Jump to content
The Education Forum
James DiEugenio

The Tippit Case in the New Millenium

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

I am pretty sure that the Clemmons description would describe Vaganov and Garner.

Vaganov especially, and unlike Davis, she got the clothes right with him.

That does not mean in any way that they were the killers.

But it does point out that the WC never even looked anywhere else.

And DVP can howl into the night about the weapon.  But David is correct and DVP knows this from years ago; he just likes to throw sand in the eyes by repeating discredited arguments.

The following is a fact: There is simply no proof that Oswald ever picked up that .38 Smith and Wesson modified Victory model at REA.  And as McBride points out in his book after a long seven page analysis, the ballistics evidence is an absolute mess. 

Edited by James DiEugenio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

There is simply no proof that Oswald ever picked up that .38 Smith and Wesson modified Victory model at REA.  

Doesn't matter one bit. Oswald had that exact gun in his hands just 35 minutes after Tippit was shot with that gun. And the constant protests from the conspiracy crowd couldn't possibly matter less when compared to the fact I just mentioned.

Meaning: It's impossible (in the real world) for Lee Harvey Oswald to be innocent of shooting Officer J.D. Tippit.

 

Quote

And as McBride points out in his book after a long seven page analysis, the ballistics evidence is an absolute mess. 

Total BS. The two non-Poe bullet shells recovered at the scene of Tippit's murder have a clear and distinct chain of possession --- From Davis to Doughty for one of them. And from Davis to Dhority for the other one. And that's a fact too.

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

This is your problem Davey.

And it makes your denial syndrome even more ingrained.  You come over here and you start preaching to all of us like we are all stupid, or ignorant or liars.  You just now said that there is a clear line in the two shells not attributed to Poe.  And you therefore call me a BSer.

Because you think you are above us all, you did not even read my article.  Because I show with a reference to a footnote that the Davis sisters could not verify the shells when the FBI contacted them and showed them the exhibits.

But beyond that, the shells were not even entered on the inventory until six days later. Plus they were not sent to the FBI for how long? 

 You either knew about this and chose to ignore it, or you did not know about it. If the former, you are not being honest. If the latter then are not a researcher.  But then, if the latter, then you will say, well I am not really a researcher.   Then  why do you pontificate to the rest of us like you are?

You have never been able to confront or even acknowledge this personal conundrum in your personality.

 

Edited by James DiEugenio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:
 

This is your problem Davey.

[...]  Then  why do you pontificate to the rest of us like you are? [...]

 

.john tells him so?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, David Josephs said:

 

So Dave, why do they contradict themselves, Markham, Bowley and the others?  Why do you neglect Mrs. Higgins and Holan from directly across the street who tell a completely different version along with a number of witnesses you conveniently ignore...?

If these 2 are the BEST you can do... with the WCR putting their full faith in Markham despite the contradictory evidence... despite Oswald already being at the theater....  Read carefully Dave...  your BEST WITNESSES are par for the course....

 

Mr. BALL. What did he do? 
Mrs. MARKHAM. Well, he stared at me. 
Mr. BALL. What did you do? 
Mrs. MARKHAM. I didn't do anything. I couldn't. 
Mr. BALL. Didn't you say something? 
Mrs. MARKHAM. No, I couldn't. 
Mr. BALL. Or yell or scream? 
Mrs. MARKHAM. I could not. I could not say nothing. 

Mr. BALL. That was before you put your hands over your eyes? 
Mrs. MARKHAM. Yes, sir; and he kept fooling with his gun, and I slapped my hands up to my face like this. 
Mr. BALL. And then you ran to the policeman? 
Mrs. MARKHAM. After he ran off. 

Mrs. MARKHAM. I was out there, I didn't see anybody. I was there alone by myself. 
Mr. DULLES. I see. You didn't see anybody else in the immediate neighborhood? 
Mrs. MARKHAM. No; not until everything was over--I never seen anybody until I was at Mr. Tippit's side. I tried to save his life, which was I didn't know at that time I couldn't do something for him. 

Mrs. MARKHAM. No, I couldn't understand. I was screaming and hollering and I was trying to help him all I could, and I would have. I was with him until they put him in the ambulance. 

 

Seems there is a conflict...  With Mrs. M scared to death and covering her eyes, she was not standing across the street hollering and drawing attention to herself... she was trying to be invisible....    Mrs. MARKHAM. I could not. I could not say nothing. 

 

Mr. BELIN. Did you see him go through any bushes by your house or not? Or didn't you see him? 
Mrs. DAVIS. No, sir. 
Mr. BELIN. You mean you didn't see him? 

Mrs. DAVIS. We saw him when he cut across our yard. 

Mrs. DAVIS. When Mrs. Markham was standing across the street hollering, she told us to call the police, so Jeanette and I went in there, and Jeanette called the police and we went back and he was cutting across our yard, and we gave him time to go on because we were afraid he might shoot us. 
Mr. BELIN. Did you call the police before or after you saw him cut across your yard? 
Mrs. DAVIS. Before.

 

David...  Below is the 12/1/63 signed statement of Virginia Davis... who says the exact opposite of what her testimony says...  why is it that most every witness claims one thing shortly after the 22nd yet completely changes the story when they testify before the commission (without any cross examination)...  ???

This says:  SHOT - SHOT - run to door - man crossing yard - HELEN SCREAMS from the corner - back inside together - call police...  now wouldn't that make it AFTER he cuts across the yard?

Mr. BELIN. Did you call the police before or after you saw him cut across your yard? 
Mrs. DAVIS.
Before.

Mrs. DAVIS. By the time we got back from off the phone, he had already gone. He had already disappeared behind the corner of our house. 
Mr. BELIN. Did you see him going in front of your house before you called on the phone? 
Mrs. DAVIS. Yes.

Seems there is a conflict - again... and it also seems that one of the two witnesses didn't see "the man" do much of what everyone else supposedly did....

Mr. BELIN. You didn't actually see what he did with them when he got them in his hand, did you? 
Mrs. DAVIS. No, sir. 
Mr. BELIN. You are nodding your head no? 
Mrs. DAVIS. No. 
Mr. BELIN. Then what did you see the man do? 
Mrs. DAVIS. Well, he just cut across. He disappeared from behind the corner of the house. 

 

David - just go to her testimony... pages 460-461.  She doesn't seem to be very sure about much of anything... compared to her sworn before the Secret Service affidavit...   or do you feel that affidavits aren't worth the paper they're written on?  Seems the BAKER, WEITZMAN and BOONE affidavits are easily forgotten.... 

Now, what about sister Barbara?

 

Mr. BALL. You were lying on the bed. What did you do? 
Mrs. DAVIS. I got up, put my shoes on to see what it was. 
Mr. BALL. Did you ever go outdoors? 
Mrs. DAVIS. At first, I didn't. 
Mr. BALL. When you went to the door, did you open the door? 
Mrs. DAVIS. I opened the door and held the screen opened. 
Mr. BALL. What did you see? 
Mrs. DAVIS. Mrs. Markham standing across the street over there, and she was standing over there and the man was coming across the yard. 
Mr. BALL. A man was coming across what yard? 
Mrs. DAVIS. My yard. 
Mr. BALL. And what did you see the man doing? 
Mrs. DAVIS. Well, first off she went to screaming before I had paid too much attention to him, and pointing at him, and he was, what I thought, was emptying the gun. 

   Mr. BALL. Or yell or scream? 
   Mrs. MARKHAM. I could not. I could not say nothing. 

Mr. BALL. Show an arrow about where you were standing. 
Mrs. DAVIS. About there. 
Mr. BALL. That is 21, photo 21 and Commission Exhibit 534. 
After the man left, what did you do, after he went out of sight what did you do? 
Mrs. DAVIS. I went back in and phoned the police. 

 

Mr. BALL. Show an arrow about where you were standing. 
Mrs. DAVIS. About there. 
Mr. BALL. That is 21, photo 21 and Commission Exhibit 534. 

img_1134_260_200.jpg

Mr. BALL. Did you see the policeman? 
Mrs. DAVIS. Yes. 
Mr. BALL. Where was he? 
Mrs. DAVIS. He was laying on the left-hand side of the car on the ground, by the left-hand fender.

Ever wonder how she could see a man lying in the street on the opposite side of the car from where she was standing

23985710_DaviscouldntseeTippitonground.thumb.jpg.11d09508e3813396f3dd0268622422bd.jpg

 

BARBARA AFFIDAVIT:  Today November 22, 1963 shortly after 1:00 pm, my sister-in-law, Virginia Davis, and I were lying on the bed with the kids. I heard a shot and jumped up and heard another shot. I put on my shoes and went to the door and I saw this man walking across my front yard unloading a gun. A woman was standing across the street screaming that "he shot him, he killed him" and pointed towards a police car.

 

img_1136_448_200.jpg

 

Mr. BELIN. Did you see anything else as you heard her screaming? 
Mrs. DAVIS. Well, we saw Oswald. 

Mr. BALL. Or yell or scream? 
Mrs. MARKHAM. I could not. I could not say nothing. 

Mr. BALL. And then you ran to the policeman? 
Mrs. MARKHAM. After he ran off. 

 

Mr. BALL. Was he dressed the same in the lineup as he was when you saw him running across the lawn? 
Mrs. DAVIS. All except he didn't have a black coat on when I saw him in the lineup. 
Mr. BALL. Did he have a coat on when you saw him? 
Mrs. DAVIS. Yes, sir. 
Mr. BALL. What color coat? 
Mrs. DAVIS. A dark coat. 

Mr. BALL. I have a jacket, I would like to show you, which is Commission Exhibit No. 162. Does this look anything like the jacket that the man had on that was going across your lawn? 
Mrs. DAVIS. No, sir. 
Mr. BALL. How is it different? 
Mrs. DAVIS. Well, it was dark and to me it looked like it was maybe a wool fabric, it looked sort of rough. Like more of a sporting jacket. 

1726263449_TheWhiteJacket-forweb.jpg.25b15938c8a9caeeab70c6d674f43d3c.jpg

Great stuff David.  The pictures for me especially.  They let us see what you and they say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

...the Davis sisters could not verify the shells when the FBI contacted them and showed them the exhibits.

Barbara Davis and Virginia Davis, of course, could not "VERIFY" with 100% certainty that the shells they were shown were the EXACT same shells they each recovered --- and that's because neither of those witnesses MARKED those shells. So how could either Davis girl possibly know for sure they were the exact same shells? They couldn't. But the markings of the police officers (C.N. Dhority and George M. Doughty) are the markings that provide the rock-solid chain of custody for those two non-Poe bullet shells.

In June 1964, both Dhority and Doughty positively identified their initials on the shells in question (see CE2011, Page 7 and Page 8; also see Dale Myers' book, "With Malice", Pages 266-269). And those shells positively came out of Revolver V510210 (i.e., Oswald's gun) [see 3 H 466].

And this same type of thing occurred with the witnesses surrounding Stretcher Bullet CE399 too. Darrell Tomlinson and O.P. Wright didn't put their initials on that bullet, so (obviously) all they could reasonably say is that the bullet shown to them later "looked like" the bullet they saw on 11/22 --- which each of them DID say on 6/12/64.

I can't really see what the purpose is of the FBI even bothering to show a civilian witness a piece of evidence that the FBI has to know was never marked/initialled by the witness they're showing it to. The FBI has got to know that the witness isn't going to be able to positively I.D. such an item. But the FBI keeps showing witnesses evidence anyway. I guess it's just so they can get the "It Looks Generally Like It" response from the witness. Which, of course, is better for the prosecutors than getting a "No, This Is Definitely Not The Same One" response from a witness.

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

RIchard:

According to McBride, Leavelle said he did not even check Tippit's clipboard.  Hard to believe but that is what he said.

As per suspects, McBride had three that I think are pretty interesting.  They are Igor Vaganov, Dwayne Garner and Harry Olsen.  

If I recall correctly, Don Thomas also thought Olsen was suspicious.  He was familiar with Ruby, and when he and his dancer wife Kay Coleman split up, according to Thomas, she said they knew Oswald also.  If you read Specter's interview with Olsen, someone briefed Arlen on all the liabilities Olsen posed for the WC. 

Garner was  a suspect in the shooting of Warren Reynolds and we all know how that relates to the whole Betty McDonald case that Sylvia Meagher found so suspicious. 

Vaganov is, well what can you say about this guy?  Lee Farley started an interesting thread about him here a few years ago.  Fonzi wrote a milestone article about him in Philadlephia Magazine.  That article was so fascinating that the MSM decided it had to be knocked down.  But the John Berendt article in Esquire that was supposed to do that, IMO, actually made Vaganov even more suspicious.

As per Tippit, another triumph of the McBride book is that he really does try and delve into his character and background.  To put it mildly, the image of Tippit as a Leave it to Beaver husband and father, is not accurate. If I recall correctly, he worked part time for awhile at both Austin's Barbecue and the Texas Theater.  He also was having an affair with a waitress from the former. At least one witness said, I think it was Paul's former wife, that she and he knew Tippit.  And I think Ruby's sister said that she saw him in Ruby's club.

Mc Bride's book is really a good depository on this info.  I would have had a much harder time writing that article  without it.

 

Yes, Tippit worked security on Friday and Saturday night's in particular at both Austin's BBQ and the Texas Theater as both were hangouts for local teenagers at the time if my memory of the book is correct.  He was also not well liked by kids I think it said.  Didn't the waitress at Austin's get pregnant but the paternity was questionable?  I.E., no he wasn't a great father or husband.

On another thread someone brought up the old idea that maybe Tippit was badge man.  In spite of his dad's statement to Mr. Mc Bride about his accuracy as a hunter and one tour in the Army as a private,  I can't believe anyone would trust him to or have him shoot the president, go wait for Oswald at the service station across the bridge, then leave him hanging to go chasing around Oak Cliff hunting the patsy on his own.  That's a fairytale.     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Mark Knight said:

When DVP's rebuttal begins by quoting DVP himself, it's obvious that the argument is more about what DVP thinks and less about any evidence.

That's my cue to tune him out.

I don't read  most of his posts.  But they do obfuscate ( I like that part of the definition of this word that says "muddy the waters") and quickly bury relevant discussion.

Little more guitar,

https://www.bing.com/search?q=muddy+waters+rolling+stones+mannish+boy&form=PRUSEN&mkt=en-us&httpsmsn=1&refig=dba112df303d43a8b77c4a80423d6b99&sp=-1&pq=muddy+waters+rolling+stones+mannish+boy&sc=0-39&qs=n&sk=&cvid=dba112df303d43a8b77c4a80423d6b99

Edited by Ron Bulman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I also should thank David for that post about the Davis sisters.  How you could screw up those jackets is a real head scratcher.

And again, one of the best summaries of just how dubious the ballistics evidence is in the TIppit case is by McBride, on pages 252-59.  Really thorough and detailed. No objective person would be able to take it seriously after reading that.  And as I quoted in my article, even Hale Boggs asked "What proof do you have though that these are the bullets?" (p. 258)

Let me add, Joe is one of the leaders in the movement of writers to self publish their books through a fulfillment house.  John Newman does this also. And I have to say I did not see any fall off in quality of the product.  And Into the Nightmare is an oversized book.  Beautiful color cover I should add. 

Let me say this also, the Tippit material in that book is pretty much inclusive.  Joe used everything out there as far as I can tell.  He used previous books as secondary sources, unpublished manuscripts like Gary Murr's, interviews with local Dallas researchers, previous articles, and interviews with the police, and Tippit's father.   He did a long interview with Tippit's girlfriend and came to the conclusion that the affair had ended months before and had nothing to do with what happened at 10th and Patton.  Joe worked on this book off and on for about 20 years I think.  

 

Edited by James DiEugenio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing to do with Officer Tippit, but the date is relevant.  On 22 November 1981, in the middle of their mammoth American tour, the Rolling Stones arrived at Chicago. Long influenced by Muddy Waters and the Chicago blues, members of the band paid a visit to Buddy guy’s club, the Checkerboard Lounge, to see the legendary Bluesman perform. It didn’t take long before Mick Jagger, Keith Richards, Ronnie Wood and Ian Stewart were joining in on stage and later Buddy Guy, Junior Wells and Lefty Dizz also joined in the fun. It was a unique occasion that was fortunately recorded and captured on camera.  It's hard to overestimate how the blues legend meant to the Rolling Stones. During their very early days, the band members landed a gig and had to give an official name (they didn't have one yet). Thinking quickly, they looked at The Best of Muddy Waters album sitting on the floor of their flat, and they zeroed in on the first track "Rollin' Stone" which then led to the group's name, the Rolling Stones.  Waters himself said: "They stole my music but they gave me my name."  In an excerpt from the opening pages of Keith Richards' biography, Life, he talks about the band's trip to the United States:

I think some of us had died and gone to heaven, because a year before we were plugging London clubs, and we're doing all right, but actually in the next year, we're somewhere we thought we would never be. We were in Mississippi. We'd been playing this music, and it had all been very respectful, but then we were actually there sniffing it. You want to be a blues player, the next minute you xxxxing well are and you're stuck right amongst them, and there's Muddy Waters standing next to you. It happens so fast you really can't register all of the impressions that are coming at you... It's one thing to play a Muddy Waters song ... it's another thing to play with him. 

The Stones precipitated a huge resurrection of many blues musicians in the mid-Sixties.  Prior to this revival, Muddy Waters was allegedly reduced to painting Chess Records' recording studio in the year the Stones recorded there. The group also demanded that Howlin' Wolf join them on the television program Shindig in 1965, subsequently exposing him to millions of Americans.  Later, BB King, Stevie Wonder, the Meters and Ike and Tina Turner, all profited from supporting the Stones on tour.  In 1984, during an interview with The New York Times, Jagger suggested that he wanted to perform, as many blues musicians did, until he died.  More than thirty years later, the Stones continue to tour.

Gene

Image result for muddy waters influence on the stones   Related image

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Joe worked on this book off and on for about 20 years I think.  

 For those who might be new to the forum, such information reminds me that my jaw drops an inch or two, every time I start imagining how Joseph McBride was able to do so much in so little time.

He has been a college professor, he's written widely and knowledgeably about film, and authored the definitive biography of John Ford. How in God's name he was also able to learn about the JFK story in full AND write an engaging,  important book, on one aspect of a very complicated story, is - as  the Mets first managerCasey Stengel used to say, amazin!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just dug up this thread on Callaway started by Gil Jesus.

 

Read it and weep.  Duncan McRae and DVP tried to sidetrack him but Gil rolled right through them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RH: He has been a college professor, he's written widely and knowledgeably about film, and authored the definitive biography of John Ford. How in God's name he was also able to learn about the JFK story in full AND write an engaging,  important book, on one aspect of a very complicated story, is - as  the Mets first managerCasey Stengel used to say, amazin!


 

Joe has had a really wide career as a  writer.  He has written about sports, and also about films.  In fact he has written several books about famous directors like Welles, Ford and Hawks.  In fact, he has written three books on Welles.  In addition to that he has written at least one screen play.  And he was the writer behind more than one televised AFI tribute.

This is why I appreciate his efforts in the JFK field.  Because it shows that people who have developed a reputation in other disciplines can come to the JFK case and do honest work.  And you are right Robert, in light of the above, plus his current career as an academic, Joe never lost sight of what he wanted to do in the JFK case.  I am really glad he decided to concentrate on the TIppit murder.  Since we really did not have a book length study of that case on our side.  

I am sure you are aware that Dale Myers did not like Joe's book.  Wonder why?

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

×