Reply #396: So, you'll take the Bible's standard of "proof" for something over forensic evidence?

[stopbush]

Te Bible sez get two witnesses to say the same thing and it's as good as being true. That's the same Bible that shows that one need only get two people to tell the same lie and a court will believe that they're being truthful (see: the trial of Jesus - two false witnesses).

No, sorry Octafish - physical evidence trumps eyewitness accounts/recollections/imaginings every time. Thankfully, we've moved on from the pathetic burden of proof that was acceptable in the Bronze Age.

BTW - I find it strange that you discount the WC's findings and rail against the "official" version of the JFK assassination and then posit that a policeman's word is good in court while that of two policemen is better. Aren't both entities agents of the government?

And why would "it not be credible to suggest that Harkness somehow "misunderstood" what they (ie: the armed SS agents) said to him?" That's yet another opinion, not a fact. Are we really to believe that Harkness is absolutely unimpeachable in understanding what these agents said or didn't say to him? He's human, isn't he? Do you truly believe that it strains credulity to believe that Harkness might have heard them wrong in the heat of the moment just minutes after the assassination? Give me a break. This is the same Harkness who is such an expert cop that he - apparently - failed to ask these SS agents for their credentials or to even bother to ask them to identify themselves by name. He just took their word for it. Now, THERE'S a cop who's cool under fire! He's witness to the biggest murder in history and the first people he encounters carrying weapons tell him a story without as much as flashing a badge and Harkness' reaction is, "OK, boys. Yer good to go!"

One imagines that had he run into Oswald leaving the building he would have bought the story that he was Sammy Davis Jr.