The psychology of Conspiracy Think

[James DiEugenio]

12 minutes ago, Cory Santos said:

So he wrote the paper that lead to drug convictions?   

Lancie's specialty was making sure that the local authorities made drug cases that would stick and he advised those authorities on issues of admissibility. 

Therefore, he must be well versed in that whole aspect of the law.  Last time he never told us about this. Can you believe that?

[Micah Mileto]

1 minute ago, James DiEugenio said:

 

There is also no solid information that explains who developed the camera film, or how the images from the positive camera film were copied over onto negative film.

 

BTW this may be one issue with the autopsy photos that people are overlooking - the prints and negatives are photographs of photographs, only the positives are said to be the original film coming from the autopsy. The prints in the official collection of evidence have an inferior picture quality because they come from the negatives (or "internegatives"). When the Parkland doctors were shown the autopsy photographs at the National Archives in 1988, they were only shown the inferior-quality prints.

 

A new set of prints should be made from the positive film (unless that's already been done).

[Micah Mileto]

6 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Lancie's specialty was making sure that the local authorities made drug cases that would stick and he advised those authorities on issues of admissibility. 

Therefore, he must be well versed in that whole aspect of the law.  Last time he never told us about this. Can you believe that?

Fun fact: plea bargains are a form of torture. This torture is being justified by the incorrect notion that the Justice system can be trusted to find the truth.

Edited December 21, 2022 by Micah Mileto

[Denny Zartman]

A person claiming to be a lawyer but is ready to throw Oswald under the bus even though Oswald had no motive, steadfastly claimed his innocence, and never had a single second of legal representation, is sad. Unfair too, imho.

[James DiEugenio]

Now Lancie Boy, in addition to those problematic pictures which would be almost impossible to surmount considering Stringer's sworn testimony, as you must know the official brain weight of JFK's brain is 1500 grams.

1500 grams.

Now, according to the most expansive study ever made of this issue, average brain weight, printed in a Dutch medical journal, the average weight of a brain is about 1340 grams. 

You are in  court: Lesar starts showing pictures of Jackie Kennedy's pink suit, he starts quoting testimony about her reachaing out of the back of the car to retrieve her husband's flying brain, Lesar shows pictures of the back of the car smeared with blood and tissue, he shows a bucket from a SS man who was apparently cleaning  it up, he then starts showing the Z film, with that tremendous head explosion at 313 with that jet of blood and matter exploding into the air etc etc.

When this is all done, Lesar turns to the jury and then to you: "How in God's name can Kennedy's brain weigh MORE than the average after all that evidence showing it had LOST so much of its mass?"

Counselor: How could you reply to that question?

Edited December 21, 2022 by James DiEugenio

[James DiEugenio]

Now, Lancie Boy,

As you know, the official brain illustration shown in the HSCA volumes pictures a brain  that is slightly lacerated, but pretty much intact. You can see it almost anywhere on the web. Its the famous Ida Dox illustration.

How can that be when so many witnesses, over ten, recall a brain that was, in keeping with the above evidence, missing a large part of its mass. Let me list some of the witnesses which, in an ideal world, Lesar would have called to testify:

Frank O'neill, an FBI agent present at the autopsy.

Jim Sibert, an FBI agent present at the autopsy

Mortician Tom Robinson, who was at the morgue late that night.

Dr. Boswell, a pathologist

Dr. Humes, a pathologist

Floyd Riebe, photo assistant at Bethesda

James Jenkins, Navy lab technician at Bethesda

Dr. McClelland, at Parkland

Dr. Jones, at Parkland

Nurse Diana Bowron, at Parkland

 

Each of these witnesses, and more, would have testified to seeing a brain that was nowhere near intact as shown in the illustration.  Therefore, Lesar would have attacked this exhibit on three evidentiary planes: of authorship of photos, an impossible weight, and witness identification.  

As you as an attorney specializing in admissible evidence, I ask, how could you get these photos or illustrations into court?  This is not conspiracy thinking or the BS you try to toss around here.  This is real evidence in a real case, the murder of JFK. You can check on all the above, its accurate.

How would you get those photos into court and how can they be real?

I await your reply Lancie Boy.

 

[James DiEugenio]

Now counselor, after you reply to those questions, please reply to this one:

If the defense can prove that the prosecution has used dubious evidence in order to get a conviction, is it not true that the defense can then make a motion to either dismiss the case or to move for a mistrial based on bad faith?

In fact does this not happen rather often in the real world of court procedure? Which you inhabit.

[Pat Speer]

1 hour ago, Micah Mileto said:

All drugs should be legalized. I believe in liberty over security. As far as I'm concerned, arresting a heroin dealer is no different from arresting Anne Frank.

I feel sorry for you.

[Guest]

 

@James DiEugenio are you playing Max Cady? 

Edited December 21, 2022 by Chris Barnard

[W. Tracy Parnell]

1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

since the author said they were not taken by him

He didn't say that. In fact, he confirmed he took them:

JFK Revisited Distorts John Stringer's Testimony (onthetrailofdelusion.com)

[Sandy Larsen]

1 hour ago, Micah Mileto said:

All drugs should be legalized. I believe in liberty over security. As far as I'm concerned, arresting a heroin dealer is no different from arresting Anne Frank.

 

Do you think your precious liberty has greater value than the lives ruined by heroin dealers? And the burden heroin addiction puts on society?

What you say is actually a great argument against libertarianism. The ideology of selfishness.

 

[Michaleen Kilroy]

JFKA is the only conspiracy I believe in because of the facts in the case.  Wasn't looking for a conspiracy - it found me.

It's clear to me that Helms-Joannides were involved in building LHO's pro-Castro legend in NO.  Top CIA operators don't engage in this level of propaganda for no reason.  The fact that operation coincided with JFKA and supported the CIA's objectives after the crime tells me the assassination was planned by top CIA operators as well.

There's more but really I don't need any more.  It's obvious.  What's also obvious is that the CIA will never give up the last incriminating files regarding their interactions with LHO in NO unless and until the Executive branch of the USG and the Fourth Estate pressure them to.  And that apparently will never occur.

Edited December 21, 2022 by Michaleen Kilroy

[Micah Mileto]

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

I feel sorry for you.

If one does not subscribe to the principal of liberty over security, then they may as well admit to not believing in any liberty at all. This is because there is no shortage of important-sounding arguments in favor of increasing security at the expense of liberty.

[Micah Mileto]

56 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Do you think your precious liberty has greater value than the lives ruined by heroin dealers? And the burden heroin addiction puts on society?

What you say is actually a great argument against libertarianism. The ideology of selfishness.

 

Just because I said that I believe in the principal of liberty-over-security doesn't mean that I could not make the argument that legalizing all drugs would also result in more security. You seem to believe that legalizing all drugs would increase the addiction rates. You cannot actually prove that. I strongly suspect that legalization would actually lower addiction rates. And basic logic shows that legalization would lower accidental overdoses to virtually zero. Somebody who is intending to try recreational drugs could consult a medical professional on how to avoid accidental overdose and addiction. If heroin were sold at Walgreens, that heroin would be of a consistent purity. Also, a medical professional could suggest that patients try other kinds of less-dangerous drugs before they go trying harder drugs. There are plenty of drugs that bring euphoria that don't have the same level of danger as heroin. I think the fact that we don't have such safeguards is the fault of the government, not dealers. I cannot absolutely prove my ideas, but nobody can disprove them either, and I think that sometimes, the simple fact that one cannot disprove an idea is enough to embrace it because the benefit of the doubt should be given to freedom (negative rights against authority figures forcing their will onto you).

 

And, as I just said to Pat,

 

If one does not subscribe to the principal of liberty over security, then they may as well admit to not believing in any liberty at all. This is because there is no shortage of important-sounding arguments in favor of increasing security at the expense of liberty.

 

EDIT: Also, I am only a libertarian socially, fiscally I believe in state communism.

Edited December 21, 2022 by Micah Mileto

[Micah Mileto]

59 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

He didn't say that. In fact, he confirmed he took them:

JFK Revisited Distorts John Stringer's Testimony (onthetrailofdelusion.com)

https://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/TracesOfWitnessTampering/TracesOfWitnessTampering.htm