Jump to content
The Education Forum
Dawn Meredith

Dale Myer's Tippit book

Recommended Posts

My friend and great researcher Larry Ray Harris has been dead since 1996, and his

research was by no means complete. In fact the whereabouts of his extensive files

is not known ever since the one-car accident which killed him (reports are that

his most serious injury was a broken leg).

I prefer the newer much more complete and extensive work of John Armstrong, who has

a comprehensive chapter on the "ordering of the weapons". As I recall, John could

not trace either the rifle, scope or revolver to LHO. Check Harvey&Lee.

Jack

Edited by Jack White

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I apologize Jack if it seemed I was besmirching the research of your deceased friend. But with respect, whether it be Larry Harris's or (particularly) Armstrong's research I find it difficult to ignore the testimony of people who were actually at the murder scene and directly involved. Plus all the ballistic evidence regarding the Tippit slaying. Denis.

Edited by Denis Pointing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey Roy,

To whom have you been talking?

Gary Eugene Marlow, yes.

Wim

Wim, I just became curious when I read something you posted which mentioned his name and I found him in the Social Security Death Index. It seems he was about a year younger than Oswald, and ended up living in Conyers, Georgia, or around there. Original social security card issued in Illinois. Was this in Chicago? What was he doing in Georgia?

Tot ziens,

Roy Bierma

DATE: April 4, 2007

PUBLICATION: Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The (GA)

TYPE: News Obituary Listing

GARY E. MARLOW, 66, of Conyers died Monday. The body was cremated. Memorial service, 11 a.m. Friday, Scot H. Ward, Harry White Chapel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey Roy,

To whom have you been talking?

Gary Eugene Marlow, yes.

Wim

Wim, I just became curious when I read something you posted which mentioned his name and I found him in the Social Security Death Index. It seems he was about a year younger than Oswald, and ended up living in Conyers, Georgia, or around there. Original social security card issued in Illinois. Was this in Chicago? What was he doing in Georgia?

Tot ziens,

Roy Bierma

DATE: April 4, 2007

PUBLICATION: Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The (GA)

TYPE: News Obituary Listing

GARY E. MARLOW, 66, of Conyers died Monday. The body was cremated. Memorial service, 11 a.m. Friday, Scot H. Ward, Harry White Chapel.

Hey Roy,

You mean you actually do real research and don't have an inside source who infiltrated the conspiracy and is now a wannabe whistleblower who wants Clint Eastwood to play hi in the movie?

A feather for your cap.

BK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Officer Poe was faced with a conundrum: he recalled having marked the shells, but the evidence before him was that he hadn't. Either his memory or training had failed him, or the shells were not the same as those he'd taken. It is much simpler to believe that he'd not marked the shells than it is to prove they'd been substituted.

or:

Mr Ball. Now, I have here a package which has been marked "Q"--FBI lab. Q-74 to Q-77. Would you look those over and see if there is any identification on there by you to indicate that those were the hulls given to you by Benavides?

Mr. Poe. I want to say these two are mine, but I couldn't swear to it.

Mr. Ball. Did you make a mark?

Mr. Poe. I can't swear to it; no, sir.

Mr. Ball. But there is a mark on two of these?

Mr. Poe. There is a mark. I believe I put on them, but I couldn't swear to it. I couldn't make them out any more.

Mr. Ball. Now, the ones you said you made a mark on are you think it is 'these two? Q-77 and Q-75?

Mr. Poe. Yes, sir; those two there.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Which would imply that by this time the shells had so many identifying scratches on them from others at the DPD, that he could not tell whether his mark was present or not. There was also two other shells found at the scene. The chain of evidence for these is solid.

Which could imply that by this time the shells had so many identifying scratches on them, etc. It could also imply that they were simply not visible due to any of a number of other reasons, including that the marks were not his. It could imply anything within a whole range of possibilities, including the one that Officer Poe testified to himself:

Mr. Ball. Did you make a mark?

Mr. Poe. I can't swear to it; no, sir.

Did you miss that when you copied the testimony? He could not swear to even having put a mark on them at all! That's not an implication, that's a statement, under oath, by an honest cop!

You make my point for me: no positive identification, no longer evidence. At least, not in an American court.

As to the other two shells, we know the chain of evidence is solid on them because ... why? Two shells that DPD claimed not to know their whereabouts, then they're found by an FBI agent - not even by a Dallas cop! - loose in a file drawer and we know that they're the exact same bullets found at the scene of the crime because ... why? We know that nothing's been done with or to them because ... why?

We don't know - whether or not we can prove anything had been done - we don't know nothing had been done, we don't know who had them, we don't know why they were put in a file drawer, we don't know how or when they got there, we don't know why DPD didn't turn them over to the FBI with any or all of the other evidence they transferred, we don't know why nobody could find them, we don't know why it took an outside investigative agency to find them for DPD who'd apparently "lost" them ... and you call the chain of evidence (certainly not the chain of possession!) solid?!? Since you apparently know something nobody else does, perhaps you can trace that chain of possession from start to finish to show just how solid it is?

It seems clear where behind the bar you're seated, and it's not on the bench making impartial rulings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. Ball. Did you make a mark?

Mr. Poe. I can't swear to it; no, sir.

QUOTE: Did you miss that when you copied the testimony? He could not swear to even having put a mark on them at all! That's not an implication, that's a statement, under oath, by an honest cop!UNQUOTE

No Duke, I didn't miss it but it would appeared you did.

QUOTE: Officer Poe was faced with a conundrum: he recalled having marked the shells, but the evidence before him was that he hadn't.UNQUOTE

As for the other two shells, well Duke its not really too difficult now is it? The Davis girls found the shells, handed them to a police officer, they were marked by Captain G.M.Doughty, placed in a filing cabinet, retrieved by an FBI agent and the ID marks positively identified by Captain Doughty.

Of course, if your of the mindset that anything that makes Oswald appear guilty even as so much as jaywalking was either: planted, fabricated, substituted, forged or altered, then yes, it is impossible to know anything. By the way what exactly does the remark "It seems clear where behind the bar you're seated, and it's not on the bench making impartial rulings." meant to mean? If you have something to say then say it.

Edited by Denis Pointing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr. Ball. Did you make a mark?

Mr. Poe. I can't swear to it; no, sir.

QUOTE: Did you miss that when you copied the testimony? He could not swear to even having put a mark on them at all! That's not an implication, that's a statement, under oath, by an honest cop!UNQUOTE

No Duke, I didn't miss it but it would appeared you did.

QUOTE: Officer Poe was faced with a conundrum: he recalled having marked the shells, but the evidence before him was that he hadn't.UNQUOTE

As for the other two shells, well Duke its not really too difficult now is it? The Davis girls found the shells, handed them to a police officer, they were marked by Captain G.M.Doughty, placed in a filing cabinet, retrieved by an FBI agent and the ID marks positively identified by Captain Doughty.

Of course, if your of the mindset that anything that makes Oswald appear guilty even as so much as jaywalking was either: planted, fabricated, substituted, forged or altered, then yes, it is impossible to know anything. By the way what exactly does the remark "It seems clear where behind the bar you're seated, and it's not on the bench making impartial rulings." meant to mean? If you have something to say then say it.

Dennis,

What happened to the cigarette pack?

Weren't the shells placed in a cigarette pack before being given to cops?

And on what basis can it be concluded that Poe was an honest cop?

Not that I know different, or that he isn't an honest cop, it's just that there are so many cops and so many motives, and I'd like to get to know Officer Poe a little more before I would clear him of missremembering what was probably the most important fifteen minutes of his life.

And if Ball did cut off his testimony, then that makes me even more suspicious.

BK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Revolver Bullets

Four bullets were recovered from the body of Officer Tippit. In Nicol's opinion one of the four bullets could be positively identified with test bullets fired from V510210 revolver, and the other three could have been fired from that revolver. In Cunningham's opinion all four bullets could have been fired from the V510210 revolver, but none could be positively identified to the revolverthat is, in his opinion the bullets bore the revolver's rifling characteristics, but no conclusion could be drawn on the basis of microscopic characteristics. Cunningham did not conclude that the bullets had not been fired from the revolver, since he found that consecutive bullets fired in the revolver by the FBI could not even be identified with each other under the microscope. The apparent reasons for this was that while the revolver had been rechambered for a . 38 Special cartridge, it had not been rebarreled for a . 38 Special bullet. The barrel was therefore slightly oversized for a . 38 Special bullet, which has a smaller diameter than a . 38 S. & W. bullet. This would cause the passage of a . 38 Special bullet through the barrel to be erratic, resulting in inconsistent microscopic markings.

Based on the number of grooves, groove widths, groove spacing, and knurling on the four recovered bullets, three were copper-coated lead bullets of Western-Winchester manufacture (Western and Winchester are divisions of the same company), and the fourth was a lead bullet of Remington-Peters manufacture. This contrasts with the four recovered cartridge cases, which consisted of two Remington-Peters and two Westerns. There are several possible explanations for this variance: (1) the killer fired five cartridges, three of which were Western-Winchester and two of which were Remington-Peters; one Remington-Peters bullet missed Tippit; and a Western-Winchester cartridge case and the Remington-Peters bullet that missed were simply not found. (2) The killer fired only four cartridges, three of which were Western-Winchester and one of which was Remington-Peters; prior to the shooting the killer had an expended Remington- Peters cartridge case in his revolver, which was ejected with the three Western-Winchester and one Remington-Peters cases; and one of the Western-Winchester cases was not found. (3) The killer was using hand-loaded ammunition, that is, ammunition which is made with used cartridge cases to save money; thus he might have loaded one make of bullet into another make of cartridge case. This third possibility is extremely unlikely, because when a cartridge is fired the cartridge case expands, and before it can be reused it must be resized. There was, however, no evidence that any of the four recovered cartridge cases had been resized.

http://www.geocities.com/jfkinfo/app10.htm#p5

NARA Record Number: 124-10371-10120

ADMIN FOLDER-A11: HSCA ADMINISTRATIVE FOLDER, OUTGOING COMMISSION FOLDER VOLUME V

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...p;relPageId=104

"It was never conclusively ascertained that the bullets in Tippit's body came from Lee Oswald's pistol.."..

Jesse Curry: JFK Assassination File: 1969....page 67......CD 774

B

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
... As for the other two shells, well Duke its not really too difficult now is it? The Davis girls found the shells, handed them to a police officer, they were marked by Captain G.M. Doughty, placed in a filing cabinet, retrieved by an FBI agent and the ID marks positively identified by Captain Doughty.
They were? When? By what instrument? In the testimony he didn't give? In the affidavit he didn't make? Who was the police officer who got them from the Davises? Whom did he give them to, and he to whom?

The only "positive identification" I've ever heard of is an FBI report that reported, in the third person, that an agent reported that Doughty, in the fourth person, identified one shell as having been in his possession; in that same report is a report that the same agent also was told that Poe said (again in the fourth person) who said, on two separate occasions, not only that he thought he made a mark on two shells, but that he did make such a mark, "JMP," which he could not find. The earliest "report of a report" was made in June 1964, the last report in that report being in July.

What we do know from the report is that no identification was made under oath, not even in affidavit form. What we don't know from this fourth-person report is whether the officers in question said "yes, that is (are) the shell(s) I had possession of, no question about it" or "yeah, it looks like it," or "well, if my initials are there, it must be the one," or if they said "well, it could be, probably is, might be."

If that report's good enough for a "positive identification" of the shells, then the same report is also "proof" that Joe Poe did put his initials on the shells, and thus the shells are inadmissible since there does seem to be some confusion. We likewise don't know who if anyone had access to the shells, we cannot absolutely preclude that others were substituted for the originals, that the marks on them were not duplicated by someone else, or even in whose custody they were when they were found.

Isn't that something you'd want to know in your murder trial? Shouldn't you have that confidence? Shouldn't the prosecutor? If we don't know the evidence had always been secured, we cannot know that it was the original evidence in its original state, can we.

Of course, if your of the mindset that anything that makes Oswald appear guilty even as so much as jaywalking was either: planted, fabricated, substituted, forged or altered, then yes, it is impossible to know anything.
That's not my point at all. The point is, if there's confusion about the shells/bullets/weapon which you were accused of killing someone with, would you want them used as "evidence" against you? That's the key question. Is it your position that anything that tends to make Oswald - or anyone - appear to be guilty, must make them guilty? That is a prosecutor's mindset (particularly Henry Wade's); it's not that of a defense attorney or a judge (except maybe a "hangin' judge"), hence my comment about where "behind the bar" you're seated (the "bar" is the rail separating the court from the gallery).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr. Ball. Did you make a mark?

Mr. Poe. I can't swear to it; no, sir.

QUOTE: Did you miss that when you copied the testimony? He could not swear to even having put a mark on them at all! That's not an implication, that's a statement, under oath, by an honest cop!UNQUOTE

No Duke, I didn't miss it but it would appeared you did.

QUOTE: Officer Poe was faced with a conundrum: he recalled having marked the shells, but the evidence before him was that he hadn't.UNQUOTE

As for the other two shells, well Duke its not really too difficult now is it? The Davis girls found the shells, handed them to a police officer, they were marked by Captain G.M.Doughty, placed in a filing cabinet, retrieved by an FBI agent and the ID marks positively identified by Captain Doughty.

Of course, if your of the mindset that anything that makes Oswald appear guilty even as so much as jaywalking was either: planted, fabricated, substituted, forged or altered, then yes, it is impossible to know anything. By the way what exactly does the remark "It seems clear where behind the bar you're seated, and it's not on the bench making impartial rulings." meant to mean? If you have something to say then say it.

Dennis,

What happened to the cigarette pack?

Weren't the shells placed in a cigarette pack before being given to cops?

And on what basis can it be concluded that Poe was an honest cop?

Not that I know different, or that he isn't an honest cop, it's just that there are so many cops and so many motives, and I'd like to get to know Officer Poe a little more before I would clear him of missremembering what was probably the most important fifteen minutes of his life.

And if Ball did cut off his testimony, then that makes me even more suspicious.

BK

Bill, the Winston cigarette box contained the Poe shells, the above post is really about the two other shells which the Davies girls found which, as far as I know, were not placed in a box.. I have no idea what happened to the cig box, perhaps it was handed over to the crime lab along with the shells. Is it importaint?

It was actually Duke that said Poe was an honest cop, I was merely quoting him. But I think its fairly safe to presume he was , after all he could have just said the shells shown to him by Ball were definitely the ones found at the crime scene and that would have been the end of it. Its the officers honesty which causes the ambiguity.

If you go back to my post #18 the link now seems to be working again (if not just type it in rather than "click") and you can read the whole interview, Ball doesn't just cut off at that sentence. Denis.

Edited by Denis Pointing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They were? When? By what instrument? In the testimony he didn't give? In the affidavit he didn't make? Who was the police officer who got them from the Davises? Whom did he give them to, and to whom?

Testimony such as this perhaps? Its there to be found if you look Duke.

------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. BROWN. Yes. In regard to the Officer Tippit murder, the same date,

November 22, 1963, Lt. T. I’. Wells received a telephone call from a Mrs. Barbara

Davis of 499 East 10th stating that her sister-in-law of the same address, her

name as Mrs. Virginia Davis, had found an additional empty .38 caliber shell

cartridge in her front yard.

Lieutenant Wells ordered my partner, C. N. Dhority, and I, to go to the

Davis residence w-here Mrs. Barbara Davis handed my partner this spent hull

at, approximately 7 p.m., that evening. That was brought to the homicide and

robbery bureau by myself and Detective Dhority.

Mr. BELIN. Was it brought to that bureau at the time you brought the two

women?

Mr. BROWN. At the same time the Davis women were brought to the office

for affidavits and identification.

Mr. BELIN. Who did you turn that cartridge shell over to?

Mr. BROWN. That went to the crime lab, Dallas Crime Lab.

250

Mr. BELIN. Did you, yourself, turn it over?

Mr. BROWN. No ; Detective Dhority handled that.

Mr. BELIN. Detective Dhority handled that?

Mr. BROWN. We were keeping this evidence in a chain there. Mrs. Barbara

Jeanette Davis handed him the spent cartridge. He gave it to the crime lab

himself, which was initialled by both of us.

Mr. BELIN. Anything else, sir?

Mr. BROWN. None in regard to any evidence or identification of any further

witnesses.

Mr. BELIN. Anything else in connection with either the assassination or the

Tippit murder?

Mr. BROWN. None that I recall at this time, sir.

Mr. BELIH. Sir, you have an opportunity to either read the deposition when

it is transcribed and sign it, or else waive the reading and have our court

reporter send it directly to Washington. You can take your choice.

Mr. BROWN. Well, I have no reason to read it for any reason at all.

Mr. BELIN. Do you want to waive signing it then?

Mr. BROWN. That would be fine. Waive signing, and you can send it right

out. To the best of my knowledge, that is everything that happened.

Mr. BELIN. Well, we certainly appreciate all of your cooperation and the

cooperation of the Dallas Police Department.

TESTIMONY OF L. C. GRAVES

Testimony of L. C. Graves was taken at 3 :lO p.m., on April 6,X%4, in the office

of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan and Erv

Edited by Denis Pointing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They were? When? By what instrument? In the testimony he didn't give? In the affidavit he didn't make? Who was the police officer who got them from the Davises? Whom did he give them to, and to whom?
Testimony such as this perhaps? Its there to be found if you look Duke.
Wait. Let me get this straight: you make the statement that "the chain of evidence is solid," and I'm supposed to gather the data to support your claim? I don't think so!

So the testimony you've cited, although it is given by Patrolman C.W. Brown, is what you're emphasizing as testimony given by Captain G.M. Doughty (the bolded "testimony he didn't give," which reference to Captain Doughty as "he" you omitted from your reference)? Doughty didn't give any testimony, which is what I'd said in response to your saying, "The Davis girls found the shells, handed them to a police officer, they were marked by Captain G.M.Doughty, placed in a filing cabinet, retrieved by an FBI agent and the ID marks positively identified by Captain Doughty."

And, gosh, forgive me, but I'm not seeing where Officer Brown - who was only temporarily assigned to the Robbery & Homicide Bureau, by the way - identified any shells that were in evidence, merely that he initialled "a" spent shell, not "this spent shell that I'm examining now" or pointing out his initials, there, on the shell he was examining ... because he wasn't examining one. He did not identify a shell, he merely discussed one and we don't really know which one it is except by inference.

So is the shell that he initialled the one that's in evidence? You can state this with certainty based on the fact that he'd initialled "a" shell along with Detective C.N. Dhority, which Dhority alone took to the crime lab and gave over to a person, unknown to Brown, at the crime lab, which DPD later apparently (according to Agent Cortlandt Cunningham of the FBI) claimed not to even have, but later was found not by DPD but by Cunningham when he undertook a search of DPD's files nearly six months after the bullets were supposedly fired, and after God-only-knows who'all else handled them, mishandled them, or did who-knows-what with them ... you're certain that this is the same shell?

To save you a moment looking for what Detective Dhority had to say about the shell - all that is on record about it - here it is:

Mr. Ball
. Did they give you anything?

Mr. Dhority
. Virginia gave me a .38 hull.

Mr. Ball
. Did she tell you where she got it?

Mr. Dhority
. I believe that she said that she found it in her front yard, as well as I remember.

Mr. Ball
. What did you do after that?

Mr. Dhority
. We carried them down to the police department and took affidavits off of them and they went to the lineup.

...

Mr. Ball
. Now, what did you do with the empty hull that was given to you, that Virginia gave you?

Mr. Dhority
. I gave it to Lieutenant Day in the crime lab.

Here again, I fail to note his saying that he'd initialled it, much less his making any identification of a shell that he was given to examine and identify ... because he wasn't given one to examine and identify. Just like Patrolman Brown and Captain George Doughty weren't and didn't, the latter as we've already been previously so you don't forget.

You might find that Carl Day identified a shell or shells, but you'll probably find that he wasn't even asked about them.

And it really doesn't matter if an FBI agent not under oath reported that another FBI agent also not under oath told him that Brown, Dhority, Doughty and a dozen other people told him while they were not under oath that they recognized the bullets he proffered them, presuming that he actually did show them the shells which he also did not swear to having done; he merely told another agent that he had.

Two shells that can't be positively identified by all of the officers who handled them, one that was not identified by either of the two officers who handled it, and a fourth that nobody identified except to an FBI agent who told another FBI agent ... which might be ruled inadmissible as hearsay in some jurisdictions, you think?

"Solid chain of evidence" you say? You mean "solid" in the sense that a sponge is solid, right?

Apologies for doing part of your work for you, but you'd never have found what you were looking for anyway.

Edited by Duke Lane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They were? When? By what instrument? In the testimony he didn't give? In the affidavit he didn't make? Who was the police officer who got them from the Davises? Whom did he give them to, and to whom?

Testimony such as this perhaps? Its there to be found if you look Duke.

------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. BROWN. Yes. In regard to the Officer Tippit murder, the same date,

November 22, 1963, Lt. T. I’. Wells received a telephone call from a Mrs. Barbara

Davis of 499 East 10th stating that her sister-in-law of the same address, her

name as Mrs. Virginia Davis, had found an additional empty .38 caliber shell

cartridge in her front yard.

Lieutenant Wells ordered my partner, C. N. Dhority, and I, to go to the

Davis residence w-here Mrs. Barbara Davis handed my partner this spent hull

at, approximately 7 p.m., that evening. That was brought to the homicide and

robbery bureau by myself and Detective Dhority.

Mr. BELIN. Was it brought to that bureau at the time you brought the two

women?

Mr. BROWN. At the same time the Davis women were brought to the office

for affidavits and identification.

Mr. BELIN. Who did you turn that cartridge shell over to?

Mr. BROWN. That went to the crime lab, Dallas Crime Lab.

250

Mr. BELIN. Did you, yourself, turn it over?

Mr. BROWN. No ; Detective Dhority handled that.

Mr. BELIN. Detective Dhority handled that?

Mr. BROWN. We were keeping this evidence in a chain there. Mrs. Barbara

Jeanette Davis handed him the spent cartridge. He gave it to the crime lab

himself, which was initialled by both of us.

Mr. BELIN. Anything else, sir?

Mr. BROWN. None in regard to any evidence or identification of any further

witnesses.

Mr. BELIN. Anything else in connection with either the assassination or the

Tippit murder?

Mr. BROWN. None that I recall at this time, sir.

Mr. BELIH. Sir, you have an opportunity to either read the deposition when

it is transcribed and sign it, or else waive the reading and have our court

reporter send it directly to Washington. You can take your choice.

Mr. BROWN. Well, I have no reason to read it for any reason at all.

Mr. BELIN. Do you want to waive signing it then?

Mr. BROWN. That would be fine. Waive signing, and you can send it right

out. To the best of my knowledge, that is everything that happened.

Mr. BELIN. Well, we certainly appreciate all of your cooperation and the

cooperation of the Dallas Police Department.

TESTIMONY OF L. C. GRAVES

Testimony of L. C. Graves was taken at 3 :lO p.m., on April 6,X%4, in the office

of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan and Erv

feel the wheels coming off, Denis? "Solid as a sponge" sound familiar?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Earlier in this thread I posted that Benevides claimed that a car was stranded in the the middle of Patton, between 10th and Jefferson. He was on his way to get a part and had to travel east-west down 10th as he forgot the part number and this is the reason he witnessed the shooting of Tippit. Does anyone have any more info about this stranded car? From Benevides description I imagine it would have been south of Scoggins parked taxi and north of Calloway and Guinard. No one else seems to mention it in their testimony. The driver of this vehicle, if he stayed with his car (and one assumes he would) should have witnessed the shooter's escape.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...