Why was Tippit Murdered? (A perfect example for the lies that trolls tell)

[David G. Healy]

the below thread is posted here with the thread respondents' permission

Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk

From: Ben Holmes <ad...@khadaji.com>

Date: 30 Mar 2008 10:05:27 -0700

Local: Sun, Mar 30 2008 10:05 am

Subject: Re: For CT's: Why was Tippit Murdered? (A perfect example for the lies that trolls tell)

Reply | Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

In article <e254b93e-3af8-4842-bbea-1926dfeff...@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,

xxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx.com says...

>On Mar 28, 11:06=A0pm, XXXXX XXXXXXX <xxxxx@xxx-xxx.com> wrote:

>> While most students of the Kennedy assassination that believe in

>> conspiracy have accepted the idea that Lee Harvey Oswald, in flight,

>> killed JD Tippit, the CT's that post here are a special breed of kook.

Translation - while CT'ers who aren't here to defend their belief in Oswald's

murder of Tippit, I'm sure they exist *somewhere*... in the meantime, the CT'ers

who are here on this forum, willing to defend their statements with citations to

the evidence, for some strange reason aren't in lockstep with these other

mythical CT'ers that exist somewhere...

Trolls need to lie to make their points, and yet; they aren't even *reasonable*

lies... they are, in many cases, simply silly.

>> Most kooks, like Dealey Plaza cardboard/popsicle stick

>> reconstructionist xxxx xxxxxxxxx,

Ad hominem attacks on those who merely present the evidence demonstrates the

problems that trolls have... the evidence simply doesn't support their faith, so

they have to criticize the messengers...

>> do not believe Oswald was near the

>> corner of 10th and Patton.

This *is* what the evidence shows. Trolls simply can't get around that fact.

>> Officer JD Tippit motioned a pedestrian who

>> resembled Oswald

And yet, the descriptions of this "pedestrian" *DON'T* "resemble" Oswald at all.

In fact, the *closest* eyewitness simply refused to identify Oswald as that

murderer... until he was pressured to do so months later.

Just as in the TSBD, the description of the person, and the description of the

clothing worn, simply don't match Oswald.

>> to stop for some questions...and, per the kooks, was

>> gunned down for some unknown reason

Tippit's murder never *was* investigated. They simply pinned it on Oswald, then

stopped the investigation.

We still don't even know *why* he was where he was...

>> by this still unknown (44 plus year later) assailant.

If you don't investigate, you aren't going to come up with any facts.

>> This killer fled, and left behind some pretty

>> incriminating evidence...

Yes... he did. It's a shame that due to political necessities they needed to

frame Oswald for it.

The real killers got away.

>> spent shells that are a perfect ballistic match

Here's another example of the lies that trolls tell. This xxxxx knows perfectly

well that the shells have *NO* chain of custody worth spit - and that the

description of these shells AT THE SCENE are different from the ones received in

evidence... you won't hear these facts from the xxxxx.

The shells that where marked in accordance with routine procedure suddenly

didn't have those markings when they got to the WC.

>> to the LHO pistol he was arrested with a half hour later, for

>> starters.

>> If Oswald was a patsy, why the need to kill Tippit?

What LNT'ers fail to understand is that there isn't necessarily any connection

AT ALL between JFK's assassination and Tippit's murder. Police in any large

city don't routinely decide that the same suspect must be involved when they

have two murders 30 minutes and miles apart.

In fact, the only *real* evidence of a connection is the inability of LNT'ers to

be able to explain Tippit's location. And the explanation for that leads

inexorably to conspiracy.

>> What's the

>> plotters' mindset here? The plotters already have Oswald's rifle, or

>> have planted a rifle that could be tied to Oswald, in the building he

>> worked at...they've accomplished their 'mission'.

That's far from the only thing needed for a frameup.

>> I'm sure no CT's will take a crack at this other than just a general

>> dismissive paragraph that Tippit was 'in' on it too, but even if

>> Tippit was some sort of co-conspirator, why kill him? He is looking at

>> the death penalty, too, if his role is 'discovered', so he isn't going

>> to talk anymore than the other 'plotters' that have stayed silent for

>> 44 years and counting.

Another obvious lie. Books have been written on the strength of those who've

talked about their part in the assassination. Indeed, one book is titled

"Someone Would Have Talked" - and details the number who did.

The lie that no-one has talked is a frequently asserted one, in spite of the

mountain of eyewitnesses who *HAVE* talked.

>> Let's grant the point that the slugs recovered from Tippit are

>> ballistically inconclusive as a definitive match to the Oswald pistol.

This, of course, is merely the truth.

The FBI, with presumably the best ballistics experts in the world, couldn't

match 'em up - so the WC went "expert shopping" and found someone who would.

Given the obvious bias on the part of the FBI, it's a testament to the honesty,

(or fear of discovery) that we have as much exculpatory evidence as we do have.

>> They still had uneven strike marks like the type of marks Oswald's

>> pistol would've left on that same ammo!

As *any* pistol would have on ammo not fitted to it. (Or, more accurately, as

any pistol would have on *ANY* ammo when the pistol's barrel has been changed

from factory standard)

This is a fairly weak argument, but it sounds impressive.

>> So what is the answer?

A conspiracy & frameup, of course. The fact that the evidence simply doesn't

support your faith is reason enough for you to lie about it. If the evidence

supported your belief, you wouldn't need to lie about the evidence.

>> Either Oswald killed JD Tippit, in obvious flight, for whatever reason

>> you want to insert, or someone who looked similar to LHO killed Tippit

>> and left ejected shell casings that are a ballistic match to his

>> handgun.

If Oswald killed Tippit, he did so prior to the time he would have been able to

get there - the police and WCR would not have engaged in a pattern of changing

the evidence for that time... the shells would not have mysteriously changed

from 'automatic' to revolver, the shells would still have been marked by the

officers at the scene, the radio transcripts wouldn't have required the

alterations they've had, photographs would have been taken of the scene to

include the shells in situ, real lineups could have been conducted, a real

investigation - to include why Tippit was where he was, would have been

conducted, the fingerprints would have been a vital clue, rather than being

falsely labeled as "smears", the wallet found would be in evidence, and so

forth...

>> So instead of arguing bushy hair or 1:06pm or whatever,

Translation: Instead of arguing the evidence... let's presume who the killer

was, and proceed from there...

>> let's hear the

>> reasoning behind an Oswald double killing a cop for no reason.

>I know, LNers hate when you answer with a question, but one is needed

>to be asked first before you can attempt to answer your question

>Chuck. It is vital to the whole story. Why was Tippit in the Oak

>Cliff section anyway? This is the key question as it made the whole

>story of LHO fleeing and shooting the cop possible. All other cops

>were in the downtown area due to the assassination so I wonder what

>Tippit was doing in this northern section of town anyway.

Sadly, the only real explanation for Tippit being where he was must have

involved a conspiracy and frameup. This is indeed a real problem for LNT'ers.

Edited March 30, 2008 by David G. Healy

[Duke Lane]

Edited April 2, 2008 by Duke Lane