Dean Hagerman

Absence of the specific evidence you seek to substantiate a claim of alteration is not evidence of absence of alteration.

Well the alterationists, like you, sure have an absense of specfic evidence......

You have evidence and proof in your house

For some reason you refuse to admit that

Myers did the same thing to me when I posted a video presentation on Youtube that was critical of his work. He sent me several threatening emails, saying he was going to sue me and complained to Youtube to make them remove the video.

Thats weak!

Todd or DVP should get in touch with Myers and have him join the Ed forum

That way I can make fun of him for all his silly copyright complaints

I have no problem believing that J.D. stood for Jefferson Davis

I mean Tippit was born in Clarksville, Texas which was part of the Confederacy (Before JD was born obviously), so I dont think its a stretch that he was named after the hero of the Southern States

And I take strong esception to Dale Myers' insuniation that J.D. Tippit is "The man I love to hate," because hate is a very strong word and I have the highest regard and respect for all law enforcement officers, even those in the FBI, as my father was a policeman and detective in Camden, N.J., which has ranked as the most dangerous city in the USA. So why would I or anyone hate a policeman, especially one who was murdered in the line of duty. - Bill Kelly

http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2007/12/man-with-no-name.html

The Man With No Name

by DALE K. MYERS

I guess comedian Ron White was right. You can't fix stupid. It seems that some of the conspiracy folks who populate John Simkin's U.K. based Educational Forum just can't let a good yarn die no matter what the facts are.

Take one of the more recent discussions entitled "Jefferson Davis Tippit" in which a long dead factoid was resurrected by William "Bill" Kelly, who wrote:

"...nobody names anybody with a name or a nickname that doesn't stand for anything.

"If Jay Dee was his real and only name, then he had an uncle or a godfather or his father had a buddy in the service with that name or there was an instance that created a reason for him to be named J. D. and those initials stand for something. If not Jefferson Davis then John Doe, but not nothing.

"I understand that it is the Tippit family who says that Tippit was named JD and that it is not an abriviation for Jeff Davis, and the meaning might not be Jeff Davis, but it is, I can assure you, means something. And the family's reluctance to acknowledge or reveal what it means makes me even more suspicious of what it really does mean."

Uh? NEWSFLASH, Bill: The Tippit family told me eleven years ago that J.D.'s initials didn't stand for anything - certainly not, "Jefferson Davis," as conspiracy nutjobs on numerous conspiracy forums and websites keep insisting; essentially refusing to accept the truth. I printed the truth about J.D.'s name in my book With Malice: Lee Harvey Oswald and the Murder of Officer J.D. Tippit in 1998 - nearly ten years ago. The fact that you haven't had time to read my book sometime during the passed decade is understandable. You must be busy chasing down the big conspiracy.

If the information in my book wasn't enough, I learned from the Tippit family after the publication of my book, the complete story behind Tippit's naming and published that story at www.jdtippit.com, the official website dedicated to J.D. Tippit's memory. Here's what you'll find there regarding Tippit's name:

"Edgar and 'May Bug' named their first born son after a character in a book that Edgar had read about once. 'He use to read a little you know, when he was hunting,' J.D.'s brother Don recalled. 'He'd read a story about a guy named "J.D. of the Mountains," and gave him that name. Guess it fascinated him.' The initials, despite some claims over the years, never stood for anything."

So, what is so hard to understand?

I guess Bill and his fellow buffs are upset because they can't twist J.D. Tippit into some kind of a right-wing, neo-Nazi, Gestapo, boot-stomping, rebel named after confederate rebel Jefferson Davis. How inconvenient. It would be so much better for the conspiratii if Tippit was a no-good, backstabbing, s.o.b. who liked to gun down goofy little innocents like Oswald, right?

Too bad. I guess these inconvenient little facts just spoil everyone's good time. Maybe Bill and friends should stop fantasizing and actually read about the man they love to hate. (Gee, what a novel idea.) They might actually learn something.

I guess it's too much to expect the "Jefferson Davis" moniker to disappear from the vast wasteland of useless JFK assassination factoids. I can only hope that those interested in the truth about the assassination will come to realize that J.D. Tippit is the original Man With No Name.

Forty-five years of controversy and sorrow

http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2008/11/with-malice-tippit-murder-45-years.html

If Officer J.D. Tippit had died on any other day, Oswald’s conviction would have been swift and sure. The only reason we’re still talking about this senseless crime four and a half decades later is because of the other killing Oswald was involved in that day – the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

Keeping the controversy and myths alive has become a parlor game for many, a reason to get together, attend conferences, post messages on the Internet, and ponder the many ways the various puzzle pieces might fit together.

For the Tippit family, it is a raw, open wound that will never completely heal.

Allegations that J.D. Tippit was part of a conspiracy to murder the president or kill Oswald are false and malicious and in no way recall the man his friends and family knew and remember. I wish I could say that they are spared the pain that such thoughtless and irresponsible notions cause. They are not.

In the wake of the publication of With Malice, I worked closely with the Tippit family to create a website that we hoped would help debunk some of the misinformation available elsewhere on the Internet and provide a true portrait of the boy from Clarksville, Texas, whose fun-loving spirit was extinguished so abruptly in 1963.

While the reaction to the website has been overwhelmingly warm and positive, there are the inevitable reminders that myths die hard.

One such myth that sprung up around the Tippit name was the falsehood that Officer Tippit’s initials “J.D.” stood for “Jefferson Davis” and that the Texas native had been named after the former West Point graduate who became the President and inspirational leader of the Confederate States during the American Civil War. Of course, those who hang this false moniker on J.D. Tippit don’t mean it as a compliment.

I was never able to pin down exactly how this began, but I did determine the truth of the matter and published it in With Malice. The family told me that Edgar Lee Tippit named his son after “J.D. of the Mountains,” a character in a book he had read once while on a hunting trip. The initials never stood for anything. In fact, it was rather common in the south and west, and has been for nearly 250 years, to name offspring using only initials.

One time, J.D. had trouble completing a credit application because the company insisted that a name, not initials, be used on the form. They ended up inserting “John” on J.D.’s behalf in order to fulfill their policy. At least one document in J.D.’s police file also uses this name. Neither document is evidence of his true name, which by all accounts was simply, J.D.

Despite the publication ten years ago of the truth about the origins of J.D.’s name, this silly myth continues to find an audience. Believe it or not, I spotted a website recently that treated the family’s explanation as just another unsubstantiated allegation.

It seems the myths and controversy will never end

Yea, Dale, only because people like you keep it confusing, and the Dallas PD failed to properly investigate the murder of their fellow officer and indict and convict the person or persons actually responsible for his murder. - BK

Thanks Bill.

While you are all talking about the Tippit shooting and Myers.....

do one of you know where in can get my hands on the out of print "With Malice" from Myers

for a reasonable price?

I'am not willing to pay 300 and more for a used book:

http://www.amazon.com/Malice-Harvey-Oswald-Murder-Officer/dp/0966270975

Thank you forward.

Martin

Martin

Unless you get super lucky and find one at a garage sale you are going to have to pay $100s for "With Malice"

Just like most of the other rare out of print books on the assassination

I do not own "With Malice" but I do own most all of the expensive OOP books on the assassination

I have no problem believing that J.D. stood for Jefferson Davis

I mean Tippit was born in Clarksville, Texas which was part of the Confederacy (Before JD was born obviously), so I dont think its a stretch that he was named after the hero of the Southern States

Larry Dunkel, the Fable Guy

Would you agree that all reasonable people know that Oswald couldn't have killed Tippit, Jim?

Yep I sure do.

1. When you cannot prove that LHO ordered or picked up the weapon

2. Or that he bought the ammo

3. And when the DPD only sent one bullet to the FBi that did not match

4. And when they then took six days to substitute shells that did match

5. When even after that, the shells do not match the bullets

6. And when clearly, witnesses have been manipulated

7. When automatics were initially reported--and it is impossible for a cop to mistake automatic for revolver shells

8. When Hill's "fast frisk" at the theater revealed no bullets, but then three hours later, miraculously, the cops find five bullets on LHO

9. When the best evidence indicates that LHO would have had to traverse 9/10 of a mile in five minutes--which is a physical impossibility

10. When the FBI deliberately tried to confuse Poe before he testified before the WC

11. When the FBI and WC deliberately avoided witnesses who indicated more than one assassin.

12. When someone plants LHO's mockup of a wallet at the scene

13. When LHO's prints are not on the car

14. When David Belin brings a jacket to a witness which he knows is the wrong one to fake a positive ID since he knows the right jacket would not be Oswald's. (Meagher, p. 275) Why? Because most of the witnesses do not recall that killer wearing that jacket Belin was stuck with. (ibid, 274-276)

15. And when the DPD faked three transcripts to get TIppit to the scene

16. When the DPD deliberately delayed the release of the autopsy so they can get their ballistics story straight

17. And when a witness at first does not ID Oswald leaving the scene, but then gets shot and switches his story

18, And when the best witness Benavides won't ID Oswald at the time

19. And when Markham's ID testimony is ridiculous

20. And when Scoggins ID is exposed by the man at the phony line up with him

Well, yep, when all this happens and more, then I tend to not believe the official story.

Let me close with the words of a professional in the field. A man who brings a breath of fresh air to the subject since he tried felony cases for a living in NYC. He did it every day for years. Bob Tanenbaum told me that there are two things that you have to have established in a felony case, or murder case.

1. The chain of possession of your major exhibits has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. If not, the defense will drive holes of doubt into your case and the jury will begin to question parts of it.

2. Your best witnesses have to be solid and they have to tell a similar story. There can be no indications of coaching after the fact.

And the last thing he said was this: You have to have a solid reason for the police getting to the suspect.

This case is an inverse template of those criteria. The defense would be able to drive not a semi, but a fleet of trucks through the chain of possession issue. The witnesses at the scene who are supposed to ID LHO as the killer actually do not. And the rest of them are highly suspect because of the phony line ups the DPD employed.(Meagher, pgs 256-60)

FInally, as Tanenbaum pointed out, he has never been able to find a good reason for a.) Why Tippit was there and b.) Why he pulled over what was supposed to be Oswald.

In the real world, according to a real DA, this case is a loser for the prosecution. Only in a world where you have estate lawyers like David Belin conducting criminal prosecutions, and where there is no cross examination, and where the defense is not allowed to investigate and mount their own case, can you even begin to take the Tippit case against Oswald seriously. In other words when the accused has no rights and is arraigned before a kangaroo court, only then can crap like this get by.

And even then, only with the likes of DVP and McAdams.

I agree with Lee, very strong stuff Jim

Great job, I cant wait to see how DVP dances around your post like a wild indian

Was Jackie's head in the way of Oswald as he walked down Beckley?

David, I really don't enjoy fencing with you about these things.

Then why are you doing it?

Same reason I go to the dentist for a root canal. I feel better when it's done.

People say im crazy but I love getting a root canal

The pain that I feel when my dentist is pulling the roots out for some reason gives me a rush, its almost euphoric

I dont really know how to explain it

Well, to tell you the truth, Dean, I really haven't seen you post very much substantive material since my arrival here on 8/2/10. It seems like most of your replies are very short, and many of them consist of no words at all, merely this:

So, I guess I've missed most of your posts that deal with any of the facts or details of the case. Sorry.

Thats just to show that im always laughing, im a jokester and I find humor in just about everything

Start looking beyond my laughing David, you might be shocked to find out how many CT theories that I dismiss

Well, tell me straight out Dean,

Are you a member of the popular Internet "ANYBODY BUT OSWALD" club?

No I am not David

I believe Oswald was involved in the plot at a low level and was set up

I also believe that Oswald may have killed JD Tippit (im about 60/40 on that)

I take it that you must read right over all of my posts, that sucks because I read all of yours

He is always very cordial and forthcoming with ANY evidence and information he has come across

I dont post PM or Emails because no matter what they say they are private and I have a strict personal code

But you are very wrong David

If you are really interested in how Gary Mack treats people (me) who have different opinions then he does then send me a PM and I will show you

I am lost.

AFAIK, Gary Mack still believes the acoustical evidence.

How can someone "fink" out someone by alerting another about information posted on a public forum?

Because instead of being a man and posting all on his own, Gary likes to hide behind his job title and send PMs, and now we can see that Gary sneaks around finking, snitching, and telling on John Simkin for posting Dale Myers work

Gary Mack is a fink who likes to cause trouble

If you are going to snitch on the website owner then you should at least be man enough to post on that website

Gary Mack makes me sick

[Well, I see John did remove the criticism of Dale Myers work from the forum. I think it should be reposted and discussed further, especially if he doesn't want it.

No, I did not. I only removed his original words. It just highlights the fact that he is not willing to have his opinions questioned by the experts on this forum. It is interesting that Gary Mack, the gatekeeper of truth concerning the JFK assassination, was the one who complained to the email group of my posting Dale Myers' account. Of course, he is another one who is scared to engage in debate on this forum (even though he is a member).

Gary Mack finked on you John?

Ban him! Kick him off the forum so he cant send his 100s of worthless PMs to every member

He wont even post here because he is too chicken xxxx!

I cant believe he ran and told Dale Myers on you like an 8 year old little girl

which has gone largely ignored

It has not been ignored by me! lol

I have seen your study Duncan and to me your study seems to be spot on

I must respectfully disagree, my friend.

I feel the same way Cliff

No need to keep going because unlike Craig I respect your opinions and theories even if I disagree with some of them

Sitzman's statement was to Tink Thompson, Rosemary spoke to HSCA investigators.

Whats that have to do with anything?

Louis Witt spoke to the HSCA and lied his ass off

Are you saying that Sitzman lied to Tink but would have told the truth to the HSCA?

her testimony trumps Duncan's speculation, I'd reckon.

So her testimony trumps what Sitzman said?

It trumps what we see in Nix?

It trumps what we see in Muchmore?

It trumps what we see in Darnell?

Duncan's analysis ignores the evidence.

Cliff

Show me another witness besides Rosemary Willis who saw a single "conspicuous" person in the BDM position

The HSCA analysis of Willis 5, Dean.

http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol12/html/HSCA_Vol12_0006a.htm

A "distinctly straight-line feature" that was "near the region of the hands" rules out

a baby, seems to me.

I didnt ask for an analysis Cliff, I asked for another witness

Both of us know that no other witness saw what Rosemary said she saw

Duncan's analysis ignores the evidence.

Cliff

Show me another witness besides Rosemary Willis who saw a single "conspicuous" person in the BDM position

I demand that the moderators put Francois Carlier on moderation (or better still, ban him from the forum). I refuse to accept veiled threats.

Stop being silly you were not threatened he wrote

Laverick, you're beginning to get on my nerves.

It's easy to insult people through a computer. Weak people do that !

I'd like to see you talk in front of me !

Len

So if you were in a bar and said something rude about another person in the bar under your breath and they said to you "I'd like to see you say that to my face"

You would not consider that a threat?

But that's not what he said. He said, "I'd like to see you talk in front of me!" which can be interpreted as a complaint that Bernie was taking advantage of their distance from one another, and was being ruder than he would be otherwise. Or not.

Why not ask the man? Francois, did you mean to imply that you'd hit Bernie if he talked like that in front of you? If so, guess what, you threatened him.

Come on Pat

You know what Frank was saying

Why do you call him “Frank” the Anglicization of his name is Francis, Frank is “Franc” in French. At retty much nailed it. He was (rightly or wrongly} complaining that Bernie was being ruder on the internet than he would be on person

Well Len I started out calling him Francis, then I took Francis and shortened it to Frank

I have two close friends named Francis

Take a wild guess at what name both of them have gone by since pre-school

I agree with Duncans opinion 100%

I'm just curious...why would Rosemary Willis make up a story about a "conspicuous" person who happened

to "disappear the next instant"?

http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol12/html/HSCA_Vol12_0006a.htm

I almost always defer to the people who were there, but that's just me...

The woman and the baby hit the ground, right after that CardaginMan (The husband/dad) turned and ran up the stairs (as seen in Muchmore and Nix) to go back and protect his wife and child right after the head shot.

Sitzman saw the black couple on the bench eating and drinking soda, the bench that was right behind the retaining wall, in the same area that we see BDM in Willis and Betzner

Just like Duncan said its not BDM its BDW (and child)

I agree with Duncans opinion 100%

I don't doubt that if people did say , in person, some of the things they write to each other there would be fists flying.

I agree, but however if we were all in person talking to each other im sure that most would not talk in the way they do on the forum, I think when in person the level of respect increases dramaticlly

Unless some of the members have no respect at all when in the company of others that they may not agree with

He might have paused for a second or two (or maybe not even that

David, you are getting close to Larry Dunkels amazing ability to speculate and the call it fact

You better slow down so you dont pass your master

I demand that the moderators put Francois Carlier on moderation (or better still, ban him from the forum). I refuse to accept veiled threats.

Stop being silly you were not threatened he wrote

Laverick, you're beginning to get on my nerves.

It's easy to insult people through a computer. Weak people do that !

I'd like to see you talk in front of me !

Len

So if you were in a bar and said something rude about another person in the bar under your breath and they said to you "I'd like to see you say that to my face"

You would not consider that a threat?

But that's not what he said. He said, "I'd like to see you talk in front of me!" which can be interpreted as a complaint that Bernie was taking advantage of their distance from one another, and was being ruder than he would be otherwise. Or not.

Why not ask the man? Francois, did you mean to imply that you'd hit Bernie if he talked like that in front of you? If so, guess what, you threatened him.

Come on Pat

You know what Frank was saying