Oswald's Guilt a Foregone Conclusion

[Gil Jesus]

In a January 11, 1964 memo, "For the Members of the Commission" ( 1 ), Chief Counsel J. Lee Rankin outlined the areas of the Commission's "work".

In this memo, he used the phrases, "Lee Harvey Oswald as the Assassin of President Kennedy"( 2 ), "Evidence Demonstrating Oswald's Guilt"( 3 ),
"Evidence Identifying Oswald as the Assassin of President Kennedy"( 4 ), the "Permissable Inferences of Oswald's Murder of Tippit" ( ibid. ),
"Lee Harvey Oswald: Background and Possible Motives" ( 5 ) and "Lee H. Oswald as the Assassin"( 6 ).

Keep in mind that this memo naming Oswald as the President's lone assassin,
was written almost one month BEFORE the Commission heard its first witness or saw its first piece of evidence.

This was NOT a criminal investgation. This was a collection of evidence against one suspect who had been deemed guilty by his accusers.
If this were a court case, you could say that the verdict was in before the trial had even begun.

And there'd be no defense.

Sources:

( 1 ) Loading Image...

( 2 ) Loading Image...

( 3 ) Loading Image...

( 4 ) Loading Image...

( 5 ) Loading Image...

( 6 ) Loading Image...

[Ben Holmes]

Post by Gil Jesus
In a January 11, 1964 memo, "For the Members of the Commission" ( 1 ), Chief Counsel J. Lee Rankin outlined the areas of the Commission's "work".
In this memo, he used the phrases, "Lee Harvey Oswald as the Assassin of President Kennedy"( 2 ), "Evidence Demonstrating Oswald's Guilt"( 3 ),
"Evidence Identifying Oswald as the Assassin of President Kennedy"( 4 ), the "Permissable Inferences of Oswald's Murder of Tippit" ( ibid. ),
"Lee Harvey Oswald: Background and Possible Motives" ( 5 ) and "Lee H. Oswald as the Assassin"( 6 ).
Keep in mind that this memo naming Oswald as the President's lone assassin,
was written almost one month BEFORE the Commission heard its first witness or saw its first piece of evidence.
This was NOT a criminal investgation. This was a collection of evidence against one suspect who had been deemed guilty by his accusers.
If this were a court case, you could say that the verdict was in before the trial had even begun.
And there'd be no defense.
( 1 ) https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/jan64memo0.jpg
( 2 ) https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/jan64memo2.jpg
( 3 ) https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/jan64memo3.jpg
( 4 ) https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/jan64memo4.jpg
( 5 ) https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/jan64memo5.jpg
( 6 ) https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/jan64memo6.jpg

Combine this with the first meeting where Chief Warren asserted:

1. He did not want the Commission to employ any of their own
investigators.
2. He did not want the Commission to gather evidence. Instead he
wished for them to rely on reports made by other agencies like the FBI
and Secret Service.
3. He did not want their hearings to be public. He did not want to
employ the power of subpoena.
4. Incredibly, he did not even want to call any witnesses. He wanted
to rely on interviews done by other agencies.
5. He then made a very curious comment, "Meetings where witnesses
would be brought in would retard rather than help our investigation.

... and it's clear that the WC was doing a coverup, not an
investigation.