JFK - Why Oswald is guilty.

As I have just spent the last three months reading the most detailed book imaginable on the JFK assassination I thought I would put that reading to some use and outline why it is pretty clear Oswald was guilty and acted alone in the act. As I know we have some subscribers to various conspiracy theories on here would be nice to hear some of the counter views.
 
1 – The ballistics tests carried out on the bullet fragments found in JFK and Governor Connally were found to have been fired from the rifle owned by Oswald, to the exclusion of all other rifles in the world. I should clarify that this is not the model of gun, but the specific rifle found on the sixth floor, which it was proven was owned by Oswald, beyond any reasonable doubt.
 
2 – Oswald had previously made an unsuccessful attempt to assassinate another local politician, General Walker. Obviously not absolute proof he murdered Kennedy but a pretty strong indication that he was more than capable of attempting such a murder.
 
3 – No evidence has ever been found that a bullet was fired from anywhere other than the sixth floor of the Book Depository. No bullet fragments or shells were ever found in or around Dealey Plaza other than those fired by Oswald.
 
4 – The entry and exit wounds found in Kennedy and Connally were consistent with a shot being made from the upper floors of the Book Depository and no other location, as confirmed by the team of pathologists who examined the body.
 
5 - Oswald stayed with his wife the night before the assassination (they lived apart) on a Thursday night. He never stayed with her during the week. The gun used to kill Kennedy was stored at his wife’s address. What possible motivation did he have to break with a long established routine other than to collect the murder weapon.
 
6 – Of all the employees of the Book Depository Oswald was the only employee to leave the building and area after the murder. Would an innocent person act in such a manner.
 
7 – There was no magic bullet. In a presidential limousine the front seat occupied by Governor Connally was what is known as a jump seat and is lowered and set off to the left, thus meaning the bullet that struck both of them acted in a totally consistent manner from the perspective of trajectory.
 
8 – In a related point the idea that the shot was difficult or could not be made with Oswald’s rifle are a myth. Tests were carried out post the assassination where Oswald’s results were not only equalled but even bettered. Should also be remembered during his time in the marines Oswald was at one point classified as a sharpshooter, the second highest grade below expert, and at the risk of stating the obvious the US marine tests are pretty difficult.
 
9 – The only fingerprints found in the snipers nest on the sixth floor in the immediate aftermath of the murder belonged to Oswald, no credible physical evidence has ever emerged that anybody other than him or as well has him has ever emerged.
 
10 – The most popular conspiracy theory, that a shot was made from the grassy knoll does not really stand up to analysis. The grassy knoll is directly across the plaza from the main street where most people had gathered to watch the motorcade, any assassin or shot from there would have been in direct view of up to 80 witnesses, yet no credible witness or physical evidence has ever emerged to support such a proposition.
 
This is a brief run through some of the myriad factors that point to Oswald’s guilt but am always happy to hear the counter views.

Is there anything that alludes to Oswald being put up to this by the FBI or other parties?

Back when this happened over 90% of Americans believed that Oswald acted alone, that figure today stands around 20%.

I've always been fascinated by JFK. I'm fully in agreement that Oswald shot him, it's why, and the inconsistencies afterwards that grab my attention. Like why was the Autopsy not completed to full requirements? Why were certain organs not weighed? The fact that the Autopsy report submitted was not infact that original completed.

There's so much intrigue around his death and the aftermath that you can't help think 'conspiracy'.

One intriguing fact i've always found fascinating is that when Jackie lurches forward after the initial bullet hits JFK; it's not to protect him, she was actually trying to pick up the bits of his brain.

Nothing concrete Alistair, the truth is Oswald was completely unreliable, he was a guy unable to hold down even the most menial of jobs, completely given to flights of fancy and delusions of grandeur. The idea that if an organisation like the FBI or CIA were going to use someone outside their organisation to carry out the most important murder in possibly the history of the world that they would use Oswald is just too fanciful to believe, it would be akin to asking me to carry out brain surgery for you.

Oswald had previous with the FBI though. He'd asked to meet them after being arrested at a demonstration. Maybe that's when they realised this guy was the patsy they needed to pull this off? There are still a few question marks around Oswald's interaction. The trip to Mexico City for example. Does this book cover that?

Oswald's guilt is questionable..

Anybody really believe mafia man Ruby killed him because he loved Jackie ??

I agree with the Warren's commission report though ..............There was only one shooter...he came from the book depository but it's impossible to say for sure who it was !!

Do I think it was Oswald...probably..

Oswald was well known locally as a friend of Cuba and had appeared on radio shows.....So in all likelihood he probably knew he was a patsy when JFK was killed..So the "why does the innocent guy walk out of the depository" theory doesn't wash....He also had lived in the USSR...Hardly need to be Einstein to know If shots came from the book depository who'd be number 1 suspect..

I don't buy anything about fingerprint evidence back then......A magic bullet turned up on the dead President's stretcher if memory serves correctly....The picture of Oswald with the gun has been disproven too...

Oswald being a sharpshooter is disputed also by fellow marines........

No offence but you are making a circumstantial case..........What we'd call stirring the S**t storm....

No grassy knoll....One shooter...Was it Oswald ....Probably ???

Oswald guilty who knows..............No one ever will..

He killed Tibbit....I have no doubts......But why did Tippit and the other cops know who to look for so quickly ??

Oswald’s interactions with the FBI are a bit overplayed by the conspiracy community. As he had emigrated to Russia he was inevitably questioned on his return, which was completely standard procedure and subject to relatively infrequent checks by them, as would be standard for any US national who emigrated to a communist country in the height of the cold war, particularly one who had previously served in the US military.
 
The trip to Mexico is covered in the book. Basically, after realising the Soviet Union was not the communist utopia Oswald imagined it was Oswald decided Cuba was, and his trip there was to try and obtain a visa to either live in that country or transit there with a view to not leaving. All of which ties in with the view of him as a bit of a fantasist and dreamer.

Are you American, Trussman?

Whilst I subscribe to the theory that Oswald shot JFK, I've read enough accounts that create an element of doubt that (a) he was the only shooter and (b) even if he was the only shooter, that he otherwise acted alone.

Back and the left... back and to the left...

The gun picture has not been disproven Truss, the pohotgraphic experts who examined it were almost universal in proclaiming it genuine. Also people look at it through the realms of what is possible now, there was no photoshop back then, to doctor a picture was pretty difficult and also pretty obvious once done. Should also be noted the picture was signed by Oswald on the back, which points to its authenticity.

Similarly the sharpshooter title is an official marine classification, acheived through testing, Oswald scored sufficiently under the testing to earn a mark which qualified him for such a title. The fact that some of his fellow marines may not have throught he was all that is a subjective opinion, the score in a test is totally objective.

superflyweight wrote:Whilst I subscribe to the theory that Oswald shot JFK, I've read enough accounts that create an element of doubt that (a) he was the only shooter and (b) even if he was the only shooter, that he otherwise acted alone.  

Back and the left... back and to the left...

Likewise.

The acoustics report that was discredited because it confirmed the theory that there were two gunman is a good example of this.

superflyweight wrote:Whilst I subscribe to the theory that Oswald shot JFK, I've read enough accounts that create an element of doubt that (a) he was the only shooter and (b) even if he was the only shooter, that he otherwise acted alone.  

Back and the left... back and to the left...

They've proved it came from the sixth floor....

Photographic experts have also disproven the picture...The light and the position of the gun as to whether he could hold it like that..

If we are going all circumstantial we can ask...........

Why did the whole of the police force manage to know who they were looking for so quickly.....Cagney and Lacey eat your hearts out..

Why was Ruby allowed in through the back door of the police station...Why were Oswald's moving times changed and how did Ruby know not to be there earlier at the original time of his proposed move from the station...

If Ruby's murder of Oswald was a crime of passion why did he spend the whole morning getting his affairs in order ??

As the grassy knoll area was a "chicken shoot" why did Oswald shoot from the harder position at the book depository............He must have known whereever he shot JFK from the police would see his record and suspect him !!!!!...He was a bright lad...He knew he had to leave the depository after the shooting...So why not the easier grasy knoll where he was in metres of the President ??

Witness testimonies weren't followed up....

The President's botched autopsy.....

Has 1/2 taken over your account Truss

There's always going to be certain questions especially as people tend to view stuff then as we do now (hence the photo etc) there was something a bit fishy as can be seen with Ruby etc but don't think it's as big as people want it to be. (Who wants to know that a nut working on his own could kill the president????)

He didn't shoot from the grassy Knoll as he had less chance of getting away than at the depositry, as Rowley pointed out there would have been a lot of people in or around the area which would have more than likely made it easier to pinpoint where it had come from.

Yeah he has yeah...

Oswald did it .......end of.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

superflyweight wrote:Whilst I subscribe to the theory that Oswald shot JFK, I've read enough accounts that create an element of doubt that (a) he was the only shooter and (b) even if he was the only shooter, that he otherwise acted alone.  

Back and the left... back and to the left...

Why did the whole of the police force manage to know who they were looking for so quickly.....Cagney and Lacey eat your hearts out..

Witness testimonies weren't followed up....

The President's botched autopsy.....

Excellent points, Trussman.

It's always intrigued me how they managed to go from blaming Oswald for the murder of Tibbit to then pinning the Presidents murder on him. 'Man found in Cinema Murders President', it's fairytale stuff.

There were plenty of witness statements that put question marks over the presence of Oswald within certain floors of the book depository. There's also the fact that he immediately bumped into a police officer when reportedly heading back from the 6th floor and was apparently 'startled' by the officers gun in his face?

The autopsy is the one that gets me. I've read various accounts of this and there's some huge inconsistencies. The fact they forcibly removed Kennedy's body to get him out of Texas, his missing brain.

This is the issue I have with the conspiracy theories, the sheer volume of work and number of people needed to carry it off. Let’s take one small aspect of the evidence which has already been mentioned, the photo of Oswald with the gun. Now this does not establish his guilt, it merely alludes to it, so in the puzzle of any conspiracy it is a tiny piece. However for this conspiracy to work this is what is required. As I have already mentioned, the photographic experts who examined it for the Warren Commission and later the HCSA all confirmed it was genuine. If memory serves these were about eight different experts both times, so that is sixteen people already in the conspiracy. As I also mentioned one of the photos was signed by Oswald on the rear and  handwriting experts confirmed the writing was Oswald’s. As I don’t believe anyone is suggesting Oswald signed the doctored photo to assist people to frame him we also have the handwriting expert in on the conspiracy, or was he not in on it, an absolutely world class handwriting forger willing to join the conspiracy.
 
Also in her testimony to the Warren Commission Oswald’s wife Marina confirmed under deposition that she took the photo, so she is another willing to join the conspiracy to frame he dead husband. Just a quick tally of the numbers on this we have well over 20 people all willing to risk the criminal prosecution to assist in the murder of the president. Given this is one tiny element of any conspiracy, exactly how many people would be required to sign up to carry off the various other deceptions  necessary to carry out and get away with the frame up.

I don't believe in many conspiracies....

But to say they don't exist is very dangerous..

LBJ later said he had doubts after talking to his aides......

I've read "On the trail of the assassins" by Jim Garrison.......He highlighted some very suspicious events concerning the investigation and what went on before and after it....

You cannot make a generalisation about conspiracy theories just to rule one out ..mate

Look at Watergate....

It's easy to take one aspect of evidence and use it to disprove the conspiracies, Rowley.

What about the inconsistencies with the witness statements?

The 'Cagney & Lacey' apprehension of the chief suspect?

Why was the HCSA's theory that acoustic evidence proved more than one shooter disproved by the NSA, which in turn was later proved to be flawed in its dismissal of the HCSA's claims?

I'm not generalising. What I am saying is based on what I have read I believe Oswald killed the president and acted alone. You mention Watergate but to me this supports my argument, in that all the conspirators needed to do was destroy a couple of tapes and were incapable of doing so, the idea that similar agencies can carry out a conspiracy on a different stratosphere to that is just much of a stretch for me.

To be fair Alistair the police received a number of witness statements that had seen shots from the sixth floor window and offered descriptions of someone fitting Oswald's appearance. Given the shots had been heard from the book depository this was the focus of thier investigation. They asked the foreman if they had anyone who fit that description, which he obviously said was Oswald, when he was the only employee not still at the building they put two and two together. The idea this was some wonder of investigative work just isn't the case. The description was circulated and Tippet pulled up a guy who fit the bill, which he inevitably would do.

Oswald almost certainly fired from the TSBS(and was almost certainly the only gunman), but the chances he acted alone are slim to none. The mob was behind the JFK hit. The mafia helped JFK win Chicago in the 1960 election, and in return he was to get Castro out of Cuba and let the mob re-open their casinos there.

JFK's failure to kill Castro, coupled with RFK's clampdown on organised crime sealed both of their fates.

Jack Ruby is the single most bit of compelling evidence against a lone nut..

When Oswald died the Government could close the file.....However how many people linked to Oswald had untimely deaths...I can name at least 20...

They've locked the files away under stupid "National security" .....

The Senate committee in 1975 or 78 ????..... reviewed the evidence and overturned the warren commission's findings......said "It was a conspiracy by person and persons unknown !!..They had access to the warren commissions evidence.......We don't !!

Watergate is very relevant to this...

Americans laughed it off the Government could be complicit in such a small crime....

Do I think Oswald did it.........Probably............Do I think he was alone ...nope.

Remember we'd just had the bay of pigs and Russia and Cuba were kicking off...........It was convenient to blame it on a nutter..

Great debate though.....

incontinentia wrote:Oswald almost certainly fired from the TSBS(and was almost certainly the only gunman), but the chances he acted alone are slim to none. The mob was behind the JFK hit. The mafia helped JFK win Chicago in the 1960 election, and in return he was to get Castro out of Cuba and let the mob re-open their casinos there.

JFK's failure to kill Castro, coupled with RFK's clampdown on organised crime sealed both of their fates.

Why not kill his brother at that time?

Carlos Marcelo "Kill the head and the tail dies too"................LBJ hated Robert Kennedy...Thought the Kennedy's looked down on him....

Cuba was a paradise for the mob.........They owned Batista........When kennedy refused the CIA support for the Bay of pigs......Not only were the mob p**sed off but the CIA too....Director Dulles was sacked remember..

Plenty of people hated the President...........

Was it a lone nut maybe.............Who can say for sure......Which is my point.

Rowley wrote:To be fair Alistair the police received a number of witness statements that had seen shots from the sixth floor window and offered descriptions of someone fitting Oswald's appearance. Given the shots had been heard from the book depository this was the focus of thier investigation. They asked the foreman if they had anyone who fit that description, which he obviously said was Oswald, when he was the only employee not still at the building they put two and two together. The idea this was some wonder of investigative work just isn't the case. The description was circulated and Tippet pulled up a guy who fit the bill, which he inevitably would do.

Are you talking about witeness statements from the ground?

Yes, there were a number of people who say a rifle barrel pointing out of the window. They assumed, as you almost certainly would, that it was a Secret Service person guarding the motorcade.

Here's one issue...

police received a number of witness statements that had seen shots from the sixth floor window and offered descriptions of someone fitting Oswald's appearance

How can people possibly give an accurate description of someone 6 floors up, crouching in a window?

It doesn't have to be hugely accurate, saying he is white, his hair colour and approximate build it more than possible. Ask the foreman if they have any employees who could fit that bill. We have one who has just left the scene of the crime, you would then ask his work colleagues for a more detailed description and circulate it.

Even if you take out the witness descriptions if you believe the shots came from that building the first thing you would do is ask the foreman to account for all his employees. The minute you can't account for everyone you would ask for more info on the ones you could not account for. How long would it seriously take to establish the one who was missing was Oswald and that he was considered a bit of a weirdo and a loner by his colleagues (as he most certainly was). In the absence of any other leads is it really such a feat of police work to make him your key suspect, or at the very least a person you would want to speak to as a matter of urgency.

Also have to bear in mind there was a huge police  and FBI presence on the day, the resources to question the employees and get a description/profile of Oswald was certainly not an issue.

I'll wait for 1-2 to comment, so that what I bave to say doesn't sound as cuckoo

Come on Raf, show some balls.

Rowley wrote:Come on Raf, show some balls.

14k+ worth of comments have shown that's probably not gonna happen

Rowley wrote:It doesn't have to be hugely accurate, saying he is white, his hair colour and approximate build it more than possible. Ask the foreman if they have any employees who could fit that bill. We have one who has just left the scene of the crime, you would then ask his work colleagues for a more detailed description and circulate it.

Even if you take out the witness descriptions if you believe the shots came from that building the first thing you would do is ask the foreman to account for all his employees. The minute you can't account for everyone you would ask for more info on the ones you could not account for. How long would it seriously take to establish the one who was missing was Oswald and that he was considered a bit of a weirdo and a loner by his colleagues (as he most certainly was). In the absence of any other leads is it really such a feat of police work to make him your key suspect, or at the very least a person you would want to speak to as a matter of urgency.

Also have to bear in mind there was a huge police  and FBI presence on the day, the resources to question the employees and get a description/profile of Oswald was certainly not an issue.

White, average build American men with brownish hair is hardly an 8 foot tall ginger bloke with massive hands. It's incredibly generic. And again, there were various, differing reports as to Oswald's location at the time.

It's entirely plausible that those 'witnesses' could have been planted, or maybe coerced into giving a certain description. I'm not saying this is the case of course, just that you can look at it objectively.

Just as much as you could argue that despite the heavy police presence a man managed to carry out an incredibly public assassination of one of; if not THE most influential man in world politics, and escape through the back door of his building only to accidentally get caught shooting a copper and hiding out in a cinema. If you plan to kill the President, in such a way, you don't get caught that easily.

Wasn't having a pop Truss just saying it tongue in cheek

JFK is one of them subjects that has pretty good evidence both ways. Tend to agree that the mafia had some involvement as think at the point they'd shown they weren't above going after political figures and over in Italy think they'd already hit some major high ups (There was discussions between the Italian and American Mafia)

So we add the planted witnesses into the 20 odd people willing to fake the photo into the conspiracy. Obviously we already have the shadowy figures arranging the whole thing who approach these people, and silence the ones, who given they are being asked to carry out consipracy to commit murder (carried the death penalty in Texas) refuse or threaten to expose the conspiracy. How many people are we up to thus far in the scheme?

Is this really a more plausible explanation than the theory that a lone nut shot him? As I mentioned previously my issue with the whole theory is if you accept a consipracy once you start tallying it up the sheer number of people who would need to be involved and keep their mouth shut for the rest of their lives renders it completely implausible.

Also needs to be remembered, whilst obviously no president is univerally loved Kennedy's approval ratings were pretty high. That enough people hated him enough to agree to one of the most dangerous propositions imaginable, one that would lead them to the electric chair and infamy as pariahs just doesn't seem believable.

With respect Derby there isn’t good evidence against the Oswald acted alone theory. There are a lot of rumours, suppositions and leaps of faith, but evidence is something that you could take to a court of law. The ballistics experts saying the bullet fragments found in Kennedy were fired by his gun, to the exclusion of all other guns in the world is evidence, saying the mob did it because Kennedy’s brother was coming after them is not.
 
Also just to stay on that point for a minute, if someone is attacking you is the best way to put him off to do something that, if discovered, is likely to make him even more committed to destroying you? Surely if the mob were found to be guilty they knew Bobby, the police, the FBI and pretty much every arm of law enforcement would devote their every waking hour to wiping the mob from the face of the planet?

Rowley wrote:
Also needs to be remembered, whilst obviously no president is univerally loved Kennedy's approval ratings were pretty high. That enough people hated him enough to agree to one of the most dangerous propositions imaginable, one that would lead them to the electric chair and infamy as pariahs just doesn't seem believable.

I'm using hypothetical's as a counter argument. Obviously that's the whole issue here, alot of it is hypothetical because of the absolute hash that was made of the investigations in the aftermath.

In response to the above quote, does it have to be about hatred? Rumours have been rife for years that Kennedy was ill and that it was brain related. Was there a fear that perhaps Kennedy had gone soft? That perhaps there was far more to his illness than met the eye and that actually, Kennedy was becoming a danger to his country? You couldn't be seen to oust out a President with such high approval ratings, however, you could cement his legacy and his place in history by having him assassinated, the first since Lincoln.

Hell, maybe LBJ planned it, thought he did such a good job he decided to take Robert out as well...

If more than Oswald was involved it's a conspiracy.....Doesn't have to be a big one.

Dallas police were in the pocket of organised crime...How did Ruby get in again ???

You have to remember it was in the government's, mafia's and the CIA,s best interests to shut the book on JFK..

They were trying times..

Easy to fix a picture....and plant evidence...

Ruby offered to talk in 66........But told the Commission he had "Grave doubts pertaining to my situation!!"..

Was the Babushka lady the spotter for the snipers on the grassy knoll Jeff?

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:
Ruby offered to talk in 66........But told the Commission he had "Grave doubts pertaining to my situation!!"..

That is a popular quote in a lot of conspiracy books Truss. They are a little naughty with it though because what he actually said he would only talk in Washington, but his next line was that he was not part of any conspiracy and acted alone. Funnily enough very few conspiracy authors quote the last line!

Scottrf wrote:Was the Babushka lady the spotter for the snipers on the grassy knoll Jeff?

Yes she also had one of those machines off Men In black to ensure nobody else stood near her saw the gunmen.

That will do.

So look, maybe Oswald did act alone. Maybe he was a lone nut who had a particularly rough day. Still there are a few issues.

- He killed the president of United States! Think most people would take odds on a guy who nearly missed a target from 30 metres (the Walker attempt) hitting a kill shot from 75m at an angle, with that much pressure and a moving vehicle. Doesn't make it impossible, of course, but I'd chew your hand for odds of say 2/5. Sure he was a marksman would have been an eon ago, and shooting, I'm told isn't the sort of skill that suddenly improves by osmosis.

Still, he could have done it. And fair play if he did

In all fairness Raf when you look at the shooting, if we accept he was aiming for the head, as any assassin would (crack mafia assassin Ruby aimed for the almost always fatal stomach as an aside) he actually only made one out of three shots. Hardly the feat of wonderous shooting some would have you believe.

I watched a documentary on the gunman, re-enacted by some gun specialist in the US who said it was a pretty difficult shot to actually replicate.

http://22november1963.org.uk/lee-harvey-oswald-marksman-sharpshooter

http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=39&relPageId=454

How did Judy Garland end up with Ruby's slippers? In the book they were silver. It doesn't make sense. Explain that Jeff.

Rowley wrote:In all fairness Raf when you look at the shooting, if we accept he was aiming for the head, as any assassin would (crack mafia assassin Ruby aimed for the almost always fatal stomach as an aside) he actually only made one out of three shots. Hardly the feat of wonderous shooting some would have you believe.

Still, 1/3 is still a helluva improvement at double the distance. He didn't even take a shot to know the adjustments he would have to make for weather and distance.

So if we accept he did not make the difficult but not impossible shot, what is our other option. Given we know the shots come from Oswald's rifle, which is the only conclusion the ballistic evidence supports are we saying someone broke into Ruth Paine's house, stole the rifle and fired it? If so what was in the rifle shaped package Oswald was seen carrying into work on the morning of the shooting, the same package found in the snipers nest?

Again to believe Oswald made the shot takes a lot less of a leap of faith than the alternative.

What if he was the fall guy?

Define fall guy Alistair, if you mean a willing participant willing to take the fall I would refer you to my point made earlier, that of all the people you would rely on for something like this Oswald is the last person. We're planning to kill the president, who shall we hinge the whole scheme on, a fantasist who is incapable of holding down the most menial of jobs? Again, it seems unlikely.

If you mean he was an unknowing fall guy, there are simply too many unknown factors for this to work. Firstly and as an example of these the majority of Book Despository employees chose to take their lunch early and watch the motorcade from the pavement outside the building. What happens if Oswald joins them? The whole scheme falls to bits on something completely out of anyone's control.

Alistair wrote:What if he was the fall guy?

I don't think Lee Majors was involved.

superflyweight wrote:

Alistair wrote:What if he was the fall guy?

I don't think Lee Majors was involved.  

He's the unknown gunman that made Oswald such a star.