Jump to content
The Education Forum

QUESTION: How difficult was it to get out of Dallas on 22 NOV?


Recommended Posts

Bill,

What time was Oswald apprehended? 1:30? From the start at the crack of the first shot at 12:30, that's pretty quick.

The first physical description on the President's shooting went out at 12:45. Their was no clothing description.

The first broadcast on the suspect in the Tippit shooting went out at 1:19. At that time, Dispatch said there was "No physical description."

The first physical description on the suspect in the Tippit shooting went out at 1:22.

LHO was arrested around 1:50.

Steve Thomas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill,
What time was Oswald apprehended? 1:30? From the start at the crack of the first shot at 12:30, that's pretty quick.

The first physical description on the President's shooting went out at 12:45. Their was no clothing description.

The first broadcast on the suspect in the Tippit shooting went out at 1:19. At that time, Dispatch said there was "No physical description."

The first physical description on the suspect in the Tippit shooting went out at 1:22.

LHO was arrested around 1:50.

Steve Thomas

So LHO was captured an hour and twenty minutes after the Dealey Plaza shootings began, and a half hour after Tippit was killed.

Thanks Steve,

BK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... Did all or any of those officers fail to carry out their orders?
"Orders?" What orders?

If I call them "assignments", will it ease your befuddlement? :ph34r:

Sent by carrier pigeon, maybe?

I have no idea how the "assignments" were given, Duke. I'd start the search for that answer by trying to eliminate radio first. Carrier pigeons would come somewhere between smoke signals and two cans connected by a really long piece of string.

They were assigned to regular patrol duties, i.e., no special assignment;

Correct. Then after the assassination, they were REassigned to set up road blocks.

they did "roadblock duty" of their own volitions.

That may have applied to Parker, but not to Wallace or Everitt.

...

Here's another link that may be handy:

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...bsPageId=146053

...

OK, so what we're seeing here is an FBI report dated June 16, 1964 which twice uses the word "assigned," in reference to Wallace and Everitt, hence you feel as if actual assignments were made by DPD on November 22, almost seven months earlier.

We shall eliminate the radio as being the means by which these "assignments" were made:

  • The word "roadblock" or words "road block" do not appear anywhere in the transcript. When used alone, all but two of the occurrences of "block" refer to a block on a street, and two refer to someone being "blocked in."
  • The words "pleasant," "grove," or "samuel" (or any variation of them) also do not appear in the transcript.
  • Wallace, call sign 57, was on the radio only a couple of times:
    • At 12:51 he called dispatch to report being "clear" (available for duty); no assignment was given to him at this time. Dispatch responded "57 clear. 12:51."
    • At 1:52, an hour later, he calls again to say something about "... telephone." Dispatch responds "10-4." He is not called or heard from again through 2:13.

    [*]Everitt, call sign 65, was a tad busier:

    • At 12:24, he was contacted by dispatch and told to "call 633," and subsequently went "out to use the phone," from which he cleared at 12:36.
    • At about 12:48, he apparently also called in using "67," which was not acknowledged by dispatch.
    • At 1:11, dispatch gave a "signal 16" call at 4700 Scyene Road, which ambulance 603 responded to. Dispatcher then said "65, meet him there," which 65 acknowledged.
    • At about 1:45, he "cleared" (was again available for duty) from, presumably from 4700 Scyene. He repeated the "clear" call at 1:46.
    • At 2:05, 65 and 242 we dispatched to a "signal 7" at Buckner and Hume. He didn't acknowledge this transmission, and just before 2:08, dispatch called to ask him if he was en route; he said "no." He was then told "you'll meet 252 there," which Everitt acknowledged. He also was not called or heard from again through 2:13.

If you want to say that they were "assigned," you'll need to come up with something better than a couple of words in a third-hand report made nearly seven months after the fact by someone who wasn't even with DPD, that was based on information received from an assistant chief of DPD, which in turn was gleaned from reports made by cops who were responding to an investigation into a car 207 - or any other police car - tooting its horn in front of Oswald's rooming house. (Naturally enough, none did and Earlene Roberts was simply "mistaken.")

If they weren't by radio, they also weren't by phone unless the calls were initiated by the officers themselves, cuz they damned sure weren't allowed to carry cell phones back then! That "really long piece of string" starting to look good to you now?

If you don't know how any such "assignments" were assigned, how can you call them "assignments" or "REassignments," or accuse me of "befuddlement" when the only "proof" of such "assignments" was the unsworn reports of cops who were saying, in effect, "it wasn't me that she saw, no siree bob!"

And, as we've seen on the maps, what would the point have been to station oneself in one spot in an area so far from the scene of the crimes while traffic continued unimpeded across so many other roads, intersections and highways?

Bottom line: I'm not saying that they "failed to carry out their orders;" I'm saying once again that they were never given any.

Edited by Duke Lane
Link to comment
Share on other sites

... And Golly Gee Duke, I'm not a lawyer. I thought we knew each other better than that.
Oh. I wonder where I got the idea that you were? I dunno ....
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, so what we're seeing here is an FBI report dated June 16, 1964 which twice uses the word "assigned," in reference to Wallace and Everitt, hence you feel as if actual assignments were made by DPD on November 22, almost seven months earlier.

The report also has Duncan down as being assigned to set up a roadblock. This one at the the Northwest Hwy and Central Expressway intersection.

We shall eliminate the radio as being the means by which these "assignments" were made:

If we go back to the start of the report, it has Captain Talbert advising that after the assassination "he took personal charge of all assignments of his platoon and all officers were told to report to him at the Texas School Book Depository where he was making the individual assignments."

The report goes on a couple of pages later to say that Talbert advised the following officers were assigned to specific districts and squad cars up to and including the time of the assassination of the President. He advised his records reflect the following subsequent assignment of these officers. Duncan, Parker, Wallace and Everitt are all listed thereunder.

* The word "roadblock" or words "road block" do not appear anywhere in the transcript. When used alone, all but two of the occurrences of "block" refer to a block on a street, and two refer to someone being "blocked in."

* The words "pleasant," "grove," or "samuel" (or any variation of them) also do not appear in the transcript.

* Wallace, call sign 57, was on the radio only a couple of times:

o At 12:51 he called dispatch to report being "clear" (available for duty); no assignment was given to him at this time. Dispatch responded "57 clear. 12:51."

o At 1:52, an hour later, he calls again to say something about "... telephone." Dispatch responds "10-4." He is not called or heard from again through 2:13.

* Everitt, call sign 65, was a tad busier:

o At 12:24, he was contacted by dispatch and told to "call 633," and subsequently went "out to use the phone," from which he cleared at 12:36.

o At about 12:48, he apparently also called in using "67," which was not acknowledged by dispatch.

o At 1:11, dispatch gave a "signal 16" call at 4700 Scyene Road, which ambulance 603 responded to. Dispatcher then said "65, meet him there," which 65 acknowledged.

o At about 1:45, he "cleared" (was again available for duty) from, presumably from 4700 Scyene. He repeated the "clear" call at 1:46.

o At 2:05, 65 and 242 we dispatched to a "signal 7" at Buckner and Hume. He didn't acknowledge this transmission, and just before 2:08, dispatch called to ask him if he was en route; he said "no." He was then told "you'll meet 252 there," which Everitt acknowledged. He also was not called or heard from again through 2:13.

Okay. You have eliminated radio and forced me to read more of the damned report. :ph34r:

If you want to say that they were "assigned," you'll need to come up with something better than a couple of words in a third-hand report made nearly seven months after the fact by someone who wasn't even with DPD, that was based on information received from an assistant chief of DPD, which in turn was gleaned from reports made by cops who were responding to an investigation into a car 207 - or any other police car - tooting its horn in front of Oswald's rooming house. (Naturally enough, none did and Earlene Roberts was simply "mistaken.")

Slow down there, Duke. You'll burst a vein. The information comes directly from the person who made the assignments for that platoon on that day.

If they weren't by radio, they also weren't by phone unless the calls were initiated by the officers themselves, cuz they damned sure weren't allowed to carry cell phones back then! That "really long piece of string" starting to look good to you now?

No. It got much shorter. Seems that most received their reassigned duties after reporting direct to Talbert at the TSBD.

(Obviously there was at least one cop who was a no-show at the TSBD...)

If you don't know how any such "assignments" were assigned, how can you call them "assignments" or "REassignments," or accuse me of "befuddlement" when the only "proof" of such "assignments" was the unsworn reports of cops who were saying, in effect, "it wasn't me that she saw, no siree bob!"

Well, this is an another example of your befuddlement. You don't read what is supplied to you, and assume alternative sources to what is actually indicated. This didn't come from the "unsworn reports of cops who were saying in effect yadda yadda yadda..."

Nothing wrong with befuddlement. I myself, when the time comes, will feel right at home in the Twilight Home for the Chronically Befuddled.

And, as we've seen on the maps, what would the point have been to station oneself in one spot in an area so far from the scene of the crimes while traffic continued unimpeded across so many other roads, intersections and highways?

Again, I never claimed they were effective.

Bottom line: I'm not saying that they "failed to carry out their orders;" I'm saying once again that they were never given any.

Unfortunately Talbert, in two sessions before the WC, was not asked about the assignments. It is clear from the statements and testimony of others under Talbert's command though, that they were indeed, given new assignments after arriving at the TSBD. McDonald for one...

Mr. McDONALD - Well, after I left the car, my partner and I reported to a supervisor, and he directed us to patrol the crowd and move the crowd around Elm Street, and rope off the area.

.

He was then sent to Oak Cliff (according to Talbert in the FBI report) to help with the investigation. McDonald himself didn't say in testimony he was sent there under orders... and in fact, he seems to hint that it was his own idea to go - so maybe this is one instance where Talbert either assumed he had sent him, or he was covering for McDonald acting as a lone wolf.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Greg, your whole argument centers around a report made by the FBI - which didn't assign anybody anywhere - based on the reports from cops' reports about how they weren't in Oak Cliff in car 207 beeping in front of Oswald's rooming house trying to get him to hurry up or whatever.

Read the report all you want: it doesn't establish a damned thing other than the officers' "alibis" because either Earlene Roberts was entirely mistaken, or there was at least "a" Dallas cop-car in front of the house. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to have been driven by a Dallas cop. Hmmmm....

Since you mention Talbert's command and his "making assignments" (for his platoon - who were they?) I suppose you can also document his making these assignments? I think his call sign was 15, or was it 5? Either way, not every cop in Dallas went downtown first to personally get his orders from Talbert or anyone else: Talbert was in charge at the scene, and did not make assignments outside of that area. Not all of them went to the scene, even though a large number of them did, from points surprisingly far away from "the downtown area."

According to your own quote, he only made assignments to officers who actually went to DP. Can you either document who went there to get such assignments, or explain why other patrol units were advised by dispatch to remain on assignment in their areas without their having "reported" to Talbert, or without Talbert having told dispatch who he did and didn't need downtown or elsewhere?

... and further to your comment about McDonald, he was far from the only cop in Dealey Plaza who took off and went to Oak Cliff when he heard another cop had been shot. Most of them did not report doing so on the radio, and some even said that they didn't say anything to anybody, ever, but just left to go hunt down the cop-killer.

(Smart move on the cop-killer's part, especially if he knew President-killers were still downtown, doncha think?

As for my "befuddlement" over things that were "supplied" to me, don't you know what the source of what Talbert had to say to the FBI? They are not "alternative" sources, but primary sources; I didn't "assume" them, I read them. Just because you're unaware of them doesn't mean that I'm "befuddled." Do a search for either "car 207" or "Valentine" on MFF and you'll find the originals sooner or later. The FBI report, via Talbert, only reiterates them.

If you want to say that they were "assigned," you'll need to come up with something better than a couple of words in a third-hand report made nearly seven months after the fact by someone who wasn't even with DPD, that was based on information received from an assistant chief of DPD, which in turn was gleaned from reports made by cops who were responding to an investigation into a car 207 - or any other police car - tooting its horn in front of Oswald's rooming house. (Naturally enough, none did and Earlene Roberts was simply "mistaken.")
Slow down there, Duke. You'll burst a vein. The information comes directly from the person who made the assignments for that platoon on that day.
Well, no it doesn't ... but that was one helluva sentence, don't you think? I think I deserve a grammarian's medal for that!!
Okay. You have eliminated radio and forced me to read more of the damned report.
The radio is the primary source. If you have another one - recorded phone conversations, for example - you're certainly welcome to post that. The report is nothing more than second-hand hearsay.
Unfortunately Talbert, in two sessions before the WC, was not asked about the assignments. It is clear from the statements and testimony of others under Talbert's command though, that they were indeed, given new assignments after arriving at the TSBD. McDonald for one...

Mr. McDONALD - Well, after I left the car, my partner and I reported to a supervisor, and he directed us to patrol the crowd and move the crowd around Elm Street, and rope off the area.

He was then sent to Oak Cliff (according to Talbert in the FBI report) to help with the investigation. McDonald himself didn't say in testimony he was sent there under orders... and in fact, he seems to hint that it was his own idea to go - so maybe this is one instance where Talbert either assumed he had sent him, or he was covering for McDonald acting as a lone wolf.

What you're failing to recognize here is the difference between Talbert (and others under different circumstances) saying "he did this" and "I told him to do this."

Did Talbert want to say that the men under his command simply disappeared, en masse, when they heard about Tippit getting shot, or did he want to say that going to Oak Cliff - despite being at the scene of the assassination of the President of the United States, not exactly an everyday occurrence or your run-of-the-mill infraction - was exactly what he wanted them to do, all 30-some-odd of them? McDonald was far from the only one he "covered" for, not least among them being himself.

Edited by Duke Lane
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Duke,

Since you mention Talbert's command and his "making assignments" (for his platoon - who were they?) I suppose you can also document his making these assignments? I think his call sign was 15, or was it 5?

I can't add anything to the discussion, but Talbert was the Second Platoon commander for the Headquarters Station. Here's his platoon

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...p;relPageId=142

He was number 15

Steve Thomas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
... Patrolman Everitt set up road blocks Pleasant Groves & Samuels. ...
Hey, I'm having trouble with this: there is (no longer?) a "Samuels" in Dallas, tho' there is - and was - a "Samuell" that is part of Everett's district. Likewise, there is no "Pleasant Grove" - singular or plural - anywhere along Samuell, the closest name being "Grove Hill."

Any guesses about this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought I'd answer the question - "How difficult was it to get out of Dallas on 22 November?" - graphically by way of Putnam Exhibit 1, below.

This is the color key:

Red
- "all squads in the downtown area" ordered to report "Code 3 with caution" to Elm & Houston; except

Yellow
- initial responders outside immediate downtown area (including "downtown" officers);

Green
- those who later reported they had gone downtown, whether broadcast or not;

Light yellow
- those who reported they were assigned to Parkland;

Light blue
- those who were not in their districts for other reasons;

Pink
- those who reported that they remained on patrol in their districts;

Dark blue
- the TSBD district, center of activity;

Light green
- Tippit's district (78) and new assignment (91/92, "central Oak Cliff"); and

White
- those who were
not on radio
and
filed no report
, presumed to have been in district.

So the answer is, if someone wanted out of town, as long as they didn't run into a pink or white district, they were home free.

The short answer to "how difficult was it" is: not very.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought I'd answer the question - "How difficult was it to get out of Dallas on 22 November?" - graphically by way of Putnam Exhibit 1, below.

This is the color key:

Red
- "all squads in the downtown area" ordered to report "Code 3 with caution" to Elm & Houston; except

Yellow
- initial responders outside immediate downtown area (including "downtown" officers);

Green
- those who later reported they had gone downtown, whether broadcast or not;

Light yellow
- those who reported they were assigned to Parkland;

Light blue
- those who were not in their districts for other reasons;

Pink
- those who reported that they remained on patrol in their districts;

Dark blue
- the TSBD district, center of activity;

Light green
- Tippit's district (78) and new assignment (91/92, "central Oak Cliff"); and

White
- those who were
not on radio
and
filed no report
, presumed to have been in district.

So the answer is, if someone wanted out of town, as long as they didn't run into a pink or white district, they were home free.

The short answer to "how difficult was it" is: not very.

Truly excellent work Duke...thanks for the help, its appreciated. Denis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...