Gil Jesus

by Gil Jesus ( 2024 ) The Dallas Police....developed by powder and lifted a latent palmprint from the underside of the barrel....the latent palmprint was identified as the right palm of Lee Harvey Oswald. ( Report, pgs. 565-566 ) This is what the Commission's Report said about the palmprint, probably the most important piece of evidence tying Oswald to the rifle. But it's not what the Report says, as much as what it learned in testimony and chose not to say. The Report CHOSE NOT TO SAY how the Dallas were able to "develop" the palmprint using a black powder on the dark surface of the barrel. The Report CHOSE NOT TO SAY that it never corroborated that Lt. J.C.Day lifted the palmprint. It chose not to say that Day never told the FBI that the palmprint was on the rifle. The Report CHOSE NOT TO SAY that Lt. Day failed to photograph the palmprint in situ before lifting it. The Report CHOSE NOT TO SAY that contrary to Day's claim that there was a remnant of print left on the barrel after the lift, the FBI found no residual of any palmprint or that any lift had occurred. The Report CHOSE NOT TO SAY that no mention of the discovery of a palmprint was made known until the evening of November 24th, after Oswald was dead. This narrative is not to reject the palmprint as being Oswald's, nor is it to reject that it was lifted off the gun barrel, but rather it is to refudiate the manner in which it was obtained. I do not accept that the palmprint was lifted off of the barrel of the rifle on November 22nd, but rather sometime between November 24th and November 26th, well after Oswald was dead. And the following evidence supports my theory. Let's start with Lt. Day's story and look at the evidence that refutes it. LT. DAY'S STORY Sometime on the evening of the assassination, Dallas Police Lt. J.C. Day allegedly found a palmprint on the underside of the barrel of the rifle. The palmprint was reportedly under the wooden stock and could not have been disturbed without disassembling the rifle. Day testified that he lifted it from the underside of the barrel, not the wooden stock. Mr. BELIN. Let me clarify the record. By that you mean you found it on the metal or you mean you found it on the wood ? Mr. DAY. On the metal, after removing the wood. ( 4 H 260 ) At 11:45pm, FBI Agent Vincent Drain picked up the CE 139 rifle and flew with it to Washington aboard an Air Force plane to be examined by FBIHQ. Early the next morning, the rifle was examined by Latona along with the cartridges and the clip. He processed the entire weapon using GRAY POWDER. In order to do this, he completely disassembled the rifle. His examination could find no identifiable prints. Lt. Day testified that when he released the rifle to the FBI at 11:45pm on Friday, he thought that "the print ......still remained on there...there were traces of ridges still on the barrel." ( 4 H 261-262 ) But when the rifle arrived at FBI Headquarters, there was no trace of the print. Mr. LATONA. I was not successful in developing any prints at all on the weapon. I also had one of the firearms examiners dismantle the weapon and I processed the complete weapon, all parts, everything else. And no latent prints of value were developed. Mr. EISENBERG. Does that include the clip ? Mr. LATONA. It included the clip, it included the bolt, it included the underside of the barrel which is covered by the stock. ( 4 H 23 ) On 11/23, there was no palmprint on the rifle. HOW DO YOU DEVELOP A PRINT ON A DARK SURFACE USING BLACK FINGERPRINT POWDER ? When dusting for fingerprints, we're always trained to use black powder for lighter surfaces and the lighter grey powder for dark surfaces. This is Criminal Investigation 101. It's common sense that you'd use a powder that brings the print out, not blends the print in with the background. The point was made to the Commission during testimony by its FBI expert on fingerprints, Sebastian Latona: These powders come in various colors. We use a black and a gray. The black powder is used on objects which are white or light to give a resulting contrast of a black print on a white background. We use the gray powder on objects which are black or dark in order to give you a resulting contrast of a white print on a dark or black background. ( 4 H 4 ) But Lt. Day testified that everything he dusted, he dusted using black powder. ( 4 H 259 ) The Commission never asked him why he would use a black powder to bring out a print on the dark colored barrel. More importantly, how he was able to dust a print on a dark surface with black powder without damaging it. THERE IS NO CORROBORATION THAT LT. DAY LIFTED THE PALMPRINT ON 11/22 No witness can corroborate the act of the lifting of the print. Day told the FBI that "he had no assistance when working with the prints on the rifle and that he and he alone did the examination and lifting of the palmprint from the underside of the barrel ( CE 3145, 26 H 832 )." Not only were there no witnesses to Lt. Day's discovery and lifting of the palmprint, he apparently told two different stories, one to the Commission and one to the FBI. In his April 1964 testimony, Lt. Day told the Commission that he could not identify the palmprint as being Oswald's: The palmprint again that I lifted appeared to be his right palm, but I didn't get to work enough on that to fully satisfy myself that it was his palm. ( 4 H 262 ) Mr. BELIN. Did you make a positive identification of any palmprint or fingerprint ? Mr. DAY. Not off the rifle or slug at that time ( ibid. ). But in September 1964, Day told the FBI that he made a tentative identification of the palmprint as Oswald's on the evening of 11/22 and only told two people about it, Chief Curry and Capt. Fritz. Day said that "he could not remember the exact time he made the identification nor the exact time that he told them", but it was "prior to the time he released the rifle to SA Agent Vincent Drain" at 11:45 pm. ( CE 3145, 26 H 832 ) During the period that oswald was in custody, both Curry and Fritz were reeling off an abundance of information to the press, yet neither one mentioned the incriminating palmprint. ( CE 2141-2173 ) If Day had lifted a palmprint and hadn't been able to identify it on the evening of the 22nd, why didn't he send the lifted print off to the FBI with the rest of the evidence for identification ? If he had told Chief Curry about lifting the palmprint and tentatively identifying it as Oswald's, why did the Chief express disappointment the next day that Oswald's prints had not been found on the rifle ? 11/23: CHIEF CURRY EXPRESSES DISAPPOINTMENT THAT OSWALD'S PRINTS HAVE NOT BEEN FOUND ON THE RIFLE The next day, when asked by a reporter about fingerprints on the rifle, Dallas Police Chief Jesse Curry never mentioned that police had lifted a palmprint from the rifle the night before. In fact, he implied the opposite, lamenting, "if we can put his prints on the rifle" meaning that as of Saturday the 23rd, police still had not found Oswald's prints on the weapon. https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/curry-if-we-can-put-his-prints-on-the-rifle.mp4 This exchange was ( according to Lt. Day ) AFTER Day had notified him that he had lifted a palmprint from the underside of the barrel and identified it as Oswald's. So why is the Chief expressing disappointment at not having Oswald's prints on the rifle when he knows a palmprint has been found and identified as Oswald's ? Because he hadn't been told. The palmprint didn't exist on 11/23. The Chief wasn't the only one who Lt. Day never told about the palmprint. LT. DAY NEVER TOLD THE FBI ABOUT THE PALMPRINT Not only did Lt. Day not tell the Chief or Capt. Fritz about the palmprint, he never told the FBI about it. But FBI agent Sebastian Latona, who examined the rifle in Washington on 11/23, testified that, "we had no personal knowledge of any palmprint having been developed on the rifle." ( 4 H 24 ) If the palmprint was on the rifle on 11/22, why was there no verbal or written communication to the FBI from Lt. Day addressing it ? Day never communicated it to the FBI because the palmprint didn't exist on 11/22. Of course, as has been seen many times in this case, whether or not there was a remnant of palmprint left on the barrel and whether the FBI had been told about it could have been resolved by Agent Drain, who picked up the rifle from the Dallas Police both times, on 11/22 and on 11/26. But Agent Drain was never called to testify. Not only did the FBI have no knowledge of the palmprint's existence on 11/23, when they examined the rifle, they found no evidence that a palmprint had existed. Sebastian Latona testified that, "There was no indication on this rifle as to the existence of any other ( than the trigger guard ) prints." ( ibid. ) LT. DAY TOOK NO PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PALMPRINT Lt Day testified that this omission was because he was ordered by Chief Curry to "go no further with the processing, it was to be released to the FBI for them to complete..." ( 4 H 260-261 ) But the normal procedure in lifting fingerprints is to photograph the dusted print first, then lift it, as described by Latona: "Our recommendation in the FBI is simply in every procedure to photograph and then lift." ( 4 H 41 ) Lt. Day knew this, because he attended, "an advanced latent-print school conducted in Dallas by the Federal Bureau of Investigation" ( 4 H 250 ). He admitted that "it was customary to photograph fingerprints in most instances prior to lifting them." ( CE 3145, 26 H 832 ) If the Chief really had interrupted him in the middle of his processing the palmprint, he should have ended up with the photograph and not the lift. So why did he choose to lift the print before photographing it ? The Commission never asked. It simply accepted his excuse that his work was interrupted by the Chief. Either Lt. Day neglected every possible procedure that would have provided proof that he found and lifted a palmprint on the rifle, or the palmprint did not exist until 11/24, after Oswald was dead. The first revelation of the palmprint came on the evening of Sunday, 11/24. WADE MENTIONS THE PALMPRINT FOR THE FIRST TIME ON 11/24 The first mention of a palmprint was during DA Henry Wade's Sunday night press conference, after Oswald was dead. This except is taken from a video at @Vince Palamara's Youtube Channel: https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/palmprint-wade.mp4 Wade did not mention the palmprint in any of his interviews on Friday night or Saturday ( CEs 2142, 2169-2173 ), even when asked specifically by reporters if fingerprints had been found on the rifle. Wade's announcement of a palmprint caused the FBI to take notice. They had examined the rifle the day before and had found no palmprint or any evidence that a lift had been done. So if the palmprint did not exist before 11/24 but it did exist when the Dallas Police sent it to the FBI on 11/26, how did the police come into possession of it ? The answer could lie in a visit to the Miller Funeral Home on the night of 11/24. THE POST MORTEM FINGERPRINTING OF OSWALD Late in the evening of November 24th, authorities descended on the Miller Funeral Home, where Oswald's corpse was beng prepared for burial. Mortician Paul Groody alleged that during their time there, Oswald's body was fingerprinted. https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/groody.mp4 The purpose for this post-mortem fingerprinting has never been offically explained. Authorities had Oswald's fingerprints on record from the Marine Corps ( 17 H 289 ), his arrest in New Orleans ( 2 HSCA 379 ) and his arrest in Dallas ( 17 H 282 ). Why would they need a fourth set of his prints ? They wouldn't. The only purpose for such a visit would be to finally place Oswald's palmprint on the rifle in order to connect him to the weapon. IMO, the post-mortem fingerprinting of Oswald's corpse was a ruse to give authorities access to the body and to hide the fact that Oswald's palmprint was being placed on the rifle. THE LIFTED PALMPRINT IS FINALLY SENT TO THE FBI Two days after the post mortem fingerprinting, on November 26th, the "lifted palmprint" was finally sent to the FBI with all the other evidence. It is listed as the 14th item on the evidence list. The evidence was turned over once again to Agent Drain. Although the fingerprint card with the lifted palmprint is dated 11-22-63, that date could have been added to the card anytime between 11-22 and 11-26. The card is initialled by Capt. George Doughty, who may have cleared up the time and day of the lift, but he was never called to testify. The FBI received the "lifted palmprint" on November 29th. ( 4 H 24 ) THERE'S ALWAYS AN INDICATION THAT A LIFT HAS BEEN PERFORMED The Commission concluded that Day's lift was so perfect, that it was the reason that Latona found no trace of the print on the rifle when he examined it, nor "any indication that a lift had been performed." ( Report, pg. 123 ) While it's possible to lift a print without leaving a remnant of that print behind, it is not possible to lift a print without disturbing the power surrounding it. This video shows how to dust a print on a dark surface and what happens to the surrounding powder when that print is lifted: https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/lifting-a-fingerprint.mp4 As you can see, the tape pulls all of the powder off in the area under where the tape contacted the surface. This leaves the surface to appear shiny. The point is that when you lift a fingerprint, there is always evidence that a lift has been done because there is an area surrounding the print where no powder exists. Even if the lift of the palmprint was so perfect as to completely lift the print off the gun barrel, it would have also taken with it the surrounding loose powder and the absence of that powder would have made it obvious that a lift had been performed. The fact that the FBI did not find "any indication that a lift had been performed" means that no lift could have been done prior to their examination of 11/23. As I said in the beginning of this narrative, I'm not contesting that the palmprint came from the rifle or that it was even Oswald's. I'm contesting the manner in which the palmprint was obtained. I believe the palmprint was placed on the rifle late night 11/24 at the mortuary. The timeline and evidence surrounding its discovery seems to indicate that the account provided by Lt. Day and accepted by the Warren Commission was not the truth. CONCLUSION Lt. Day claimed to have seen and lifted a palmprint from the bottom of the gun barrel under the stock on the evening of November 22nd. He made no such report about the print. No one saw him lift the print. He said he told Chief Curry and Capt. Fritz about it. Neither ever mentioned it and the Chief acted as if no prints were found on the rifle. In fact, that's what David Brinkley reported the next day. https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/rifle-no-fingerprints.mp4 Lt. Day never told the FBI either verbally or in writing about the print that "still remained on there...there were traces of ridges still on the barrel." ( 4 H 261-262 ) When the FBI received the rifle on the 23rd, it found no trace of the palmprint and no evidence that a lift had been performed. It sent the rifle back to the Dallas Police. On the evening that the police got the rifle back, DA Henry Wade revealed for the first time the existence of a palmprint. The Commission was faced with a problem, conflicting stories from the Dallas Police and the FBI. During his testimony for the HSCA, Wesley Liebeler said that the palmprint problem was a rather heated subject matter for the staff. ( 11 HSCA 219 ) In the end, the Commission decided that both Lt. Day and the FBI were correct and that Day's lift of the print was so perfect, the FBI didn't even know the lift had been performed. Apparently, the HSCA avoided the "heated subject matter" like the plague. The Committee, although mentioning that "Critics of the Warren Commission have...... argued that..... his palmprint was planted on the barrel" ( HSCA Final Report, pg. 54 ), never took on the topic in its Final Report. Instead, its footnotes on its conclusions with regard to the palmprint referred to pages 122-124 of the Warren Report. A FINAL WORD The FBI suspected that the palmprint had been planted. In a memo, A. Rosen stated that, "the Dallas Police made no mention of this latent palm print for a number of days after the assassination." He went on to note that Henry Wade made the first mention of the print on November 24th: "On Sunday, Novenber 24, District Attorney Henry Wade, when questioned before news media, made the statement that a palm print had been found." His final point was clear: "the existence of this palm print was not volunteered to the Bureau until a specific request was made to the Dallas Police Department." ( FBI file # 62-109060, Sec. 86, pg. 52 ) That request was the request of November 26th, that all the evidence in the case be turned over to the FBI. In December 1996, ARRB staff member Joseph R. Masih wrote to Jeremy Gunn: "there is no contemporaneous evidence of the palm print such as a photograph or written record on the date of discovery by Lt. Day. Furthermore, the FBI found no print on the weapon or any evidence that one had been lifted." ( ARRB files of Joseph R. Masih, Palm3.wpd, pg. 2 ) There's no record of it and the FBI never saw it because the palmprint was never lifted on November 22nd. On the evening of the day Oswald was murdered, its existence was made public and later that night, the palmprint was placed on the rifle under the guise of "fingerprinting the corpse". It was then "lifted" from the barrel of the rifle and the lift was sent to the FBI on November 26th, with the rest of the evidence.

I believe Trump was Carlson's original source. I believe that Trump got his information from Pompeo. I believe that Carlson ( or his producers ) went to Pompeo and got confirmation of what Trump told him. That would put Pompeo on the hot seat. It coincides with what Trump told Judge Napolitano. That's my opinion, FWIW. You're going to find out in the long run that it was the CIA's Cubans who pulled the trigger. Of the Cuban groups, my main suspects are the DRE. Oswald was an FBI informant who tried to infiltrate their group in New Orleans and in retribution, they set him up as their "patsy". The whole things smells of a CIA operation: Create an atmosphere of hate. Arm the opposition group. Let the opposition group do their thing. The CIA set it up, with help from their pals in the US Military and the Secret Service. In the aftermath, the Dallas cops arrested the wrong guy ( Oswald ) and the FBI and Warren Commission covered up the whole sordid affair. The American government is run by the CIA. It started back after the second world war ended. The National Security Act of 1947 created the CIA. Truman thought when he signed the act into law that the CIA's purpose would be to collect information. He never thought it would be an operational arm of the US Government. But the CIA also became an operational arm of American business, creating changes in foreign governments who were not friendly to our corporations. The CIA started by subverting governments in foreign countries in tha 1950s. On November 22, 1963, they brought their expertise home. Kennedy's election in 1960 was a coup d'etat. The Joint Chiefs, who had taken orders from the Supreme Allied Commander of WWII for eight years, were now going to take orders from a PT boat commander. The White House Detail, the most elite assignment in the Secret Service, would now become errand boys, babysitters and lookouts for Jackie whenever the President was engaged in infidelities with other women. These were deeply degrading and depressing times for the military and the Secret Service. This BS had to end and in my opinion, when the opportunity presented itself, last minute changes were made to the motorcade route to make it easier for the gunman to hit the President. When the shooting started, the driver even slowed the limo down, not accelerating until after he saw the President's head explode. They had intentonally taken the President into an ambush. Kennedy was a dead man in a matter of seconds. JFK's assassination was a counter-coup to return the Presidency to the power elite that controlled it prior to 1960. In allowing the President to be killed, the pre-1960 status quo had been re-establshed and the Cold War continued. It meant billions for the military contractors and jobs for their employees. Kennedy's doctors said he wouldn't live to the age of 45. When Johnson saw the doctor's reports, he changed his mind about taking the # 2 spot. Once JFK was elected, the CIA now had their man Johnson waiting in the wings. But Kennedy didn't die as his doctors had thought. He proved the doctors wrong and a 45th birthday party was given to him at Madison Square Garden in May of 1962, highlighted by Marilyn Monroe singing , "Happy Birthday to You ". From the CIA to Soviet Premier Khrushchev, everyone thought they could push the young President around. They thought they could get him to do their will. They quickly found out different. Unable to control him, they had to remove him from office. Kennedy was seen by the most extreme of his political enemies as a coward and a traitor. His desire to peacefully coexist with Communists was seen as an anathema. It was a departure from George Kennan's policy of "containment" which had been the foundation of American Foreign Policy since 1947. They saw themselves as patriots. In their view, Kennedy's policies and his behavior while in office presented a serious threat to the securty of the country. He had to be removed from office.

That sounds about right. Mr. Brown makes up a lot of things, like Tippit was killed at 1:17. Lone Nut supporters have to make up things because the evidence doesn't add up. They're left with "filling in the holes" with opinion, speculation, conjecture and what they call, "common sense". Their speculations and wild guesses only serve to raise more questions, questions they can't answer. For example, Mr. Brown puts Helen Markham on the corner witnessing a murder at 1:17, when she should be on her 1:15 bus. Mr. Brown suggests that Tippit was shot at or after 1:15 and killed instantly. If that's true, how did a doctor at Methodist Hospital know the exact minute he was killed ? Not even a coroner can tell you the exact minute a victim was killed. He can narrow it down to a timeframe, but he can't tell you the exact minute. There is corroborating evidence that Tippit was killed before 1:15. There's corrborating evidence that documents were altered by the FBI to show Tippit was pronounced dead at 1:25 instead of 1:15. Mr. Brown and his allies choose to ignore this evidence. Lone Nutters grab on to one piece of evidence and the hang onto it like their lives depended on it. They do it with the dictabelt. They do it with the "backyard photographs". They do it with the Tippit shells. They claim Oswald received the murder weapons, but can't tell us on what date he received them or who in the Post Office and REA Express office handed him those weapons. They can't tell us how Oswald allegedly ordered a 36" troop special and got a 40" short rifle in its stead. They can't tell us why the shells found at the Tippit murder scene don't match the bullets removed from his body. They can't tell us how Oswald purchased a postal money order and mailed it in an envelope that was post-marked at a time when his work sheets proved he was at work. They can't tell us why the only stamp on the money order is a stamp for deposit and why there are no stamps indicating that payment was made on that money order. They can't tell us why the "fillers' in the police lineups in no way resembled the descriptions of the witnesses to the Tippit murder. They can't tell us why Oswald was not allowed to see his family until Saturday. They can't tell us why Oswald was not allowed to use a phone until Saturday afternoon. They can't tell us why the back of head autopsy photo shows the scalp intact, when the autopsy report notes that there was a hole that extended into the "occipital region" where there was an "absence of scalp". ( 16 H 980 ) And there are plenty more. They can't explain the gaps in the chain of custody for much of the evidence. You'll notice, as I do, that 90% of what these Lone Nutters post is comments. They can speculate, but they can't provide the proof to back it up.

That is correct. In fact, Kennedy attended Rayburn's funeral in 1961. Sounds like this author didn't do his research.

One of those officers who DID ride at the rear corner of the limousine, B.J. Martin, testified that, "they instructed us that they didn't want anyone riding past the President's car and that we were to ride to the rear, to the rear of his car, about the rear bumper." ( 10 ) Not only were they reduced in number and moved to the rear corners of the car, the four who were positioned at the rear of the limo were told not to react if anyone assaulted the President. Martin said that, "at morning muster the four Presidential motorcycle officers were ordered that under no circumstances were they to leave their positions regardless of what happened." ( 11 ) Sound like they were interested in protecting the President ? Martin also said that, "while Kennedy was busy shaking hands with all the well wishers at the airport, Johnson's Secret Service people came over to the motorcycle cops and gave us a bunch of instructions...We were to stay well to the back and not let ourselves get ahead of the car's rear wheels under any circumstances." ( 12 ) These last minute changes were made to keep the motorcycle officers out of the line of fire. It indicates that "Johnson's Secret Service people" were well aware from which direction the shots would be fired. And it also indicates that the Secret Service played a role in the assassination. Sources: ( 10 ) 6 H 293 ( 11 ) "Murder From Within" by Fred Newcomb & Perry Adams (1974), p.33 ( 12 ) Jean Hill, "JFK: The Last Dissenting Witness" (1992), pp. 112-114

I once asked the Warren Commission supporters what standard they used to determine a witness' credibility. I got no answer. Because the answer is that their standard is this : any witness who adds to Oswald's guilt is credible and any witness that adds to his innocence is not. Witnesses who have come forward years later ( like Paul Landis and Jack Ray Tatum ) are still measured according to that standard. That's the standard they use. It doesn't matter if the physical evidence supports the witness or not. It's all about what the witness has to say in relation to the guilt or innocence of Oswald. These people have their own truth and are not open minded or willing to accept new evidence. You can show them testimony after testimony and document after document and they still won't accept it. Corroborating evidence means nothing to these folks. Witnesses and physical evidence that corrobrates what you say is nothing more to these folks as "kook sh*t". Many of them are driven by a hatred for "conspiracy theorists". They don't care that they've only heard one side of the story. They've only heard the prosecution's side of the case. Many of them haven't even read the 26 volumes, only the Report. That's like being a juror in a murder case, never hearing any of the testimony and only hearing the prosecution's final summation. What kind of a reasonable and prudent juror ( or judge ) would be satisfied never hearing from the defense and only deciding the guilt or innocence of an accused based solely on the prosecution's summation ? But, in effect, that's the stand these people have taken. Guilty until proven innocent. And even after you cast a reasonable doubt on his guilt, he's still guilty. If anyone has any doubt on the success of brainwashing, they only need to engage one of these folks to see it. The Dallas Police, the FBI and the Warren Commission started with a conclusion ( that Oswald was guilty ) and worked backwards to try to prove that. That's not the way a criminal investigation is conducted. If this case were legitimate and the evidence authentic, then everything should add up. There should be NO questions. The bullets that killed Tippit should match the shells found at the scene. The rifle should have been able to hit the sillouette targets in the head. The ammunition tests should have produced a bullet like CE 399. The wounds tests should have produced head wound like the one the President suffered. Not one of the tests conducted for the Warren Commission produced results that supported its conclusions. There should be no questions about the chain-of-custody of any of the evidence. The fact that there are nothing but questions about the evidence is troubling. But it's not just about the evidence. In a normal investigation, witnesses are not harassed into changing their stories, like W.W. Litchfield or Dr. Malcolm Perry. Witnesses are not warned to keep their mouths shut like Richard Randolph Carr or Acquilla Clemmons. Witnesses are not threatened with deportation like Marina Oswald or with death like Orest Pena. These are things you would do in a coverup. In a normal investigation, a suspect would not have been questioned after he asked for a lawyer. He would not have been held incommunicado from his family for 24 hours. He would not have been delayed a phone call until the next day. His lawyer would have been present when he was shown in a lineup. The "fillers" in that lineup would not have been teenagers and a Mexican. They would not have been men whose appearances automatically eliminated them from being chosen. Witnesses would not have told the suspect was in the lineup. These are things you would do if you were trying to frame an innocent man for a crime he did not commit. But none of this matters to people who think that your Constitutional rights are granted by Supreme Court decisions and that those rights are not in effect until the court says so. So I'm going to put these people on ignore and post what I post and I'm not going to respond to them. It's a total waste of time that could be better used for something else.

Witnesses who viewed Abraham Zapruder's original film at Kodak described what they saw. https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/first-showing.mp4

I was very disappointed for a couple of reasons when I saw the part in Episode 3 where they claim the extant Zapruder-film has been altered. #1 The female reporter claims to have been shown a version of the film where the driver shoots the President. In this film, she describes her host slowing it down and demonstrates how "the bullet comes out of the gun this slow". Those of us who have done the calculations on bullet speed and Zapruder frames know that this is not possible. Only a high speed camera can film a bullet in flight. Zapruder's camera at 18.3/fps simply was not fast enough. The film she was being shown was obviously an altered film, a fake. #2 She was told that the bootleg Groden version, the version that the public has seen, is an altered film and the proof is that in that version there is a tree in mid-air. I had never seen this before and found this interesting so I went back to my copy of the Zapruder film and it shows the tree intact. Upon closer look, the so-called "floating tree" version is the obvious fake, because the shadow of the tree trunk is visible where no trunk is apparent. If they had said that the "floating tree" version was the original and that some anomaly in the camera caused the tree to appear to have no trunk, they might have had me, because I had gone over the Z-film a hundred times and had never seen that version before. But to say that the "floating tree version" is the bootlegged public version shown by Bob Groden in 1975 is not true. This is a frame from Groden's 1975 "Goodnight America" presentation showing the tree trunk intact. And to suggest that Zapruder's camera was fast enough to pick up a bullet in flight and film it in several frames is not true as well. I believe the reporter saw what she said she saw. To her credit, she was skeptical. But I'm disappointed that the producers didn't call out the "floating tree" film and "the bullet travelling through the air" film as fakes. The version shown to the reporter of the driver shooting the President and the bullet travelling through the air IMO, is an obvious fake. As is the version with the "floating tree". Yes, what the reporter was shown were two fakes, one presented as the "original" with the driver shooting the President and the "bullet travelling through the air", and the other presented as the altered public version with the tree trunk missing. Speaking of fake versions of the Zapruder film, the revelation that there ARE altered versions out there may serve the CIA's purpose very well in the long run. The more fakes out there, the easier it would be for the Agency and its allies to reject a copy of the original film as a fake should one ever surface.

Good story teller, but provides no evidence. This guy's full of baloney. A police officer picked up Oswald, but he never tells you who. Only that it wasn't Tippit. How does he know ? Who's his source ? And who is Mr and Mrs. Malcolm, who allegedly witnessed the murder of Tippit but are never mentioned in the official records ? Who was the blonde in the '62 Ford who smashed into the back of Tippit's cruiser ? Why isn't she mentioned by any of the witnesses ? Why is there no accident report in the Dallas police files ? And why isn't there any damage in the rear of the cruiser ? He claims that the limo had a glass partition between the front seat and the rest of the car. But it didn't. This guy tells a good story but it's the official version with some of his BS speculation added in. He interviewed people but he presents no recordings, no videos and no documents to prove his case. Mr. Down writes : "JFKA researcher Michael Brownlow investigated the Tippit shooting for many years and interviewed many of the witnesses. He confirmed Oswald shot Tippit." If he "confirmed Oswald shot Tippit" I'd have no questions. I guess you have to buy his books to find out the answers to your questions. That should tell you something. SMH.

Mr. Brown has provided no evidence to support his claim ( the subject of this thread ) that Bowley's watch was slow and that the killing occurred at 1:17. Mr. Brown does not tell you that the average time of Bowley's trip between the Robert L. Thornton Elementary School, where he picked up his daughter at "approximately 12:55", to the Tippit murder scene was 14 minutes, completely consistent with Bowley's arrival at 1:10 pm. In addition, Mr. Brown fails to explain why Helen Markham was on the corner of 10th and Patton at 1:15 when she should have been on her bus at that time. As I've explained before: you can't have the shooting either at or after 1:15 and have Markham on the corner. It doesn't add up. So either Markham is on the corner and the shooting is BEFORE 1:15, or the shooting is at or AFTER 1:15 and Markham is on her bus. Mr. Brown also fails to tell us ( if Tippit was killed instantly at 1:15 ) how Judge Joe Brown knew that when he issued the permit for the autopsy. Mr. Brown also fails to tell us how the time of death is determined when a victim is D.O.A. Doctors only use a clock to declare a victim dead if the victim displays signs of life when admitted, as in the case of President Kennedy. The President was making an effort to breathe, so the doctors decided to resuscitate him. That effort began with establishing an airway. When efforts to resuscitate him were exhausted, Dr. Clark declared him dead. Although the clock inidcated the time was earlier, the doctor decided that the official time would be 1:00 pm, in order to give LBJ time to get to Love Field. The point is that times-of-death are determined in different ways depending on the circumstances. In the case of a D.O.A. ( such as this was ) the time of death is not determined by the time of injury. It is determined by the time of arrival at the hospital, hence "Dead-On-ARRIVAL". If the autopsy request says the body was dead on arrival and the time of death was 1:15, then the body arrived at the hospital at 1:15. It's not rocket science but apparently Mr. Brown doesn't get it. Mr. Brown also does not tell you why, when the FBI realized that they had a problem with different times of the murder, they instructed the Dallas office to " make sure our times jibe". Were they ordering the Dallas FBI to alter the times in their reports ? Apparently yes, because the next day, that's exactly what they did. In this report, the time Tippit was pronounced dead has been altered. As I've said before, if you look closely at the time, the original time was altered to read 1:25. And this wasn't the only document the FBI changed the time to read "1:25". They did the same thing in their report on the records of the Dudley Hughes Funeral Home, the ambulance company that transported Tippit. On this document, the time has been altered by hand. It's obvious to anyone looking at these documents that they were altered. The first was typed over, the second was altered by hand. All of this in order to make the times "jibe". Mr. Brown also failed to respond when I asked him why the dictabelt indicates that Ted Callaway made a second citizen call for help AFTER the ambulance had already arrived. Mr. Brown also fails to tells us why the record shows that taxi driver William Scoggins radioed his dispatcher for an ambulance ( 3 H 326 ) at 1:25 ( CD 5, pg. 78 ) when Tippit's body was already at Methodist Hospital. There are a lot of things Mr. Brown doesn't tell you about this case. Probably because Dale Myers never addresses it. Of course this whole timing issue could have been resolved by the doctor who pronounced Tippit dead, but Dr. Liquori was never called to testify. Why not ? Does Dale Myers address any of these issues ? Because Mr. Brown doesn't. The "Oswald-did-it" timeline only worked if Tippit was shot at 1:15 or after. A week after the assassination, the FBI knew that. They ordered the Dallas Office to make sure their records reflected that. The altering of these documents causes me to question the motive behind those alterations. I believe that the record was altered to hide the fact that Tippit was murdered sometime between 1:06 and 1:10 and that Oswald could not have been that killer. But for folks like Dale Myers and Mr. Brown, there's nothing to see here.

It's been explained to you in the paragraph previous to the one you cited. Please try to keep up.

I owe you an apology. While the Dallas Police transcript shows the caller to be "78", ( Tippit ) the FBI transcript shows the callers to be two different units, the first being "58" and the second being "488". I went back and listened to the audio and the FBI transcript is correct. The two calls made at 1:08 that the Dallas Police attributed to Tippit were not made by him. This is the FBI transcript and I've added the audio to show this to be true. Note: The FBI did not transcribe all the the broadcasts only those they felt were pertinent. So you're going to hear exchanges that are not on the transcript. https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/the-two-78s.mp4 I erred in saying that both versions of the radio transcripts had the same information. I also erred in taking the Dallas PD version as gospel without comparing it to the FBI version. When I did and found the conflict between the two transcripts, I went back and studied the audio and found that the FBI transcript was the correct one. I apologize to anyone who was misled. The two calls to dispatch made at 1:08 were NOT made by Tippit. But that doesn't mean he was killed at 1:15.

You don't have to rely on the honesty of Helen Markham when there is corroborating evidence that supports what she says. I identified a call at the time I WANTED ? I use it because I like it ? No I use it because it's evidence and part of the official record. I identified what was cited on the transcript as Tippit's last call. I didn't make the transcript up myself, it's part of the official record. I didn't alter it. It's cited for anyone to double-check. I merely cited it as the last time we know Tippit was alive. It's cited on both the Dallas Police transcript ( CE 705 ) and the FBI version ( CD 1420 ). And yes, it is audible on the recording. I have it a copy of it. Anyone who knows me knows I don't make stuff up. I may not always be right, but I don't make stuff up. Everything I post I back up with evidence. And I cite everything in red so anyone who doesn't believe me can check my sources for themselves. It's called transparency. If you have evidence that Tippit never made the two attempts to call his dispatcher at 1:08 or was alive after 1:10 pm please post it. I'd be interested in seeing your evidence. Thanks in advance.

You can't have the shooting at 1:15 and Markham standing on the corner, a block from her bus. At 1:15, she would have been on her bus. She testified to that. So either the shooting was at 1:15 and Markham never witnessed it because she was on her bus, or she DID witness it and it occurred before 1:15. The preponderance of the evidence indicates that she DID witness the murder ( other witnesses place her there ) so the shooting HAD to have occurred BEFORE 1:15. Mr. Brown's theory that Bowley used the radio at 1:17 is in error and it's based on the dictabelt being accurate. Unlike some of you folks, I don't rely on the dictabelt being accurate. I've already given an example of the recording of a second civilian use of the police radio to call for help ( blue highlight ) AFTER the ambulance has arrived on the scene ( pink highlight ). No one's been able to explain why the civilian ( Callaway ? ) made a second broadcast for help AFTER the ambulance had reportedly arrived. When I see things depicted out of their logical order, this certainly raises my suspicion over the accuracy of that order. Maybe other people have no problem with this, but to me it makes no sense. A second call for help SHOULD have occurred BEFORE the ambulance arrived. This is common sense. The fact that the second call appears on the dictabelt AFTER the ambulance arrived leads me to believe that the dictabelt is not accurate and may have been tampered with. The evidence indicates Mrs. Markham was on the corner at 1:06-1:07. Her testimony indicates Tippit was alive and confronted someone on foot. The evidence indicates Tippit was alive and used his radio at 1:08. The evidence indicates he was dead at 1:10. The evidence indicates his body arrived at Methodist Hospital and was pronounced dead on arrival at 1:15. The evidence indicates the FBI altered two reports dated 11/29 to reflect that Tippit was pronounced dead at 1:25. Like I've said, you can believe the dictabelt, or you can believe everything else to the contrary.

Because he rode a bus to get to the theater. Earlene Roberts saw him standing at the bus stop outside the roominghouse after he left. ( 7 H 439 )