     And you can`t show that such exactitude has ever been necessary in a murder   
   case in order to find people culpable of crimes. I`ve seen videos of cops   
   emptying their clips at suspects, I doubt it would be possible to determine   
   which shots hit in what    
   order, or which shots missed, nor would it be necessary to do so to determine   
   what occurred. The bar is always placed at the highest for other people`s   
   ideas, the lowest for conspiracy ideas.   
      
   > John Connally was wrong.    
      
     Understandable under the circumstances. A surprise attack lasting seconds   
   and you expect a split second accounting of events?   
      
   > Nellie Connally was wrong.    
      
     See above.   
      
   > Motorcycle officer James Chaney was wrong.    
      
     See above. And Chaney got some things right, like the shots coming from   
   behind him.   
      
   > The witnesses who found and handled the stretcher bullet and could not   
   identify CE 399 as that bullet were all wrong.    
      
     You refuse to show how they could make a positive identification without   
   marking them.   
      
   > The witnesses who found the spent shells at the Tippit murder scene and   
   could not identify the shells in evidence as the shells they found were all   
   wrong.    
      
     See above.   
      
   > The witnesses who knew and placed Jack Ruby at Parkland Hospital were all   
   wrong.    
      
     In order to believe them you must call other witnesses wrong.   
      
     I guess it is ok when you call witnesses wrong.   
      
   > The witnesses who testified of a close relationship between Jack Ruby and   
   the Dallas Police were all wrong.    
      
     He was friendly with some. So what?   
       
   > Everybody was wrong and in spite of all of this error, they managed to   
   arrest the right person for TWO homicides on the very first time.    
      
     You refuse to show how what you produced draws into question Oswald`s guilt.   
      
   > Truly a remarkable piece of police work, the likes of which I've never heard   
   of in my lifetime.   
      
    Oswald wasn`t a hard man to track, he left bodies wherever he went.   
      
    You being a stump, unable to figure out simple crimes does not reflect on   
   anyone else but yourself.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)