LET'S PRETEND......Lee Harvey Oswald is on trial for the murder of
Dallas Patrolman J.D. Tippit.
I can just hear the Johnnie Cochran-esque arguments being made in
court, in an attempt to persuade the jury to swallow the defense
team's pro-conspiracy guesswork and accusations of evidence-tampering
regarding Tippit's murder. It would have been a howl.
Let's listen in to the defense's arguments to the jury (and, yes, I realize the
references to the Warren Commission and HSCA would not have occurred
at any real trial of Oswald, but this is all pretend anyway, so let's overlook
that particular point):
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury.....
Yes, it's true that there's not a scrap of witness testimony or
reliable evidence that tells us that the Tippit bullet shells were
found anywhere except where Mr. Domingo Benavides and Virginia and
Barbara Davis said they found the shells...which was in or near the
Davis' front and side yard.
But we, in defense of Lee Harvey Oswald, think it is our civic duty to
present to you members of the jury an alternate scenario of the way
the shooting is said to have occurred.
Sure, the witness testimony, the physical evidence, and the Warren
Commission Report all point to Lee Oswald being the sole killer of
Officer Tippit. But are we (and you) supposed to believe all of THAT
stuff, ladies and gentlemen?! Are we really supposed to believe our
lying eyes and ears with respect to the witnesses and the ballistics
evidence in this case?! Come now! Surely not!
Wouldn't it be much better to simply disregard and toss in the trash
ALL of that silly "Oswald's Guilty" stuff espoused by the WC, the
HSCA, the DPD, the FBI, and all of those silly witnesses who said it
was Mr. Oswald who committed this murder?
Wouldn't it, therefore, be a much better idea to merely speculate that
a man armed with an automatic weapon really killed Dallas Police
Officer J.D. Tippit on November the 22nd, 1963?
Yes, it's true, we have no automatic shells to show you....and we have
no gun in evidence that supports our view that Tippit was killed by an
automatic weapon....and we only have a majority of witnesses who saw a
man named Lee Harvey Oswald shoot the police officer (or saw him
fleeing the scene, gun in hand, while dumping shells in the Davis'
yard).
But we still feel that the "best" evidence in this Tippit murder case
is the evidence that we CAN'T see or touch. And is evidence that does
not even EXIST in this case. The best evidence, by far, is the murky,
cloudy, invisible evidence in this case, which ALL says that an
unknown, unseen killer OTHER than Lee Oswald killed Officer Tippit.
And, by way of a stroke of very bad luck for Mr. Oswald and his
defense team, Oswald just HAPPENED to be lurking nearby in Oak Cliff,
and was acting "funny" on Jefferson Boulevard, within a mere minutes
of the Tippit shooting, according to witness Johnny Calvin Brewer. But
can THAT witness, Mr. Brewer, be trusted either? No way Jose! Why
should we trust that guy?
And then, by more amazing good fortune for the Patsy-Framers, Mr.
Oswald decides he wants to START KILLING COPS within the Texas Theater
when he pulls his gun on police in the theater and makes multiple
strange comments which sound curiously like the words of a man with a
guilty state of mind.
And that gun that Mr. Oswald had on him in the theater is later linked
to the Tippit murder via the spent shells on 10th Street...but,
remember, WE CANNOT TRUST ANYTHING THAT LEADS DOWN AN "OSWALD DID IT" PATH! If it leads toward Oswald, forget it! It cannot be trusted! I
hope you ladies and gentlemen of the jury realize that critical fact!
If you don't realize that critical fact, we at the defense table over
here might just as well pack our bags and head for home right now. And
you don't want that, do you, ladies and germs?
In addition -- What appear to be the "best" witnesses to the Tippit
crime have all been "coerced" by the evil forces of the Dallas Police
Department -- even though there's really no need for this coercion,
because the plotters don't NEED Oswald to be guilty of the Tippit
murder anyway, since the Patsy-Framers did such a perfect job of
setting him up for President John F. Kennedy's murder, which occurred
just 45 minutes before Tippit was slain.
But we on the defense side of the aisle will pretend that the plotters
DID need Lee Harvey Oswald framed for this second superfluous murder
anyway.
In short, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, if the evidence in the
Tippit case ALL points toward Lee Oswald as the killer -- then this
MUST indicate just the OPPOSITE...i.e., Oswald was innocent of said
crime, and was merely framed for another November 22nd killing in
Dallas by people who don't even really need to have him found guilty
of this second murder.
In other words --- IF THE DEFENSE ARGUMENTS SOUND LIKE SHIT....YOU
MUST ACQUIT!
Yes, ladies and gentlemen, it does seem as though our case in defense
of Oswald is a tad weak on all fronts....and this "frame-up" theory is
being based on the fact that a police officer initially said the gun
used to kill Tippit was an "automatic" weapon -- a mistake that was
fully explained by the DPD's Gerald Hill....but are we supposed to
believe HIM too?
Surely we can't believe EVERY Tom, Dick, and Gerald who takes that
witness stand under oath, can we?! For, surely SOMEBODY was lying in
this case, right?! There's GOTTA be at least a handful of falsehood-
tellers in EVERY murder case, doesn't there?! Why of course there
does! Otherwise where are we lawyers gonna get our conspiracies from?!
And it's up to me, the lead defense attorney for Lee Harvey Oswald, to
tell you (the members of the jury) just exactly which witnesses were
the bald-faced liars at this trial and which ones were the truth-
tellers. Coincidentally, as it turns out, EVERY single liar in this
case happened to be a prosecution witness. Amazing, I know. But I've
been assigned the "Liar Scorecard", and that's my tally, ladies and
gentlemen. Like it or not.
Also, ladies and gentlemen, let's not forget one simple rule when it
comes to defending Lee Saint Oswald of the murders he was charged with
in nineteen sixty-three --- and that rule is (and I quote from the
official "Kook Rule Guide Book"; Page #1; Rule #1A):
When a defense attorney is faced with major obstacles like the
physical evidence and the witness identification evidence (which all
point toward the guilt of the defendant), MERELY PRETEND THAT ALL OF
THIS STUFF NEVER REALLY EXISTED AT ALL!
Close quote.
Therefore, instead of relying on the actual evidence in the official
record, we, the defense, will simply make believe that a band of
conspirators and cover-up agents got together to tell one lie after
another in a desire to falsely accuse an innocent man of murder on
November 22nd, 1963!
It's your choice, members of the jury --- either choose to believe the
official record which shows Lee Oswald to be guilty as Hitler -- or
join us, and thereby embrace conjecture, flimsy allegations of
evidence-tampering, and even more-despicable allegations of witness
coercion in our fight to set Mr. Lee H. Oswald free.
And remember, jury members, if you vote "Not Guilty" in this Tippit
murder case, please rest easy in knowing that, many years from now,
you will also be called upon to serve on the O.J. Simpson jury.
Because, like Mr. Oswald, Orenthal James Simpson desperately needs
lawyers like us and jurors like you on his side.
Thank you, ladies and gentlemen.*
* = The above "Oswald Was Framed" defense summation consists of only
simulated arguments, and shouldn't be confused with any such real-life
arguments which may or may not have been made in a U.S. court of law.
But, rest assured, any "real" comments purporting the same silly
scenario would have been equally as unsupportable and equally as
hilarious with respect to their overall idiocy.
Member FDIC.
All rights reserved by the "Anybody But Oswald Clubs Of America,
Inc."; Jim Garrison, Founder and CEO.
David Von Pein
August 2006
December 2006
