This case is unique in that there is no absolute, objective standard of proof for any evidence whatsoever. There will never be a generally accepted consensus in support of any detail of the assassination.
True
I think this is partly because of the sheer volume of information,and partly because of human nature. I think it's a common tendency to accept evidence that bolsters ones position,and to reject evidence that does not.
Even more true. I've given a talk, dozens of times to hundreds of people, on the assassination that covers the three most common conspiracy theories, plus the Warren Commission, Not one person changed their preconceived opinion about what "really" happened.
