The Lone Assassin Question

[William Kelly]

The Lone Assassin Question

- for Lone Nutters Only.

If Lee Harvey Oswald alone is responsible for what happened at Dealey Plaza and was the lone shooter, then when did he decide to kill the President?

While Oswald was still alive, a Dallas District Attorney Henry Wade told reporters, "I think that it's a man that planned this murder weeks or months ago and has laid his plans carefully and has carried them out and had planned at that time what he was going to tell the police who are questioning him at the moment."

Yet, others who believe Oswald did it alone, who actually knew him, like Ruth Paine, consider the idea that he didn't decide to kill the President until after his wife Marina rejected an offer of reconciliation the night before the assassination.

Just as Conspiracy Theorists are divided over whether President Kennedy was murdered by a group outside the government or was a victim of a coup by those who took over the government, Lone Nutters who believe Oswald did it alone are also divided over the question of exactly when Oswald decided to kill the president.

So when was it? And what was it? Was it all planned out in advance, or was it a sudden decision to take advantage of the opportunity because he didn't get laid the night before?

Studiously avoided by the Warren Commission, this question is one that should be answered as a matter of national security, because certainly such a determination can only help thwart other such assassinations, especially if the Secret Service itself claims Oswald acted alone.

But their failure to answer the question only increases its significance. The only real reason for not even trying to answer the question implies that there's really no reason to look for a time of decision, or a motive, because none exists. Why bother if you already know the answer?

When did Oswald decide to kill the President?

(I've also posted this at John McAdam's forum and DPF)

[McAdams says Oswald must have decided sometime AFTER the motorcade route was published in the newspapers.]

Edited July 1, 2010 by William Kelly

[Paul Baker]

I don't understand why this question is so important. From a 'Lone Nutter' perspective, what difference does it make, when the physical and circumstantial evidence points to Oswald's guilt. We know he did it, therefore we know he decided to do it at some point. When, who cares, and how does it help? Knowing when anyone decides to kill someone else is useful, for sure, but usually the prospective killer doesn't talk about it beforehand.

But ...

Oswald visited his wife on a Thursday, which he'd apparently never done before. His reason for going there on that day was to pick up his rifle, so he could shoot the president the next day. This implies that his intentions were real before Marina rejected him. I agree with McAdams, that in all probability he decided to shoot JFK when he learnt of the motorcade route.

As for planning, there wasn't much to do. The president was coming to the assassin's lair. All the assassin had to do was get a gun and sit and wait.

Paul.

[Pat Speer]

I don't understand why this question is so important. From a 'Lone Nutter' perspective, what difference does it make, when the physical and circumstantial evidence points to Oswald's guilt. We know he did it, therefore we know he decided to do it at some point. When, who cares, and how does it help? Knowing when anyone decides to kill someone else is useful, for sure, but usually the prospective killer doesn't talk about it beforehand.

But ...

Oswald visited his wife on a Thursday, which he'd apparently never done before. His reason for going there on that day was to pick up his rifle, so he could shoot the president the next day. This implies that his intentions were real before Marina rejected him. I agree with McAdams, that in all probability he decided to shoot JFK when he learnt of the motorcade route.

As for planning, there wasn't much to do. The president was coming to the assassin's lair. All the assassin had to do was get a gun and sit and wait.

Paul.

Not to derail the topic, Paul. But you have to know there's problems with that scenario. For it to be true, Oswald would have to have traveled home on Thursday with a large piece of wrapping paper stuffed in his shirt. Could he have done so without being detected? It's doubtful, and was never tested. For it to be true, he also would have to have carried a rifle in this wrapping paper the next morning. Strangely, however, the only two witnesses to see him with a bag the next morning, claimed the bag he was carrying was far smaller than the bag would have to have been to have carried the rifle. This is a huge hole in the evidence, which can not be ignored. (This in and of itself does not prove his innocence, of course, but it certainly raises questions about his guilt.)

[William Kelly]

I don't understand why this question is so important. From a 'Lone Nutter' perspective, what difference does it make, when the physical and circumstantial evidence points to Oswald's guilt. We know he did it, therefore we know he decided to do it at some point. When, who cares, and how does it help? Knowing when anyone decides to kill someone else is useful, for sure, but usually the prospective killer doesn't talk about it beforehand.

But ...

Oswald visited his wife on a Thursday, which he'd apparently never done before. His reason for going there on that day was to pick up his rifle, so he could shoot the president the next day. This implies that his intentions were real before Marina rejected him. I agree with McAdams, that in all probability he decided to shoot JFK when he learnt of the motorcade route.

As for planning, there wasn't much to do. The president was coming to the assassin's lair. All the assassin had to do was get a gun and sit and wait.

Paul.

Well Paul, From a security and prevention perspective it's a huge question, as it should be determined if the person who killed the President did so spontaniously or he planned to do it in advance. The question must be asked and should be answered.

And if not answered, why not?

BK

[Bernie Laverick]

I don't understand why this question is so important.

Then you probably never will.

From a 'Lone Nutter' perspective, what difference does it make, when the physical and circumstantial evidence points to Oswald's guilt.

Points to, doesn't prove.

We know he did it,

No you don't.

therefore we know he decided to do it at some point.

No you don't.

When, who cares,

I do.

and how does it help?

It helps if you care why JFK was killed.

Knowing when anyone decides to kill someone else is useful, for sure, but usually the prospective killer doesn't talk about it beforehand.

But ...

Oswald visited his wife on a Thursday, which he'd apparently never done before.

And yet he cashed a cheque in Iriving on Tursday, October 31 (CE1165)

His reason for going there on that day was to pick up his rifle, so he could shoot the president the next day.

No, his reason for going to Irving, according to Ruth Paine and Marina, was that "he felt badly about arguing with his wife about the use of a ficticious name. He said that he was lonely, because he had not come the previous weekend, and told Marina that he 'wanted to make his peace' with her." (R740)

This implies that his intentions were real before Marina rejected him. I agree with McAdams,

More fool you.

that in all probability he decided to shoot JFK when he learnt of the motorcade route.

As for planning, there wasn't much to do.

Except for sneaking the rifle out of the house unseen (supposedly concealed in materials he stole from the bench of a man who never left his work station and never saw Oswald around and which he took back to Irving without Frazier noticing) and then sneaking it into the TSBD unseen and then finding a place to hide it all morning from all is work mates and then building a "snipers nest" without anyone noticing etc etc

The president was coming to the assassin's lair.

Can you prove that Oswald knew that?

All the assassin had to do was get a gun and sit and wait.

Paul.

So to sum it all up then, you don't know why you say he did it, you don't care, and you don't even want to hazard a guess?

How strange, when almost ANY other post is placed on here there is almost a feeding frenzy of LNers ripping into it, disrupting the flow with paragraph after paragraph of pedantry and clumsy wooden reasoning. It could be about the autopsy, the ballistics, the gun, Tippit, Oswald...you name it, and they will flood the post with ream upon ream of ignorance.

But give them the floor as Bill as so cleverly done and...where are they? Only one so far has dared step up to the plate. And let's face it, his heart wasn't really in it. It was a token gesture Paul. I applaud your guts, but your logic - as Lee has admirably demonstrated - is one very warped blunt instrument.

Oswald obviously did it so why study the evidence? Can anyone else hear a banjo being picked....?

Paul here's a tip: please don't ever become a lawyer, judge or policeman. In fact stay away from anything that requires making decisions based on given facts. It really isn't your forte.

[Peter McGuire]

But ...

Oswald visited his wife on a Thursday, which he'd apparently never done before. His reason for going there on that day was to pick up his rifle, so he could shoot the president the next day.

Oh he did?

How would you know you little twerp?

Edited July 2, 2010 by Peter McGuire

[Paul Baker]

Tip-toeing nimbly through the usual bullxxxx ...

Mr Speer, thank you for your measured and polite response, a rare thing around here. If that bag was folded up, wouldn't it have been easy to conceal? I wouldn't say that was too difficult. The evidence regarding the size of the bag. Isn't the fact that he was *carrying* that bag at all (as seen by witnesses) more important, and that he claimed it contained curtain rods, which he didn't need and were never found?

Mr Kelly. I see what you're getting at now. Oswald planned it at quite short notice, I believe. If the motorcade route wasn't going past the TSBD, JFK wouldn't have been murdered that day.

Mr May. So Oswald went to Irving on Thursday to make amends with Marina? Why couldn't he wait until the following evening, when he would be visiting as usual anyway? Why did he go into the garage, and why did the rifle he kept in the Paine's garage go missing?

Mr May. I still think it's rather obvious that Oswald didn't have to do much planning. Get a rifle, arrange some boxes, sit and wait.

Mr Laverick. "Oswald clearly did it so why study the evidence?" Are you aware that all the physical evidence and most of the circumstantial evidence points to Oswald's guilt? Obviously not. The evidence has been studied, which is why it's clear who committed the crime.

Mr McQuire, try to act your age, you're only embarrassing yourself here. There's too much of this school playground stuff going on. xxxx xxxx pants on fire, etc.

Paul.

Edited July 2, 2010 by Paul Baker

[David Williams]

Paul were is your proof that Lee entered the garage that night?

[Paul Baker]

Paul were is your proof that Lee entered the garage that night?

Mrs Paine believed he'd been in there, as the light had been left on. Coupled with the bag evidence, and the fact that the rifle went missing from that location, I'd say that proves beyond reasonable doubt that he'd collected his gun from the Paines' garage that evening.

What do you think?

[Terry Mauro]

Paul were is your proof that Lee entered the garage that night?

Mrs Paine believed he'd been in there, as the light had been left on. Coupled with the bag evidence, and the fact that the rifle went missing from that location, I'd say that proves beyond reasonable doubt that he'd collected his gun from the Paines' garage that evening.

What do you think?

Mrs Paine "believed" he(Oswald) had been in the garage because the light was left on. The rifle was missing ( you mean the rifle used to murder JFK or another rifle? ).

I'd say your evidence is lacking. You havent proven anything

[Terry Mauro]

But ...

Oswald visited his wife on a Thursday, which he'd apparently never done before. His reason for going there on that day was to pick up his rifle, so he could shoot the president the next day.

Oh he did?

How would you know you little twerp?

He probably read this dandy book from way back in 1991.

http://www.amazon.com/Conspiracy-One-Definitive-Kennedy-Assassination/dp/0962621927

Jim Moore argues very much like Paul Baker.

Jim Moore's 1991 book was probably the silliest and simple minded of all the "Oswald did it" books.

[Paul Baker]

I'd say your evidence is lacking. You havent proven anything

It's a shame that, as a believer in conspiracy, you have no real evidence whatsoever! What has a consipracy theorist ever proven? Absolutely bugger all. Zilch. You have no idea what happened, for some reason you just can't bring yourself to believe the simple truth.

[Terry Mauro]

I'd say your evidence is lacking. You havent proven anything

It's a shame that, as a believer in conspiracy, you have no real evidence whatsoever! What has a consipracy theorist ever proven? Absolutely bugger all. Zilch. You have no idea what happened, for some reason you just can't bring yourself to believe the simple truth.

"simple" truth seems to be your forte. You have to be brain dead to believe that LHO killed anyone on 11/22/63.

Maybe one day the "light" will go on in your garage?

[Paul Baker]

Paul,

There's really no need to swear, is there? It seems rather odd labeling our responses as "the usual bullxxxx" and then thanking Pat for his "rare" polite response.

Anyhoo, when you say "Mr May" I assume you mean me? My name is, as it says, Hay not May.

Why didn't Oswald wait until friday? I don't think anyone could give a definitive answer on that. We are, after all, talking about matters of the heart (if the reason he went is because he missed his family). Also, no one knows what he had planned for that weekend. Perhaps he'd arranged to meet with someone else?

Actually, didn't Oswald tell the Police he didn't want to go to the Paine house that weekend because they were holding a party for one of the kids? I can't remember exactly, I'll have to look that up...

Martin

Apologies Martin, for getting your name wrong.

I find it irksome that it's so difficult to have a civilised conversation here. The polite, rational members are a small minority. Because I believe that Oswald did it, that somehow makes me a "nutter", and fair game for insults. Hence my bullxxxx comment. I get irritated sometimes.

Anyway. I'll have to look that up too. I thought Oswald missed the previous weekend due to a party. If he wasn't going to go to Irving on the 22nd that would add credence to the argument that he just wanted to see Marina and the children. Irrespective of that though, there's still the bag. What was in it? I think it's safe to say it didn't contain curtain rods.

[Terry Mauro]

Paul,

There's really no need to swear, is there? It seems rather odd labeling our responses as "the usual bullxxxx" and then thanking Pat for his "rare" polite response.

Anyhoo, when you say "Mr May" I assume you mean me? My name is, as it says, Hay not May.

Why didn't Oswald wait until friday? I don't think anyone could give a definitive answer on that. We are, after all, talking about matters of the heart (if the reason he went is because he missed his family). Also, no one knows what he had planned for that weekend. Perhaps he'd arranged to meet with someone else?

Actually, didn't Oswald tell the Police he didn't want to go to the Paine house that weekend because they were holding a party for one of the kids? I can't remember exactly, I'll have to look that up...

Martin

Apologies Martin, for getting your name wrong.

I find it irksome that it's so difficult to have a civilised conversation here. The polite, rational members are a small minority. Because I believe that Oswald did it, that somehow makes me a "nutter", and fair game for insults. Hence my bullxxxx comment. I get irritated sometimes.

Anyway. I'll have to look that up too. I thought Oswald missed the previous weekend due to a party. If he wasn't going to go to Irving on the 22nd that would add credence to the argument that he just wanted to see Marina and the children. Irrespective of that though, there's still the bag. What was in it? I think it's safe to say it didn't contain curtain rods.

Irrespective of that though, there's still the bag. What was in it? I think it's safe to say it didn't contain curtain rods.

Why because JFK was shot to pieces? Therefore Oswald brought a rifle into the building where he worked?

Now you know why there was no trial