Miss Prissy exonerates Lee

barto wrote:Exactly Greg.

Now then what is the deal w the so called last words of LHO, this stuff cannot be substantiated at all or can it?

https://www.trivia-library.com/b/jfk-assassination-last-words-of-lee-harvey-oswald-part-10.htm

From what I read this stuff would have happened during his last interrogation.......yet there is bugger all to support it.

greg parker wrote:

barto wrote:Exactly Greg.

Now then what is the deal w the so called last words of LHO, this stuff cannot be substantiated at all or can it?

https://www.trivia-library.com/b/jfk-assassination-last-words-of-lee-harvey-oswald-part-10.htm

From what I read this stuff would have happened during his last interrogation.......yet there is bugger all to support it.

Barto, all Brussell did was use all the quotes attributed to Oswald in the interrogation reports, arrest reports and in various testimonies.

But let's concentrate on the interrogation reports. My position on them is this: The quotes are a mix of direct, paraphrased, and deliberately altered and made-up quotes. 

I think the alterations and and made-up quotes were used only when necessary - so you can tell what they are - they are the ones that confirm the developing narrative and/or are self-incriminating. Where neither of those things apply,  the quote imo,  is likely to be fairly accurate. The quote about Kennedy being replaced would fall into that category.

Interesting comment from a journalist in one of those real crime shows about 2 guys on death row being exonerated. He basically said cops often form a theory of who did it and how and then go about making the evidence fit. The case looked at was from the 1980s, but one of the men was convicted on the basis of NOTES claiming he gave the cops details of the crime not known to the public. There was no attempt to obtain a written confession, or to film or tape a confession. The guy always denied making any of the statements attributed to him and as the journalist said, if you have someone making statements like that, you rush to record it, get it down and signed and whatever else, so it can't be denied. Yet it still took 12 years and DNA to get those guys off death row.

Reasons why cops go after someone too quickly would be political (DA up for election - as was the case here), truly believing you have the right person, community pressure to clear a bad crime, keeping up a high clearance rate, having a grudge against a particular person.

That's how this case looks to me: they were tossed a good-looking suspect and grabbed him with both hands under huge federal, local and international pressure to clear the crime. Normal procedure kicked in from there. Work up a scenario and make the evidence fit. And once you start going down that path, it's hard to back up. All too often, the cops double-down when the case starts to unravel. Not hard to do when the interrogations are not recorded, evidence rigging is never detected, let alone suspected  (at least not back then), and the suspect is dead after 2 days.