Nic Martin

Fantastic, I hadn't thought of that. I'll definitely save up to be there. It's a must. Wow, in 2013, I'll be 26. That seems quite far away, really.

Nic-

  I apologize. I really wasn't trying to be condescending at all. I too am a part of "the next generation." I am only 26. I've been researching since I was 9 which would be 1988. I understand where you are coming from. I've spoken to Marina several times. I agree that Oswald deserved justice.And yes, his death certainly did matter. However, Ruby did stand trial. He did go to prison and he died there. And since you are asking about justice, then what happened with Officer Tippit? He was killed that day too. I don't forget that Oswald was a person. Believe me I don't. I am not saying that your research is stupid by any means. Santayana did say that, "Those who do not know the past are condemned to repeat it." I am saying that I believe Oswald's murder was a diversionary tactic. Think about it, how much time have you spent asking who let Ruby in. THAT part doesn't matter in MY opinion. Again, I'm not saying you're wrong. But, how much time have you spent asking "Why was Johnson ducking into the floorboard before he made the turn from Houston onto Elm?" "Why were Jean Hill and Mary Moorman's pictures confiscated?" "Who is the Badge Man?" Why were witnesses mysteriuosly disappearing?"

  Nic- If you are interested, since you are one of the "next generation" that Jean Hill so believed in educating then perhaps I can get you in touch with some who were there. After all, the truth about history lay with a school teacher (Jean Hill, deceased), a car salesman (James Tague) a cop (Jim Leavelle), a Russian immigrant (Marina Oswald-Porter) and various others. I do apologize for sounding condescending. Perhaps I worded my thoughts wrong. I think it's great that you are so young and digging as deeply as you are! It's hard being younger though because very few take you seriously. But, I do have some things that you might eb interested in. To be honest, I got on here to connect with some old friends that I haven't spoken to in about 5 years. I don't speak anymore. I haven't given an interview since 2000 which was also the last time I was in Dallas. I am amrried now. I have two little boys.  I really don't have time anymore. What I do have is 17 years worth of interview notes, about 5,000 books, Lord knows how many magazines and newspapers. I cherish my relationships with Leavelle, Tague, Porter, the late Jean Hill, the late Madeliene Brown, and Beverly Oliver Masagee. But that is all they are now. Cherished relationships. They are no longer witnesses to me. I call Leavelle "GrandPa Jim". Would you be interested in having any of these things that I mentioned? All I ask is that they aren't sold or misused. You still have the time and energy to do this thing. I don't. E-mail should you have any other questions or should you want these things. Keep up your interest Nic. So few our age do.

-Carrie

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Officer Tippit deserves justice as well, but Oswald is in the history books as, "assassin." He doesn't even get the benefit of "alleged assassin" or "accused assassin." He's marked as guilty without even the slightest benefit of a doubt, and he DESERVES that. Jack Ruby died in jail yes, but Oswald's name is still being dragged through the mud on flimsy evidence that the vast majority of the public doesn't even believe in anymore.

I don't spend all my time wondering who the Babushka Lady is, or who Badge Man was. I'd like to know, sure, but that's not where my time is spent. Most of my time is spent researching the Paines & Lee Harvey Oswald's time in Russia. However, I like knowing as much as I can about this case. I like asking questions, in the hopes that maybe one person can give me a little more knowledge about it than I had going into the topic. I like answering questions when I can.

I'd love to talk to Mr. Tague ( as the only contact I've had with him was buying things from him on eBay ), and Marina - but I have a habit of people hanging up on me phone-wise. Maybe I sound like a telemarketer.

I'm a Kennedy collector ( in the past 3 years, I've collected 70+ books, 129 magazines, 80+ VHS tapes, 10+ DVDs, and misc. other items including 2 Jackie Franklin Mint dolls & a 1960's black vinyl train case ), and wouldn't sell anything of mine for the world. The closest I'm coming to selling anything is seriously considering a donation to a museum. I want to be an archivist, at the JFK Library. That's my dream, that's what I'm studying for in college, that's the life I want ( whereas my current boyfriend wants to be a rock star ). I was raised with a respect for vintage things ( as silly as it sounds, my mother's obsessed with Cher, so I grew up around magazines from the 60's & 70's ). I add to it every time I get the money. During the 40th anniversary, I drove all the way around Houston looking for a gas station that sold the Dallas newspapers because they had so many issues covering it. My stepfather's parents gave me two uncirculated JFK half dollars. My aunt gave me a 45 she found in the attic of a house they were moving into, of the inaugural address. It's pretty safe to say I'd appreciate anything and it'd be going to a good home.

I'm unmarried ( can't really see myself ever being anyone's wife - I'm too wildly independent ), and I'm never having kids. This case, the Kennedy family, it's my life. The best story I can talk about is during the 40th anniversary, I was taping the 3-hour Frontline on Lee Harvey Oswald in my bedroom, and my mother & stepfather were watching "Porky's."

Nobody takes me seriously. I get people saying, "Nobody that's 18 cares about the Kennedys." I don't know why it fascinates me, I don't know why I'm drawn to it, but I am. However, people can refuse to take me seriously all they want, they can say I'm not dedicated, that I'm not worthy of being here. I guess it's easier to whine at me than know about me first. I haven't had support from my peers or most of my family on this, it really doesn't bother me that people on the internet don't support me either. I'm pretty thick-skinned, I guess.

x

Nic-

  The story about Putnam has been stated before. I have looked into it as thoroughly as I can through Cheryl and LeeAnne. All they know it what J.A. told them. I wish Smith had said something before his death but he didn't. Now, everyone that could say 100% whether Smith was telling the truth the truth or not is dead. In reality it doesn't matter. The fact is that Ruby DID get in the basement whether let in by J.A., walking past Vaughn or whether a buddy of his from Press Corps got him in. It's kind of like in the game Clue when a noise in heard in the library causing everyone to leave the living room only to discover that the maid was murdered in the living room while they went to investigate the noise. Kennedy was killed in Dealey Plaza. Not the basement of the DPD. Unless you believe Oswald had a hand in it then his murder meant nothing anyway. The only significance I can see is as a distraction in which the entire world was looking at the first murder on live  T.V. So, in that case it would be time to look back into Dealey. I've researched for 17 years and started out as one of the most rabid conspiracy theorists around. The more I looked and the more people I spent time with I realized that none of these people had the ability to orchestrate a cover up like that. Jim is a great guy. He's a "straight shooter." in Texas lingo and his story has remained the same since Day 1. Roy Vaughn is one of the most honest cops that is around. Have you seen JFK? Remember Beverly Oliver's character saying, "Mr. Garrison, they killed the President of tegh U-nited States. You think they're gonna think twice about a two bit showgirl like me?" Have you seen Executive Action? Look what happened to Bowers, Ferrie, and countless other witnesses. There is no doubt in my mind that IF a conspiracy took place, those that know the facts took them to their graves. All of the others were just unfortunate witnesses to the crime of teh century. Was Ruby told to knock off Oswald? Maybe. But I think it was just a diversion. I don't think either one of them had a clue.  Just an opinion. If you'd grown up with it like I have you'd share my opinion. Regardless, keep seeking your truth. It's the only one that matters in the final analysis. .

-Carrie

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Unlike you, I DO think Oswald's death matters. He, too, like President Kennedy - was a murder victim in late November, 1963. I'm not going to shove that aside because he wasn't President, or because he wasn't charismatic or conventionally handsome. He deserved to live his life, and his kids deserved to know their father - even if he wasn't the best parent around. He deserves justice, and I'll be damned if all the justice he gets was that a silly mob-wannabe like Jack Ruby kept him from a trial he deserved.

Research has helped, even if it's not by much. We know a little more here in 2005 than we did in 1963.

I've been reading into this case for more years than most of my peers have known it even happened. Since I was roughly twelve years old, I've done everything I could to find out about this case, including listening when people more knowledgeable than I am decide to talk to me about it.

I'm not giving this up. All these people on this board, they're not kids. In twenty, thirty years, sadly - some of these wonderful researchers will be dead. I'm the next generation. I'm living the healthiest life I can, in the hope that I'll be alive long enough to at least convince one more person to look into this - or at least long enough to contribute my research to where it amounts to something.

However, I dislike this arrogant "If you'd been me, you'd realize this was all stupid!" attitude you seem to have. If it's so ridiculous to still be talking about, why are you even here? So you grew up with people who were there that day. Unless you can contribute something more than condescending remarks, I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't bother responding to me.

If he was in Love Field, it's entirely possible that he was waiting for a shot. I watched the footage from Love Field two days ago, and when JFK entered the crowd - all the cameras were blocked by the surging crowd of people. Maybe he didn't want to risk missing when JFK was stepping off of the plane, when the Secret Service agents would have had time to tackle him and search for a shooter, which explains why he didn't fire then. If he'd gotten Kennedy while in the crowd, it'd have been a much larger panic & given more time for an escape. I'm not sure if I believe him, but I like looking at all sides of the story here.

However, with all the evidence that links so many people to this case for one reason or another, it gives me the chills. Of course, not all of them were involved, but it's still sad really that nobody's honest anymore.

Two days later, he was at the site where Ruby shot Oswald. "The security was pretty damn good," said Aynesworth. "I was stopped three times. It was a one-in-a-million deal that Ruby got in."

Am I the only one that thinks it wasn't an accident that the one person that got by security was Jack Ruby, after being 2 hours late for the transfer? No, I don't think the entire DPD was in on that, but I think Ruby had a source.

So someone claims Ruby got in entirely underground? Has anyone verified this by personal experience?

That's from the May 21, 1979 issue of "Newsweek." I don't have it, but that's what I found.

Thanks, you two. :] I get so much drama for speaking my mind elsewhere, it's nice to have a little support.

As has been stated, sexual activities ARE pleasurable. I'm 18, and I've known that since puberty. I don't believe in saving myself for marriage, just for love. I'm not eager to sleep with everyone that looks my way, I believe in a need for trust. That said, I KNOW how to protect myself. I know all about condoms, the pill, IUD, depo, and my future goal of sterilization. However, ACCIDENTS DO HAPPEN.

One girl I know, is 18, and since August of last year, has had sex with 3 different men - usually after only knowing them a week or so. Personally, the idea of doing that, freaks me out - but it's her body, and her life. She wants a LOT of kids, and is constantly trying to get pregnant. We used to be friends, until I told her having a kid at 17 would be really stupid & that it costs a LOT to raise a kid. She didn't like hearing that, so she stopped talking to me. She kept insisting, and does to this day, that her parents ( who live in the very poor side of town ) would buy a house for her & baby, would pay for everything baby needed, as well as college for her. I told her frankly that she was living in a dream world.

I have to drive 30 minutes away if I want birth control pills, because so many pharmacists are refusing to fill it because it MUST MEAN I'M HAVING SEX! Er, only that I'm not. I'm a virgin. Pretty much the only virgin I know. I want to be on the pill because I have endometriosis, and it helps - since no doctor will sterilize me.

I'm in love with my boyfriend, and I want to be with him, but we haven't gotten there yet. When we do, we know how to protect ourselves, and we're both willing to take responsibility.

This isn't just my body, this is my LIFE. If I got pregnant on accident, my choices would be either risking my life ( as due to medical complications, I cannot carry a baby to term ) at 18, and giving up all the dreams I have and don't want to let go of.. Or abortion. Several women don't regret their abortions, as I've pointed everyone to already - http://www.imnotsorry.net

I don't believe in drinking, or smoking. Both of them could lead to death, or - if you're drinking & driving, possibly several deaths. However, I realize there's a lot of people that drink, and a lot of people that smoke. My boyfriend smokes. I'm not trying to, ban smoking because I disagree with it. I believe people are smart enough to make their own decisions.

I understand, Mr. Gratz, that you're extremely conservative. My grandfather's like that, but he also is a lot like Archie Bunker - which is precisely the reason he hasn't met my Hispanic boyfriend. However, not everyone thinks like you do. If you don't believe in abortion, as I've said before - don't have one. Don't support your wife/girlfriend/mistress/daughter/daughter-in-law/niece getting an abortion. However, who are YOU to take away MY rights? This is my body, my uterus. Quite frankly, if you want the baby to live so badly, YOU carry it around for nine months & raise it for eighteen years. If "god" wants it to live, HE can carry it for nine months and raise it.

On another message board I'm on, this one girl is 21 and is pregnant with her first child - by a man with 3 other kids. Every day brings another post with pictures of her disgusting pregnant belly, or ultrasounds, or information on how sick she gets in the morning. However, I made a post about graduating with a 4.0, and I was ignored. It really seems like the world cares more about breeding than anything that requires a brain, not just working sex organs.

Therefore, it's no surprise that people still exist that think it's their place to tell me how to live my life and what choices to make with my body. If you wanted to go out right now and get a tattoo - go on with your bad self, make your skin look like a graffiti wall. Hell, get piercings - make yourself look like a walking pincushion. None of my business. To me, it's not a child, it's a mistake - and it's MINE to get rid of.

I know a 16 year old that's pregnant right now. She wants an abortion, but her mother is making her have the child to teach her a lesson ( making her, basically, by not giving permission for an abortion as you need in Texas ). Yeah, that's really smart - the girl can't take care of herself, so let's give her a BABY to take care of! Makes perfect sense!

All these people try to convince me to spread my legs and breed, and I really think it's because misery loves company. They say, "It's different when they're your own." Then I see people who say that in the news for raping their kids, or not feeding them, or beating the crap out of them. Yeah, must be different when they're your own. Or, "Who's going to take care of you when you're old?" My stepfather's kids don't TALK to him, so that pretty much ruins that idea. "But your kid could cure cancer!" Don't you think Charlie Manson's mother thought the same thing? Pretty soon, you can fill a Bingo card with all the excuses I hear from mainstream America about why I should HAVE TO BREED. Nevermind that I don't want to, because EVERYONE WANTS THE BABIES!

Sigh. This country has baby-rabies so badly, it's sickening.

I've wondered before if there wasn't more to Michael Paine, since all you really hear about is Ruth. It's kind of clever, really - all these years, all the attention on Ruth.. But you never hear anything about Michael. To this day, I can't find a birthdate, a possible death date, anything about his life at all. It's almost creepy, it's kind of like Pablo Bruner - shows up for this brief point in time, just long enough to make a mark, then pretty much disappears again.

A post that starts by calling pro-life adherents "morons" hardly merits a reply.

It is not a question of religion.

John, you have made the point that atheists can have moral principles and I believe that you do.  I believe that the moral principles do come from God however.  Be that as it may, any moral person recognizes that greatest crime a person can commit is the taking of another human life.

Dr. Bernard Nathanson was an atheist when he came to the realization, through his medical training, that the abortions that he was performing were indeed the taking of human life and he could no longer countenance it.

Nic talks about pro-life demonstrators screaming at women entering abortion clinics.  I have never seen this happen, and indeed it would be counter-productive to their cause.  More often, I believe, pro-death advocates reap scorn and abuse on pro-life demonstrators.  Dr. Nathanson stated he decided to become a Cathloic (I am not a Catholic myself, by the way) when he saw the kindness the pro-life people demonstrated to those who cursed them.

My point is that the societal sanctions against murder do not violation the provision of the separation of church and state, any more than sanctions against robbery or other crimes that are also condemned in the Bible and in the Koran.  The increases in medical knowledge in the last century clearly demonstrate that life begins at conception.  The issue that must be addressed is at what point life should be protected by the state.  Clearly the fetus in the mother is a separate and distinct human being being sheltered and nurtured by the mother's body.

It is not true that pro-life advocates do not care for the plight of the woman with an unwanted pregnancy.  Indeed, most larger cities have organizations to assist such women that are organized and funded by pro-life proponents.

It is often true that women who undergo abortions suffer deep psychological effects as they later realize that they have indeed taken an innocent human life.  These possible consequences are never discussed by the doctors who profit from performing abortions.  But the pro-life movement also assists women in recovering from the scars of abortion by demonstrating that they can achieve forgiveness.

Certainly there can be difficult questions that arise, such as Nic's point about the rape victim.  But very few abortions result from rape and most are simply for convenience.  Would Nic support a prohibition on abortion except in cases of rape or where there was a serious issue of the health of the mother?

Since the science is now clear that a separate human life begins at conception, it seems difficult, I think, to countenance the taking of that life except under very unusual circumstances such as rape or the health of the mother.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You've never seen people screaming outside clinics? I have. I've also seen news reports about supposedly "pro-life" wackjobs blowing up clinics, killing everyone inside. Yeah, because the life of several masses of cells is worth SO MUCH MORE than the lives of people that have lives, family, & friends.

I know SEVERAL women that have had abortions that don't regret it, and that don't feel badly about it. I'm a member of a community board online that has a few hundred of those women. Hell, check out http://www.imnotsorry.net

And no, I wouldn't support a prohibition on abortion EVER. It's my body, it's my uterus - and until I can find a doctor that will sterilize me, abortion is an option I would take without a second thought. I have dreams, I have a life that I've worked really damn hard on - I'm not going to spend nine months pregnant and eighteen years paying for one mistake that, knowing how impatient I am, I'd probably wind up pulling an Andrea Yates on.

I KNOW this about myself, I know I'm impatient, I know I'd resent something that took my life away, I know that when in restaurants - I ask to be sat as far away from small children as they can put me. My favorite restaurant, in fact, is where nobody under age five is admitted.

I'm in a relationship, with a guy that I'm crazy about. He treats me wonderfully, and he makes me happy. He doesn't pressure me, he adores me for who I am, and he's loyal to me. No matter how many precautions I took if I were to have sex with him - accidents can happen. I'm not giving my life up for a mistake, and I'm not living a Puritan existance because that's not who I am.

Here's how I see my life going. I'm going to go to community college for two years, so I can save up enough money through a job to afford a starting life at a college away from home. I'm going to double-major in history & political science, and hopefully intern at a Presidential library. After graduation, hopefully I'll be able to become an archivist for a branch of the NARA - my #1 choice would be the JFK Library in Boston.

Kids don't fit into that. EVER. I don't like kids, I don't think they're cute. The idea of a child touching me with it's clammy, germy hands - makes me want to vomit. I'm not a kid-friendly person. If I was forced to stay pregnant, I seriously would rather put a gun to my head than deal with that.

And then these pro-life nitwits say, OMG WELL ADOPTION IS ALWAYS AN OPTION! Yet, I find it ironic how these people, when they are discovered as infertile and someone suggests adoption, they get this horrified look on their face and say, "BUT IT'S NOT PART OF MEEEEEEEEEEEEE."

This INSANELY stupid mentality that every woman regrets an abortion BECAUSE OMG I KILLED A BAYBEE is shoving you into the era when women couldn't vote. Not all women melt into puddles of goo at the thought of a baby. I grimace when I hear one crying, and I think they're ugly.

You believe in god, right, Mr. Gratz? And so you believe god created us all, and loved us all? Then surely this same god, if we follow that belief, also gave us free will, correct? So, by that token - who are you and your braindead pro-life cronies to defy the choices that your god gave us to make?

I don't want to clog up the forum with yet another post, but I also got a DVD from a source of mine that's the breakfast in Fort Worth on the morning of 11/22, and they mention the motorcade route as "down Main" to the Stemmons Freeway. Just thought that was interesting.

They also spent about 5 minutes talking about Secret Service security measures and the assassination of McKinley. Ironic.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi Nic.

I have also bought a box of clippings before - it was very interesting stuff. I found quite a few gems.

The magazine [which I have posted photos from in the past] Confidential Detective has an entire section devoted to some of the past assassinations, and a large feature on the Secret Service - their history, rigorous training, professionalism, etc. Some of the past assassinations and attempts. Interesting - they got their start at the close of the Civil War to combat counterfeiting. They were the only investigative agency that the Federal government had at that time [FBI hadn't been formed]. Protecting the President was apparently always a primary function, which was ammended to later include the President elect [1913], and then further, the President's family [1917]. It wasn't until 1951 that it was extended to the VP, but only at his request.

Here's a bit I thought you might appreciate:

No, the men who have set out to assassinate the President of the US - whether successful or otherwise - have invariably been small men with ideas too big for them to handle.  Call what they had a compulsion, a vision, a self-created cause, or what you will.  Whatever it is, they've had it.  There have been stupid individuals; some have been surprisingly intelligent.  But they all have one thing in common:  They are invariably insane.  No man working a Secret Service detail involving a would-be or real assassin will tell you otherwise.

The bold type was used as indicated.

No mention of the SS having left the President in the care of firemen, or that they had been drinking in the Cellar until the wee hours, or that fact that none of the men were suspended or disciplined in any way following their failure on 11/22.

Here's something else I just learned - apparently in 1960, Richard Pavlick travelled to Palm Beach, Florida, with a car loaded with nitroglycerine. His plan was to ram [the President Elect] Kennedy's car when he emerged from Church. As Kennedy was accompanied by his wife and daughter, Pavlick aborted. He made a second attempt at the Supermarket, but was again thwarted by his own scruples - there were too many women and children in the area. He was somehow arrested on a Postal Inspector's tip. He admitted to the two attempts.

"He believed that John F. Kennedy had bought the election and it was his, Pavlick's, mission to destroy him as a corrupt individual and a disgrace to the Presidency."

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That is interesting, I'd heard about Richard Pavlick before but didn't know how they'd caught him. Thanks.

I don't want to clog up the forum with yet another post, but I also got a DVD from a source of mine that's the breakfast in Fort Worth on the morning of 11/22, and they mention the motorcade route as "down Main" to the Stemmons Freeway. Just thought that was interesting.

They also spent about 5 minutes talking about Secret Service security measures and the assassination of McKinley. Ironic.

Good stuff, Nic.

Interesting bit by Gertrude Morritt. I wonder who the prophetic writer was?

James

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I was wondering that, too - part of the reason I posted this, the other being that I too found that so interesting.

I recently purchased online a scrapbook made by a then-11-year-old-girl in Toronto, Canada of JFK's assassination, which arrived today via airmail. I was looking through and found some statements of Toronto citizens & visitors about the assassination. Thought they might be of some interest. I cant' scan it because this particular page is still glued into the book, and I'm afraid if I tried to remove it, I'd do more damage than it's worth. The paper is dated Saturday, November 23, 1963.

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

He proved his presidential calibre by the way he organized his election campaign. He was a good president and fair. He would have been swept back into office in 1964 and be as popular as Roosevelt was. I have confidence Lyndon Johnson will make a good successor.

- Chris Kampf, farmer, Connecticut.

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

Slaying the president is more than just killing a man, it is a crime against the free world. What will the consequences be? I'm alarmed to think. The killer would have to be a mental case to do what he did even as a hired assassin.

- Josephine Woodcock, retired.

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

I'm shocked and grieved. I never expected this to happen to President Kennedy. Yet I have a press clipping of the time of his election and the writer said Kennedy was a likely candidate for assassination. How prophetic!

- Gertrude Morritt, Blyth, Ont., housewife.

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

I'm shocked and sickened. Is there any human being so low in this civilized day and age to stoop to kill any one, political opponent or not? Such a fine president, and the true leader of the free world. A dastardly and inhuman act. His loss is as personal as it could be.

- Sheila Sone, housewife.

I can't say I was a huge fan ever since the ABC special where it was heavily implied all conspiracy theorists were nutjobs, but it's still going to be sad not seeing his face.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Nic,

I remember watching Jennings, self-described "Boy Anchor" on ABC in the sixties (I'd like to say my parents told me about it).

Brent Bozell was not a big fan, as you may have read.

Regards,

JAG

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The 60's is one decade that I wish I could have seen, such an important decade. Instead, I just get to ask my grandmother about it - because my mom was born in 1962, and only remembers a handful of popular songs from the late '60s. I remember my grandmother telling me the story about when JFK died, she was ironing infront of the TV, and the news broke in with the information on shots fired. Even as a Republican, she spent the next 4 days infront of the television, shocked that this could happen in America.

Maybe things like this is why the most common thing people say to me is that I have an "old soul." Or maybe that's just because I'm more likely to listen to the Rat Pack than what's on MTV.

I can't say I was a huge fan ever since the ABC special where it was heavily implied all conspiracy theorists were nutjobs, but it's still going to be sad not seeing his face.

I see these anti-choice protestors outside clinics, screaming, "Killer," and "Whore." I look at those people, shouting judgements, and they have no clue in hell what the girl's story is. I would like to see ANY of these pro-life morons put themselves in the shoes of a rape victim whose body isn't strong enough to handle giving birth, or even carrying to term. Walk a mile in that, then tell her that you have a right to choose what she does with her body, and then tell her that your holier-than-thou attitude is rightfully deserved because YOU'VE never had to make a choice like that.

If she wasn't at the clinic, she'd be at home in her bathroom trying to do a vintage abortion with a coat-hanger, and she'd probably die because of it. But this is what all these pro-life people think should happen? Women are going to have abortions whether it's legal or not, but when they're legal - they have a better chance at surviving.

In a perfect world, abortion wouldn't be needed. But in a perfect world, I could find a doctor to sterilize me at 18 instead of telling me, "This is a life changing decision, and you'll change your mind!" However, someone my age could go to the doctor and say, "I want to have a baby, give me IVF!" and the doctor would say, "Cash or charge?" This society is so intent on pleasing those that breed, and those who don't have kids are royally screwed.

If you don't believe in abortion, fine - don't have one! Nobody's forcing you to, but these pro-lifers keep insisting that because they believe something, because their god-of-choice says so, it should become LAW. Seperation of church & state, MAYBE you've heard of it - or have you ignored my governmental rights recently?

Probably nothing new, but as there's never really been a resource for pictures relating to this case as much as the JFK case, I might as well share a few scans of mine in case one of you hasn't seen one of these. They're out of order because they're from seperate sources, but I know all of you can put things right in your mind.

The rest will be posted in 2 replies, to follow.

Wasn't the gun found in a Lousiana swamp, or am I imagining articles?

I have some pretty good quality scans relating to this case, I'll work on posting them later.

I HATE when people bring up such insane remarks like that. I'm pro-choice ( and I never want kids ), and I'd appreciate people keeping their laws and their religion off of my body. It's even worse to compare it to something so extreme as Nazi Germany, it'd be like comparing your fish dying to 9/11.

Sometimes, people really just need to shove their foot in their mouth.

I never really looked too much into Jack Lawrence, although I'd run across his name plenty times. Thanks for posting this, highly informative.

Other than the pictures on the first page of this topic of two officers holding a wallet at the Tippit scene?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Who are those officers? Has anyone talked to them? How do we know it's not Tippit's wallet?

According to Armstrong's Harvey and Lee, Tippit's wallet was found in the pocket of his uniform at Methodist Hospital.

Also according to Armstrong, an unidentified person handed the wallet containing Oswald and Hidell ID to the first officer on the scene of the murder, reserve sergeant Kenneth Croy, who later gave the wallet to Sergeant Calvin Owens. Armstrong's cited source for this is an interview of Croy by Jones Harris in 2002. Both Croy and Owens gave WC testimony, but neither one said anything about a wallet. Of course they also were not asked about one.

Ron

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks Ron, that was information I was looking for - but I'm rearranging my room at the moment and I couldn't find the notebook I have for the Tippit area of this case.

So if you're walking quickly, you shot a cop? Well, I must have killed a cop yesterday, because I was attempting to get from one end of a store to the other before the payment department closed. Maybe he had to meet someone ( since he reportedly did sit next to several people in the theater ) and was running late. Maybe he saw the killing, and knew who did it.

Maybe Oswald chickened out. Maybe he talked about the CIA, the government, blah blah blah - but when it came down to actually doing anything, he turned into a complete wimp. It's a possibility. Maybe he fought the cops because he wasn't supposed to have an unlicensed, concealed weapon.

Strange behavior does not a killer make.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You're absolutely correct that in a rush to judgment, the DPD could have framed the mysterious commie-loving Oswald for the Tippit killing. Stranger things have happened. But, that's not the contention of this thread, as I understand it. It seems to me that this thread is exploring the possibility or probability that Tippit was killed specifically to frame Oswald, by having Oswald's wallet dropped at the scene of the crime. I don't buy it.

It makes no sense to me that the DPD would refuse to investigate the murder of one of their own, simply to frame a commie who was already going down. It also makes no sense to me that a DPD officer would just so happen to be killed a few blocks away from the movie theater where Oswald was hanging out, and that the men seeking to frame Oswald just happened to be in the neighborhood. So that leads us back to the possibility that someone outside the DPD killed Tippit and framed Oswald, knowing Oswald was nearby. But then we run into the wall that, if there really were two wallets, someone in the DPD knew about it. Read Larry Sneed's interviews with the DPD in No More Silence. These men barely cared about Kennedy compared to how much they wanted to catch Tippit's killer. I just don't believe that anyone in the DPD would deliberately look the other way and let Tippit's real killer escape.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This brings us back to why would it have been Tippit's wallet in the photographs? By your admission, they cared about Tippit's murder, and one of their own - so they'd have known he was a cop, why the need for a check of his wallet? If you're going to suggest they were investigating the idea of robbery as a motive, I don't know of any criminal stupid enough to attempt to rob a uniformed cop in a marked police car in the middle of broad daylight. Even if we took that giant leap, why would he continue shooting him several times AFTER he was already dead? If you'd just robbed a cop, and shot him - you would be running for the hills because killing a cop is really frowned upon, and you'd want to get out of there.

Actually, I agree that it's best to entertain the idea that Oswald killed Tippit, however, I like to have my questions answered before I make statements like they're fact - and I like to question other people's ideas and their statements, I think you learn more that way.