Lee Oswald’s Departure from the TSBD

[Antti Hynonen]

J. Raymond Carroll Posted Today, 03:25 PM

QUOTE(Antti Hynonen @ Oct 9 2008, 09:38 AM)

You can read Julia Postal's testimony (unless you already have) to form an opinion of it. My two sentence synopsis of the jist of it, should not be considered equal to studying her WC statement.

Here is Julia's testimony. As we all know, there were no defense counsel present, so we have Mr. Ball hurrying her along to his already pre-determined conclusion.

http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/postal.htm

Mr. BALL. And you didn't see him actually enter the theatre then?

Mrs. POSTAL. No, sir.

Mr. BALL. You hadn't seen him go by you?

Mrs. POSTAL. I knew he didn't go by me, because I was facing west, and Johnny, he had come up from east which meant he didn't go back that way. He had come from east going west.

It sounds as though She did not see the man until he was gone, and in parts of her testimony she seems to be reporting what Johnny Brewer told her

Postal refers to her employer, John Callahan, who had taken tickets from the 24 (or 14) people who had paid to enter the cinema, so Ball called as the next witness the aforementioned Mr. Callahan ....NOT.

If this had been an honest inquiry, Mr. Callahan would have been a vital witness. But it was not an honest inquiry and Mr. Callahan was never questioned, as far as I know. He was the person who could have established whether he took a ticket from Lee Oswald at or about the time the movie began.

QUOTE

What kind of a person carries a gun.....

A short-barreled revolver is a weapon of self-defense, and on this particular afternoon there were assassins loose in Dallas. I bet he was not the only Dallas resident who decided to pack that afternoon.

QUOTE

What kind of a person strikes a police officer, while being searched?

See Duke's post above. I think McDonald said he made a grab for Oswald's body, not too far from the crotch area. I've never tried it myself, but I hear that grabbing guys in the crotch will get you a punch on the nose every time.

QUOTE

These facts together with the observations as stated in the witness testimonies as discussed prior, clearly point to a man on the run from the law imo.

Do you mean sinister activities like taking buses and taxis?

It sounds as though She did not see the man until he was gone, and in parts of her testimony she seems to be reporting what Johnny Brewer told her

Postal refers to her employer, John Callahan, who had taken tickets from the 24 (or 14) people who had paid to enter the cinema, so Ball called as the next witness the aforementioned Mr. Callahan ....NOT.

If this had been an honest inquiry, Mr. Callahan would have been a vital witness. But it was not an honest inquiry and Mr. Callahan was never questioned, as far as I know. He was the person who could have established whether he took a ticket from Lee Oswald at or about the time the movie began.

Sure, agreed, it wasn't an honest inquiry, that's for sure. Postal didn't get a good look of the man that snuck in behind her. Nevertheless, her testimony allows the reader to understand it was the same man (LHO) that was arrested and dragged out moments later by the DPD.

What kind of a person carries a gun.....

A short-barreled revolver is a weapon of self-defense, and on this particular afternoon there were assassins loose in Dallas. I bet he was not the only Dallas resident who decided to pack that afternoon.

Sure didn't help poor Lee to play tough guy with a 38 under his shirt. Like I said this is one of the facts that adds to his being suspect.

What kind of a person strikes a police officer, while being searched?

See Duke's post above. I think McDonald said he made a grab for Oswald's body, not too far from the crotch area. I've never tried it myself, but I hear that grabbing guys in the crotch will get you a punch on the nose every time.

So, you say that McDonald had something else in mind, not just searching the man for a gun? I don't think I'd take a swing at a police officer whilst being searched, even if he was searching in that area. I might say something like: "do you mind?". I don't quite buy the crotch grabbing and the punch being a result of that, sorry.

These facts together with the observations as stated in the witness testimonies as discussed prior, clearly point to a man on the run from the law imo.

Do you mean sinister activities like taking buses and taxis?

No, sir. Nothing sinister with using public transportation and taxi's. I chiefly meant his apparently perfectly timed popping into the shoe store and the movie theater to avoid the police driving by on Jefferson.

Also, I think he probably should have checked with his supervisor at the TSBD if it was ok, to take the rest of the day off and go to see a picture. As I recall he just took off.

Oh, by the way, I also think that he did in fact stop by at 1026 N. Beckley to change and pick up his 38 (Mrs. Roberts testimony has some short comings but the big picture is entirely believable)

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Postal didn't get a good look of the man that snuck in behind her.

True, unless she had eyes in the back of her head.

Nevertheless, her testimony allows the reader to understand it was the same man (LHO) that was arrested and dragged out moments later by the DPD.

Huh? So she DID have eyes in the back of her head?

Sure didn't help poor Lee to play tough guy with a 38 under his shirt. Like I said this is one of the facts that adds to his being suspect.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. If you mean that he did NOT try to shoot the arresting officers, as Dennis Pointing claims, then I agree with you.

So, you say that McDonald had something else in mind, not just searching the man for a gun?

I never said or suggested any such thing.

I don't quite buy the crotch grabbing and the punch being a result of that, sorry.

Do you mean you don't buy the evidence that McDonald grabbed him in the crotch area? I take it you don't find McDonald a very credible witness then.

I chiefly meant his apparently perfectly timed popping into the shoe store and the movie theater to avoid the police driving by on Jefferson.

It seems that SOMEBODY did make a big deal of drawing attention to the Texas Theater, we can agree on that much.

Also, I think he probably should have checked with his supervisor at the TSBD if it was ok, to take the rest of the day off and go to see a picture. As I recall he just took off.

Wow! Paydirt at last.

But what about all the other TSBD employees who also took the afternoon off without supervisor approval. If you are to be consistent, then you must find those people equally suspicious, no?

[Antti Hynonen]

Wow! Paydirt at last.

But what about all the other TSBD employees who also took the afternoon off without supervisor approval. If you are to be consistent, then you must find those people equally suspicious, no?

Sure, ok. Do you know many of the TSBD employees were missing when Truly discussed this with Shelley and the others? I think a few were missing, especially one man with a criminal record was missing. He was located later that afternoon. Do you know of others?

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

Mr. TRULY. Then in a few minutes--it could have been moments or minutes at a time like that--I noticed some of my boys were over in the west corner of the shipping department, and there were several officers over there taking their names and addresses, and so forth.

There were other officers in other parts of the building taking other employees, like office people's names. I noticed that Lee Oswald was not among these boys.

So I picked up the telephone and called Mr. Aiken down at the other warehouse who keeps our application blanks. Back up there.

First I mentioned to Mr. Campbell--I asked Bill Shelley if he had seen him, he looked around and said no.

Mr. BELIN. When you asked Bill Shelley if he had seen whom?

Mr. TRULY. Lee Oswald. I said, "Have you seen him around lately," and he said no.

So Mr. Campbell is standing there, and I said, "I have a boy over here missing. I don't know whether to report it or not." Because I had another one or two out then. I didn't know whether they were all there or not. He said, "What do you think"? And I got to thinking. He said, "Well, we better do it anyway." It was so quick after that.

So I picked the phone up then and called Mr. Aiken, at the warehouse, and got the boy's name and general description and telephone number and address at Irving.

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

http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/truly1.htm

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

QUOTE

Nevertheless, her testimony allows the reader to understand it was the same man (LHO) that was arrested and dragged out moments later by the DPD.

Huh? So she DID have eyes in the back of her head?

I think you know what I mean, her testimony supported Brewer's - the man who pointed out LHO in the theater.

QUOTE

Sure didn't help poor Lee to play tough guy with a 38 under his shirt. Like I said this is one of the facts that adds to his being suspect.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. If you mean that he did NOT try to shoot the arresting officers, as Dennis Pointing claims, then I agree with you.

Yep, can't say the he did try to do that (the testimony is rather mixed or unclear as to what happened with that gun there), all I said is he took a gun to the theater and I do not think that was a smart thing to do. Especially in retrospect - this definitely had an impact on how he is/was perceived by the police and the general public (imo).

QUOTE

So, you say that McDonald had something else in mind, not just searching the man for a gun?

I never said or suggested any such thing.

Ok, Hmmm... So, an officer of the law searches the man, one who is considered a suspect. The officer also searches in the crotch area of the suspect - so therefore a punch is called for. Nope, don't agree.

Do you fly much?

QUOTE

I don't quite buy the crotch grabbing and the punch being a result of that, sorry.

Do you mean you don't buy the evidence that McDonald grabbed him in the crotch area? I take it you don't find McDonald a very credible witness then.

I don't buy that the reason for the punch was the fact that the officer searched Lee for a gun in the crotch area.

Edited October 9, 2008 by Antti Hynonen

[J. Raymond Carroll]

I think a few were missing, especially one man with a criminal record was missing. He was located later that afternoon. Do you know of others?

There were 72? (Duke is the expert on this) people working in the TSBD that day and only a small number worked for Truly. So you have to consider all those other people. Since you are accusing LHO of wrongdoing by leaving early, the burden is on you to show that he did something that others did not do, and you have not met that burden so far. Most of those who left without specific authorization were women, so I suppose you will tell us now that it is OK for women to leave, but not for men?

I think you know what I mean, her testimony supported Brewer's - the man who pointed out LHO in the theater

Yes, she repeated what Brewer told her. I could do the same, but it would not follow that I have eyes in the back of my head.

I don't buy that the reason for the punch was the fact that the officer searched Lee for a gun in the crotch area.

OK, Antti, nothing personal but don't ever come up and grab at me in the crotch area while I am enjoying my afternoon movie, or you too will get a punch on the nose, regardless of the uniform you are wearing.

[Denis Pointing]

Four of the arresting officers McDonald, Hutson, Walker and Bentley signed the arrest report, that report was of course written on the actual day of arrest, NOT after the weekend when Oswald was no longer around to contradict the report. They all state that Oswald pulled a gun. Three independent witnesses Gibson, Brewer and Applin all corroborate that Oswald pulled a gun. Its those independent witnesses, more so than the police officers, that convince me Oswald did exactly that and probably attempted to fire the weapon as well.

http://www.jfk-online.com/mcdonald.html

http://www.autographsmovieposters.com/Oswald_arrest.htm

Edited October 9, 2008 by Denis Pointing

[Duke Lane]

I think a few were missing, especially one man with a criminal record was missing. He was located later that afternoon. Do you know of others?

Just having taken a quick glance, there were something like 74 people working at (as opposed to "for") TSBD that day. Tho' I haven't looked at the source document (CE1381) for a while and don't remember what all of my notations might've meant, you can see a synopsis here of where everyone was during the shooting and whether or not they went back inside the building. In all, there were 14 people who did not return into the building during the immediate aftermath, tho' most of them were women.

You can read Julia Postal's testimony (unless you already have) to form an opinion of it. My two sentence synopsis of the jist of it, should not be considered equal to studying her WC statement.

... Julia's testimony ... sounds as though She did not see the man until he was gone, and in parts of her testimony she seems to be reporting what Johnny Brewer told her.

Postal refers to her employer, John Callahan, who had taken tickets from the 24 (or 14) people who had paid to enter the cinema, so Ball called as the next witness the aforementioned Mr. Callahan ....NOT.

If this had been an honest inquiry, Mr. Callahan would have been a vital witness. But it was not an honest inquiry and Mr. Callahan was never questioned, as far as I know. He was the person who could have established whether he took a ticket from Lee Oswald at or about the time the movie began.

Without having looked at Postal's testimony, I don't recall that she said that she had ever seen "the man who'd snuck into the theater" until Oswald was taken out of the theater past her. She is indeed providing only hearsay evidence and speculation since she did not, by her own words, see anyone sneak in nor, ergo, from what direction he'd have come (it could only have been anywhere but from the west, the direction she was facing).

That said, the WC had no procedural rules about the acceptance of hearsay, and if she was able to deduce that, if what Brewer had told her about a man ducking into the theater was true, then she did not sell him a ticket, it would probably be admissible in court, especially if counsel introduced the question with evidence already heard.

There is a "law" in jurisprudence that one should "never ask a question you don't already know the answer to;" the corollary to that is, "don't ask a question when you know the answer to be unfavorable to your position." Just because there is nothing in writing about any discussions with Callahan does not mean that nobody talked with him.

Consider, as a parallel, that WC counsel frequently asked witnesses if they - counsel and witness - hadn't spoken prior to the formal deposition about what questions (and possibly also what answers) would come up during the deposition, and in some cases even asked if the witness felt there was anything that they'd discussed but which hadn't been covered during its course.

It is thus not beyond the realm of possibility that Callahan was asked "informally" what he could add to the investigation, and that he'd said that maybe he'd remembered someone looking like Oswald buying a ticket from him - couldn't state for certain, but thought that maybe he might have - and the decision being made that he "obviously didn't know what had happened," and thus would not be an appropriate person to interview ... along the lines of "be careful what you ask, you might not want to hear the answer," or "the boss isn't going to like this guy's answers." If you hear it officially, you might have to investigate it, eh? Such an "informal interview" might have been "formal" in Callahan's mind, and so he raised no questions himself about there being no further interviews or deposition.

Strangely, I don't recall I've ever read anything critical where anyone - Meagher, Lane or Weisberg, for example - has ever raised the question about Callahan's not being deposed, or what he might've been able to add; nor do I recall anything where anyone ever tried talking to him about this, much less had something to add about what he might've said if he was asked.

What kind of a person carries a gun to the movie theater?

A short-barreled revolver is a weapon of self-defense, and on this particular afternoon there were assassins loose in Dallas. I bet he was not the only Dallas resident who decided to pack that afternoon.

What kind of a person strikes a police officer, while being searched?

See Duke's post above. I think McDonald said he made a grab for Oswald's body, not too far from the crotch area. I've never tried it myself, but I hear that grabbing guys in the crotch will get you a punch on the nose every time.

Well, I'm not going to buy into the "defensive posse" concept where everyone grabbed a gun because they, too, might be targets of the people who'd shoot a President or thought that they might just run across the killer and be able to subdue him. Nor am I going to propose that rather than McDonald putting his hand on Oswald's "waist," that what he was really saying that he went for Oswald's crotch thinking "what a waste!" (Some guys do go to the movies to actually watch the movie, y'know! Shame on Ray for even thinking otherwise!)

That said, here are some possibilities to consider:

• If Oswald had reason to believe that he was being set up - remember: he never said "they got the wrong guy" or "I don't know what you're talking about," he said "I'm just a patsy" which at least suggests he knew something - it might make sense for him to make sure he was armed before venturing out in public where he could be gotten to by the actual perps.
  
• If he was being set up and was, in fact, in the process of being set up - let's go with the deal about the "El Chico Oswald" seen by Mack Pate's mechanic being absolute fact - who's to say that he wasn't left off by whomever was setting him up, say, on the corner of Zangs & Jefferson ("and here's your gun, kid!") just as the sirens started homing in on his location, might you not duck out of sight, maybe even hide in a theater hoping not to be seen or found? Had it not been for Brewer, maybe he might've gotten away with it, eh? (Damn, the luck!)
  
• If in such a scenario, what if the man who supposedly was watching calmly from behind Oswald (never identified) or even one of the cops who'd come up behind Oswald - or even McDonald! - had tried to slip a gun into his pocket or had otherwise touched or prodded him in, say, the lower back area just as McDonald was approaching him looking ready to draw his gun ... Oswald's surprised, whips his hand and body around to his right (in the process, hitting McDonald in the face with his left hand) ... next thing he knows, he's got a gun in his hand, someone gripping his hand around it (one of the officers nearby testified that he was told to let go of the gun, to which he replied "I can't!") ... and the rest is history.
  
• In such as scenario as that - and given both the number of people who said they heard the "snap" and the officers who said they saw a dent - who's to say that the object wasn't to shoot McDonald - or at least fire the gun - likely ensuring that the "assassin" (who would've been assuredly identified as such when dead, just as he was when he denied it) didn't get out of the theater alive, nevertheless "solving" the crime.
  

Had that happened, part of the proof would've been questions similar to what you'd asked: why would he carry a gun into a theater and fight with an officer if he wasn't guilty? And here, ladies and gentlemen, is the evidence we would've found even if he had lived ...!

Just to reflect a little on those items, the hardest things to reconcile with a "patsy" scenario are these:

• First, if Oswald really had just wanted to "make a name for himself in history" as the WCR suggested as a possibility, why didn't he just go ahead and say "yeah, ya got me, I did it?" Similar to what Weisberg wrote in Whitewash - "if he wanted to get caught, why run?" - if he wanted to "go down in history," why deny it?
  
• If someone did get ahold of Oswald either before or after he'd gotten to the roominghouse to get his pistol (which could account for his not being seen anywhere between 1026 and 10&P), they kept him in a car at El Chico and then dropped him off, gun in hand, on Jefferson as in the second scenario above, why didn't he just disappear into one of the surrounding neighborhoods and stroll along like the innocuous young man that he was and hope to disappear from his tormentors? I mean, it's not like a bunch of hardened killers are going to flag down a passing cop car and give him up, is it? And as "citizens" themselves, they couldn't just go and shoot him, so ...?
  
• Once he was safely in police custody (to what end we know to be true in his case), why the fancy dance with Fritz and Company when he could've told them straight-out exactly what had happened to him and who had done it, and thereby solved the Crime of the Century while exonerating himself at the same time?
  

Of course, I suppose if you factor in the thoroughly fair lineups, the belated findings of evidence (can you imagine anyone giving him the pat-down in police hq not finding five rounds of ammo in his pocket, or waiting a couple hours to see if he might've had anything in his pockets that could've jeopardized his or their own safety?), among other things, he might've gotten the mistaken impression that telling the Dallas cops what had happened would've fallen on deaf ears and gotten him killed "falling down the stairs" or while "trying to escape." The tone of his supposed answers to his interrogators seem to almost suggest as much.

By remaining silent, however, he was able to ensure his safe transfer into custody other than DPD's, where he would be able to spill the beans without having to worry about dropping the soap, likewise ensuring that a fair trial was held for the real perps, and that there'd be no lingering questions about the assassination of a President.

Somehow, I don't think that after his acquittal, we'd have heard about him breaking into anyone's hotel room flashing a gun and demanding all of his assassination memorabilia back, do you?

Anyway, just some thoughts to suggest a "why" to the questions Antti'd asked, all flimsy as hell, but worth a gander anyway.

(And Ray? Move to a better neighborhood!)

[Robert Newell]

Hi all...Sorry for my mess up with my previous attempts at posting. This is a great thread. I would just like to throw a thought out for consideration. Sometimes questions, even somewhat silly ones, should be asked if for no other reason than to throw them in the out basket. This is not a theory of mine but a thought. a 'what if' question. What if Oswald's 'job' that day was to get himself arrested as a person of interest in the killing of the President? He would just be the best little leftist he could and send the investigating hounds and public opinion in that direction. As he sat in the theater waiting to be picked up things changed. The arresting officers were now a cop killer posse. Oswald's demeanor

changed from a lousy 'b' actor, "It's all over now", to one of defending himself from being killed.

He may have been reassued while in custody, until his own death while in the hands of the same group who arrested him. Oswald's actions after 12:30 are enough of an enigma anyway, that I thought I would throw this into the mix. I have other thoughts on this but then it would be to much like a theory and as I've said it is not---really!

Robert

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Nor am I going to propose that rather than McDonald putting his hand on Oswald's "waist," that what he was really saying that he went for Oswald's crotch.

OK Duke, since you're the WHIZZ KID with the spreadsheets, let's see if your spreadsheet can figure this one out: A total stranger, apparently a police officer in uniform (though the light is not the best) comes up to you and after saying "stand up" he makes a sudden and unexpected lunge (not the gentle "putting on of hands" that your post seems to suggest) at an area of your person that is at or below the belt. THe question for your spreadsheet is this: How much time do you have -- the one and only M. Duke Lane -- to figure out what this guy's intentions are before your evolutionary instinct for self-preservation kicks in?

QUOTE what if the man who supposedly was watching calmly from behind Oswald (never identified)QUOTE

DO you recall the source for this?

QUOTE (one of the officers nearby testified that he was told to let go of the gun, to which he replied "I can't!") ... and the rest is history.QUOTE

Maybe Mr. Pointing will prove that he was lying when he said "I can't" and was really just waiting for a better opportunity to start shooting people.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Hi all... . Oswald's demeanor changed from a lousy 'b' actor, "It's all over now", to one of defending himself from being killed.

Welcome Robert. I suggest that

"It's all over now"

was just the lyrics of a song going round in McDonald's head. I don't think there is much in the way of corroboration for what McDonald claimed to have heard and, as you rightly point out, it is completely out of synch with Oswald's behaviour for the rest of his life.

[Antti Hynonen]

Here's key parts of what Julia Postal said about the man that ducked into the theater:

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

Mr. BALL. And after you saw the police car go west with its siren on, why at the time the police car went west with its siren on, did you see the man that ducked? This man that you were----

Mrs. POSTAL. This man, yes; he ducked into the box office and----I don't know if you are familiar with the theatre.

Mr. BALL. Yes; I have seen the theatre.

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

Mr. BALL. The last time you had seen him before he ducked in, he was just standing outside of the door, was he?

Mrs. POSTAL. No, sir; he was still just in----just off of the sidewalk, and he headed for the theatre.

Emphasis in bold mine.

To me it sounds like she did observe this man. If it had been a totally different man that the cops brought out moments later, I'm sure she would have brought it up - at least she would have said something to Johnny, the shoe store man.

QUOTE(Antti Hynonen @ Oct 9 2008, 05:58 PM)

I think a few were missing, especially one man with a criminal record was missing. He was located later that afternoon. Do you know of others?

There were 72? (Duke is the expert on this) people working in the TSBD that day and only a small number worked for Truly. So you have to consider all those other people. Since you are accusing LHO of wrongdoing by leaving early, the burden is on you to show that he did something that others did not do, and you have not met that burden so far. Most of those who left without specific authorization were women, so I suppose you will tell us now that it is OK for women to leave, but not for men?

The burden of proof? Man, sounds like a court of law. I think you are getting upset with me Ray, that wasn't the idea.

Well, let me put it this way: How many other TSBD employees got arrested that day, and were carrying concealed handguns?

For some reason, Lee sure received a lot of attention that afternoon, and mostly in the negative sense, unfortunately. I was saying that his behavior that afternoon contributed greatly to his arrest.

I am entirely happy if you see things differently and will gladly listen to your thoughts of what went down that afternoon. For the time being I see things a little differently, shall we say.

[Antti Hynonen]

Duke Lane wrote:

That said, here are some possibilities to consider:

If Oswald had reason to believe that he was being set up - remember: he never said "they got the wrong guy" or "I don't know what you're talking about," he said "I'm just a patsy" which at least suggests he knew something - it might make sense for him to make sure he was armed before venturing out in public where he could be gotten to by the actual perps.

If he was being set up and was, in fact, in the process of being set up - let's go with the deal about the "El Chico Oswald" seen by Mack Pate's mechanic being absolute fact - who's to say that he wasn't left off by whomever was setting him up, say, on the corner of Zangs & Jefferson ("and here's your gun, kid!") just as the sirens started homing in on his location, might you not duck out of sight, maybe even hide in a theater hoping not to be seen or found? Had it not been for Brewer, maybe he might've gotten away with it, eh? (Damn, the luck!)

If in such a scenario, what if the man who supposedly was watching calmly from behind Oswald (never identified) or even one of the cops who'd come up behind Oswald - or even McDonald! - had tried to slip a gun into his pocket or had otherwise touched or prodded him in, say, the lower back area just as McDonald was approaching him looking ready to draw his gun ... Oswald's surprised, whips his hand and body around to his right (in the process, hitting McDonald in the face with his left hand) ... next thing he knows, he's got a gun in his hand, someone gripping his hand around it (one of the officers nearby testified that he was told to let go of the gun, to which he replied "I can't!") ... and the rest is history.

In such as scenario as that - and given both the number of people who said they heard the "snap" and the officers who said they saw a dent - who's to say that the object wasn't to shoot McDonald - or at least fire the gun - likely ensuring that the "assassin" (who would've been assuredly identified as such when dead, just as he was when he denied it) didn't get out of the theater alive, nevertheless "solving" the crime.

Had that happened, part of the proof would've been questions similar to what you'd asked: why would he carry a gun into a theater and fight with an officer if he wasn't guilty? And here, ladies and gentlemen, is the evidence we would've found even if he had lived ...!

Just to reflect a little on those items, the hardest things to reconcile with a "patsy" scenario are these:

First, if Oswald really had just wanted to "make a name for himself in history" as the WCR suggested as a possibility, why didn't he just go ahead and say "yeah, ya got me, I did it?" Similar to what Weisberg wrote in Whitewash - "if he wanted to get caught, why run?" - if he wanted to "go down in history," why deny it?

If someone did get ahold of Oswald either before or after he'd gotten to the roominghouse to get his pistol (which could account for his not being seen anywhere between 1026 and 10&P), they kept him in a car at El Chico and then dropped him off, gun in hand, on Jefferson as in the second scenario above, why didn't he just disappear into one of the surrounding neighborhoods and stroll along like the innocuous young man that he was and hope to disappear from his tormentors? I mean, it's not like a bunch of hardened killers are going to flag down a passing cop car and give him up, is it? And as "citizens" themselves, they couldn't just go and shoot him, so ...?

Once he was safely in police custody (to what end we know to be true in his case), why the fancy dance with Fritz and Company when he could've told them straight-out exactly what had happened to him and who had done it, and thereby solved the Crime of the Century while exonerating himself at the same time?

Of course, I suppose if you factor in the thoroughly fair lineups, the belated findings of evidence (can you imagine anyone giving him the pat-down in police hq not finding five rounds of ammo in his pocket, or waiting a couple hours to see if he might've had anything in his pockets that could've jeopardized his or their own safety?), among other things, he might've gotten the mistaken impression that telling the Dallas cops what had happened would've fallen on deaf ears and gotten him killed "falling down the stairs" or while "trying to escape." The tone of his supposed answers to his interrogators seem to almost suggest as much.

By remaining silent, however, he was able to ensure his safe transfer into custody other than DPD's, where he would be able to spill the beans without having to worry about dropping the soap, likewise ensuring that a fair trial was held for the real perps, and that there'd be no lingering questions about the assassination of a President.

Somehow, I don't think that after his acquittal, we'd have heard about him breaking into anyone's hotel room flashing a gun and demanding all of his assassination memorabilia back, do you?

Anyway, just some thoughts to suggest a "why" to the questions Antti'd asked, all flimsy as hell, but worth a gander anyway.

(And Ray? Move to a better neighborhood!)

Duke, some sound thinking. I think the only way to make something logical and sensible out of these events is to fill in the blanks as well as we can.

Robert Newell,

Welcome to the Forum! New ideas and theories are also welcome.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Here's key parts of what Julia Postal said about the man that ducked into the theater:

did you see the man that ducked? This man that you were----

Mrs. POSTAL. This man, yes; he ducked into the box office and----I don't know if you are familiar with the theatre.

Now that answer by Postal is right up there with the very best of SARAH PALIN.

When you ask Sarah a question that she doesn't want to answer, she changes the subject... just like our Julia did in the exchange you quoted.

Well, let me put it this way: How many other TSBD employees got arrested that day, and were carrying concealed handguns?

Let me see if if I have got this straight: There was nothing suspicious about leaving work that day, but it was suspicious in the case of one person only, because he was the only one who was arrested.

So if I am understanding your logic correctly, the fact that he was arrested makes HIS leaving work look suspicious, but does not make the others who left early look suspicious because they were not arrested.

Have I got that right?

[Steve Thomas]

Duke,

Bottom line: Oswald did not draw a pistol prior to being approached by McDonald, McDonald never saw him do so (although it's a reasonable inference when someone's hand suddenly has a gun in it that he did!), and actually, nobody else in the theater did either ... or, rather, nobody who testified to or gave statements about it.

I posted this some time ago under a thread enetitled, "The snap that never was.":

I have always taken it on faith that during his arrest at the Texas Theater, Lee Harvey Oswald took out his gun and attempted to shoot arresting Officer M.N. McDonald. This is based on accounts of an audible "snap" that was heard. Later, we read accounts that the only reason Oswald's attempted murder of McDonald didn't succeed because of a bent primer or a "misfire"

I would like to contend that perhaps the "snap" that was heard was either the sound of something else, or was accidently caused by the officers seeing the gun and immediately reacting to take it away from Oswald and that Oswald did not attempt to shoot Officer McDonald.

I say this for the following three reasons:

1)

Here are the after action reports of the arresting officers filed with Police Chief Curry on Decembers 2 - 5, 1963.

They can be found in the Dallas Police Archives, Box 2, Folder# 7

http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/box2.htm

E.L. Cunningham: "When I reached the seating area on the main floor, several officers were in the process of disarming and handcuffing the suspect. ...I did not see anything that indicated that any more force was used than was absolutely necessary to effect the arrest".

Paul Bentley: "Just as I entered the lower floor, I saw Patrolman McDonald fighting with this suspect. I saw this suspect pull a pistol from his shirt, so I went to Patrolman McDonald's aid immediately"

Bob Carroll: "When I arrived at the lower floor, Lee Harvey Oswald was resisting vigorously"...At this time I observed a pistol with the muzzle pointed in my direction. I grabbed the pistol and stuck it in my belt..."

Ray Hawkins: "The subject stood up and as Officer McDonald started to search him, he struck Officer McDonald in the face. The subject and Officer McDonald began to fight and both fell down in the seats. Officer Walker and I ran toward the subject and grabbed him by his left arm. The subject had reached in his belt for a gun and Officer McDonald was holding his right hand with the gun in it".

T.A. Hutson: "As I entered the row of seats behind the suspect he jumped up and hit Officer McDonald in the face with his fist, Officer McDonald was in the seat next to the one in which the suspect was originally sitting, and the suspect was up out of his seat struggling with Officer McDonald. I reached over the back of the seats and placed my right arm around the suspect's neck and pulled him up on back of the seat. Officer C.T. Walker came up and was struggling with the suspect's left hand, and as Officer McDonald struggled with the suspect's right hand, he moved it to his waist and drew a pistol and as Officer McDonald tried to disarm the suspect, I heard the pistol snap".

K.E. Lyon: "Enroute to the City Hall, Oswald refused to answer all questions. and he kept repeating, "Why am I being arrested? I know I was carrying a gun, but why else am I being arrested"?

M.N. McDonald: "When I got within a foot of him, I told the suspect to get to his feet. He stood up immediately, bringing his hands up about shoulder high and saying, "Well it's over now". I was reaching for his waist and he struck me on the nose with his left hand. With his right hand, he reached for his waist and both our hands were on a pistol that was stuck in his belt under his shirt. We both fell into the seats struggling for the pistol. ... I managed to get my right hand on the pistol over the suspect's hand. I could feel his hand on the trigger. I then got a secure grip on the butt of the pistol. I jerked the pistol and as it was clearing the suspect's clothing and grip I heard the snap of the hammer and the pistol crossed over my left cheek, causing a four inch scratch".

As you can see from reading these reports, at no time in the first 10 to 12 days following the assassination, did any of the arresting officers on the scene claim that Oswald tried to shoot M.N. McDonald. If the pistol did go off and cause a "snap" of the hammer falling into place, it was because McDonald jerked it out of Oswald's pants.

2)

When questioned by Captain Fritz on the afternoon of November 22nd, Fritz did not accuse Oswald of trying to shoot Officer McDonald.

Fritz (4H214)

Mr. FRITZ. He told me he went over and caught a bus and rode the bus to North Beckley near where he lived and went by home and changed clothes and got his pistol and went to the show. I asked him why he took his pistol and he said, "Well, you know about a pistol; I just carried it." Let's see if I asked him anything else right that minute. That is just about it.

Mr. BALL. Did you ask him if he killed Tippit?

Mr. FRITZ. Sir?

Mr. BALL. Did you ask him if he shot Tippit?

Mr. FRITZ. Oh, yes.

Mr. BALL. What did he say.

Mr. FRITZ. He denied it---that he did not. The only thing he said he had done wrong, "The only law I violated was in the show; I hit the officer in the show; he hit me in the eye and I guess I deserved it." He said, "That is the only law I violated." He said, "That is the only thing I have done wrong."

3)

If Oswald had attempted to shoot Officer McDonald, why were no charges of attempted murder filed as they were in the case of Governor Connally?

I believe that the account of Oswald trying to shoot McDonald was invented after the fact.

Steve Thomas

[J. Raymond Carroll]

I believe that the account of Oswald trying to shoot McDonald was invented after the fact.

Steve Thomas

Thank you Steve, and I for one would say that your belief is amply supported by the evidence.

[Duke Lane]

Here's key parts of what Julia Postal said about the man that ducked into the theater:

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

Mr. BALL. And after you saw the police car go west with its siren on, why at the time the police car went west with its siren on, did you see the man that ducked? This man that you were----

Mrs. POSTAL. This man, yes; he ducked into the box office and----I don't know if you are familiar with the theatre.

Mr. BALL. Yes; I have seen the theatre.

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

Mr. BALL. The last time you had seen him before he ducked in, he was just standing outside of the door, was he?

Mrs. POSTAL. No, sir; he was still just in----just off of the sidewalk, and he headed for the theatre.

... To me it sounds like she did observe this man. If it had been a totally different man that the cops brought out moments later, I'm sure she would have brought it up - at least she would have said something to Johnny, the shoe store man.

If I were a trial attorney, I'd object to her answers as non-responsive: she didn't answer the questions. You've extracted a small portion of what Postal had said ... and I've gotta say that she wasn't the sharpest knife in the drawer, it doesn't seem. Witness this exchange:

Mr. Ball

. Now, did many people go into the theatre from the time you opened at the box office until about 1:15 or so?

Mrs. Postal

. Some.

Mr. Ball

. How many? Can you give me an estimate?

Mrs. Postal

. I believe 24.

Mr. Ball

. Twenty-four?

Mrs. Postal

. Fourteen or twenty-four. I believe it was 24. Everything was happening so fast.

No, it was only "happening so fast" after she had sold the 14 or 24 tickets, when the cops arrived and all of the patrons were inside; she was not in the midst of selling tickets throughout the time of the arrest. Her constant answers of "uh-huh" for "yes" and "huh-uh" for "no" is almost as irritating as Cecil McWatters' "in other words" repeated several times per thought; my personal favorites are how she described her boss going "that-a-way" to his car, but even better, her going to the "homicidal bureau" (which I can only hope that Julia was not at the Post Office, since it would suggest a completely different origin of the phrase "going Postal!"). Here's another good one, noticing how many words she uses to answer a simple question:

Mr. Ball

. How many men had hold of him?

Mrs. Postal

. Well, I -

like I said, the public was getting there at that time, and the streets, sidewalk and around the streets and everything and they brought him out the double doors here (indicating). I remember, the officer had his hands behind him with his chin back like this [indicating] because I understand he had been using some profuse

[sic]

language which - inside

. I'd say four or five.

But enough of unnecessary opinions. Here's more of what she had to say:

Mr. Ball

. And after you saw the police car go west with its siren on, why at the time the police car went west with its siren on, did you see the man that ducked? This man that you were --

Mrs. Postal

. This man, yes; he ducked into the box office and - I don't know if you are familiar with the theatre.

Mr. Ball

. Yes; I have seen the theatre.

Mrs. Postal

. You have?

Well, he was coming from east going west

. In other words,

he ducked right in

.

She contradicted herself on these two points more than once.

Mr. Ball

. Now, did you see anybody go in the theatre well, did you see any activity on the street?

Mrs. Postal

. Now, yes, sir; just about the time we opened, my employer had stayed and took the tickets because we change pictures on Thursday and want to do anything, he - and about this time I heard the sirens - police was racing back and forth.

Mr. Ball

. On Jefferson?

Mrs. Postal

. On Jefferson Boulevard, and then we made the remark, "Something is about to bust," or "pop," or something to that effect, so, it was just about -

some sirens were going west, and my employer got in his car. He was parked in front, to go up to see where they were going

.

He, perhaps I said, he passed Oswald

. At that time I didn't know it was Oswald.

Had to bypass him

, because as he went through this way, Oswald went through this way and ducked into the theatre there

.

...

Mr. Ball

. A police car had gone by just before this?

Mrs. Postal

. Yes, sir; going west.

...

Mr. Ball

. Ducked in, what do you mean? He had come around the corner--

Mrs. Postal

. Yes; and

when the sirens went by he had a panicked look on his face, and he ducked in

.

Mr. Ball

. Now, as the car went by, you say the man ducked in,

had you seen him before the car went by, the police went by?

Mrs. Postal

.

No, sir; I was looking up, as I say, when the cars passed, as you know, they make a tremendous noise

, and he ducked in as my boss went that way to get in his car. ["I didn't see anything because the sirens were so loud?"]

...

Mr. Ball

. Where did you say he was?

Mrs. Postal

. Yes; I say, they bypassed each other, actually, the man ducked in this way and my employer went that-a-way, to get in his car.

Mr. Ball

. When you say "ducked in," you mean he entered the door from the street?

Mrs. Postal

. No, sir;

just ducked into the other - into the outer part of it.

Mr. Ball

. I see,

out in the open space?

Mrs. Postal

.

Yes, sir; just right around the corner

.

Mr. Ball

. Just right around the corner?

Mrs. Postal

. Yes.

Mr. Ball

. And your boss passed him, did he?

Mrs. Postal

. Yes; they went - one came one way, and one went the other way just at the same time.

Mr. Ball

.

What did you see him do after he came around the corner?

Mrs. Postal

.

Well, I didn't actually - because I stepped out of the box office and went to the front and was facing west. I was right at the box office facing west

, because I thought the police were stopping up quite a ways. Well,

just as I turned around

then Johnny Brewer was standing there and he asked me if the fellow that ducked in bought a ticket, and I said, "No; by golly, he didn't," and turned around expecting to see him.

Mr. Ball

. And he had ducked in?

Mrs. Postal

. And Mr. Brewer said he had been ducking in at his place of business,

and he had gone by me, because I was facing west

... I knew he was in there. Well, he just had to be.

...

Mr. Ball

. And

you didn't see him actually enter the theatre then?

Mrs. Postal

.

No, sir.

Mr. Ball

.

You hadn't seen him go by you?

Mrs. Postal

. I knew he didn't go by me, because

I was facing west

, and Johnny, he had come up from east which meant he didn't go back that way. He had come from east going west.

...

Mr. Ball

. When he went in was it tucked in his pants when he went in?

Mrs. Postal

. No, sir; because I remember he came flying around the corner, because his hair was and shirt was kind of waving.

Mr. Ball

. And his shirt was out?

Mrs. Postal

. Uh-huh

Mr. Ball

. You say--

Mrs. Postal

. It was hanging out.

Johnny Brewer had this to say:<B>

Mr. Belin</B>. She [Postal] - did she say whether she had seen him, or don't you remember?

Mr. Brewer

. She said she couldn't remember a man of that description going in.

The bottom line is that Postal's testimony is full of inferences as opposed to observations: police car went running west past the theater ... she steps out of the box office and looks to the west ... her boss came out the door to his car; since Oswald was going in, they "must've" passed each other ... then, she turns around and Johnny Brewer is already beside her, asking if the guy had paid ... he says she didn't remember anyone going in, she says she watched Oswald with a "panicked face" duck into the doorway, but didn't notice him actually go through the door.

If I've got it out of order somewhere, it's easy to do given Postal's interesting way of telling things. Check out her way of answering Ball's question, which required a simple yes-or-no answer:

Mr. Ball

. Did you ask Butch Burroughs if he had seen him [Oswald]?

Mrs. Postal

. No, sir; I told Johnny this, don't tell him, because he is an excitable person, and just have him, you know, go with you and examine the exits and check real good, so, he came back and said he hadn't seen anything although, he had heard a seat pop up like somebody getting out, but there was nobody around that area, so, I told Johnny about the fact that the President had been assassinated. "I don't know if this is the man they want," I said, "in there, but he is running from them for some reason," and I said "I am going to call the police, and you and Butch go get on each of the exit doors and stay there."

So, well, I called the police, and he wanted to know why I thought it was their man, and I said, "Well, I didn't know," and he said, "Well, it fits the description," and I have not - I said I hadn't heard the description. All I know is, "This man is running from them for some reason." And he wanted to know why, and told him because everytime the sirens go by he would duck and he wanted to know - well, if he fits the description is what he says. I said, "Let me tell you what he looks like and you take it from there." And explained that he had on this brown sports shirt and I couldn't tell you what design it was, and medium height, ruddy looking to me, and he said, "Thank you," and I called the operator and asked him to look through the little hole and see if he could see anything and told him I had called the police, and what was happening, and he wanted to know if I wanted him to cut the picture off, and I says, "No, let's wait until they get here."

So, seemed like I hung up the intercom phone when here all of a sudden, police cars, policemen, plainclothesmen, I never saw so many people in my life. And they raced in, and the next thing I knew, they were carrying - well, that is when I first heard Officer Tippit had been shot because some officer came in the box office and used the phone, said, "I think we have got our man on both accounts." "What two accounts?" And said, "Well, Officer Tippit's," shocked me, because Officer Tippit used to work part time for us years ago. I didn't know him personally.

Mr. Ball

. You mean he guarded the theatre?

Mrs. Postal

. On Friday nights and Saturdays, canvass the theatre, you know, and that - then they were bringing Oswald out the door over there and --

Mr. Ball

. Well, now, was this before they had gone into the theatre that this officer used the phone?

(The disinterest in Tippit's having worked for the theater company - actually at a different theater - is evident in the last question!)

The long and the short of it is that there is really no way to tell if she actually saw Oswald at any point. The sirens went by westward, attracting her and her boss's attention to the west; the sirens had gone by westward, according to Brewer, too, while Oswald was still in the vestibule in front of his store, and Oswald didn't leave there until they'd faded away. When did Julia come outside of the box office: before or after her boss left the building? Did she actually see him leave the building, or did she merely infer that because he'd been in the building and she next saw him getting into his car to follow the cops ... to the west?

Every indication is that Postal's attention, from the time the police cars had gone by westward, was drawn to the west and away from Oswald's approach. Did she really see him, or did she just "remember" the details from things she learned later? I think it's too tough a call to make. Sole point being that resting a conclusion on her testimony is probably a bit shaky at best.