Lee Oswald’s Departure from the TSBD

[Duke Lane]

I'll soon be publishing - possibly here on the forum, initially - a three-part analysis of the events in TSBD from about 11:30 to about 12:40. Through that analysis, you'll find that the entire Baker-Oswald encounter - which I believe took place, but Officer Baker being deceased, I can only take that on faith - is a red herring that really means nothing at all.

Why? Because not only did Oswald not run down the stairs to eventually meet up with Baker, nobody ran down the stairs, then or later. They simply rode the freight elevator - which was not noisy as some like to posit - down past Baker as Baker made his noisy way up with Roy Truly.

The only questions about that are whether they - and there were two or more persons - first took the freight elevator up to six, descending when Truly & Baker took the closed passenger elevator up to the seventh floor, or whether they timed it such that the noise of the two men running up from five to six covered the noise of the elevator going down. They only had to - and possibly did - only descend to the fourth floor.

They were seen descending by stair somewhere between two and six, tho', and it is on record.

One man, also now deceased, actually spent several (probably very nervous) minutes with them, and was probably saved from having been "Lee Oswald's" second victim by the arrival of the men on the fifth floor. Yet another, also unfortunately deceased, also witnessed it close at hand and most likely participated in the events taking place. These were "The Three Blind Mice."

He has been overlooked by every author and research to my knowledge, but his culpability is virtually undeniable, his alibis - such as they were - suspect at best. I've dubbed him "The Invisible Man," even though he has a name.

If any of these things are true - and they are all documentable and documented, tho' overlooked - then the encounter with Oswald on the second floor is absolutely meaningless in terms of Oswald's escape from the sixth floor ... because they mean that Oswald wasn't on the sixth floor, and thus did not "escape" from it.

Oswald's not being on the sixth floor is evidenced by the fact that neither of two people who were on the sixth floor during the minutes leading up to the shooting, and none of the four people who would have been able to see who was coming downstairs (if they actually came down the stairs), and the one who absolutely, positively could not have not seen someone coming downstairs if they did, ever testified to having seen Oswald there.

With Oswald dead by the time of their testimonies, what would they have had to fear by so identifying him? The only reason they didn't testify to having seen him is because they didn't see him, even tho' they were in a position to have done so. If, perhaps, they hadn't been so desperate to "see no evil," perhaps their testimony might've been better suborned, and they'd have "admitted" to having seen Oswald running downstairs.

Their testimonies are glaring by their omissions.

But the question does still remain, since we know that Geraldean Reed saw Oswald after the encounter with Baker would have taken place, where he went from there, how he went, and possibly with whom he went. Unfortunately, from that point onward, there is nothing on the record, and the one person who might've told us was dead less than 48 hours later.

[Kathleen Collins]

I hate to complicate things, but to me there were two 'Oswalds' who left the TSBD area - one [who the WC was focused upon] who got on a bus and taxi and one [who the WC ignored] who got into the Rambler Wagon. Perhaps Armstrong really was more on the mark, than most want to acknowledge.....

I'm with you. I believe in 2 Oswalds. All the research John Armstrong did, only half of it coming to life with that book. I came across something curious the other day. It was a remark somewhere about how people could be fooled into thiniking there's 2 or more Lee Harvey Oswalds. Judyth Vary Baker said that Lee was born in the old creole section of New Orleans, and that there was so much inbreeding there that many men (at least at the time) who came out of there looked like Lee. She also applies this to Lee's "accent."

I know Judyth isn't believable, but it gave me cause to wonder. All the photos we've seen. Like the one of LHO in Russia by a river and he's only like 5' tall. Yet he's got the same face! It wasn't "trick photography."

He leaves in a Rambler but is arrested and taken out the back of theTexas Theater, while Harvey is arrested and taken out the front. A third Oswald?...

Kathy

[William Kelly]

I hate to complicate things, but to me there were two 'Oswalds' who left the TSBD area - one [who the WC was focused upon] who got on a bus and taxi and one [who the WC ignored] who got into the Rambler Wagon. Perhaps Armstrong really was more on the mark, than most want to acknowledge.....

I'm with you. I believe in 2 Oswalds. All the research John Armstrong did, only half of it coming to life with that book. I came across something curious the other day. It was a remark somewhere about how people could be fooled into thiniking there's 2 or more Lee Harvey Oswalds. Judyth Vary Baker said that Lee was born in the old creole section of New Orleans, and that there was so much inbreeding there that many men (at least at the time) who came out of there looked like Lee. She also applies this to Lee's "accent."

I know Judyth isn't believable, but it gave me cause to wonder. All the photos we've seen. Like the one of LHO in Russia by a river and he's only like 5' tall. Yet he's got the same face! It wasn't "trick photography."

He leaves in a Rambler but is arrested and taken out the back of theTexas Theater, while Harvey is arrested and taken out the front. A third Oswald?...

Kathy

When I first met John Armstrong, I sat across from him at a dinner party in the back room of the Egyptian Lounge in Dallas, during one of the anniversary conferences before the publication of his book.

As an example of a similar Soviet operation to create a man with two identities, Armstrong talked about (Able?), the KGB agent exchanged for Gary Powers, and how he was reared to be a secret agent with multible identies from when he was a child.

As another example, I gave Armstrong the story of Trotski's assassin (Illich Ramarez?), who was raised to be a secret agent from when he was a child, along with his two brothers, and support of his Marxist parents, as deailed in Issac Don Levine's book on the subject.

What I thought odd was Levine, who worked for Life Magazine, was involved in the purchase of the Zapruder film, and contributed to the evolution of Marina Oswald's story, could see the Soviet complete control of Trotski's assassin, but failed to see the similar control of JFK's accused assassin, from an early age, including the military recruitment of his two brothers, much like the Ramarez family.

Issac Don Levine was not blind to these similarities, but instead of exploiting them, he decided to portray the assassin as a deranged lone nut loser who couldn't hold a job and beat his wife, rather than the well trained, and experienced, stealth assassin, who almost got away with assassinating the President.

Creating agents and assassins through raising them with multiple identies is something Levine could see the Soviets doing, but not something the USA would try to duplicate, even though that was the excuse the CIA used in starting the mind control experiments that we suspected the Koreans, Chinese and Soviets were already doing.

When was Oswald recruited and when did the multible Oswalds become "operational"?

When he was in USMC? When he was in the New Orleans CAP? When his mother registered him in Big Brothers? When his older brother was recruited into USMC and he was made part of a brothers recruitment experiment? When his mother put him and his brothers into the orphange?

When Dr. Herzog in New York studied delinquents by giving the the Minnesotta Multiphasic Personality Invitory, which could identify those with a Passive-Aggressive personality prefered by the Navy for those recruited into their special ops program (See: Lt. Com. Narut, London Sunday Times)?

I met an Marine vet at an American Legion dinner who served with Oswald at Atsugi, and said that the Oswald he knew was not the one killed by Jack Ruby, and wrote an article about it that Armstrong mentions in his book.

While the multiple Oswalds begin to appear while Lee Harvey Oswald is in the USSR, Armstrong came up with many other examples, and my problem with Armstrong's thesis, as it was ultimately published, is the limiting it to only two identities, when we have examples of more than just two.

Armstrong tries to define the two by their mutually different characteristics, mainly looks, height and language differences, Harvey and Lee are still two different individuals, not one person with two identities.

If one person went to Russia and another one stayed home, they were still two differnet individuals, and they should not both be called Lee Harvey Oswald.

If one individual left the TSBD and jumped into a Rambler station wagon, and another left by the front door and talked with two newsmen before walking east up Elm, jumping on and off a bus going in the opposite direction and then grabbing a cab to his rooming house, then that's still two different individuals.

One was Lee Harvey Oswald and the other may have resembled him, but they were stoill two different individuals, both suspects - and should be identified separately, by whatever name you want to call them.

At this stage in the game, we should becoming more clear and definate rather than more obscure and confusing.

BK

[Kathleen Collins]

I'll soon be publishing - possibly here on the forum, initially - a three-part analysis of the events in TSBD from about 11:30 to about 12:40. Through that analysis, you'll find that the entire Baker-Oswald encounter - which I believe took place, but Officer Baker being deceased, I can only take that on faith - is a red herring that really means nothing at all.

Why? Because not only did Oswald not run down the stairs to eventually meet up with Baker, nobody ran down the stairs, then or later. They simply rode the freight elevator - which was not noisy as some like to posit - down past Baker as Baker made his noisy way up with Roy Truly.

The only questions about that are whether they - and there were two or more persons - first took the freight elevator up to six, descending when Truly & Baker took the closed passenger elevator up to the seventh floor, or whether they timed it such that the noise of the two men running up from five to six covered the noise of the elevator going down. They only had to - and possibly did - only descend to the fourth floor.

They were seen descending by stair somewhere between two and six, tho', and it is on record.

One man, also now deceased, actually spent several (probably very nervous) minutes with them, and was probably saved from having been "Lee Oswald's" second victim by the arrival of the men on the fifth floor. Yet another, also unfortunately deceased, also witnessed it close at hand and most likely participated in the events taking place. These were "The Three Blind Mice."

He has been overlooked by every author and research to my knowledge, but his culpability is virtually undeniable, his alibis - such as they were - suspect at best. I've dubbed him "The Invisible Man," even though he has a name.

If any of these things are true - and they are all documentable and documented, tho' overlooked - then the encounter with Oswald on the second floor is absolutely meaningless in terms of Oswald's escape from the sixth floor ... because they mean that Oswald wasn't on the sixth floor, and thus did not "escape" from it.

Oswald's not being on the sixth floor is evidenced by the fact that neither of two people who were on the sixth floor during the minutes leading up to the shooting, and none of the four people who would have been able to see who was coming downstairs (if they actually came down the stairs), and the one who absolutely, positively could not have not seen someone coming downstairs if they did, ever testified to having seen Oswald there.

With Oswald dead by the time of their testimonies, what would they have had to fear by so identifying him? The only reason they didn't testify to having seen him is because they didn't see him, even tho' they were in a position to have done so. If, perhaps, they hadn't been so desperate to "see no evil," perhaps their testimony might've been better suborned, and they'd have "admitted" to having seen Oswald running downstairs.

Their testimonies are glaring by their omissions.

But the question does still remain, since we know that Geraldean Reed saw Oswald after the encounter with Baker would have taken place, where he went from there, how he went, and possibly with whom he went. Unfortunately, from that point onward, there is nothing on the record, and the one person who might've told us was dead less than 48 hours later.

Please tell us who the Invisible Man is. Also -- wasn't there an electrical blackout in the TSBD when Kennedy got shot? Suppose the murderer got stuck in an elevator.

Some suspects:

Mac Wallace of the famous fingerprint on a 6th floor box near the sniper's nest.

Jack Ruby wanted to make a statement about the Jews. So he shot Kennedy.

The Butler did it.

And then the most likely one: They took Hubert H. Humphery out of mothballs and he did the deed.

Kathy

[Duke Lane]

Please tell us who the Invisible Man is. Also -- wasn't there an electrical blackout in the TSBD when Kennedy got shot? Suppose the murderer got stuck in an elevator.

Some suspects:

Mac Wallace of the famous fingerprint on a 6th floor box near the sniper's nest.

Jack Ruby wanted to make a statement about the Jews. So he shot Kennedy.

The Butler did it.

And then the most likely one: They took Hubert H. Humphery out of mothballs and he did the deed.

Kathy

Aye, but 'tis none of the above.

The story of the electrical blackout is a misconstruction. I'm thinking that it was Geneva Hine - don't have time to look it up at the moment - who had stayed behind the the TSBD to answer phones. She noted that, at about the time the motorcade came around, the phone stopped ringing "and all the lights went out." What she was referring to was not to the lights in the building, but the lights on the phone.

If you remember the old multi-line phones, they had a row of clear lucite buttons with which to select the line. When in use or when ringing, the lights beneath the buttons lit up: steady when the line was in use, blinking when it was ringing or on hold.

On the other hand, two people testified to the elevator not working as they rode from the first floor upward to the second. One of them was Luke Mooney, whose testimony following that incident is most interesting. The other was a woman who'd testified to the same thing; I can't think of her name offhand either.

The "Invisible Man" was standing about 10 feet west of the west (freight) elevator at the time of the shooting, which likewise placed him about 10 feet from the stairwell, directly in the path of anyone who would have run down from the sixth floor to any floor below. He apparently had the elevator doors open, for about 60-75 seconds later, Roy Truly tried calling the elevator down, but it didn't move; he even rang the bell to get whoever might've been using it's attention to close the door, but to no avail. It and the passenger elevator to the east - which could only be operated when someone was in it and could not be called anywhere - were both at the fifth floor, exactly where the "Invisible Man" said that he was.

Interestingly, when Truly and Baker got to the fifth floor (where Truly had last seen both elevator bottoms when he looked up the shaft), Truly took Baker right by where the freight (west) elevator should have been - but wasn't - and went to the passenger (east) elevator, which the two of them rode up to the seventh floor, past the sixth. Truly even testified that he saw the freight elevator was gone, but he did not call it to Baker's attention.

Since it would seem that a moving elevator would've caught even Baker's attention - he wouldn't have necessarily known there was supposed to have been an elevator there - it would seem that the elevator had either ascended or descended while B&T were running up the stairs, making all sorts of noise.

Going down might've caused whoever was operating the freight elevator - which faced the stairs - to have been noticed by Baker as they made their descent to (or past) the fifth floor if, for example, Baker had hesitated on the fifth floor like he did on the second floor, with Truly running ahead.

On the other hand, if the freight elevator went up while B&T were coming up from below, they had but one floor to move and no chance of bumping into Baker on the way down. Once Truly got him on the enclosed passenger elevator, going down past B&T as they "hopscotched" the sixth floor would've provided the cover that was needed to get down to, say, the fourth floor.

Both elevators moved at almost exactly the same speed (according to Billy Lovelady, who had previously timed the two elevators going down from the seventh to the first floors), thus the passenger elevator going up two flights was roughly equal to the freight elevator going down two floors, both stopping at about the same time. The elevator "stall" - which may have been the result of someone not closing the gate fully? - happened after that.

Luke Mooney saw whoever it was that was coming down. He thought they were cops, but there were no other cops in the building other than Baker - who was on the seventh floor at the time - Mooney's partner going up the stairs, and Mooney himself who was momentarily stranded on the second floor, walked up, and was the first officer known to be on the sixth floor other than Baker on his way down from seven. Mooney did not run into Baker on the stairs because he testified that the "officers" (or officers) he met were "plainclothes, like me" (or words to that effect), which does not describe Baker.

The "Invisible Man?" We've known about him for years. Just nobody's put together what he did and when, and what opportunities that befell him. The reason? He was "retarded" ... tho' today, we'd know better.

You'll just have to (ahem!) "wait for the book."

[Kathleen Collins]

Please tell us who the Invisible Man is. Also -- wasn't there an electrical blackout in the TSBD when Kennedy got shot? Suppose the murderer got stuck in an elevator.

Some suspects:

Mac Wallace of the famous fingerprint on a 6th floor box near the sniper's nest.

Jack Ruby wanted to make a statement about the Jews. So he shot Kennedy.

The Butler did it.

And then the most likely one: They took Hubert H. Humphery out of mothballs and he did the deed.

Kathy

Aye, but 'tis none of the above.

The story of the electrical blackout is a misconstruction. I'm thinking that it was Geneva Hine - don't have time to look it up at the moment - who had stayed behind the the TSBD to answer phones. She noted that, at about the time the motorcade came around, the phone stopped ringing "and all the lights went out." What she was referring to was not to the lights in the building, but the lights on the phone.

If you remember the old multi-line phones, they had a row of clear lucite buttons with which to select the line. When in use or when ringing, the lights beneath the buttons lit up: steady when the line was in use, blinking when it was ringing or on hold.

On the other hand, two people testified to the elevator not working as they rode from the first floor upward to the second. One of them was Luke Mooney, whose testimony following that incident is most interesting. The other was a woman who'd testified to the same thing; I can't think of her name offhand either.

The "Invisible Man" was standing about 10 feet west of the west (freight) elevator at the time of the shooting, which likewise placed him about 10 feet from the stairwell, directly in the path of anyone who would have run down from the sixth floor to any floor below. He apparently had the elevator doors open, for about 60-75 seconds later, Roy Truly tried calling the elevator down, but it didn't move; he even rang the bell to get whoever might've been using it's attention to close the door, but to no avail. It and the passenger elevator to the east - which could only be operated when someone was in it and could not be called anywhere - were both at the fifth floor, exactly where the "Invisible Man" said that he was.

Interestingly, when Truly and Baker got to the fifth floor (where Truly had last seen both elevator bottoms when he looked up the shaft), Truly took Baker right by where the freight (west) elevator should have been - but wasn't - and went to the passenger (east) elevator, which the two of them rode up to the seventh floor, past the sixth. Truly even testified that he saw the freight elevator was gone, but he did not call it to Baker's attention.

Since it would seem that a moving elevator would've caught even Baker's attention - he wouldn't have necessarily known there was supposed to have been an elevator there - it would seem that the elevator had either ascended or descended while B&T were running up the stairs, making all sorts of noise.

Going down might've caused whoever was operating the freight elevator - which faced the stairs - to have been noticed by Baker as they made their descent to (or past) the fifth floor if, for example, Baker had hesitated on the fifth floor like he did on the second floor, with Truly running ahead.

On the other hand, if the freight elevator went up while B&T were coming up from below, they had but one floor to move and no chance of bumping into Baker on the way down. Once Truly got him on the enclosed passenger elevator, going down past B&T as they "hopscotched" the sixth floor would've provided the cover that was needed to get down to, say, the fourth floor.

Both elevators moved at almost exactly the same speed (according to Billy Lovelady, who had previously timed the two elevators going down from the seventh to the first floors), thus the passenger elevator going up two flights was roughly equal to the freight elevator going down two floors, both stopping at about the same time. The elevator "stall" - which may have been the result of someone not closing the gate fully? - happened after that.

Luke Mooney saw whoever it was that was coming down. He thought they were cops, but there were no other cops in the building other than Baker - who was on the seventh floor at the time - Mooney's partner going up the stairs, and Mooney himself who was momentarily stranded on the second floor, walked up, and was the first officer known to be on the sixth floor other than Baker on his way down from seven. Mooney did not run into Baker on the stairs because he testified that the "officers" (or officers) he met were "plainclothes, like me" (or words to that effect), which does not describe Baker.

The "Invisible Man?" We've known about him for years. Just nobody's put together what he did and when, and what opportunities that befell him. The reason? He was "retarded" ... tho' today, we'd know better.

You'll just have to (ahem!) "wait for the book."

The suspense is killing me. He was retarded but was not Jack Ruby. I guess I have to know this person and that he worked in the TSBD. So I'll have to learn the names and testimonies of people who worked there. Is that right? Or was it a soldier of fortune.

It just hit me: the invisible man, retarded -- David Ferrie! who gave as his alibi that he was driving to Texas to go ice skating -- only the weather was extremely bad to drive in. He was with Lee (of Lee and Harvey fame). He was always with Lee, wasn't he?

Am I right? Where's my prize?

Kathy

[Alaric Rosman]

Mr. Rosman wrote:

Oswald was conned by rogue CIA agents into believing that President Kennedy, keen to invade Cuba (to retrieve his loss of face over the Bay of Pigs), and desperate for a justification for such an action, sanctioned a plan whereby an unsuccessful assassination attempt on him could be trailed through Oswald back to Castro. Oswald's role was to be a 'Communist' plant with appropriate Moscow baggage to whom the assassination rifle could be traced.

I have suggested that Oswald may have been talked into helping incriminate himself because of a deliberately failed assassination attemot. This scenario resolves a lot of questions. But there are several possibilities in addition to the one mentioned above, e.g.:

(1) There actually was a failed assassination plot planned by the CIA (not rogue agents) with the actual purpose to justify an invasion of Cuba. But a sinister element (certainly the OC comes to mind) could have hijacked the plot changing a failed assassination into an actual one.

(2) There was an actual assassination planned but Oswald was conned into thinking it was planned to fail. But why would the planners need to be rogue CIA agents? If a sinister element (again I offer OC) was aware that Oswald was working with US intelligence, why could Oswald not have been told that someone was from the CIA even though he was not? Oswald could have been instructed that the plan was so compartmentalized and so secret that he must tell no one even his normal handlers.

I tend to favor (1) above. This could explain the presence of CIA agents in Dallas while their presence would have been sufficient to necessitate a desperate cover-up. Planning a failed assassination attempt is not so far-fetched when one considers the plans contemplated by Operation Northwoods.

So it seems we have either an actual assassination attempt communicated to Oswald as designed to fail, with the plotters being rogue CIA operatives or others claiming to be CIA; or an officially sanctioned simulated assassination hijacked by the forces of darkness. Either of these scenarios could explain a lot and certainly explains Oswald's actions when he discovered that he was being set uo to take the blame for the death of the president. I suggest it could it also explain a wild shot designed to miss everyone and hurt no one but that resulted in a ricochet that wounded Mr. Tague.

[Kathleen Collins]

I hate to complicate things, but to me there were two 'Oswalds' who left the TSBD area - one [who the WC was focused upon] who got on a bus and taxi and one [who the WC ignored] who got into the Rambler Wagon. Perhaps Armstrong really was more on the mark, than most want to acknowledge.....

I'm with you. I believe in 2 Oswalds. All the research John Armstrong did, only half of it coming to life with that book. I came across something curious the other day. It was a remark somewhere about how people could be fooled into thiniking there's 2 or more Lee Harvey Oswalds. Judyth Vary Baker said that Lee was born in the old creole section of New Orleans, and that there was so much inbreeding there that many men (at least at the time) who came out of there looked like Lee. She also applies this to Lee's "accent."

I know Judyth isn't believable, but it gave me cause to wonder. All the photos we've seen. Like the one of LHO in Russia by a river and he's only like 5' tall. Yet he's got the same face! It wasn't "trick photography."

He leaves in a Rambler but is arrested and taken out the back of theTexas Theater, while Harvey is arrested and taken out the front. A third Oswald?...

Kathy

How about this Oswald? A little guy with the same face.

[Kathleen Collins]

I hate to complicate things, but to me there were two 'Oswalds' who left the TSBD area - one [who the WC was focused upon] who got on a bus and taxi and one [who the WC ignored] who got into the Rambler Wagon. Perhaps Armstrong really was more on the mark, than most want to acknowledge.....

I'm with you. I believe in 2 Oswalds. All the research John Armstrong did, only half of it coming to life with that book. I came across something curious the other day. It was a remark somewhere about how people could be fooled into thiniking there's 2 or more Lee Harvey Oswalds. Judyth Vary Baker said that Lee was born in the old creole section of New Orleans, and that there was so much inbreeding there that many men (at least at the time) who came out of there looked like Lee. She also applies this to Lee's "accent."

I know Judyth isn't believable, but it gave me cause to wonder. All the photos we've seen. Like the one of LHO in Russia by a river and he's only like 5' tall. Yet he's got the same face! It wasn't "trick photography."

He leaves in a Rambler but is arrested and taken out the back of theTexas Theater, while Harvey is arrested and taken out the front. A third Oswald?...

How about this Oswald? A little guy with the same face. He looks like a pubescent Harvey, but the hat the woman on the ground is wearing came out as a fad in 1960, a Chinese sun hat.

Kathy

Edited March 25, 2008 by Kathleen Collins

[James Richards]

Duke,

Re your 'Invisible Man', I guess you are referring to J.E. Dougherty?

If so, do you have anything on a Redfern Dougherty?

James

[Duke Lane]

The suspense is killing me. He was retarded but was not Jack Ruby. I guess I have to know this person and that he worked in the TSBD. So I'll have to learn the names and testimonies of people who worked there. Is that right? Or was it a soldier of fortune.

It just hit me: the invisible man, retarded -- David Ferrie! who gave as his alibi that he was driving to Texas to go ice skating -- only the weather was extremely bad to drive in. He was with Lee (of Lee and Harvey fame). He was always with Lee, wasn't he?

Am I right? Where's my prize?

With all due respect, Kathy, I know what I'd said and don't need it repeated in full in the very next message. I only quote yours in full because there have been several between then and now.

Learning the names of the people who worked in the TSBD and what they had to say is a very good first step. It beats the heck out of buying wholesale into a "two Oswalds" theory (which has merits, FWIW) and dripping silly sarcasm ("It just hit me: the invisible man, retarded -- David Ferrie! ... He was with Lee [of Lee and Harvey fame]") to "win a prize" like on a board game.

But silly me, isn't that what this is? No, you didn't win a prize. Nor, I think, did you expect to.

[Duke Lane]

Re your 'Invisible Man', I guess you are referring to J.E. Dougherty? If so, do you have anything on a Redfern Dougherty?

Is there a relation between the two? I haven't seen anything on such a person, nor has anyone to my knowledge ever to date suggested that J.E.D. (deceased 1991) had anything to do with anything that day other than eating lunch with Danny Arce, not in and of itself incriminating. Send me a PM if you have a moment so I follow your thinking better.

[Kathleen Collins]

With all due respect, Kathy, I know what I'd said and don't need it repeated in full in the very next message. I only quote yours in full because there have been several between then and now.

I see people on this Forum including previous large posts all the time. Why did you mention it to me?

Kathy [\quote]

Edited March 26, 2008 by Kathleen Collins

[Alaric Rosman]

The time from Lee Oswald's Departure from the TSBD (12:33:30) to his arrest at the Texas Theatre (1:51) is 77½ minutes A period in which everybody's behaviour was inexplicable to reason and baffling to experience.

Alaric, it is apparent you have put a lot of time into the Tippit murder, but in asking your very pertinent questions you seem to be doing a lot of speculation. In addition, it's a mistake to rely on such dishonest books like Myers' "With Malice" when original records are available. As I recently explained to Gary Mack in an email, Dale Myers is deliberately deceptive and should not be cited as a source for anything.

I have great respect for Dale Myers' "With Malice ". A good 75% of the facts for my 2005 DPUK Canterbury Seminar Presentation ("Did Tippit Stop Anybody?") came from Mr Myers' research.

His book is an absolute 'must' for anybody who wants to understand the Tippit slaying. "With Malice" is an immensely impressive effort: well put together, clearly and concisely written, with excellent maps, and digitally enhanced photographs.. If this book doesn't convince you of Oswald's guilt, then nothing by any other author would do so.

Myers book may be convincing if you don't read anything else, but like Posner and Bugliosi et al, those who try to pin the blame for the assassination and Tippit murder on Oswald alone, also claim that he was a deranged lone nut who couldn't hold a job and beat his wife becuase he was such a loser.

In fact, the case for conspiracy doesn't depend on a multible assassin scenario, and far from being crazy, Lee Harvey Oswald was a well trained and experienced covert intelligence operative, who was part of a domestic, anti-Communist intelligence network affiliated with ONI and the CIA counter-intelligence.

However, for all that it is a far from being an unblemished book.. Michael Grifffith has provided a very detailed critique ("Did Oswald Shoot Tippit?": http://karws.gso.uri.edu/JFK/the_critics/g...ith_Malice.html and I have myself many criticisms additional to those of Mr Griffith.

But the book's failures --- well, nearly all of them --- fall under one heading: "With Malice" is dominated by a mind set so fixed on Oswald's guilt that evidence becomes emptied of its immanent value and coherence, and instead is judged transcendentally --- solely by whether it fits into the jigsaw of Oswald's guilt.....

.......

[but putting aside Myers' erroneous Change of Direction Theory, and returning to reality Oswald in fact would never have seen Tippit's police car until it overtook him and stopped in front of him].......Myers uses Directional Change Theory to explain Tippit's suspicions of Oswald, but, as I showed in my Presentation to the DPUK Canterbury Seminar in 2005, this theory is incorrect. Myers writes (p 354) of Oswald's noticeable "demeanor and suspicions actions", but, again, as I showed in my Presentation, none of this has any basis in fact........

Is there any way you can post your DPUK Canterbury Seminar presentation here?

Even though Myers is a stuge, I happen to agree with him on the change-of-direction theory because it is behavior that fits in quite neetly with Oswald's covert intelligence operational profile, and exhibits his training in counter-suveillance and his use of standard operational techniques.

"When a tal-smart spy is trying to spot a possible surveillance, he may appear to act indecisively, even implausibly. Suddenly and without any apparent reason, he will whirl and double back on his tracks, looking into the faces of those behind him and making eye contact with as may of the crowd as he can. Any foot surveillant within a hundred feet of a clever spy who makes a series of these moves is likely to have to drop the chase." (Mole, by William Hood, Ballentine, 1982, p. 220).

(9) Myers tells us that Oswald felt severely threatened by police cars. He comments (p 363) that Oswald seemed to have taken 20 minutes to move from Tenth Street to the movie house --- normally a ten minute walk.

Myers attributes slowness this to Oswald fleeing from main roads to alleyways and side streets, in order to avoid all the hustle and bustle around him: Oswald, says Myers, is trying to avoid the lawmen who have poured into the area (mostly concentrated on Tenth Street) and the siren-shrieking police cars.......

"After doubling, redoubling, and doubling his path again, an agent may board a subway at the last minute, step off at the next stop, walk slowly along the platform toward the street exit, and, at the last moment, jump back onto the train....For measure, he might stop for an hour of browsing in Macy's....The Russians call this 'dry cleaning'....."

If we only had Myers talking about an abrupt change of direction by the suspect while walking down 10th street, then that would be speculation, but since the official story has him doing it three times - leaving the TSBD, walking five blocks, getting on a bus going in the opposite direction, abruptly leaving the bus after one block, getting a cab five blocks past his rooming house and walking back to it, then the possibly abrupt misdireciton on 10th street fits into the counter-surveillance pattern, by the book.

........

After Oswald is arrested, we never hear of any more leads. His guilt is never in doubt (M 178,179, 180). And this transformation --- from a lead into the lead --- happened immediately. But how? We are never told. Strangely the question is never asked.

That doesn't stop us from taking up the leads -

Bill Kelly

The belief that the gunman was originally walking West (and that he changed his direction on seeing Tippit's police car) has its origin in an affidavit that Scoggins made on the day of the assassination to the Dallas Police, and its fully explicit and starker reiteration ( 11 days after the assassination) in an affidavit made during the course of an interview with two Secret Service Special Agents In the opening paragraph of his Dallas Police Scoggins deposed as follows:- "............ About the time I started to eat my lunch I saw a police car going East on Tenth. The police stopped on Tenth just east of Patton. The officer got out of the car and evidently said something to a man walking west on Tenth."

This assertion that the gunman was walking west on Tenth was taken up eagerly by the Dallas Police, who were obviously baffled by Tippit's murder.

Wondering why any intercepted person would so sensationally panic as to not only shoot their interrogator, but to do so as an immediate response, they concluded that the proximity of the two killings --- two miles in distance, 45 minutes in time --- pointed to some linkage.

"When you have a president killed and a few minutes later you have an officer shot within a couple of miles, you're going to think they're connected. A. person that doesn't think they're connected is an idiot.

That's going to be his first thought. If it's not, he's not normal "

That was the quoted opinion of Captain Westbrook, one of the police officers at the scene of the Tippit killing. (Myers 98,99) A similar thought was expressed by the Assistant District Attorney Bill Alexander: "We all knew," he recalled some 20 years later, " the same man that killed the President had killed Tippit. We had made up our minds by the time we got there." (Myers 99) [it is difficult to see how this sameness could possibly be a matter of knowledge.] One thought was that Tippit had heard over his car police radio what the police later admitted was a meagre description of the suspect, and that he thought --- in what must have been such an astonishingly intuitive insight as to constitute a mystical experience --- that the gunman ( the man waking on the sidewalk) was the suspect --- or, at least, sufficiently like him to be stopped for questioning.

But why did the idea of the gunman walking west appeal to the police?

The answer is simple.

Because if the gunman had been walking west he would have been approaching Tippit's easterly moving police car, and the encounter would have been face to face, something which gives credibility (if only superficially) to the idea forming in the police minds.

And that idea was that the seemingly inexplicable --- the apparently meaningless gunning down of a patrolman performing a regular stop and earch --- could only be explained by something equivalently incredible, that in some amazing feat of inspired intuition, Tippit, sub-consciously working on meagre police description of an average sort of young man, had experienced a sort of mystical identification, and had been spiritually (?) moved to see in this particular man --- no features to distinguish an appearance replicated tens of thousands in twenty-something Dallas males --- the likely features of Kennedy's assassin ( as described by the police ) and then, carrying out a stop and interrogate action, Tippit had got himself gunned down by the consequently panicked assassin.

On the other hand, the gunman had been walking in an easterly direction, the identifcation would have had to have been a rear view one, which would have considerably weakend the credibility of the supposed incident, reducing it to an entirely mystical --- a Voice from the Beyond --- experience.

Scoggins's statement was then obviously welcomed by the Dallas Police.

A case report, filed on the day of the Assassination, reported that Oswald "was walking West on the 400 blk. of East 10 when stopped by the above complainant to be questioned."(Myers 443) [ Incidentally in this introductory part of the report,and in the reference to Mrs Markham which follows,one cannot help noticing that the Dallas Police falsified what Mrs Markamtold them. As I've pointed out in the main text,she said nothing in her affidavit to support the notion that Tippit stopped the gunman. She connected the stopping of his caronly with the house he stopped outside., numbr 404 an address which there is, despite what Myers says, good reason to believe he was in the habit of visiting rergularly.

What all this showsis that the Dallas Police had very early on --- one is inclined to say 'immediately' (it was certainly within a few hours)--- formed a very clear of what happened, that Tippit had been killed by Kennedy's assassin, and that they were starting to impose this pre-judgement on what witnesses were aying.] In the Homicide Report on Tippit's death, the report under "Details of Offense", asserted "Deceased driving Squad Car ‡10 east on 10 th street stopped to interrogate a suspect who was wallking west on Tenth......." (Myers 447)

The key sentences appear in the last two sentences of the fourth paragraph of his deposition,, and in the opening sentence of the paragraph following.

Thus we have: "I saw the cruiser stop on the south side of 10th street about one or two houses east of the intersection of East 10th and Patton Streets. I noticed a man walking west on 10th street on the south side which is the same side of the street the cruiser is on."

And,

"The man walking west on 10th street stopped at a point just directly in line with the front bumper of the polce car"

The relevant excerpts from William Scoggins' two affidavits are as follows:

(1) The first affidavit, given to the Dallas Police on the 23rd November. Leading excerpts are: "About the time I started to eat my lunch I saw a police car going east on Tenth. The Police stopped on Tenth just east of Patton. The officer got out of the car and evidently said something to a man who was walking west on Tenth [Later, under cross examination at a Warren Commission Hearing, Scoggins admitted that the "walking west was purely an inference.] When the Policeman spoke to him the man stopped .The next thing that attracted my attention was a gun firing. I heard three or four shots, and I saw smoke near the squad car. The officer fell beside the squad car on the driver's side."

Note: (i) The word “evidently” refers not to what has been observed, but to what has been inferred. Scoggins infers that Tippit got out his car --- and (presumably) stopped it also --- to speak to the gunman. (ii) Scoggins describes the gunman as “walking west” when the police car stopped.

This affidavit became the basis of the Tippit myth.

The second affidavit, given to the Secret Service 12/2,1963, has the following pertinent excerpt:

" Just as I started eating my lunch I noticed a police car going east on 10th Street at the intersection of Patton. I saw the cruiser stop on the south side of 10th Street about one or two houses east of the intersection of East 10th and Patton streets. I noticed a man walking west on 10th street the south side [An on-the-spot inference] which is the same side of the street the cruiser was on.

" The man walking west on 10th Street stopped at a point just about directly in line with the front bumper of the police cruiser. I started to continue eating my lunch after I saw the police officer get out of the police car on the driver's side and start around the front of the car. At this point I could not see the man that had stopped at the car.

" I heard three or four gunshots.......................

Mr Scoggins: I noticed he [Tippit] stopped down there, and I wasn't paying too much attention to the man, you see, just used to see him every day, but then I kind of looked down the street, saw this, someone, that looked to me like he was going west, now, I couldn't exactly say whether he was going west or was in the process of turning around, but he was facing west when I saw him [Notice there is an obvious sequence of events here: Scoggins sees Tippit in his polce car. Nothing unusual in this. Seen him so often before. Tippit stops. Scoggins wonders why, and whilst wondering why he spots the gunman.]

Mr Belin: All right Mr Scoggins: And he was --- he stopped there.

Mr Belin: Let me ask you this now. When you first saw this man, had the olice car stopped or not?

Mr Scoggins: Yes; he stopped. When I saw he stopped, then I looked to see why he was stopping,you see,and I saw this man with a light-cooured jacket on.

[Mr Belin hasn't fully grasped what Scoggins has just said --- the sequenceof events that he has impl ied.] Mr Belin: Now you saw a man with a light-colored jacket. With relation to the polce car, was that man east of the police car, west of the police car,or kind.......

Mr Scoggins: Just a liitle east is the best I can remember. (3H, 325)

Mr Belin: I wonder if you would take Exhibit 523 and see if there is any number on Exhibit 523 which corresponds to the position of the man who was walking along East 10th Street, or wherever he was when you first saw him.

Mr Scoggins: Approximately where 16 is.

Mr Belin Yes; you are pointing to the position where the arrow is in number 16?

Mr Ball: Mr Belin, he didn't see him walking. ( 3H,329)

[Duke Lane]

I see people on this Forum including previous large posts all the time. Why did you mention it to me?

So maybe others would read it? Felt the need to mention it to someone when the occasion arose. It arose; it was you. Nothing personal. Honest.

It's just one of my pet peeves, reading the same last, long post several-several times in succession, trying to find the replies in the midst of them. I find myself doing the same thing, too, and only just recently too ... so I'm as much an object as an exemplar of my own criticism, and much less the latter than the former oftentimes.

Just blowing steam.