Oswald was never tried and convicted of any crime in a court of law. he died before any charge was brought. so he did, in fact, die an innocent man, albeit one with a tarnished name. (his funeral took 10 minutes, attendance was so bad that some of the seven reporters assigned to cover it had to be the pallbearers!)
The Warren Commisson, an investigative tribunal set up to inquire into the deaths, found that Lee Harvey Oswald was the sole gunman and acted alone. It was very easy to point the finger at Oswald to close the issue quickly. The law rules when you are dead, any action died with you, so even his family could not sue for defamation.
Oswald resides in a grey area, not innocent, not guilty and definately not a martyr.
2007-08-29 08:17:26
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
It doesn't make him innocent, but it sure does make it hard for him to testify in his defense. BTW, the Warren Commission didn't prove jack squat. Read my professor Gerald McKnight's book called "Breach of Trust." After looking at the evidence, it really is impossible to believe that Oswald acted alone. Vincent Bugliosi, Gerald Posner et al just ignore the real evidence and focus on what a crazy loner Oswald was, as if that is the key to his guilt. They also lie outright, like "there is no evidence connecting Oswald to US intel agencies," when in fact there is much evidence.
"I'm just a patsy." - Lee Harvey Oswald
There is no actual physical evidence that Oswald tried to murder the general, a fact that the general himself acknowledged, becoming a researcher on the topic. Read "Breach of Trust" to learn more about the dubious nature of the note used as the only evidence. Marina Oswald has a history of close cooperation with US intelligence agencies, of which her husband was a clear asset.
2007-08-29 15:34:18
·
answer #2
·
answered by haywood jablome 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Personally I do't think that Lee Harvey Oswald murdered J.F.K. There were three gunmen on that day and there is no such thing as a magic bullet.
2007-08-29 17:53:55
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
The role of a patsy is to take the blame off of the actual guilty parties. In Oswald's case that is. But then again maybe he did do it. . .
2007-08-29 15:13:02
·
answer #4
·
answered by Fallen 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Strange isn't all points to a government cover up with Kennedy and also the Twin towers. Says a lot about the American Governments over the years doesn't it?
2007-08-30 09:13:59
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Seeing as he murdered JD Trippit, a Dallas police officer, hardly............ This tree has been barked on since 1963. Lee had means, motive & oportunity. He had even tried a attempted murder of a Ex Army Gen eral prior to this plan. Oswald was the guy. Period....
2007-08-29 15:36:13
·
answer #6
·
answered by lana_sands 7
·
0⤊
3⤋
Technically
2007-08-29 15:06:15
·
answer #7
·
answered by Albinoballs 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
The law is man made, but a man could be a murderer before any laws were made
2007-08-29 15:28:41
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, of course not. The Warren Commission proved Oswald's guilt.
2007-08-29 15:06:39
·
answer #9
·
answered by Dr Jello 7
·
0⤊
4⤋
Only he and the real killer know whether he is innocent. The law certainly doesn't know.
2007-08-29 15:09:28
·
answer #10
·
answered by Andrew L 7
·
1⤊
0⤋