Jump to content
The Education Forum
William Kelly

Why Oswald is Innocent

Recommended Posts

Seems like Bill, Dennis and myself are not too far apart on this afterall. I agree with Bill, the conspiracy was intended to be discovered and point to Casto involvement but LBJ/Hoover et al quickly jumped on the LN senario instead of the Cuba invasion as they were intended to. Perhaps Lyndon got a taste of the missile crisis fear and wanted a Presidency that had potential to last for more than a few weeks if the invasion quickly escalated to US v USSR battle. Our only main point of difference is, did LHO have an awareness of the plan for him to be blamed or not?

Edited by Neville Gully

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another thought on the way Jack Dougherty was handled in the investigation. He has no supported alibi, was closer to the nest at the time of the shooting (by his own admission) than Oswald. (I assume by now we are fairly certain LHO was not in the SN at 12.30 from the previous posts in this thread). He also stated that he saw Oswald enter the TSBD emptyhanded. Could he have seen where Oswald stashed the rifle without Oswald seeing him, retrieved it and been involved in the shooting somehow? I am not saying this is what happened, merely proposing an alternative way in which the shooting could have occurred, one that any decent law enforcement agency should have investigated thoroughly to attempt to rule it out even if they thought Oswald did it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John, surly the police had more than a reasonable excuse to shoot down Oswald in the theater if that had been their intention/mission, he did try to shoot an officer there. You seem to implicate the whole DPD.
It can be shown that immediately following the downtown shooting, dispatchers systematically emptied Oak Cliff of police patrols, even after supposedly assigning Tippit to central Oak Cliff because they "realized" that they were draining resources from the area. There were also at least three other on-duty officers in Oak Cliff outside of their regular patrol areas and known to be there by dispatchers, not counting the officer who was regularly assigned to central Oak Cliff and was the sole DPD officer who'd gone to lunch - and allowed to go to lunch - immediately after the shooting took place.

That suggests a set-up where Tippit is killed to divert the attention of DPD from Dealey Plaza to Oak Cliff, where Oswald happened to live and be captured, which, it might be noted, was a highly successful diversion if so, taking more than half of the 85-or-so cops who were in Dealey Plaza out of Dealey Plaza. More than 60 law enforcement officers were involved in the hunt for the cop-killer; less than 40 remained on the scene of the President's assassination.

Presuming the truth in that, can you not implicate certain elements of DPD in Tippit's shooting, and if that's the case, was it sheer coincidence that they decided to kill Tippit on the heels of Kennedy's shooting? If they weren't somehow part of the first shooting, why would they have done the second? That Dallas cops were part of the second is demonstrable, so how then can they be unconnected to the first?

That clearly doesn't implicate the entire 1500-man department.

As to a reasonable excuse to shoot Oswald in the theater, it could easily be that the pistol was brought into the theater and was intended to make as if Oswald had shot Nick McDonald when in fact the gun was in someone else's hand: one of the officers near the scuffle - and after the snap - commented that someone told Oswald to let go of the gun and he responded "I can't," as if perhaps someone else was forcing him to hold it.

It could easily have been accomplished and, if certain DPD officers were willing to gun down a fellow officer once to divert attention from the assassination scene, it's not a large stretch to imagine that they'd be willing to cut down another one or two in the theater to ensure that the sole suspect - as Oswald surely would have become, even as he did - died in a hail of gunfire after opening fire on officers himself.

Jack Ruby probably would've sighed with relief if things had gone according to plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Duke, some good points as usual, it wont surprise you to learn I dont agree with most of them (I think you know my stand on Tippit) but excellent points to consider none the less. Forgive me if I dont address them here as I dont want to hijack Bill's post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Duke, some good points as usual, it wont surprise you to learn I dont agree with most of them (I think you know my stand on Tippit) but excellent points to consider none the less. Forgive me if I dont address them here as I dont want to hijack Bill's post.

Denis, Don't worry about hijacking my post, as long as you stick to Oswald's guilt or innocence.

What is it with Tippit? What's your stand there?

BK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As for his role in the assassination, I think they intended the assassination to be discovered to be a conspiracy from the git-go, and that whatever happened, whereever he was, whoever he was with, it didn't really matter, as long as JFK died before leaving Dealey Plaza, and the rifle was discovered, implicating Oswald.

As far as "controlling" Oswald, I don't think it was necessary, as they intended to blame him for providing the rifle, and they only really had to know where he worked - as detailed in Hosty's note, DeMohrenschildt's reports to J. Waton Moore, and Mrs. Paine's reports to FBI and whoever else she reported to.

that particular morning to carry a long thin package to work surly? Thanks.

Edited by Denis Pointing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Duke, some good points as usual, it wont surprise you to learn I dont agree with most of them (I think you know my stand on Tippit) but excellent points to consider none the less. Forgive me if I dont address them here as I dont want to hijack Bill's post.

Denis, Don't worry about hijacking my post, as long as you stick to Oswald's guilt or innocence.

What is it with Tippit? What's your stand there?

BK

Bill, Duke and I must have exchanged....oh, god knows how many post's between us on the Tippit slaying just a few weeks back. So I wont get into all that again if you dont mind. Suffice it to say that IMO the evidence against Oswald for that murder is 100% positive. Sorry mate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
... I am not saying this is what happened, merely proposing an alternative way in which the shooting could have occurred, one that any decent law enforcement agency should have investigated thoroughly to attempt to rule it out even if they thought Oswald did it.
One of the axioms propounded by Sherlock Holmes is that "one should always develop alternative theories in order to provide against them." Imagine that a novelist could figure that out while cops sometimes can't!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Duke, some good points as usual, it wont surprise you to learn I dont agree with most of them (I think you know my stand on Tippit) but excellent points to consider none the less.

But of course, I expected no different! We can always disagree on what the facts mean, but there's no doubt that what I've described are at least that: facts. Like the emptying of Oak Cliff, the three "extra" patrols in Oak Cliff, and the regular guy at lunch. There's no getting around those. What we might think they mean ...? :tomatoes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Duke, some good points as usual, it wont surprise you to learn I dont agree with most of them (I think you know my stand on Tippit) but excellent points to consider none the less. Forgive me if I dont address them here as I dont want to hijack Bill's post.

Denis, Don't worry about hijacking my post, as long as you stick to Oswald's guilt or innocence.

What is it with Tippit? What's your stand there?

BK

Bill, Duke and I must have exchanged....oh, god knows how many post's between us on the Tippit slaying just a few weeks back. So I wont get into all that again if you dont mind. Suffice it to say that IMO the evidence against Oswald for that murder is 100% positive. Sorry mate.

Denis,

I'll have to go back and see what I missed about Tippit.

100% is pretty strong.

I don't mind Oswald being the Tippit killer, though I'm not as positive as you are.

In fact, although I don't consider Oswald suspect as being the Sixth Floor Shooter, Oswald being a suspect in the Tippit murder is what brings the whole JMWAVE, CIA/DOD Maritime Ops into the picture, confirming the that the assassination and Tippit murder were covert ops and not the actions of a psychotic madman.

There's more of a chance that a grand jury will review the evidence in the Tippit murder before one is assigned to review the Dealey Plaza evidence, although one leads to the other.

BK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bill, if memory serves me correctly you actually posted on the Tippit thread, you had a question about one of the Davies girls, if I remember correctly. And yes, 100% is a bit strong isn't it, I'm gonna change that to 95%...my wife must have told me at least 50 million times to stop exaggerating. :tomatoes

Edited by Denis Pointing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill, if memory serves me correctly you actually posted on the Tippit thread, you had a question about one of the Baker girls, if I remember correctly. And yes, 100% is a bit strong isn't it, I'm gonna change that to 95%...my wife must have told me at least 50 million times to stop exaggerating. :tomatoes

Hey, Ackensasay refined the acoustical echo studies of the HSCA and concluded to a 95% probability there was a gunshot fired from the grassy knoll.

I tried to find the Tippit thread you're talking about but couldn't.

There's apparently also a thread with a dialog between Duke Lane and Greg Parker that I've missed.

There should be an archivable grave yard, a greatest hits or a juke box of subjects and topics.

I found one or two on the Zapruder film though.

BK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill, if memory serves me correctly you actually posted on the Tippit thread, you had a question about one of the Baker girls, if I remember correctly. And yes, 100% is a bit strong isn't it, I'm gonna change that to 95%...my wife must have told me at least 50 million times to stop exaggerating. B)

Hey, Ackensasay refined the acoustical echo studies of the HSCA and concluded to a 95% probability there was a gunshot fired from the grassy knoll.

I tried to find the Tippit thread you're talking about but couldn't.

There's apparently also a thread with a dialog between Duke Lane and Greg Parker that I've missed.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=8366 It may be the same Tippit thread referred to above.

After reading topic 8366 here, I would again urge anyone interested in Oswald's movements inside the TSBD to read the current threads on the subject at McAdams' newsgroup, particularly "Why did Oswald Buy a Coke?"

There should be an archivable grave yard, a greatest hits or a juke box of subjects and topics.

I found one or two on the Zapruder film though.

BK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As for his role in the assassination, I think they intended the assassination to be discovered to be a conspiracy from the git-go, and that whatever happened, whereever he was, whoever he was with, it didn't really matter, as long as JFK died before leaving Dealey Plaza, and the rifle was discovered, implicating Oswald.

As far as "controlling" Oswald, I don't think it was necessary, as they intended to blame him for providing the rifle, and they only really had to know where he worked - as detailed in Hosty's note, DeMohrenschildt's reports to J. Waton Moore, and Mrs. Paine's reports to FBI and whoever else she reported to.

Bill, thanks for clarifying. I thought I'd imagined every possible scenario but I must admit I've never even considered the possibility that Oswald's role as patsy only extended as far as getting the murder weapon to the TSBD, and not being framed as the actual shooter. Really thought provoking, I was up half the night thinking on it. Bill, two observations immediately came to mind, to guarantee success wouldn't the plotters have used a Cuban for the role of patsy, preferable one with a pro Castro background.

And would it not still be equally importaint to control Oswald's movements, only this time for the completely opposite reason ie to make sure Oswald DID have a cast iron alibi at the time of the shooting.

Finally a question Bill, does this mean you accept that Oswald did in fact carry a rifle in that brown paper package? If not its an impossible coincidence Oswald chose that particular morning to carry a long thin package to work surly? Thanks.

I would be hesitant to try to connect LHO to the M-C at any time after his return to Dallas. He was never seen with it, and when asked, claimed he didn't own a rifle. It is possible that he had nothing to do with the M-C after it left NOLA with Ruth and Marina. The bigger question of course, is, if that is the case, what did happen to the M-C and how did it find its way inside the TSBD on 11.22.63?

BTW, of course I believe LHO is innocent of the crimes, as he said he was, and that his involvement was just what he said it was, as 'a patsy.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As for his role in the assassination, I think they intended the assassination to be discovered to be a conspiracy from the git-go, and that whatever happened, whereever he was, whoever he was with, it didn't really matter, as long as JFK died before leaving Dealey Plaza, and the rifle was discovered, implicating Oswald.

As far as "controlling" Oswald, I don't think it was necessary, as they intended to blame him for providing the rifle, and they only really had to know where he worked - as detailed in Hosty's note, DeMohrenschildt's reports to J. Waton Moore, and Mrs. Paine's reports to FBI and whoever else she reported to.

Bill, thanks for clarifying. I thought I'd imagined every possible scenario but I must admit I've never even considered the possibility that Oswald's role as patsy only extended as far as getting the murder weapon to the TSBD, and not being framed as the actual shooter. Really thought provoking, I was up half the night thinking on it. Bill, two observations immediately came to mind, to guarantee success wouldn't the plotters have used a Cuban for the role of patsy, preferable one with a pro Castro background.

And would it not still be equally importaint to control Oswald's movements, only this time for the completely opposite reason ie to make sure Oswald DID have a cast iron alibi at the time of the shooting.

Finally a question Bill, does this mean you accept that Oswald did in fact carry a rifle in that brown paper package? If not its an impossible coincidence Oswald chose that particular morning to carry a long thin package to work surly? Thanks.

I would be hesitant to try to connect LHO to the M-C at any time after his return to Dallas. He was never seen with it, and when asked, claimed he didn't own a rifle. It is possible that he had nothing to do with the M-C after it left NOLA with Ruth and Marina. The bigger question of course, is, if that is the case, what did happen to the M-C and how did it find its way inside the TSBD on 11.22.63?

BTW, of course I believe LHO is innocent of the crimes, as he said he was, and that his involvement was just what he said it was, as 'a patsy.'

PMB, I don't think you will start too many fights saying stuff like that around here.

And to answer your questions Denis,

Bill, two observations immediately came to mind, to guarantee success wouldn't the plotters have used a Cuban for the role of patsy, preferable one with a pro Castro background.

Whose to say the Sixth Floor Shooter wasn't Cuban or pro Castro? Maybe he was. We won't know till we find out, and I think we're getting close.

And would it not still be equally importaint to control Oswald's movements, only this time for the completely opposite reason ie to make sure Oswald DID have a cast iron alibi at the time of the shooting.

I don't know that Oswald's movements were controlled. Oswald's "cast iron" alibi that I attribute to him - Baker seeing him through the closed door window - was strictly a coincidence, so he didn't have one. I don't think his movments were controlled, just monitored, and whatever happened, however it played out - Oswald was going to take the fall as the patsy and die.

Finally a question Bill, does this mean you accept that Oswald did in fact carry a rifle in that brown paper package? If not its an impossible coincidence Oswald chose that particular morning to carry a long thin package to work surly?

I don't know what was in the package, though it wasn't his lunch, and it wasn't more than two feet long, and whatever it was, he didn't have it with him when he walked through the back door of the TSBD (according to Jack Dougherty).

And, Denis, since you are 95% confident that Oswald shot Tippit at 10th and Patton, which direction was he walking. If he was walking towards Tippit, how did he get there? If he was walking in the same direciton as Tippit, why didn't all the people who were behind him - see him pass them a few seconds earlier?

Thanks,

Bill Kelly

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...