Jump to content
The Education Forum

Tommy Tomlinson

Members
  • Posts

    54
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Tommy Tomlinson's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

  • Week One Done
  • One Month Later
  • One Year In

Recent Badges

  1. That's awesome Ben, those images allowed me to find exactly where it is on Google Earth and I'm now building a "Project" on that platform to show the locations involved and their relative proximity to one another. Anyone know if there are any transcripts of those documents so I can get a clearer read? I had a look and in one part it seems to say that Walker was in "The most northerly room on the lower floor" whereas another states that he was toward the back of the house at the time of the shooting. I understand that extensions may have been built in the past 55-60 years, but the most northerly room just doesn't apply to anywhere toward the back of the house, which is all at the southern side of the building. It wouldn't be an issue, but if the most northerly room as it stands, was where he was sitting, it's literally about 10 feet from the alley. I could have hit Walker in the head with a brick from the position a sniper would have stood. The very furthest room to the rear of the house doesn't have a north facing window, (though I could well imagine that I might wall off a window if I'd been shot at through it...). That leaves the most obvious shot being through the window to the right of the French doors. Which, if you look on the interior photos generously donated by the online estate agent, is the only room that isn't a nightmare in cream and white, where there is a little study/den set up. I have three Border Collies. As pretty as that house looks, trying to keep it clean seems like my idea of a living hell.
  2. Ooh. Serendipity? I haven't been around for a while, and was about to conduct a search on The Forum for any threads pertaining to this very subject, before risking starting one that had already been covered. Top Hole! (as no one in England says any more.) It has always been confusing that Oswald was shown to be an OK shot with a semi automatic rifle on which he had received training, (and my experience with rifles is limited, but I always figured that semi-automatics would be easier to maintain aim than a bolt action...), but according to the Warren boys, using the manual bolt action rifle with which he'd had no formal training he was both stupendously hapless (Walker) yet made Carlos the Jackal look like a rank amateur with Kennedy. The thing that I've never been able to get my head round is the Walker situation, because I've never been able to find a decent break down of the circumstances. The basic time table and descriptions of cars coming and going round the church are available, but I'd love to see a layout of the area, showing line of sight/distances etc. Does anyone know where such a thing may be found? It does make some sense that if the conspirators wanted to establish an active militant Communist presence in Dallas such a move against someone with Walker's profile would help, and I don't imagine many of them would have been too upset if it had gone wrong and Walker HAD been hit. And Benjamin, you missed a trick not stealing from Sherlock Holmes and referring to "The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night" when the dog not barking led Holmes to realise that the horse thief was someone who worked at the stable... (Sorry... I digress)
  3. That's where I got the notion that there was a contamination issue. http://22november1963.org.uk/oswald-rifle-and-paraffin-tests Note 5. Near the bottom of the page. "The presence of almost identical, small quantities of barium and antimony both on the inside of the cast, which had touched Oswald’s cheek, and the outside, which had not, suggests that the cast had become contaminated. The results were complicated by the fact that they were conducted later than the spectrographic tests, which involved applying chemicals to the casts, then washing the casts. This has the effect of removing substantial amounts of barium and small amounts of antimony. The apparent contamination of the paraffin cast of Oswald’s right cheek allowed the Warren Report unjustifiably to discard the evidence of the neutron activation analysis; see Warren Report, p.562, which incorrectly states that both of Oswald’s hands tested negative." I understood that to mean that there WAS contamination on the cheek cast, and they unjustifiably used that to scrap ALL the NAA testing rather than they unjustifiably suggested there was contamination of the cheek cast in order to discard the NAA stuff... Blimey... I forget how easy it is to misinterpret this stuff.
  4. I thought that the paraffin hand casts tested positive at DPD? The way I understood it, that was one of the things that gave them so much confidence in proclaiming Oswald the killer? It was one of the most oft repeated inaccuracies in the News reports in the following days and weeks, (thereby cementing his guilt in the minds of the public) NBC, CBS and WaPo were repeatedly saying that the paraffin wax tests on his hands came back positive on both hands, "proving" that he had fired a rifle that day. Ignoring the obvious points a) that there was no such evidence on his face, and b) that at the time he was well and truly in the frame for Tippit, and if that were true he had every reason to have GSR on BOTH hands since the witnesses reported him emptying and reloading his revolver. And while I'm certain Arlen Specter could have come up with an interesting story to show how he could have done that one-handed, I don't think anyone would buy it for a second. Again, from what I gathered, they couldn't find anything on his face at DPD. And the subsequent NAA on the face cast had issues of contamination? That may all just be misinterpreting the material I've been reading... I've read so much that I wasn't previously aware of since starting this thread, my brain might be having... "filing issues".
  5. On a more serious note, I'm sure I'm not breaking new ground with this idea, but as far as I'm concerned it was THAT speech that nailed Oswald in the public eye, and the Warren Commission was never going to be able to shift public opinion after the media kind of accepted that the "accused" was automatically the "killer".
  6. I guess that's why CBS never made "CSI Dallas". The episodes would last about 8 1/2 minutes, and 6 of those would be a montage of cops in cowboy hats fabricating evidence and intimidating witnesses while Kid Rock music plays in the background.
  7. Yeah, I've heard that the nitrates, barium, antimony etc can be picked up from sources other than GSR such as various types of printers ink. But I've also read that the Wade led Dallas prosecutorial record of the time is littered with subsequent exonerations and guessed that they weren't too worried about False Positives. The identification of nitrates would not automatically prove the presence of GSR, but a complete absence would strongly suggest that a gun had not been fired. I'm just wondering if the tests were actually used in Texas court trials around 63 as evidence.
  8. Hey guys, just been told something that I don't believe is accurate, but I would still like to make sure. What I was told is that Paraffin Wax tests weren't used as evidence in Texas in 1963, as they were notoriously unreliable and just as likely to give a false positive as a real one. I always believed that they were simply replaced over time by more advanced methods using advanced scientific equipment. Can anyone fill me in on any details surrounding this.
  9. Thanks Jim, that memo does make for confusing reading... in the space of a paragraph he seems to go from, "You realize this is complete malarkey, right?" to "We have to make sure everyone believes this malarkey... right!" Kirk Coleman... I'll get right on that. It seems kind of... counterproductive for the WC to put Oswald in the frame for Walker, when his ability with a rifle is one of the most concerning issues they would have to explain. The notion that at night, with a solid fence to rest the gun, and a clear view of the stationary target inside an illuminated room, at an ideal range, with as much time to line the shot up as he needed... that the guy could miss the target, yet pull off a 3 second double tap on a moving target travelling tangentially and away from him... that's just silly.
  10. Sorry to drag you back to this Jim, But I've only just realised that you were talking about the same guy who wrote the memorandum which infamously says that the witness testimony on Oswald's movements after the assassination just as easily put him in Ethiopia. Just for my ow peace of mind, do you think he was being sarcastic when he said the whole "We know he could have done it..." thing? Reading that memo back again is interesting... I'd never really given it much thought, but the further down he gets, the more caustic his language becomes. He really wasn't impressed with those Chapter IV conclusions...
  11. Just a quick return to the rifle evidence for a moment... I've read numerous times that the bullet retrieved from the Walker crime scene was discovered to be a 30.06 calibre, but just reading through the WCR, it states it was 6.5mm. I am no expert on ballistics so have no idea whether this is simply different terminology for the same thing, a mistake in the WCR, a case of confused half truths morphing into "fact" or something else entirely? Could anyone clear this up for me?
  12. It's kind of unusual that a guy like Walker didn't have a ready made list of enemies he could produce at the drop of a hat. He was no Fred Rogers from what I understand. I had to check that Wikipedia had it right when it said that he'd run for Governor of Texas in the primary on the Democratic ticket but lost out to John Connolly... (It's almost a shame in a way that Oswald wasn't the shooter... If Oswald HAD been the shooter... had missed Walker at his home as a sitting duck, but then hit Connally and put five holes in him, when aiming at someone else... well... that would be pretty much the most hilariously ironic thing I'd ever heard...) I've read about the note and the instructions Lee apparently gave to Marina. Strange that, after escaping justice, he never had the good sense God gave little chickens and destroyed something that could potentially be used against him should the cops have come knocking at his door. Those photos... were they already developed, or were they on an undeveloped film that was still in the camera? If they were developed photos how could they tell they were from Oswald's camera? I assume they were developed, otherwise they'd have been a bit useless as evidence that he was surveilling Walker PRIOR to the shooting. Did the camera have a tell tale lens crack or something?
  13. Cheers Pete, so that's certainly suggestive there was no cooperation, since Hosty would have undoubtedly been involved if there had been. I wonder if anyone higher up in DPD might have had the info that a known communist and defector was in town, but just neglected to act on it? I also wonder if Oswald ever came up as a suspect for the Walker assassination attempt? All the documents I can find on Walker say that it remained "unsolved" (until the WC swept in and kindly cleared it up as it was seemingly busy solving everything else that had little to no conclusive proof) but I imagine it did not go "un-investigated". I'll have to check out that book,
  14. Something just occurred to me, and I'm not sure whether it warrants another thread. I don't think so, since it follows on the path that this discussion has been heading... but can anyone tell me about Hosty and the DPD? Did he talk to them prior to investigating Lee and Marina, or was the FBI observation all hush-hush? If he was on "Oswald Watch" did he have any contacts or friends in the DPD? Was he in an official liaison with DPD? Or, maybe, was there any inter agency tension? Sort of "Get off our patch!" stuff? Anything on this would be greatly appreciated.
  15. Sorry... yes, reading that back it is a little vague. Allow me to clarify... I see him in a very negative light. This is the guy who was handcuffed to Oswald and was charged with his safely negotiating the suspect through the POLICE STATION in one piece. If I'd been caught on film and shown to the world performing one of the most famous examples of dereliction of duty in history, I'd have to accept, and learn to live with, other people making jokes about the way I failed to keep a man alive... But I, for one, would struggle to grow a pair big enough to make jokes where the punchline is essentially, "Because my colleagues and I were so abysmal at our jobs, we let a guy get murdered... on national television... in our Police station... surrounded by officers... while I was handcuffed to him!" In private, among close friends, I might consider making a self deprecating joke about... "hey... don't put me in charge of carrying those drinks to the next room... did you see what happened the last time someone asked me to take something to another room But a "It's funny... because he died!" joke in front of a room full of strangers, again, in front of a bunch of cameras... that either takes a complete lack of a moral compass, or is a sign of very poor judgement. If someone else on the panel had made the joke, and JL had looked uncomfortable, (which he would have every right to...) then I'd have considered it in slightly poor taste (even considering that most of them were news men, and bad taste humour goes with the territory) and maybe felt a little sympathy for an old man who had been continually humiliated on a global platform for over 50 years. The fact that it was HIM making the joke left me with a sense of "Wow! This guy truly doesn't give a xxxx..."
×
×
  • Create New...