Edit filter log

' The Trial of Lee Harvey Oswald''''' is a 1964 American film from [[Larry Buchanan]]. It is the first speculative trial drama to be produced about [[Lee Harvey Oswald]] only a few months after the [[assassination of John F. Kennedy]] along with the assassination of Lee Harvey Oswald himself. The film was made in Dallas, and served as an idea of what the trial would have been like had it occurred, if Oswald hadn't been killed by Jack Ruby. The film opens on the first day of Oswald's trial as defense attorney Tyler and prosecutor Adkins are attempting to select an impartial jury. Tyler asks for a change of venue and points out that so many have preconceived notions as to Oswald's guilt. (Throughout the film Oswald is never actually seen in close-up. As a dramatic device only his eyes are shown). The charges against the defendant are read and the judge informs the media he will tolerate no foolishness during the proceedings. Oswald's defense attorney professes an insanity defense. The first two witnesses describe the assassination. One was standing near the book depository and one near the triple underpass near the grassy knoll. The depository witness describes seeing the gunman. During cross examination, the defense points out that the witness did not see the assailant's face. The next witness is the Chief of surgery at Parkland who treated the President. He describes the steps that were taken to save Kennedy's life as well as the nature of his wounds. An interesting footnote is that the movie mentions the adrenal disease (Addisons) that Kennedy actually suffered from and the steps that were taken. During cross-examination, the defense points out that the doctors did not open the Presidents chest for heart massage and that the wounds were not properly examined. The next witness is the doctor who performed Kennedy's autopsy and the prosecution mentions that all the wounds were consistent with shots fired from the rear of the President's car. The next witness is Oswald's boss at the book depository who casts guilt on him by pointing out he was the only employee not present after the assassination. The defense cross examines that there were many who could have had access to the building and that Oswald may not have even been present at the time. A depository employee testifies that he took Oswald up to the sixth floor in the elevator at the time the shots were fired. The defense calls into account his credibility and professes he was coached. The prosecution calls a bus and cab driver who transported Oswald after the assassination. His landlady testifies that he used an alias (O. H. Lee) when he stayed at her rooming house. She mentions that on the day of the assassination, he arrived at his rooming house and mysteriously changed his clothes. She mentions that she heard him having suspicious phone conversations in which he spoke in Russian. The defense objects for relevancy when a witness testifies that she saw Oswald shoot police officer Tippitt. The judge allows the testimony. The police officer who arrested Oswald testifies about struggling with him and how he protested police brutality. A man who drove Oswald to work the morning of the assassination tells of the mysterious package he placed in the back of his car. Police officers testify about finding the snipers nest on the sixth floor and the rifle that was found as well as three spent shell casings upon the floor. It is also mentioned that Oswald's palm print was found on the weapon The defense attempts to cast doubt on this testimony by mentioning that the rifle was handled by many people and that palm print analysis is not nearly as reliable as fingerprints. The defense also calls into credibility a gunpowder analysis done on Oswald's hands by mentioning the such things as fertilizer and even urine could cause a positive result. In summing up it's case, the prosecutor calls a handwriting expert who testifies about Oswald's signature on the mail order for the rifle used in the assassination. The defense argues to the judge that handwriting analysis is not an exact science. A librarian testifies that Oswald had checked out library books on the President and about the assassination of Senator Huey Long. The defense points out that Oswald checked out countless books and this was only one of them. The prosecutions last witness is a radio announcer who had Oswald as a guest on his show. At the time, Oswald was a pro-Communist who headed an organization called The Fair Play for Cuba. It is at this point in the film that a real life interview with Oswald is played where he discusses his political views. It is at this point that the prosecution rests. The defense begins by calling a psychiatrist who examined Oswald at 13 years old. He points out that at the time Oswald was a chronic truant whose biological father had died before he was born. He professes that Oswald is a passive-aggressive paranoid schizophrenic personality. Such people are calm on the surface but troubled beneath. They have troubled thought processes, cannot face reality and live in a fantasy world. They are a "Jekyll-Hyde" personality. Oswald's defection to Russia is mentioned as a desperate attempt to gain acceptance in a world he feel persecuted. The defense and prosecution then give their summations. The defense asks the jury for mercy on grounds of insanity and points out the circumstantial aspect of the prosecutions case. The prosecutor mentions the incredible amount of evidence that points to Oswald alone and asks for the death penalty. The movie concludes with commentary from famed Texas lawyer and legal consultant Charles Tessner who says that Oswalds guilt or innocence is up to the audience to decide.'