[Sample B: Approval/Signature Sheet] - George Mason University

to flee the scene of the assassination, and killed a police officer who tried to stop him.
This, the prosecution said, showed Oswald met the legal definition of sanity by knowing
right from wrong.
In the end, the audience of the film is left to decide whether Oswald should be
found guilty or not guilty by reason of insanity. However, Buchanan undercut this
ending by adding a final commentary from the legal consultant to the film, Texas defense
attorney, Charles W. Tessmer. He told the viewers at the end of the film that historically,
presidential assassins have not had any luck in trying to plead insanity, and no doubt
Oswald would have been convicted and executed for the assassination. Tessmer
solemnly adds that such accused individuals should not be tried in the media instead of
the courtroom – an obvious point given the many of the statements from the federal and
state authorities proclaiming Oswald’s guilt after his arrest. Buchanan sought to take
advantage of public interest in the assassination with a quickly produced, low-budget
film. In his mixing of archival footage and recordings with recreated scenes, Buchanan
set a precedent that Oliver Stone would follow.
The 1977 ABC television movie The Trial of Lee Harvey Oswald – with the same
title of Buchanan’s theatrical release – reached a far wider audience. The mini-series also
depicted a fictional scenario in which the alleged assassin faces the Texas justice system.
The screenplay by Robert E. Thompson was also published as a paperback book, but
some of the scenes are different from the television production. The film begins with a
statement that “Lee Harvey Oswald was killed before he could stand trial for the
293