Jump to content

Hear No Evil by Don Thomas


Pat Speer
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hear No Evil

Chapter 14 - The Tippit Case

By D. B. Thomas

From Mary Ferrell

http://www.maryferre...sPageId=1538456

No wonder Dale Myers was mad at John Simkin for posting his comments on Thomas' book.

While generally known and well regarded as an expert on the acoustical evidence,

Thomas takes no prisoners here, and it is apparent that he has spread out and is no longer just

a specialist on the acoustics, but has also applied his keen, analytical approach to much of the other evidence.

And guess what he finds?

This chapter completely destroys the credibility of the Tippit evidence, the Dallas police,

the medical doctor who operated on Tippit, the Warren Commission's conclusions,

and Dale Myers and his bogus book With Malice.

http://jfkcountercou...it-murder-case/

Thanks a lot Bill.

Now, thats interesting. I've been through.

How could the Dispatcher know that it was number 78 (Tippit) before Bowley mentioned car number 10???

Bill, can you maybe describe from your memory what Myers criticized about Thomas?

I'am not asking for a transcript. Just a rough description.

Since you are not a part of this private group, i see no violation at all and it's a pretty fair question.

Thank you forward.

Martin

In an earlier post on this thread, John Simkin gave two links to some of the things that Myers says about Thomas.

I think that at first Myers went along with the criticism of Thomas based on the Natonal Science retort to the HSCA acoustical study.

Now that Thomas has expanded his base into other aspects of the case, especially the Tippit murder, Myers is running around trying to stamp out fires.

If anyone who is on the list and has received info from this group, I'd like to see it, but I can't post anything since I am not among the insiders.

BK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Anyone who could possibly even begin to believe that Lee Harvey Oswald was innocent of shooting J.D. Tippit, given the wealth of evidence that proves Oswald committed that murder beyond all reasonable doubt, is a person who isn't worth taking seriously for even two seconds.

And Herbert Blenner's laundry list of documents from the Dallas Municipal Archives that Lee Farley re-posted above can only elicit a two-word response from anyone reading it:

So what?

There's nothing there that even begins to exonerate Lee Oswald.

And why Herbert Blenner thinks that some initial mistakes concerning the address of the Tippit shooting can possibly lead toward the direction of Oswald's innocence is anybody's guess. Mistakes like that are commonplace, of course. But apparently CTers feel there was no room for ordinary human error on 11/22/63 in Dallas, Texas.

Every anomaly and human gaffe MUST mean conspiracy to the CTers on the Internet. No other explanation is to even be considered among some conspiracists. Otherwise, why would anybody even bother to post something silly like the paragraph repeated below? (Does Herb Blenner think that Tippit was really shot in six different locations in Oak Cliff on November 22nd?) .....

"When police initially arrived at the scene of the Tippit shooting, the dictabelt had recorded six addresses for the location of the crime scene. This situation is particularly difficult to dismiss since a citizen reported the shooting to the police over the two-way radio of Tippit's patrol car."

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone who could possibly even begin to believe that Lee Harvey Oswald was innocent of shooting J.D. Tippit, given the wealth of evidence that proves Oswald committed that murder beyond all reasonable doubt, is a person who isn't worth taking seriously for even two seconds.

And Herbert Blenner's laundry list of documents from the Dallas Municipal Archives that Lee Farley re-posted above can only elicit a two-word response from anyone reading it:

So what?

There's nothing there that even begins to exonerate Lee Oswald.

And why Herbert Blenner thinks that some initial mistakes concerning the address of the Tippit shooting can possibly lead toward the direction of Oswald's innocence is anybody's guess. Mistakes like that are commonplace, of course. But apparently CTers feel there was no room for ordinary human error on 11/22/63 in Dallas, Texas.

Every anomaly and human gaffe MUST mean conspiracy to the CTers on the Internet. No other explanation is to even be considered among some conspiracists. Otherwise, why would anybody even bother to post something silly like the paragraph repeated below? (Does Herb Blenner think that Tippit was really shot in six different locations in Oak Cliff on November 22nd?) .....

"When police initially arrived at the scene of the Tippit shooting, the dictabelt had recorded six addresses for the location of the crime scene. This situation is particularly difficult to dismiss since a citizen reported the shooting to the police over the two-way radio of Tippit's patrol car."

David, you need to stop seeing everything through your "Oswald did it, therefore everything's been solved" prism before anyone can take you seriously. I suspect Oswald killed Tippit, but would still find the prospect the DPD edited the tapes to give Oswald "more time" interesting.

We are not children, David. We KNOW that law enforcement officials all the way up to the President will lie to the public about certain matters, as they have many times, for both political expediency and legitimate national security matters. With the murder of a president, in fact, it would be shocking if no lies were told for these purposes. So why should it be beyond the pale for LNs to admit certain witnesses were pressured into lying, or that certain evidence was faked?

Let's take for example, LBJ. IF, for example, he had jumped down beneath the seat at the sound of the first shot, and was not pushed by Youngblood, do you think we would have been told of this? OF COURSE NOT. It follows like night from day he would have lied about it, as it might make him look cowardly, and un-presidential. Similarly, IF Patrick Dean had been told by Jack Ruby that Ruby wanted to see Oswald's departure, and that Ruby would get him a date with Jada if he let him in the basement Sunday morning, it follows like night from day that Dean, and every DPD employee privy to this arrangement, would have lied about it.

So, common sense tells us some lies were told...and that some of what is the "official" story is just that, a story.

I mean, is there NO part of the story you question?

Or is it against your religion to admit such doubts?

Edited by Pat Speer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

David, you need to stop seeing everything through your "Oswald did it, therefore everything's been solved" prism before anyone can take you seriously.

Oswald DID do it. So the case HAS been solved. Even you, Pat, admit that LHO probably killed Tippit.

Everything else is just a hobby for the conspiracy theorists, whose major goal is to try to sift through the evidence and nitpick every single anomaly or inconsistency to death until they satisify their own curious desire to exonerate the lone killer of both JFK and J.D. Tippit.

E.G., Herbert Blenner's comment about there being six different addresses on the Dictabelt tape for the Tippit murder site. (BTW, if the DPD altered the Dictabelt, I'm wondering why they didn't alter out those 5 incorrect addresses too? Maybe it wasn't important enough to "edit" out of the tapes. But it sure is important to a conspiracy theorist named Herbert Blenner. Otherwise, why even bring it up in the first place?)

I...would still find the prospect the DPD edited the tapes to give Oswald "more time" interesting.

Pat,

Do you happen to know the name of the rabid conspiracy theorist who first suggested that the Dallas Police Department actually "edited the tapes" as part of a cover-up plot to frame Lee Harvey Oswald for Officer Tippit's murder? Where on Earth did that silliness come from?

There's not a shred of proof to back up that ridiculous theory, of course. But apparently some conspiracist decided to invent a radio call from T.F. Bowley at 1:12 PM (a call that never existed, of course, since Bowley's call occurred at 1:18 PM) in order to pretend that the whole timeline of official DPD radio calls surrounding the Tippit shooting has been "edited".

Bugliosi was right -- there apparently is nothing too silly for the palate of certain JFK conspiracy theorists.

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[David Von Pein] needs us all to believe that Ted Callaway placed his call to the dispatcher to tell them of a police officer who had been shot AFTER he'd helped put him in the ambulance with T.F. Bowley.

Callaway knew that somebody had called for an ambulance, but that call could have been made by a citizen on Tenth Street for all Ted Callaway knew.

Callaway didn't know if the DPD knew about the shooting or not, even after the ambulance had left the scene.

Naturally, I'm sure Farley is ready (and eager) to call Ted Callaway a xxxx, since Callaway specifically told the Warren Commission that he placed his radio call BEFORE the ambulance arrived and not afterward.

But things were happening very quickly, and Callaway's testimony to the WC is obviously slightly off on the exact timing of his radio call. He certainly placed that radio call AFTER the ambulance had left with Tippit's body, not before.

And that's just the type of inconsistency that feeds conspiracy theorists like Farley. Without such inconsistencies, which couldn't be more normal and expected in any criminal case, CTers like Farley would be lost.

I'm pretty sure that Farley's next liars will be Virginia Davis and Barbara Davis. They MUST be liars, because they nailed Farley's prized patsy to the wall (where he belongs).

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure that Farley's next liars will be Virginia Davis and Barbara Davis. They MUST be liars, because they nailed Farley's prized patsy to the wall (where he belongs).

They did nothing of the sort. They didn't witness the shooting. They couldn't get the number of shots right. Barbara Davis said the killer

was wearing a dark sports jacket. Virginia Davis told David Belin that the police were called before she saw a man running with a gun.

She was so confused and/or nervous she told Belin things that couldn't be true.

A defense attorney would have rendered the Davis sisters' testimony useless. It's a shame Oswald never had one.

David's contention that they nailed anyone to the wall is indicative of his lightweight grasp of facts and evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both Davis girls positively IDed Oswald as the man who was cutting across their yard unloading a revolver.

And the two bullet shells that those same Davis girls found in their yard on Nov. 22 (one each) were shells that were positively fired in Lee Oswald's revolver.

The fact that Michael Hogan doesn't seem to want to accept the Davis girls' positive IDing of Tippit's killer or the positive ballistics identification of the Davis shells to Oswald's gun shows Hogan's willingness to let a cop killer go free.

Sad. But it's to be expected, coming as it does from yet another member of the Anybody-But-Oswald conspiracy society, to which Mr. Hogan obviously belongs.

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both Davis girls positively IDed Oswald as the man who was cutting across their yard unloading a revolver.

And the two bullet shells that those same Davis girls found in their yard on Nov. 22 (one each) were shells that were positively fired in Lee Oswald's revolver.

The fact that Michael Hogan doesn't seem to want to accept the Davis girls' positive IDing of Tippit's killer or the positive ballistics identification of the Davis shells to Oswald's gun shows Hogan's willingness to let a cop killer go free.

Sad. But it's to be expected, coming as it does from yet another member of the Anybody-But-Oswald conspiracy society, to which Mr. Hogan obviously belongs.

Sure David. They really nailed him to the wall, didn't they? That guy wearing a dark sports jacket. After all, they each heard two shots.

They called the police before they saw the man cut across their yard. I'm sure their ID was rock solid.

You really have no idea what society I belong to. I just pointed out how silly your statement about Lee Farley was. And how unfamiliar you

are with the evidence and facts.

If you don't like being called a lightweight, beef up your game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know all about the Davis girls' testimony. I've written about it extensively on various JFK forums in the past several years.

You actually think that because the Davis girls didn't hear more than two shots, this somehow makes either of them incapable of getting a good look at the face of the man who did the shooting? (And I think it's quite logical to assume that a positive identification of an individual is largely derived from getting a good enough look at a person's FACE, and not the color of the jacket he was wearing. Would you not agree?)

You ABO types are, indeed, amazing. 47 years of attempting to exonerate an obviously guilty cop killer (and President killer).

You should get together with Judyth Baker. You two could have a ball pretending how Lee Harvey was innocent of the two murders he committed. Judy's made a career out of doing that, of course.

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know all about the Davis girls' testimony. I've written about it extensively on various JFK forums in the past several years.

Apparently you don't know. Your comment about them nailing Oswald to the wall shows that.

You should get together with Judyth Baker. You two could have a ball pretending how Lee Harvey was innocent of the two murders he committed. Judy's made a career out of doing that, of course.

Actually you have more in common with her than I do. You've also made a "career" out of your silliness, fantasies and misrepresentations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anybody actually read Thomas' Chapter 14 and want to discuss what he says?

http://www.maryferre...sPageId=1538456

From Hear No Evil by B. Thomas. Chapter 14 – The Tippit Case

The slaying of officer Tippit led directly to the capture and arrest of Oswald. Evidence that Oswald murdered Tippit is assembled in a book by researcher Dale K. Myers entitled With Malice. However, a concern not adequately addressed by Myers, nor by the Warren Commission before him, is that a second assailant may have been involved. The issue has obvious implications for the question of conspiracy. The Dallas police department’s investigation of the crime scene at the Book Depository was less than a model of efficiency. But their handling of the physical evidence in the Tippit case was even worse and is one of the more sordid episodes in the annals of police work….

“It is conceivable, even probably, that Tippit stopped Oswald because of the description broadcast by the police radio.”

The probability was nil. The description at issue was broadcast over the police radio at 12:45, fifteen minutes after the assassination. But that broadcast contained no details that could have pointed to Oswald…..

….The failure to protect a suspect from an angry mob, especially after having incited the public through irresponsible pretrial pronouncements of the suspect’s guilt, amounts to a lynching. The lynching of a guilty man is one thing, the failure to protect an innocent suspect while in custody is quite another………The most distressing reason for suspecting malfeasance in the handling of the evidence is that circumstances suggest that one or more members of the Dallas police department were involved in the Tippit murder – and in the death of Lee Harvey Oswald as well….

The fact that Tippit was shot with two different types of bullets contributes to suspicions that he was victimized by two assailants. At the very least the investigating authorities were obligated to establish whether or not Oswald was using two different types of ammunition. Because of the mismatch between the bullets and casings, it was even more essential than usual to authenticate the evidence. Instead, the Warren Commission and its staff disregarded serious breaches in the chain of possession of these items. Under the circumstances described below, the provenance of these shells is highly suspect.

Button-Button Who’s Got the Button?

The Warren Report asserts, without elaboration, that four .38 caliber bullets were recovered from officer Tippit’s body. Three of the bullets were Winchester-Western, the fourth was a Remington-Peters. The fact that two different kinds of bullets were recovered from the victim is of obvious relevance to suspicions that Tippit might have been shot by more than one assailant. Regardless of how one wishes to view the problem, the implications raised by different kinds of ammunition renders a careful accounting of the chain of possession of the bullet evidence as imperative, and a credible ballistics comparison essential. The American people got neither.

Contrary to the statement in the Warren Report, only three slugs entered Tippit’s body. The police received the three bullets recovered from the autopsy on the day after the shooting ths resulted in the official reports and public pronouncements that Tippit had been shot three times. The Homicide report, written by Detective James Leavelle, states, “Oswald pulled a .38 pistol and shot Officver Tippit three times: one time each in the head, chest and stomach.”

However at least one detective, Lieutenant Carl Day, knew that a fourth bullet had been recovered because he had given it to the FBI the night before….The bullet in question, Commission Exhibit 602, was transmitted to the FBI late on the night of the assassination…..the FBI was told at this time by the Dallas Police that the one bullet was all that was recovered. It was not until the following March that the Warren Commission got around to inquiring about the remaining Tippit slugs and a search of the police evidence files turned up the three missing bullets. On November 30 and December 3 of 1963, the Dallas Police had belatedly forwarded the ballistic evidence from the Tippit case to the FBI for laboratory analysis, but this did not include the bullets recovered from the autopsy.

The FBI and the Warren Commission’s staff knew that such bullets had been recovered because they had the victim’s autopsy report. Tippit’s autopsy report was conspicuously absent from the Wrren Commission’s published exhibits…..When the autopsy report was finally made public in 190, it was obvious why the results had been withheld. In contradiction to the Warren Report, only three bullets, not four, had been recovered from Tippit’s body. Although Tippit was actually struck four times, one of his chest wounds was only a bruise, that is, superficial, non-penetrating wound. Dr. Earl Rose, the autopsy pathologist, reported that no bullet associated with this wound was recovered……

This bullet, a .38 Special Winchester slug, had struck a brass button on Tippit’s jacket, and the button, along with the jacket and the policeman’s sternum, had prevented the bullet from entering his body and causing more than a superficial wound. The bullet, still embedded in the dislodged button, fell out of Tippit’s clothing during the ambulance ride and was found by ambulance attendant Eddie Kinsley on arrival at the hospital. Years after the assassination, Kinsley told reporter Earl Golz: “I kicked one of the bullets out of the ambulance that went into his button….onto the parking lot of Methodist Hospital. It didn’t go in the body…it fall off the ambulance still in his button.”

But in 1963 no one had asked Kinsley about the bullet because the police had not bothered to determine the provenance of the evidence. The FBI knew that the bullet had struck a button because the button was still wrapped around the bullet (Fig. 14.2). …The Warren Commission became aware of the discrepancy and asked the FBI to resolve the mystery by investigating the origin of the extranenous bullet.

It is clear that the FBI’s report on the matter, Commission Document 2011, was a fabrication by the FBI whose purpose was to disguise mishandling of the evidence by the Dallas police. The fabrication is a false affidavit which “authenticates” the discovery of CE-602, also known by its FBI number Q-13, the button bullet. Dallas police detective R.A. Dvenport swore in this affidavit, dated 12 June 1964, that he had watched Doctor Paul Moellenhoff remove the bullet from the body of officer Tippit, furthermore, that said bullet exhibited his marking! The obliging doctor agreed to sign a separate affidavit asserting that he had removed the bullet from Tippit, while admitting that he could not identify the specific bullet (Q-13) as the same. How could the good doctor fail to recall a bullet embedded in a button? One wonders, also, how frequently this doctor removed bullet evidence from murder victims before they could be autopsied, and failed to mention such to the coroner? The long withheld autopsy report revealed that the bullet had never entered the body and that, therefore, the affidavits were false. <BR style="mso-special-character: line-break"><BR style="mso-special-character: line-break">

There is no reason to doubt that the button-bullet is authentic. It is unlikely in the extreme that the ambulance driver would invent such a story, nor would anyone plant a bullet embedded in a button. Moreover, the three bullets found by the FBI in the Dallas police files in March 1964 are authenticated by the initials of Dr. Rose, the autopsy pathologist. In fact, one has to suspect that it is for reason of their authenticity that the Dallas Police decided to withhold them from the FBI in the first place. What tales would these bullets tell forensic experts? For the time being, withholding the evidence covered up the mismatch between the bullets and the casings.

The episode demonstrates the willingness of the FBI and Dallas Police to fabricate evidence, in this case a false affidavit, to cover-up the failings in their investigation. The button bullet is also relevant to the issue of a second assailant. A man’s jacket was found hanging inside the patrol car. The Dallas Police assumed that this jacket belonged to Tippit. The button bullet proves that Tippit died wearing his jacket.

….Thus, the authenticity of the live cartridges is fraught with doubt as is the other evidence. One possible explanation is that Officers McDonald and Hill were lying about the presence of a firing pin dent in the primer of one cartridge in order to bolster their incriminating story about Oswald resisting arrest by trying to shoot McDonald. On the other hand, could it be that McDonald and Hill were telling the truth and actually did see the base of the cartridge with a firing pin indentation and genuinely surmised that the gun had misfired?

….If Nick McDonald is telling the truth that he marked the evidence bullet with his initial “M”, then the live cartridges in evidence are false, planted evidence, for the purpose of making it appear that Oswald had both Winchester and Remington ammo in his gun. If McDonald and Sergeant Gerald Hill are telling the truth and they saw a dented primer on any of the cartridges in the revolver, then the cartridges entered into evidence are false, planted evidence. If Sergeant Hill’s statement to the press later that night about the revolver being fired twice was based on his finding two spent hulls in Oswald’s weapon, then the live cartridges entered into evidence are false, planted evidence. Accepting as authentic requires one to believe that the police reports were lies and fabrications.

There is another clue, and it comes from the acoustical evidence – the DPD tapes. Shortly after Oswald was taken into custody, the police radio dispatcher requested that someone return to the Texas Theater and shake it down for two spent castings! Why specifically for two casings, and why specifically at the Texas Theatre? The only reference to expended casings in connection to the Texas Theatre is the oblique reference to the pistol having been fired twice when it was taken from Oswald when he was arrested at the Texas Theatre. The context of the radio call suggest that someone had reported to the dispatcher that two casings had been confiscated from the suspect at the Texas Theatre and that these two casings were not accounted for and that a search should be made for them where last seen, at the Texas Theatre. And thus one cannot help but speculate that police officers may have salted the scene of the Tippit shooting with these casings. This theory explains both the mysterious reports of two casings in Oswald’s gun at the Texas Theatre, and the mysterious appearance of two casings at the scene of the crime after the crime scene detectives had searched and left the scene.

When one considers the state of this evidence, there arises a disturbing scenario which suggests the possibility that the Dallas Police switched the ballistics evidence, perhaps to incriminate Oswald, or perhaps to hide evidence of the involvement of a second assailant. Did the two Winchester casings that turned up later at the scene originate from Oswald’s pistol confiscated at the theatre? What if all the cartridges in Oswald’s gun and pocket were Winchesters? A policeman wishing to cover up for the involvement of a second assailant using Remington ammo would want to salt the evidence with live Remington cartridges and replace the two authentic casings found by Benavides with Remingtons fired through Oswald’s pistol. That is why the failure to authenticate the two Remington casings and the live cartridges is a serious matter of suspicion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

He also invited, rather pequliarly, his friend HDH, who heaped praises on Fritz, to join the last interview whose rather irrelevant questions considerably extended the interview/delayed the transfer, and a rap on the door brought it to a halt just as Ruby was approaching.

He appears to have given HDH a pretty free run of the evidence room.

I'm sure there is more.

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...