Duke Lane

Points taken ... except that he never capitalized on that fame. I have a newsclip of another "interview" of Worrell that will come into play later. Remember, this is but the first installment .... Romack's testimony is not unequivocal on that point at all. That's coming up, too, possibly as soon as the second installment of Part I; the third, at the latest.This portion is solely about the Love-to-Dealey aspect of Worrell's day ... assuming, that is, that it even happened as he said. At this point, I'm hardly convinced that it did, but have to admit that it's possible ... and nothing more. I'm just putting out the evidence - or, in cases, lack thereof - from as many points of view as possible. Mainly: is the evidence getting fair treatment? Let's not worry about the conclusions as yet, especially since I haven't made any firm ones myself. I think you'll find things in this you either might not have known, or may not have considered from one perspective or another. Hopefully, it'll turn out to be as complete as I think it will! (Two full pages or more on a 30-minute bus trip alone should tell you something!! Before I'd even gotten to the Romack part in the first rewrite, I'd printed out nearly ten, and there's still more to go!!)

The following is submitted for the consideration and critique of forum members. It is the first installment of a several-part examination of the actions and statements of James Richard Worrell, Jr., as related to Dallas Police, area news sources, and the Warren Commission, among others. This installment examines Worrell's stated actions prior to his arrival in Dealey Plaza on Friday, November 22, 1963. Later submissions will look at the assassination and its immediate aftermath as described by young Worrell, focusing on material from publicly available sources. A final installment will detail additional information developed independently by this writer in recent weeks (including after this installment is posted). Your comments are greatly appreciated. [Edits below in red] ________________________________________ JAMES WORRELL: Fact or Fiction? Part I ©2006 M. Duke Lane On the morning of November 22, 1963, President John F. Kennedy awoke in a hotel in downtown Fort Worth. About 30 miles away, a 20-year-old high school senior prepared to leave home to see the 35th President of the United States during his trip to Dallas. The following day, Saturday, November 23, the young man contacted police and made the following statement: Yesterday afternoon at approximately 12:30 pm I was standing on the sidewalk against a building on the corner of Elm and Houston Streets watching the motorcade of the President. I heard a loud noise like a fire cracker or gun shots. I looked arond to see where the noise came from. I looked up and saw the barrel of a rifle sticking out of a window over my head about 5 or 6 stories up. While I was looking at the gun it was fired again. I looked back at Mr. Kennedy and he was slumping over. I got scared and ran from the location. While I was running I heard the gun fire two more times. I ran from Elm Street to Pacific Avenue on Houston. When I was about 100 yards from the building, I stopped to get my breath and looked back at the building. I saw a w/m, 5'8" to 5'10", dark hair, average weight for height, dark shirt or jacket open down front, no hat, didn't have anything in his hands, come out of the building and run in the opposite direction from me. I then caught a bus to my home. (CE363) The sworn statement of James Worrell is important because it establishes the possible existance of someone in the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD) who fled the scene of the President's murder just moments after the shots were fired. While Worrell initially identified the man as having been Lee Harvey Oswald, the accused assassin, based on photos and news coverage, in the end he allowed that, despite any resemblance he may have thought, he was unable to identify the fleeing man and had only seen him from the rear. Worrell's statement eventually led to his being called to Washington DC in March 1964 to testify before the Warren Commission. Before embarking on the trip (together with assassination witnesses Amos Euins, Arnold Rowland and Dallas Times Herald photographer Bob Jackson), Worrell gave an interview to Times Herald staff writer Darwin Payne in which he'd added a new twist to his story that he was to expand upon four days later: "It was so coincidental," Worrell told Payne. "I had gone to Love Field to see the President but it was too crowded. I cam[e] downtown and just happened to pick that place" in front of the TSBD to stand and watch the parade. If nothing else did or could have, that addition to his story alone raises questions to his credibility. It caught Arlen Specter's attention to the extent that he asked Worrell, "Are you sure you were at Love Field when the President arrived there?" Worrell replied "oh, yes," and Specter conceded the point before continuing his questioning. A thorough examination of Worrell's statements - under oath and otherwise - is therefore warranted, and shall here be compared and contrasted with others' recollections of the events to which Worrell testified. THE ITINERARY James Richard Worrell, Jr., testified on Tuesday, March 10, 1964 before the Warren Commission in its offices located at 200 Maryland Avenue NE at Washington DC. Asked to state his whereabouts and actions leading up to his witnessing the assassination of John F Kennedy in downtown Dallas, he described how he had woken up that morning and waited for his mother and sister to leave their home at 13510 Winterhaven Drive in the Dallas suburb of Farmers Branch before embarking on the trip that eventually culminated in his visit to the nation's capital. Worrell stated that he'd hitchhiked (about nine miles) to Love Field, and arrived there sometime around 9:00 a.m. He "messed around" until the President arrived and, not being able to see him very well - "I just saw him get off the plane and I figure that I wasn't going to see him good, so I was going to get a better place to see him" (emphasis added) - Worrell decided to catch a bus downtown where he hoped for a better vantage point. He left Love Field before the motorcade's departure and travelled "so far on the bus ... as far as, I don't know where the bus stops, anyway I got close to [Dealey Plaza] and walked the rest of the way." He estimated that he arrived downtown at "about 10, 10:30, 10:45, something around there. There weren't many people standing around there then," he explained. The presidential motorcade, he said, arrived "an hour; an hour and a half" later. Leaving aside the bad math that "an hour; and hour and a half" before the JFK arrived in Dealey Plaza at 12:30 was not "about 10, 10:30, 10:45, something around there," Air Force One did not land at Love Field until 11:37, so it is clearly not possible for Worrell to have seen the plane land and been at Dealey Plaza so far in advance of the motorcade's arrival there. In fact, he could not have been in Dealey Plaza any more than just a few minutes before, but the fact remain that he could have been in both places. In the early 1960s, bus service was provided by the Dallas Transit Company, which later became the Dallas Area Rapid Transit system (DART). Over the years and through the successive purchases and reorganizations of the company, all copies of the bus schedules for 1963 have been lost or destroyed, and nobody contacted by this author has kept copies among their personal memorabilia, so it is not possible to determine the exact schedule of busses from Love Field to downtown that day through "official" means. A bus still follows the same route today - with an added jog to a new terminal building - as the bus that Worrell would have had to take to make his rendezvous with Fate. In 2006, bus route #39 takes 42 minutes to travel this distance over the same streets as it did in 1963. Long-time employees and retirees of DART and its predecessor companies have, however, consistently remarked that busses ran more frequently and carried more passengers than they do today ... and the vehicles themselves were larger then than they are now. (A case in point is the route from Oak Cliff to downtown, taken by Helen Markham to and from work: according to Commission Document 630h, the bus stopped at Jefferson Boulevard and Patton Street every ten minutes on weekdays; today, it comes by only once every 45 minutes.) The general concensus regarding the Love Field-to-downtown bus is that it probably ran every ten minutes on weekdays, and certainly no less frequently than once every 15 minutes. It also probably took less time - about 30 minutes - to arrive downtown since traffic was not as heavy as it is today. Thus for Worrell to have alit from the bus at its stop closest to Dealey Plaza, at about the same location as the current West End Terminal at 800 Pacific Avenue just five blocks - 0.2 miles or about five minutes walking distance from Dealey Plaza - in time to witness the assassination, he could have departed Love Field as late as 11:50 that morning and arrived in the plaza five minutes before the motorcade. If he'd had to orient himself, ask directions, etc. - a distinct possibility, it would seem, since he said that he didn't know where the bus stopped and he'd gotten off (2H191-192) - it could have taken him longer. But Worrell stated that he'd caught the bus before the motorcade had left the airport at 11:50, so he could have caught a bus as early as 11:40 (three minutes after Kennedy was on the ground and Worrell realized he wouldn't be able to see him well), conceivably getting him to Dealey Plaza by about 12:15. Even arriving then, it would have been well past the point when "there weren't many people standing around there then," as he'd testified. JFK was due at the Trade Mart roughly four miles away at 12:30, and would thus have passed through Dealey Plaza several minutes earlier if the motorcade was on time. Consequently, if Worrell arrived at 12:15 or afterward, almost as many people as would be there already were. If he'd arrived any later, he stood a good chance of missing the motorcade altogether, but not having transportation of his own, he had no control over that and was at the mercy of the bus and traffic. Not that it has an effect on Worrell's ability to be in both locations to witness all that he'd said he did, one additional possibility that obviates the busses' schedule departure times is ... a curious bus driver. If a bus was scheduled to leave Love Field at, say, 11:35 - just before JFK landed, theoretically forcing Worrell to wait until at least 11:45 to board a downtown bus - but the driver decided to linger past his scheduled departure time to catch a glimpse of the President (he could alway blame his lateness on security delays or additional traffic, roadblocks or detours, plausible excuses all), Worrell could have caught a bus that normally would already have left the airport, getting him downtown a little earlier than our previous estimates, especially if the driver drove a little faster than usual to make up lost time. Finally, since Worrell's bus - whichever one he was on and whatever time it was actually scheduled to depart - left Love Field ahead of the motorcade, there is no reason to suspect that its travel was in any way impeded by traffic or police patrols. According to a voluminous 34-page, detailed November 30 Dallas Police "chronological report of events" prepared for Chief Curry (HSCA record #180-1017-10137, file number 003019), the pilot car left Love Field just three minutes ahead of the motorcade; patrol officers assigned to security along the route did not halt traffic until that car arrived, the bus most likely proceeded along its regular route without incident. There is no doubt that Worrell could not have been at Love Field and seen JFK if he had been downtown either "around 10, 10:30, 10:45" or "an hour; hour and a half" before the motorcade arrived in Dealey Plaza. Nevertheless, given the approximate travel time by bus to reach downtown from Love Field, and absent any documentation showing the departure times and frequency of the busses leaving the airport, it remains possible that James Worrell was, in fact, both at Love Field and in Dealey Plaza, although he may have had to hurry to get to his destination in time. It must be noted that all of the estimates herein are dependent upon Worrell being in a position to board a bus in a reasonably short period of time. Since we do not know - even if we think we can infer - where he was "at Love Field," we don't know if he was in the midst of the 2000+ throng of onlookers, if he was at the fringe of the crowd, or if he was nowhere near it at all (having been "messing around" and all ... doing what and where?). More information will be forthcoming in later installments as it is available. [To be continued ....] Future additions: Chapter 2 - Downtown at the Depository Chapter 3 - Aftermath Chapter 4 - The Periphery

Coincidences? Like the fact that T.F. Bowley worked at one of Jack Ruby's nightclubs in the late '50s?

The latter part I can agree with. As to the former ... I thought you'd said "judicious?!"

More review of this clip ... and a further notation: if we want to use "just like he said he did" to posit that James Worrell was the man "running for his life ... right around the corner of the Depository," we also have to remember that he said that he'd begun running before the shots were finished, while this is clearly after they've finished and after (or at least as) a large number of people had already reacted/begun reacting to them.Moreover, a look at where Worrell "said he [was]" (CE360), he was in a position about midway between the corner of the building and the east side of the main entrance to the building. The man you're talking about ran 'way too many strides for much too long to cover that short of a distance. One cannot arbitrarily select which parts of someone's recollections are correct and which are not. If there's good reason to think that he was somewhere other than where he said he was, what is it? What's the supporting evidence? Unfortunately, what Worrell was wearing that day is not on record anywhere, so that's not going to be much help either. I'll find out if anyone can tell me that, as well as (if only for the sake of knowing) how tall he was. In any case, I still don't think "running man" is Worrell. I'm happy to be corrected, however!

Sorry, John, I'm with Lee Foreman and the Dukester on this one. I think you should wait to hear what Duke Lane has promised, his proof that Lee Oswald did not shoot Tippit, before you make up your mind. I bet you will find that there are a few things left out of Mr. Myers's book, just as there were a few things left out of the computer "reenactment" Myers did for ABC Television.Once you get to know how Myers operates, you will realize that the stuff he leaves out is sometimes the most important stuff of all. Whoa! Don't put words in my mouth! I'd prefer to call it a "creditable alternative scenario" as opposed to "proof!" Besides, it's well off into the future before it's ready for prime time. Keep your eyes out for info on James Worrell first...!

Unfortunately, I think Dale's book follows the same general reasoning - uncritical, except of those who might disagree with his "facts" - as Posner's Case Closed. What Dale wrote about the fibers is correct on its face, however consider that the two items were shipped together in the same package and not separated within it. If they'd shipped a can of oil with them, would that prove that LHO had stopped to change someone's oil on the way by the Texaco? The transferrance of fibers should be no surprise, and hardly be probative. With all the respect due to one of my favorite contributors, I really gotta tell ya that The "Case Closed" reference and the analogy are off the mark , Dukester. Myers' as uncritical? Au contraire. But I suppose it depends on one's prejudices. On the other hand, Posner's favorite techniques, - among a number of cheap little ruses - are selectivity and omission. Myers' work is as close to flawless as I have seen. But, that's just my opinion and we can agree to disagree in the same fashion I disagree with Myers' contention that LHO killed JFK.I always enjoy the writing but the reasoning and conclusion seem strained here. The FBI knows how to conduct these tests. Yes, we can cast our many aspersions at that not-so-august body but, in the absence of that testing we're left with, what, a flippant oil can shipping remark? Got to admit it's funny, though; that and the kamikaze kab killer. Speaking of packages, I'm a bit dismayed that nearly everyone seems to feel compelled to go with Oswald as 'package' murderer or Oswald as double patsy. No, he didn't kill JFK but he DID kill tippit, dammit, as any good patsy would. JG I agree, it was a fatuous comment, but it was a question, after all ... and I think the point is nevertheless valid: if you put two unrelated items together in the same package in such a way that there can be some transference between them, they can appear to be related. I'll have to find the souce for that information, which I'm sure is in something I've (re-?)read in the past few weeks or so: I just need to remember what it was.The comparison to Poser's - er, um, I mean "Posner's!" - stuff is probably a little unfair, but nevertheless as certain and smug in its conclusion that "LHO did Tippit" as Posner's was. One (minor?) example is Davis' statement that she "doesn't know why" she would have given anyone the impression that Tippit lived a couple of doors away from her home on the corner (the patrol car was stopped "in front of the hedgerow between the house next door [to her] and the one he lived in"), she didn't think that, so that's just the way it was, case closed. It's as if "okay, your denial fits my scenario, so I accept it and so should everyone else." Of course, your statement that LHO "DID kill Tippit, dammit, as any good patsy would" is as fatuous as my comment about the oil can, don't you think? I don't happen to think LHO killed JDT any more than he did JFK, and don't actually believe he was anywhere near 10th & Patton unless you count "anywhere in Oak Cliff" as "nearby," and I've got pretty good reasons for that tho' the explanation will just have to wait. ... And it of course follows that I don't think JDT was out to "get" Oswald either. I'm equally dismayed that anyone thinks that LHO killed JDT even if he didn't kill JFK: why? "Just because" is not an acceptable answer, and if it wasn't self-defense, what the hell was it? Sheer folly? I think not. Remember also - as far as the transference goes - that the FBI did not ship the shirt and jacket to the FBI, so it doesn't really matter what the FBI knows about conducting investigations or handling evidence. PS - I, too, like the "kamikaze kabbie killer" line!

I was interested in the officer that James Romack was talking about. Romack also indicated that two men whom he thought to have been "FBI" secured the loading dock entry to the TSBD within five minutes of the shooting. Their arrival is what prompted his decision to cease his "sentry duty."Clearly - to quote from our favorite work of fiction - both of these men were "mistaken" if they thought they saw men whom we all know weren't there!

I think we agree that Whaley's testimony was honest, and must agree to disagree on most of the remainder. Guys, From Dale Myers' "With Malice": 'Oswald was last seen cutting through a parking lot behind a Texaco Service station two blocks from the shooting scene. A gray zipper jacket was found there by police. Fiber evidence later linked the jacket to the shirt Oswald was wearing at the time of his arrest (emphasis added).' The phrase "best evidence" comes to mind. Unfortunately, I think Dale's book follows the same general reasoning - uncritical, except of those who might disagree with his "facts" - as Posner's Case Closed. What Dale wrote about the fibers is correct on its face, however consider that the two items were shipped together in the same package and not separated within it. If they'd shipped a can of oil with them, would that prove that LHO had stopped to change someone's oil on the way by the Texaco? The transferrance of fibers should be no surprise, and hardly be probative.

Let's say that this was intentional - what purpose could it possibly have served? Could Whaley have recalled additional details, beyond those he already provided? Ah yes: The Strange Case of the Kamikaze Cabbie Killer! "In late-breaking news, 83-year-old John Henry Wells was used as a weapon today in yet another bizarre twist to the JFK assassination saga. The man, seen by assassination witness Danny Arce attempting to gain entry into the Texas School Book Depository on the morning of the assassination ('he said he had to take a leak,' said Arce. 'But I knew from his baggy trousers that he was wearing Depenz, and quickly deduced that his real purpose was much more nefarious!'), has joined the elite ranks of sabots and flechettes as projectiles incapable of being detected and traced back to those who set them on their path of murder and destruction. Police suspect that Wells may have been a willing weapon, intent upon revenge, however circuitous, for his humiliation in wetting his pants on the hallowed ground where Kennedy was to be killed...." How 'bout let's not say it was intentional?!

See CE360. Worrell placed an X above the spot where he claimed to be. It is above the rear window of the car turning left approaching the TSBD doorway. Worrell was to the right of the TSBD doorway, so if he was "hauling ass in the direction of the front door," he was running away from the corner of the building that he ran around.It ain't Worrell in the clip, or he was wrong about where he was standing (which I think may have been in Farmers Branch!).

Welcome Eugene Barnett. Thanks, Ron.This has actually turned into more of a project than I'd anticipated. With luck, I'll have more to post in the next couple of weeks, but for now ... well, let's just say that the working title is "James Worrell: Imaginary Witness?" Worrell -> <- facts?

Quote source is Oswald Talked by Ray and Mary LaFontaine, according to the link. See also Perry's site; I don't claim personal knowledge of this whole story, except my gut says "red herring!"The thumbnail lacks a thumbprint, by the way, leading one to question whether the man in question was able to provide one if he wasn't there ... and if he was there, why didn't anyone get one from him? How does the form itself compare to any of the other arrest reports filed that that day or any other of that era? Same form? Or the one they started using in 1967?

Seems much more logical. Too bad they didn't say where - or which way - LHO went after getting this pistol, or where or when he came out of the building. It's also confusing: who's the "white woman married to a Mexican," Mrs. Lucy Lopez or her daughter? And whose daughter knew both LHO and JR, Lucy Lopez's daughter, or Lucy Lopez's daughter's daughter?If this is all so, why would LHO have supposedly stopped by his rooming house if he already had "his" gun? Just for a change of clothes? Doesn't seem like the time to be fastidious to me! Hey Duke. Yes - the details seem ridiculous, making the story seem far fetched - however, perhaps that is the intent. 'A white woman married to a Mexican' - and the relevance of that fact bearing on her statement is? It probably has everything to do with being 1963 in the South. You think maybe white women marrying Mexicans was considered "natural" in those days, unworthy of remark? Fib's had many of the same prejudices, no matter how open-minded their Director might have been. Key words: "if we can trust the notes." Clearly, we couldn't trust the man who took them since he swore under oath that he didn't take any. ... or if the gun worked and McDonald got shot (killed or not): what might've happened then? More on that another time!

The article was published in Sunday's (3/12/06) Dallas Morning News supplement. Interesting, isn't it? Of course, she was just a pup back then, and the world is much different through a child's eyes.... There is of course the theory that Oswald was to have been transported from Dallas to Cuba, by way of Mexico. It may have been a simple matter of picking up some ID not normally carried on a daily basis - like the Selective Service card for Hidell. That's speculation, of course, but would make more sense possibly. It also occurs to me that Oswald was maintaining his cover throughout the questioning - so he wasn't in a position to be honest and open about his activities or whom he may have been working with.More on the gun - I hadn't realized Oswald ordered it COD to a Post Office box. Now that's a neat trick. - lee Sometime earlier in 1963, there was an incident of a cache of guns being stolen from the armory at Terrell, some 30-40 miles east of Dallas. The perps somehow managed to catch the attention of the police and were chased at high speeds into the downtown streets of Dallas, where they promptly wrapped their new Chevy around a light pole or something.I don't have much in the line of specifics on this incident, but the theoretical extension of this - and I stress that it is just a theory - that Lee Oswald was taking part in an operation that was to prove that people could order surplus military weaponry through the mails without repercussion (such as losing a new Chevy!). The theory fits well enough with the known facts ... and could even potentially explain how someone else got a hold of "Lee's" guns to use in the commission of the crimes ... if it were more than a theory!

The article was published in Sunday's (3/12/06) Dallas Morning News supplement. Interesting, isn't it? Of course, she was just a pup back then, and the world is much different through a child's eyes....

Seems much more logical. Too bad they didn't say where - or which way - LHO went after getting this pistol, or where or when he came out of the building. It's also confusing: who's the "white woman married to a Mexican," Mrs. Lucy Lopez or her daughter? And whose daughter knew both LHO and JR, Lucy Lopez's daughter, or Lucy Lopez's daughter's daughter?If this is all so, why would LHO have supposedly stopped by his rooming house if he already had "his" gun? Just for a change of clothes? Doesn't seem like the time to be fastidious to me!

Thanks to everyone for your help so far. It has turned into more work than I'd anticipated, but it's fun nevertheless. So far, I've put together six or seven pages, and there's still more to go. If anyone happens to have - or know where I can find online, saving me a trip to the library downtown! - a copy of the March 6, 1964 front page article in the Dallas Times Herald in which Worrell's upcoming trip to Washington to testify before the WC is discussed - the one that apparently led James Romack to contact the FBI - I'd appreciate a link or a fax (email me for the number). Likewise, if anyone knows offhand the name of the officer stationed at Elm & Houston who ran to the back of the TSBD (I've got to dig it out, but have it around here somewhere), your saving me time doing that is also greatly appreciated! After that's done, we'll find out what time Tippit was killed!

Has anyone checked for implants? This could rate right up there with the mysterious "listening devices" around Dealey Plaza, and the more recent attempt by the City of Dallas to expose Plaza-ites to a deadly nerve toxin, the nefarious purposes of which remain hidden. Was this sarcasm or just a sick attempt at humor?Chuck Neither. Or both. Take your pick.Or maybe it's just an IOU, in which case you don't have a need to know if you don't already.

Has anyone checked for implants? This could rate right up there with the mysterious "listening devices" around Dealey Plaza, and the more recent attempt by the City of Dallas to expose Plaza-ites to a deadly nerve toxin, the nefarious purposes of which remain hidden.

Scary, indeed: you read about them, they die.Ummm ... could you maybe put MY posts on "ignore" for a while?

Met with Sam yesterday (more on that later) and the question of James Worrell's being downtown came up. Sam doesn't recall seeing him, and wonders whether Worrell could even have gotten downtown from Love Field in time to witness the shooting and all that he'd claimed.The question, then, is what time AF1 landed and what time the motorcade left Love Field. Worrell said (2H191-192) that he was at LF when the President arrived, but left before JFK did, taking a bus downtown. He said he arrived downtown at Elm & Houston some time after 10:00 a.m., maybe 10:30 or 10:45, about "an hour; an hour and a half" before the motorcade arrived. I'm in the process of getting a 1963 schedule for the bus routes that went from Love Field to downtown to confirm whether or not he could have made such a trip, even discounting the times he estimated: the question is as to elapsed time from one location to the other. While Sam doesn't recollect Worrell specifically, Worrell did state that he "ran down Houston Street alongside the building and then crossed over the street, I ran alongside the building and crossed over, and in [CE]359, I was standing over here, and I saw this man come bustling out of this door." This "crossing over" may or may not be something that Sam saw - he did see someone crossing Houston Street, he says - but the bigger question is whether Worrell could have been there at all if he was where he'd said he was that day. According to today's Dallas bus schedule, someone arriving at the West End Transfer Station, just a few blocks from DP, would be on the bus about 35 minutes from point to point; to arrive by 11:33 (an hour before 12:30), one would have to leave Love Field at 10:58. Did Worrell have that kind of time?

Something to add to this:"Quick step" (normal-speed marching) in the America Armed Forces is 120 thirty inch paces per minute; "double time" is 180. 120 steps per minute is two steps per second, just a wee tad slower than my estimate above. To take 2112 paces at that rate of speed, no faster and no slower, would require 17.6 minutes, or 17 minutes and 36 seconds. At "double time," it would require 11 minutes and 45 seconds. If you were ever in the military, you marched ... and if you marched, you know it is slower than the average person walks "at ease." "Double time" is pretty brisk, and can be quite taxing after only a couple of minutes at that pace on anyone not used to it. It's three steps per second ... you can try this at home (!) to see what it's like. Putting the 9/10 mile from 1026 to 10&P back onto this equation, you get: 5280 feet x 12 inches = 63,360 inches 63,360 inches x .9 miles = 57,024 inches 57,024 inches ÷ 30" steps = 1900 paces 1900 paces ÷ 120 steps/min = 15.83 mins or 15 minutes, 49.8 seconds or roughly 16 minutes. 1900 paces ÷ 150 steps/min = 12.66 mins or 12 minutes, 40 seconds. Again, what is not at issue is whether LHO could have made that trip in time to kill Tippit, but both (1) exactly when "in time" had to have been, and (2) whether he did make the trip at all. I submit that none of these data - or much else related to his having gone from TSBD to Oak Cliff (other than being in the theater in time to be arrested) - can be demonstrated with more than barely reasonable certainty, and certainly not "beyond a reasonable doubt." Of course, what doubts are "reasonable" to one are not necessarily reasonable to another!

At least two people (Divies & anr) claim to have phoned in reports of the officer's shooting. Unless I missed it, the Warren Commission did not seek these time-stamped records, though I imagine they would have been easy to obtain. Who?!? "Divies & anr????"Something I forgot to mention: Down at 10th & Denver lived the Wrights. They were sitting in the living room when they heard shots. Mister went outside, Missus called the cops. The cops sent an ambulance, identified on the DPD tapes as '602' from Dudley Hughes Funeral Home at Crawford and Jefferson, about 2 blocks from the scene. The ambulance was sent to 501 W Patton, which was the Wrights' home. The time stamp on the DPD tapes was 1:19, and the time stamp on the Hughes dispatch sheet read 1:18. Duke, can you provide a link to the schedule of Helen Markham's bus? What time was Helen's "1.15" actually scheduled for? It is found on CD630-H which I don't have immediately at hand, nor do I have a link for it. As I recall, however, the bus ran every ten minutes, including at 1:12 and 1:22. Markham estimated being at the corner of 10th & Patton "[wouldn't be afraid to bet it wasn't] six or seven minutes after one." She had about 475 feet to travel, or 5700 inches or about 190 paces. To make it there by 1:11 - thus being there a minute before the bus was scheduled to depart - she had to take just under 50 paces per minute, or a little ... less ... than ... one ... step ... per ... second, even slower if it was six minutes past the hour rather than seven.Okay, so she was "an utter screwball," but does anyone think she really walked that slow? Or that she didn't know what time - by her clock, anyway - she had to catch her bus? Even if she thought it was the 1:22 bus that came at "1:15," she still was 8-9 minutes ahead of the bus by her reckoning - based on her daily routine - with only a couple of minutes left to walk, so we're looking at around 1:13-1:14 for the shooting even based on the latest estimate possible. (Unfortunately, to my knowledge, her routine after getting downtown was not explored: what time did she get to work, how long before she was actually "on the floor" taking orders, what time did she get off off the bus at what bus stop downtown to walk how far to work? She was still alive a few years ago - she was only in her mid-30s in 1963 - and, I heard then, actually still living on 9th, tho' I don't know for certain.) Au contraire, mon ami! Donnie B was travelling west on 10th toward Patton (did I mix up Patton for 10th in my previous post? Oops!) and thus would have been "traffic" to Mrs Markham crossing 10th, especially if he hadn't given any indication (signal) that he was actually going to turn onto Patton, thus - and only thus - not impeding Markham's crossing the street. He was "traffic."

Duke I recall exactly what you are talking about. My guess is that it is in Jerry Rose's The Third Decade or Fourth Decade publication. I will try and locate all of the issues. Interestingly, there is a very small article on Same Pate on page 7 of the Jan 1999 issue of the Fourth Decade. If I find the information you want, I'll post the reference immediately. NickDuke I have located an article entitled "North of Elm on Houston" by Dennis Ford. It is in the July 1995 issue of The Fourth Decade. It is about 6 pages long and relates the stories of Richard Carr, James Worrell, Sam Pate and James Romack. Let me know if you want a copy and if mail or fax is OK Regards Nick Thanks, Nick ... sent you an email on this. It also seems I've read something about it online somewhere recently, I just can't recall where it is. Any help from anyone anywhere is greatly appreciated!