Lee Oswald’s Departure from the TSBD

[Antti Hynonen]

Duke Lane Posted Today, 03:13 PM

QUOTE(Antti Hynonen @ Oct 7 2008, 02:34 AM)

QUOTE

Duke Lane Posted Yesterday, 07:16 PM

You're jumping just a little ahead of the conversation, Antti - we haven't even gotten Oswald beyond the rooming house yet! - so allow me to just tackle your last part:

...I'll sit back, let you advance the discussion further a bit, so we can cover/recap the goodies that were said in the various Tippit threads with regards to the timing and events at 10th and Patton as well as the TT.

Sorry about that; what I should've said was that you were getting there a little faster than me! Didn't mean to be so arrogant ....

QUOTE(Antti Hynonen @ Oct 7 2008, 02:34 AM)

... Oh, by the way, once the discussion goes beyond the rooming house. Will you consider the alternative that perhaps Oswald made use of that transfer ticket and got on a bus that took him closer to 10th and Patton? Or are you asking me again to refer to the previous Tippit threads?

The "technical" problem with that scenario is that a bus driver would have taken the transfer from the rider in lieu of a cash fare, meaning that the paper transfer would no longer have been in the rider's possession ... unless the bus driver was also "in on the plot!"

Ok, thanks. Where I come from, the ticket or transfer stub stays with the passenger as a receipt for the transportation services purchased, this is in case passengers get inspected for valid tickets during the bus ride (I don't know why the drivers aren't trusted to do the checking when passengers board the bus).

Of course those who wish to complicate matters will say that LHO obtained a (car/bus) ride to 10th and Patton, in order to be there in time to slay Patrolman Tippit. Have you ever given any creedence to Earlene's statement about that Patrol car honking it's horn outside 1026 N. Beckley? Perhaps as a method of transportation somewhere?

A bit far fetched, agreed, but just wondering if this avenue ever led anyone anywhere that might be helpful in seeing the "bigger picture".

[Antti Hynonen]

J. Raymond Carroll Posted Today, 03:19 PM

QUOTE(Antti Hynonen @ Oct 7 2008, 09:34 AM)

Oh, by the way, once the discussion goes beyond the rooming house. Will you consider the alternative that perhaps Oswald made use of that transfer ticket and got on a bus that took him closer to 10th and Patton? Or are you asking me again to refer to the previous Tippit threads?

I must admit that I do not understand how the transfer system worked. I am not sure that the transfer was any good after he left downtown. It has been suggested here that the transfer in his possession was planted in order to make it seem that he was on McWatter's bus, but I have serious doubts about that. In any case, while he may have hoped to use the transfer later, the "fact" that he still had the transfer in his possession suggests that he did not use it again.

If there was a possibility that he caught a bus that would take him closer to 10th and Patton, I feel sure the Warren Commission would have tried to exploit that against him, and I don't remember them trying to do so.

If I was in his shoes and wanted to catch the 1.20 movie, I know I would walk south on Beckley to the bus stop at 5th, and keep on walking if no bus was in sight. There were bus stops every block going south, so I might catch one further along the way or just keep walking if no bus came. Either way I would miss no more than a few minutes of the opening of the first movie.

Ray,

Do you think catching the movie was Lee's main plan that afternoon? It seems that the ever so thorough Dallas cops would have found a movie ticket on Oswald since they found the transfer ticket as well. I mean he had some money on him, had he planned on going to the movies, I would imagine he would have paid for the ticket. Or do the ushers keep the tickets as well once you enter? Where I come from they just tear..... never mind.

You may have guessed that I do place quite a bit of weight on the testimonies of Postal and Brewer, so I do think Lee had in fact attempted to avoid Law enforcement officers, and did fear that he was a suspect.

Any suggestions as to why Lee was armed with the 38 revolver when he went to the movies? Were movie theaters in Oak Cliff really that dangerous in 1963 that one needed a hand gun with them, particularly at 1 p.m. or so?

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Do you think catching the movie was Lee's main plan that afternoon?

It seems that is what he claimed

It seems that the ever so thorough Dallas cops would have found a movie ticket on Oswald since they found the transfer ticket as well. I mean he had some money on him, had he planned on going to the movies, I would imagine he would have paid for the ticket.

He may have been holding the ticket stub in his hand and lost it in the scuffle, or he may have placed it on the seat beside him. It seems he was not asked about a cinema ticket during interrogation, so we do not know what his explanation would have been. I would only add that I for one do not guard a movie ticket with any great care once I have gained admission.

I do think Lee had in fact attempted to avoid Law enforcement officers, and did fear that he was a suspect.

I, on the other hand, have yet to be convinced of that.

Any suggestions as to why Lee was armed with the 38 revolver when he went to the movies? Were movie theaters in Oak Cliff really that dangerous in 1963 that one needed a hand gun with them, particularly at 1 p.m. or so?

The fact that a holster was found at 1026 suggests, but does not prove, that he picked up the gun at Beckley. It is also possible that he was carrying it all along. It is a small gun and very easy to conceal. If I was in his shoes, my answer to your question would go like this: I picked up my revolver because the word was out that there were assassins on the loose that afternoon in Dallas.

[Duke Lane]

I must admit that I do not understand how the transfer system worked. I am not sure that the transfer was any good after he left downtown. It has been suggested here that the transfer in his possession was planted in order to make it seem that he was on McWatter's bus, but I have serious doubts about that. In any case, while he may have hoped to use the transfer later, the "fact" that he still had the transfer in his possession suggests that he did not use it again.

I can perhaps provide some insight into this from a couple of perspectives.

The first is that I rode public busses for many years to and from middle and high schools and used transfers every day. That said, I did not do it in Dallas, and it's very possible if not likely that DTC's rules were different than the bus company's where I grew up. The second may be through talking with some folks still in Dallas whom I'd been in contact when researching my bit on Worrell. While I know I won't be able to dig up specific information about, say, bus route schedules, it is entirely possible that they'll be able to recall broader topics like how the transfer system worked.

The bus company I rode with allowed you to transfer on to any intersecting route, but not use it to get off of one route's bus for a period of time and get back onto that route's next bus; i.e., a transfer from line #19 could not be used to board a bus on line #19. If, however, line #20 continued past the point where line #19 stopped, you could use the line #19 transfer to get onto line #20, just as you could to change onto an east-west bus from a north-south bus.

Typically, you had to ask for a transfer when you first got onto the first bus or shortly thereafter. The transfer tickets they used were identical in most major respects to DTC's transfers, although I cannot attest to a driver's punch being used. They, too, were marked in 15-minute increments (not obvious from the ticket in evidence since all higher time intervals were cut off), with the time that was shown being the time of the transfer's expiry, i.e., you could not use a transfer cut off at 1:00 at 1:15 or 1:30 (although some drivers were undoubtedly more lenient than others).

The transfer was used in lieu of fare, meaning that the driver had to collect either the transfer or the cash from you as you boarded the bus. This prevented someone from getting on bus "A" and transferring to bus "B" and then again to bus "C" or "D" or "E" for as long as the time was not yet expired. This could be done more easily in a downtown area where several bus lines converge than it could in an outlying area where the lines are fewer even if not less frequent.

As you say, since no bus driver had the transfer, it most likely means it was not used to transfer to another bus. I will see what I can do about finding out how DTC worked in the next several weeks.

If there was a possibility that he caught a bus that would take him closer to 10th and Patton, I feel sure the Warren Commission would have tried to exploit that against him, and I don't remember them trying to do so.

There never was a suggestion that he could've taken a bus there, although - absent the transfer and assuming DTC's rules to be the same as my bus company's - it is very well possible. Indeed, even with the transfer in hand, it doesn't preclude that he couldn't find the transfer in his pocket (how long, after all, did it take the cops to find it?) and paid the cash fare instead. It was probably only a nickel or so (five or ten cents/pence for the furriners here!), which he could've had laying on top of his dresser in pennies, thus not figuring into his financial portfolio as dissected by the WC.

If I was in his shoes and wanted to catch the 1.20 movie, I know I would walk south on Beckley to the bus stop at 5th, and keep on walking if no bus was in sight. There were bus stops every block going south, so I might catch one further along the way or just keep walking if no bus came. Either way I would miss no more than a few minutes of the opening of the first movie.

'Tis so.

[Duke Lane]

... Of course those who wish to complicate matters will say that LHO obtained a (car/bus) ride to 10th and Patton, in order to be there in time to slay Patrolman Tippit. Have you ever given any creedence to Earlene's statement about that Patrol car honking it's horn outside 1026 N. Beckley? Perhaps as a method of transportation somewhere? A bit far fetched, agreed, but just wondering if this avenue ever led anyone anywhere that might be helpful in seeing the "bigger picture."

While DPD queried its on-duty officers about being in the Oak Cliff area or specifically in the Zangs/Beckley area, it appears to have taken whatever the officers said at face value. None were in the unit designated by Earlene Roberts (#107) or anything similar, and none claimed to have been in the immediate area.

Therefore (if I might digress from the subject ever so slightly) Mrs. Roberts - who was blind in one eye and distracted by trying to improve the TV reception, but nevertheless was able to positively identify Oswald to "most everyone else's" satisfaction because she'd known him for five weeks and had presumably seen him almost every day and thus could not be mistaken even though she never testified to doing more than glancing at him - was unable to differentiate a police vehicle, approximately 30 times bulkier and with a much larger provile than any human being we'll ever know, from any civilian vehicle on the road. Based on police reports - any one or more of which could have been lying to cover their sixes - she was "mistaken."

There is at least one scenario that I know of that would or could place a police vehicle in front of 1026 from its last suspected position in approximately the same elapsed amount of time as Oswald presumably spent inside the house. The driver was not and could not have been JD Tippit ... and that's all I'm prepared to say about that right now.

There is absolutely no question that Oswald could have gotten to 10&P by vehicular transport, but since he didn't own a car, didn't presumably have a license, and likewise had no assistance whatsoever, that has to be ruled out. It's further ruled out by the unlikelihood that anyone could have driven him only to that neighborhood and then forced him out of the car, gun in hand, left to his own devices (and not worry about being shot themselves, or held at gunpoint) ... and if that's as far as he was going, why get anyone else involved? If he'd hitchhiked, it was a helluva place to hitchhike to.

Even had that happened, someone still needs to put the gun in Oswald's hand, which nobody has ever been able to do.

(I kno-o-ow!)*

* With apologies to TV's Craig Ferguson!

[Duke Lane]

It seems that the ever so thorough Dallas cops would have found a movie ticket on Oswald since they found the transfer ticket as well. I mean he had some money on him, had he planned on going to the movies, I would imagine he would have paid for the ticket.

He may have been holding the ticket stub in his hand and lost it in the scuffle, or he may have placed it on the seat beside him. It seems he was not asked about a cinema ticket during interrogation, so we do not know what his explanation would have been. I would only add that I for one do not guard a movie ticket with any great care once I have gained admission.

This is probably more true in a single-screen movie theater like TT than in today's large multiplex cinemas where you can go out to the popcorn stand and then sneak into another movie: as long as you didn't leave the building - under police escort or otherwise!! - you probably didn't need to keep the ticket for any reason.

Depending upon the weight you place on other statements made or supposedly made, Ray, one might be compelled to ask "placed it on which seat 'beside him'?"

I do think Lee had in fact attempted to avoid Law enforcement officers, and did fear that he was a suspect.

I, on the other hand, have yet to be convinced of that.

That largely depends upon what occurred with him after being last positively seen on the second floor of the TSBD.

If it was as the WC concluded, then yeah, he probably did fear he was a suspect. If it was anything other than that - say, along the lines of the "Wes Wise Allegation," or the "toot-tooting" cop car being somehow involved, or his unknown ride to 10&P having ditched him - it's anyone's good guess.

It is interesting to note in that context, when asked if he'd shot anybody, he didn't say "they've got the wrong guy," but rather "I'm just a patsy," which suggests that he knew or at least suspected who else had done the shooting. For that reason, I don't think he was heading to the theater for the afternoon, but found it a convenient - if ultimately foolish - place to be.

But then, didn't someone say that they remembered him at the concession stand more than 1/2 hour before the cops came barging in? I'm sure they were mistaken, but still ...?

[Denis Pointing]

QUOTE: It seems that the ever so thorough Dallas cops would have found a movie ticket on Oswald since they found the transfer ticket as well. I mean he had some money on him, had he planned on going to the movies, I would imagine he would have paid for the ticket.

................................................................................

...................................................

I always believed one of the reasons why Oswald seemed so suspicious was because he sneaked in without paying?

[J. Raymond Carroll]

I always believed one of the reasons why Oswald seemed so suspicious was because he sneaked in without paying?

He seemed suspicious because it was ALLEGED that he was a sneak-thief.

I find it odd that, although his life and character have been examined in greater depth and detail than any other ordinary person in history, I cannot recall a single other instance -- from his childhood onwards -- where anyone ever called him a sneak-thief, or any other type of thief.

What does not add up in the official story is this: If he really HAD shot Officer Tippit, and if he really DID hope to escape- by-not getting-out-of-the-area, there was no earthly benefit to be had in drawing attention to himself by attempting to sneak in without buying a ticket. He had twelve bucks and change in his pocket, as I recall.

If he had a history of thieving behaviour I might be inclined to give more credence to the official story.

[Denis Pointing]

I always believed one of the reasons why Oswald seemed so suspicious was because he sneaked in without paying?

He seemed suspicious because it was ALLEGED that he was a sneak-thief.

I find it odd that, although his life and character have been examined in greater depth and detail than any other ordinary person in history, I cannot recall a single other instance -- from his childhood onwards -- where anyone ever called him a sneak-thief, or any other type of thief.

What does not add up in the official story is this: If he really HAD shot Officer Tippit, and if he really DID hope to escape- by-not getting-out-of-the-area, there was no earthly benefit to be had in drawing attention to himself by attempting to sneak in without buying a ticket. He had twelve bucks and change in his pocket, as I recall.

If he had a history of thieving behaviour I might be inclined to give more credence to the official story.

Yes, but IF Oswald did shoot Tippit he would surly of been in a state of panic. As I understand it Oswald ALLEGEDLY "ducked" into the theater to avoid the police cars rushing, with sirens blaring, to the murder scene. With the pay booth being in full view of the street this doesn't sound too unbelievable. IMO.

Edited October 7, 2008 by Denis Pointing

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Yes, but IF Oswald did shoot Tippit he would surly of been in a state of panic. As I understand it Oswald ALLEGEDLY "ducked" into the theater to avoid the police cars rushing, with sirens blaring, to the murder scene. With the pay booth being in full view of the street this doesn't sound too unbelievable. IMO.

Except that he was an undistinguished-looking person walking in a shopping district where pedestrians were fairly plentiful. The only thing about him that stood out was the (alleged) fact that he tried to sneak in without paying.

You are certainly free to find the Official story convincing, but excuse me if I withold judgment until someone offers persuasive evidence that he did NOT arrive at the cinema some time between 1. 14 P.M and 1.24 P.M., or thereabouts. Until then, I accept his statement (implied, to be sure) that he paid the admission price and watched the first half-hour or so of the first movie.

But then, didn't someone say that they remembered him at the concession stand more than 1/2 hour before the cops came barging in? I'm sure they were mistaken, but still ...?

I personally think that the official story still has a burden-of- proof problem after all these years.

Edited October 8, 2008 by J. Raymond Carroll

[Antti Hynonen]

I find the different points of view on this thread interesting. Particularly as the thinking here seems to go towards what was possible that Lee did and thought. I still do opine that it is safest to go with what most likely occurred, and do place my bets on much of the witness testimony related to the Oak Cliff events. Thus in my opinion, Brewer&Postal were fairly accurate in their testimonies and did in fact observe Lee.

However, I am not convinced Oswald is the killer of Tippit, although that is entirely possible too - in my mind the timing of the events is the biggest problem with this scenario.

Edited October 8, 2008 by Antti Hynonen

[Don Bailey]

When was the city bus transfer holder invented? Back in the 60’s the bus transfers were held in a stack of 50 or so in a tear-off box next to the driver… no need to ask the driver for a transfer.

Don

[Antti Hynonen]

Don Bailey Posted Today, 12:31 PM

When was the city bus transfer holder invented? Back in the 60’s the bus transfers were held in a stack of 50 or so in a tear-off box next to the driver… no need to ask the driver for a transfer.

Don

Don, I believe that in Dallas in 1963, passengers had to request the driver for a transfer.

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

Mr. BALL - Did you ever see the motorman give him a transfer?

Mrs. BLEDSOE - No; I didn't pay any attention but I believe he did.

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

Mr. BALL - Which exit did he leave?

Mrs. BLEDSOE - Front.

Mr. BALL - By the motorman?

Mrs. BLEDSOE - Uh-huh, by the motorman.

Mr. BALL - Did anybody else get off at that time when he got off?

Mrs. BLEDSOE - No, not then, but there was a lady sitting right across, she wanted to go to the train station.

Mr. BALL - To the what station?

Mrs. BLEDSOE - Train station, and she was worried about trying to get off, you know, trying to get there, and then we were hearing her, and I said, "Well, why don't you walk over there. It's just a little ways." Because the crowd was so bad we still didn't know the President had been killed, and finally she got off, but I think it was---it was before---I mean after Oswald did.

Mr. BALL - Did she ask for a transfer?

Mrs. BLEDSOE - Yes; she had the man give her one, because she caught the bus before she got to the train station. Mr. BALL - How do you know that?

Mrs. BLEDSOE - Well, I saw her.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Thus in my opinion, Brewer&Postal were fairly accurate in their testimonies and did in fact observe Lee.

OK Antti, how about a little elaboration? Duke has made most of the running on this thread, but whenever Duke offers an argument he supports it by posting actual testimony, etc., thus he allows us to evaluate the argument and the discussion is advanced. I would like to see you post the relevant parts of the testimonies you are relying on, and your analysis. For example, what did Postal say that convinces you that she saw Lee Oswald entering the cinema a half hour after the show began?

Bear in mind that Lee Oswald said (so far as we can determine) that he left his room and went directly to the cinema. If we assume he left his room at about 1.03 - 1.04 he would have made it to the cinema on foot by 1.24, (or earlier if he caught a southbound bus on Beckley). Bear in mind also that NO ONE has so far come up with ANY PLAUSIBLE explanation for why he would instead have headed to the vicinity of 10th & Patton.

[Antti Hynonen]

J. Raymond Carroll Posted Today, 03:01 PM

QUOTE(Antti Hynonen @ Oct 8 2008, 08:35 AM)

Thus in my opinion, Brewer&Postal were fairly accurate in their testimonies and did in fact observe Lee.

OK Antti, how about a little elaboration? Duke has made most of the running on this thread, but whenever Duke offers an argument he supports it by posting actual testimony, etc., thus he allows us to evaluate the argument and the discussion is advanced. I would like to see you post the relevant parts of the testimonies you are relying on, and your analysis. For example, what did Postal say that convinces you that she saw Lee Oswald entering the cinema a half hour after the show began?

Bear in mind that Lee Oswald said (so far as we can determine) that he left his room and went directly to the cinema. If we assume he left his room at about 1.03 - 1.04 he would have made it to the cinema on foot by 1.24, (or earlier if he caught a southbound bus on Beckley). Bear in mind also that NO ONE has so far come up with ANY PLAUSIBLE explanation for why he would instead have headed to the vicinity of 10th & Patton.

Ray, sure, I can add their testimonies to my post, but anyone can read them online so I don't think that is necessary. If you like I can send you links to them via PM.

I find the mentioned testimonies reliable, because Brewer did observe a suspicous man (one he thought looked "funny") and whom he was able to identify in the theater.

The fellow who entered the shoestore was suspicious enough that Brewer decided to see where he went from his shoe store. Brewer sees the man walk into the nearby movie theater, and quite apparently Ms. Postal didn't sell this man a ticket.

Brewer stays until the cops arrive, and helps the cops identify the man he had observed earlier, this is the man he thought was "funny" and whom he had observed enter the theater.

It turns out that the man, arrested at the theater will later be known as Lee Harvey Oswald, aka Alek Hidell. That is, according to Brewer, the person that was in his shoe store and as the person that entered the movie theater (without paying as per their testimony).

Julia Postal's testimony basically confirms what Brewer disclosed with regards to observing a man on the street (Jefferson Blvd), a man whom she saw out of the corner of her eye, did not see walk past her, nor did she see the man turn back to walk in the direction that he came from, followed by Johnny Brewer. She concluded that the man must have entered the theater, after talking to Brewer.

Basically from their testimonies, it sounds like they observed someone who was trying to avoid law enforcement, as this "suspicious" person seemed to enter two places of business on Jefferson mainly to hide as police cars where driving by.

I'm sure if we nitpick testimonies, we will find something wrong with quite a few of them (if not all). However, to me these witness testimonies seemed quite believable as well as logical.

As to whether Lee was anywhere near 10th and Patton on 11/22/63, I don't know, and do not see any strong evidence putting him at the scene. As a contrast, the witness testimony and evidence is rather weak&contradictory regarding Lee as a suspect in the Tippit murder case. Particularly the timing of events does not do too well to support his guilt imo.

Of course there is some evidence supporting that Lee was at the Tippit scene. As I recall in addition to some 38 shells the suspect left behind a wallet. Also a jacket or sweater of some sort was located in a nearby parking lot. From what I recall it has been argued that this piece of garment belonged to Lee. I don't know if all this physical evidence actually holds up and can be tied to Lee. This is an area I'd like to investigate and discuss further.

One item that bothers me in particular, is that one of the officers at the scene recalled that he had inscribed his initials onto the 38 shells found at the scene before they were turned in as evidence. Later examinations show that no initials can be seen on these shells (this is how I recall this). Of course in official hearings this officer said something like he "thought he had marked the shells".... rather annoying.

Edited October 8, 2008 by Antti Hynonen