Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Questions for the self-proclaimed "more knowledgeable one", Hank Sienzant: Question # 19

26 views
Skip to first unread message

Gil Jesus

unread,
Oct 26, 2023, 4:42:07 AM10/26/23
to
There are many questions that I have about this case and I feel compelled to go to a reliable source, the self proclaimed "more knowledgeable"
one, Hank Sienzant. I'm sure Hank in his infinite wisdom and knowledge will have no problem answering my questions.

QUESTION # 19: Lt. Day photographed partial prints on the trigger guard of the rifle. Did he photograph the palm print when he found it ?

John Corbett

unread,
Oct 26, 2023, 8:15:55 AM10/26/23
to
Who knows? Who cares? He lifted the palm print from the rifle. Oswald was the only one who
could have left that palm print on the rifle. That is what matters. That is the truth you don't want
to deal with.

Ben Holmes

unread,
Oct 26, 2023, 9:18:35 AM10/26/23
to
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 05:15:53 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Thursday, October 26, 2023 at 4:42:07?AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
>> There are many questions that I have about this case and I feel compelled to go to a reliable source, the self proclaimed "more knowledgeable"
>> one, Hank Sienzant. I'm sure Hank in his infinite wisdom and knowledge will have no problem answering my questions.
>>
>> QUESTION # 19: Lt. Day photographed partial prints on the trigger guard of the rifle. Did he photograph the palm print when he found it ?
>
>Who knows?


Anyone and everyone who's examined the evidence in this case knows.
You know too... you just aren't honest enough to admit the truth.


>Who cares?


Anyone not willing to frame an innocent man for a crime.


> He lifted the palm print from the rifle.


A naked assertion that you can't support - Chickenshit would label
such a "lie." You're simply lying again, Corbutt.



>Oswald was the only one who
>could have left that palm print on the rifle...


Logical fallacy. Can you name it?

Bud

unread,
Oct 26, 2023, 6:00:40 PM10/26/23
to
On Thursday, October 26, 2023 at 4:42:07 AM UTC-4, Gil Jesus wrote:
No. NEXT!

Ben Holmes

unread,
Oct 27, 2023, 9:18:25 AM10/27/23
to
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 15:00:38 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:

So, according to Bugliosi, it was this "oval" shape that was
"virtually conclusive evidence" of an SBT?

Chickenshit is TERRIFIED of this simple honest question. He knows
that Bugliosi was a moron if he truly thought this... yet you can't
get Chickenshit to publicly acknowledge that Bugliosi said this.

It's a simple "Yes" or "No" question, and Chickenshit cannot cite
where he has EVER answered it. (Without immediately denying it.)

So it's going to keep getting asked until Chickenshit answers it.
0 new messages