On Feb 28, 5:37=A0pm, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Raymond:
>
> Normally, in a criminal case, eyewitness testimony is the least
> reliable of all evidence.
>
> However, the trolls would like to twist that fact around and say that
> all eyewitness testimony is completely unreliable all of the time.
>
> That's not true.
>
> Case in point: The only "evidence" they have that puts Oswald in the
> window is from .....an eyewitness. And one that reluctantly identified
> him at that.
>
> In this case where the "evidence" was manufactured, tampered with,
> substituted, where witnesses were threatened, where witnesses were
> ignored, where affidavits were altered to say something that the
> witness later claimed he/she never said......in a case such as this,
> where EVERY SINGLE PIECE OF EVIDENCE IS QUESTIONABLE and where, in
> many cases NO CHAIN OF POSSESSION OF THE EVIDENCE EXISTS........
> eyewitness accounts and interviews become the one SOLID piece of
> evidence that cannot be refuted.
>
> As we saw in the OJ trial, when police tamper with evidence, the
> accused walks. I believe that OJ killed his wife and Ron Goldman, but
> the LAPD put the victims' blood on a glove that did not fit Simpson,
> creating enough doubt in the minds of the jury that they could not
> return a "guilty" verdict.
>
> Good eyewitnesss videos here:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/GJJdude
The Warren Wizards, themselves, were guilty of a similar pattern of
conduct. If testimony of a witness failed to meet their eventual,
pre-
conceived, lone-assassin pronouncement, the witness became only a
footnote.
Pure and total bull****. I have stated numerous times on this
newsgroup, throw out ALL eyewitness testimony...pro or con
conspiracy. All of it. Relay strictly on physical and ballistic
evidence. It leads ONLY in one direction. LHO.
To not accpet this premise, one has to be either a complete moron.
You listening Chico?
|
