Bill Brown

Greg Doudna said: The street address of the house at which Tippit stopped his cruiser when he was killed, 410 E. 10th, was given by Ruby two days later, on Sun Nov 24 the day Ruby killed Oswald, as the home address of one of his dancers... Greg, first things first. That is not the address listed in the document. The address listed is "410 1/2 10th St., Dallas" The document does not say whether or not it's East 10th or West 10th. Let's acknowledge this, first.

Greg Doudna said: Well, well. I would like to answer your question with a question: do you think it likely or unlikely that the fingerprints were left by a human being? No, I'm not being facetious, I am asking you to answer that question and explain why, since all of your objections to an individual known to have been in proximity to where those prints were found, apply equally well if not more so to all other human beings on the planet too. "No witness ever said a human being touched the front passenger fender." "Why would a human being touch the front passenger fender?" "[Therefore] these partial prints are not 'likely' to have come from a human being." Now I don't want to put words into your mouth, but would that be an accurate transference of your logic structure and logical conclusion? No. That is most certainly not an accurate transference of what I said and/or meant. I said there is no real reason (just wishful thinking on your part) to believe that the killer touched the front left fender/quarter panel of the patrol car. This is clearly what I meant and it is clearly what I said. You claim (without any shred of real evidence at all) that it is likely that those prints cane from the killer. I could just as easily say that those prints came from a suspect who was told to place his hands on the car in order to be frisked by an officer during a previous shift. I could just as easily say that those prints came from one of the bystanders at the Tippit crime scene before officers secured the area. You do realize that people descended on the area of the patrol car well before the area was secured. Right? This is a tiresome argument that goes nowhere. The bottom line is that you have no real reason to claim that it is "likely" that those prints came from the killer. Even though it is tiresome, I will be here to call you out on it every time you make the mistaken claim.

Greg Doudna said: Not one of the Tippit crime scene witnesses who picked Oswald out in lineups as the fleeing gunman knew Oswald previously or had better than brief fleeting glimpses. And there are so many instances of demonstrable mistaken identifications of Oswald by people after the assassination. If the killer of Tippit had some rough resemblance in physical description to Oswald such that witnesses could confuse, naturally they are going to like Helen Markham pick the one that looks most closely like what they remembered out of the choices. Greg, you are implying that Markham, during the lineup, decided to simply pick out the man who had the most resemblance to the man she saw shoot Tippit, even if it was not the man she saw do the shooting. You are saying that Markham wasn't going to leave the lineup without picking someone. You are saying that it was not an option for Markham to simply tell the officers conducting the lineup that none of the four was the man she saw shoot Tippit. Referring to the lineup, Markham said: "Number two was the man I saw shoot the policeman." Greg would have us believe that Markham said instead: "Number two looked the most like the man I saw shoot the policeman."

Greg Doudna said: Another possibility could be Tippit had a planned meeting either at or in front of a certain address--say, 410 E. 10th--say for 1:15 pm on Fri Nov 22. Tippit was friends with the dispatcher, Murray. On the puzzle of why Murray dispatched Tippit to Oak Cliff on Nov 22 in the seemingly strange way that happened in the police radio tapes, I have wondered if that could be as simple as Tippit quietly asking Murray in advance, as a favor, to assign him to Oak Cliff that day (so that Tippit could have that personal meeting at 10th and Patton while he was on patrol in the Oak Cliff area, not that he would necessarily tell Murray that reason). It could be conjectured that something like that was the mechanism for luring Tippit to that location and time where he was ambushed and killed. Just a heads up... the dispatcher's last name was Jackson, not Murray.

Greg Doudna said: But set that aside and on the what I consider more likely scenario that Tippit was ambushed, a hit on Tippit, something had to have brought him there at that time, or else he was a regular there at a certain time and someone was lying in wait based on pattern or habitual behavior. Greg, Jimmy Burt said the man who would eventually kill Tippit was walking from east to west on Tenth. Burt said he saw the man walking on the sidewalk on the south side of Tenth a full block to the east of the shooting scene (walking west, toward the eventual shooting scene). Lying in wait? What?

"When everyone is agreed on something, it is probably wrong" Greg, regarding the Tippit witnesses supposedly agreeing on everything, the aphorism you cite is invalid. For the sake if the point you are trying to make, you have to take all of the witnesses into account (not only those who said the man was indeed Lee Oswald). Jimmy Burt, Bill Smith, Domingo Benavides, L.J. Lewis and Robert Brock... all five of these witnesses stated that they couldn't say one way or the other if the man they saw was Lee Oswald. Because of this, your entire point is moot.

Greg Doudna said: The street address of the house at which Tippit stopped his cruiser when he was killed, 410 E. 10th, was given by Ruby two days later, on Sun Nov 24 the day Ruby killed Oswald, as the home address of one of his dancers, a friend of the self-confessed hitman who was in Ruby's car the morning of Sat Nov 23 and fled Texas. That dancer is not verified to have actually lived at the address Ruby gave and is believed to have lived elsewhere in Oak Cliff. But the point of interest is Ruby gave that address where Tippit stopped his cruiser when he was killed, "410-1/2 10th", as that dancer's home address. Why that mistake? Cite please, for Ruby giving anyone the address of 410 E. 10th Street.

Greg Doudna said: Oswald is reported by a credible witness inside the Texas Theatre--which is where it is known he did go--to have been looking to meet someone... What "credible witness" said Oswald was looking to meet someone? What makes this "witness" credible? How would this "witness" know what Oswald was looking to do?

Greg Doudna said: There are serious questions concerning the chain of custody of the shell hulls found at the crime scene, while in Dallas Police custody, reported matched to Oswald's revolver, suggesting very real plausibility of a police framing of Oswald after the arrest with respect to those shell hulls. Please explain the "serious questions" surrounding the chain of possession of the two shell casings found by the Davis girls.

Greg Doudna said: That self-confessed hit man accompanying Ruby fled the state of Texas that morning, the morning of Nov 23, hours after the murder of Tippit and immediately after the unusual abandonment of a weapon that could have been the Tippit murder weapon. No. The revolver taken from Oswald during the scuffle inside the theater is the murder weapon. The shell casings in evidence tell you so (per Frazier, Killion, Cunningham and Nicol).

Greg Doudna said: Fingerprints on the Tippit cruiser likely from the killer of Tippit are have long been established and known to not match to Oswald; Oswald is excluded as a match to those fingerprints. There is no reason whatsoever to believe that the partial prints lifted from the patrol car ever belonged to the killer. No witness ever said the killer touched the front passenger fender. Why would the killer touch the front passenger fender? These partial prints are not "likely" to have come from the killer, despite the claim by Doudna.

Domingo Benavides was tending to a broken down vehicle on Patton Avenue. To go to the auto parts store, he proceeded east in the alley behind Harris Bros. Motors (this alley ran parallel to Tenth Street and Jefferson Boulevard, halfway between the two). He took a left onto Denver and then a right onto Tenth, heading east on Tenth toward the auto parts store at Tenth and Marsalis. Realizing he forgot the parts number, Benavides turned around in one of the driveways on Tenth and proceeded west on Tenth. He crossed through the intersection with Denver and was driving west on Tenth (back toward the broken down vehicle on Patton) when he came upon the scene. Benavides drove his truck east in the alley and never made any mention of any police cars being in that alley. Those familiar with the tall-tales of supposed "researchers" will understand the significance of this. The bottom line is, there was no police car in that alley approximately ninety seconds before the Tippit shooting.

Driven by a Secret Service agent from D.C. to Detroit. The windshield was removed while the limo was still in D.C., so how could a guy in Detroit be used in determining whether or not there was a hole in the windshield?

Good grief. Nice work, Steve.

Within the first few days after the assassination, the vehicle was sent (flown?) to Detroit. There was a witness there... No. Cincinnati, not Detroit. So what witness are you referring to?

This appears staged. Jackie could not have sat in those alleged remains and have very little stains on the back of her skirt. Who says Jackie sat in the remains? Where do you think President Kennedy's head went as soon as Jackie got out onto the trunk?

.

Oh boy. Anyway... The bullet (CE-399) leaves the muzzle of the Carcano traveling around 2100 feet per second. The bullet, traveling roughly 1700 feet per second, strikes Kennedy in the upper back and exits the neck. The bullet, now slowed having passed through Kennedy's neck, hits Connally in the back, causing an 8mm x 15mm elliptical wound. This wound measurement proves that the bullet was tumbling when it hit Connally's back, proof that the bullet had passed through something else BEFORE hitting Connally in the back. The bullet, now traveling at around 1300 to 1400 feet per second, strikes Connally's fifth rib, completely shattering it. Damage to the bullet was minimal due to the fact that it was not traveling anywhere near full speed when it struck the rib. The bullet exits Connally's chest and while traveling less than half(?) of it's original rate of speed, enters the right wrist, striking the radius bone. Again, damage to the bullet is minimal because of it's slow rate of speed when it struck the radius. Basically, the bullet was traveling fast enough to cause damage to bones, but not fast enough to be damaged by impact with the bones. Every traveling bullet has a threshold where it is moving fast enough to destroy but not fast enough to be destroyed. Because it first passed through Kennedy, this bullet was within that threshold when it struck Connally's rib. The bullet exits the palm side of the wrist and while traveling at less than one-fifth of it's original speed, enters the left thigh and embedding itself in the thigh muscles. The bullet didn't go any further because it was not traveling fast enough upon striking the thigh. The bottom line is that damage to the bullet was minimal because, when it struck rib bone and radius bone, it simply had been slowed considerably, moving too slowly to be damaged. The bullet would have been greatly fragmented (basically destroyed), if when it struck the radius bone in Connally's right wrist, it was traveling at the same rate of speed as it was when it struck Kennedy in the upper back.

This is a walking tour I did of the Tippit scene, related to the witnesses, what they said they saw, etc... If you feel I said something wrong here, let me know.

Okay. Because of the evidence, "we know" that Lee Oswald (alone) is a cop-killer and a political assassin.

Who is "we" and why do you continually use this appeal in an attempt to make your point seem credible?

On the day of the assassination, Frazier stated that he didn't see Oswald after 11 AM. Then, roughly forty years later, in an interview with Gary Mack, Frazier tells Mack that he saw Oswald after the assassination crossing Houston Street. Mack (knowing what Frazier said on 11/22/63) is visually taken aback by this.

You're having it both ways. Frazier, to prevent WW3, agrees to lie, saying Oswald was not out on the steps even though he (Oswald) was. Frazier, apparently not worried about starting WW3, didn't lie about the length of the bag even though he very easily could and no one would be the wiser. Is this really your stance here?

And she (Randle) said it was three feet long.

Well said. I was thinking the same thing. Does Larsen do this sort of thing a lot?