Jump to content
The Education Forum

Clearing The Air


Recommended Posts

Guest James H. Fetzer

Joe,

Far be it for me to get in between you and David, who is quite capable of defending himself. That

you would offer the Grodon color photo as evidence without acknowledging that it is obviously fake

simply stuns me. Do you understand the point that David was making with his brilliant comparison

of the wound observed at Parkland, the wound as described at Bethesda, and the HSCA depiction?

mcfda9.jpg

And do you understand that we actually know what the wound looked like, which is not what you show?

While the wound in frames 313-317 and elsewhere was blacked out (and "crudely done", according to

the Hollywood film restoration experts), I have discovered that it is clearly visible the later frame 374.

This is from my most recent presentation. See the same frame archived on assassinationscience.com.

zn8l8j.jpg

I have the impression that you simply do not understand the medical evidence. Your endorsement of

Groden's photo is unwarranted, since we already know it is fake. The discrepancies are so blatant

that Humes was asked during his ARRB deposition whether the subject had been given a haircut and a

shampoo during the autopsy. He replied "No, no, no." Now I know why you dismiss Lifton and Horne.

Jim

For the record, I do believe that Lifton has made a valuable contribution to the case. I do believe he was right when he found the Sibert and O’Neill report and followed it up. I do believe there was post mortem surgery of the head. But, where Lifton goes awry is when he guesses and theorizes that such surgery occurred prior to JFK’s arrival in the morgue at Bethesda. I think Doug Horne corrects and modifies Lifton’s thesis. The post mortem surgery takes place at Bethesda. All the necessary equipment and people are there. People were ordered to leave rooms and ordered not to talk about anything they heard, saw, or took part in, which is exactly what happened. This order of secrecy had to be lifted by the HSCA. That there was such an order of secrecy is proof enough of a government wide conspiracy to coverup.

I'm sorry, but Horne's hypothesis makes even less sense than Lifton's - if that's possible.

Why the frack would the autopsy surgeons NEED to conduct an illicit pre-autopsy enlargement of the head wound? They're the ones who are gonna be writing the autopsy report so who the hell are they trying to fool? Themselves?

The entire basis for Horne's silliness is Tom Robinson's statement that the autopsy photos showed "what the doctors did", that they "cut this scalp open and reflected it back in order to remove bullet fragments." (ARRB MD 180) Well, of course they did - that's what happens in an autopsy involving gunshots to the head. There is nothing suspicious about this at all.

Horne also sees something suspicious in the fact that Robinson and and Ed Reed recalled Humes using a saw even though Humes admitted he did in his Warren Commission testimony:

"To better examine the situation with regard to the skull, at this time, Boswell and I extended the lacerations of the scalp which were at the margins of this wound, down in the direction of both of the President's ears. At that point, we had even a better appreciation of the extensive damage which had been done to the skill by this injury.

We had to do virtually no work with a saw to remove these Portions of the skull, they came apart in our hands very easily, and we attempted to further examine the brain, and seek specifically this fragment which was the one we felt to be of a size which would permit us to recover it." (2H354)

Humes said "virtually no work with a saw" which, of course, does not mean "no work with a saw" it means "very little".

So where's the suspicious activity?

Oh how depressing. To come on here and attack Lifton for his bullying behavior and have someone make Lifton look good by comparison by not grasping the obvious.

Surely, you understand that if you're going to write an autopsy report that says X, Y and Z you have to produce the evidence that proves it.

Surely, you understand that you can't write an autopsy report that is in conflict with the photographs and X-rays of the body?

Surely, you understand that if you falsify the wounds in the body to tell a false story, an then "document" that with the autopsy report then it looks like you just did your job?

Surely, you understand that the tampered with body would support the autopsy report? That that was the plan all along? That they were supposed to be supportive of each other?

And surely, you understand that the whole purpose of an autopsy report is to bully any witness who would claim to have seen something the autopsy report doesn't

support?

If you think there was no post mortem surgery then explain this color autopsy photo and the 90 degree angle of the wound especially when looking at the top left of the head as viewed when looking at this.

post-5639-047145100 1325545528_thumb.jpg

And if no image appears on here I'm referring to the image I have on my blog with this post:

http://justiceforkennedy.blogspot.com/2009/12/doug-horne-makes-astounding-claims-on.html

You would understand this better if you bothered to understand that we're talking about two events, not one, a pre-autopsy autopsy to alter the nature of the wounds then you have an autopsy with the other people in the room so that now everyone thinks they are at THE autopsy, the one and only one, the first one (when it's really the second) now you have everyone seeing what you want them to see, a falsified body that will align with a lone assassin firing from above and behind. What Tom Robinson described is what he saw at the pre-autopsy autopsy, when Dr. Humes was altering the wounds, (Inside the ARRB Vol II p. 629.) Robinson, it should be pointed out was a member of the Gawler's Funeral team so that may be why he was not ordered out of the room as Ed Reed and Jerrol Custer were. He was not a member of the Navy or of any Bethesda staff. Humes really didn't have any command authority over him.

Suspicious activity? How about this line from 2H349

Specter - Tell us who else in a general way was present at the time the autopsy was conducted in addition to you three doctors, please?

Humes - This, I must preface by saying it will be somewhat incomplete. My particular interest was on the examination of the President and not of the security measures of the other people who were present.

Suspicious activity? How about X-rays having already been performed on JFK when Jackie and Bobby and presumably the hearse with JFK's body in it are only just arriving at the front of Bethesda?

Suspicious activity? How about arriving in a body bag? And a multitude of other irregularities documented in Best Evidence? Where's the suspicious activity? Are you kidding me?

Suspicious activity? Not allowing Humes to see or use the photographs but having drawings of them made both in 1964 for the WC and in 1978 for the HSCA.

Suspicious activity? Humes - The photographs, to go back a moment the photographs and the X-rays were exposed in the morgue, of the Naval Medical Center on this night, and they were not developed, neither the X-rays or the photographs. They were submitted to the, and here, if I make a mistake I am not certain, to either the Federal Bureau of Investigation or to the Secret Service, I am not sure of those. 2H351

Yeah, there was suspicious activity. Quite a lot really.

Joe Backes

Edited by James H. Fetzer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 87
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest James H. Fetzer

So how do you reconcile the evidence that I have adduced above

from Parkland, Bethesda, and the HSCA, not to mention Z-frame

374, even better, with the Grodon photo that you have embraced?

24mrcw6.jpg

Edited by James H. Fetzer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

David... Mr. L.... you, nor anyone else has can say who ran into that house - other than from Roberts' words... none.

No corroboration... no one sees Oswald between this room and the theater... NOONE David - in a residential neighborhood in the 60's with mom's kids and elderly at home... Nothing.

So please... the corroboration of the evidence... the authentication of evidence - which includes FBI reports... is paramount.

Butch Burroughs says he sold popcorn to Oswald at 1:15... his is also an uncorroborated account with the same amount of weight as Roberts... but cause that would mean Oswald did NOT kill Tippit

his story is ripped apart and attacked, like the 1:06 Markham Time...

If Oswald was on the bus then it was NOT Oswald in Whaley's cab... or Click's cab.... unless the man bought a jacket on the walk from one to the other

You want to put your stock in this man's testimony?

I'm sure you know that Neches and Beckley do not intersect...

Mr. BALL. Did you notice how he was dressed?

Mr. WHALEY. Yes, sir. I didn't pay much attention to it right then. But it all came back when I really found out who I had. He was dressed in just ordinary work clothes. It wasn't khaki pants but they were khaki material, blue faded blue color, like a blue uniform made in khaki. Then he had on a brown shirt with a little silverlike stripe on it and he had on some kind of jacket, I didn't notice very close but I think it was a work jacket that almost matched the pants. Where'd the jacket come from David?

He, his shirt was open three buttons down here. He had on a T-shirt. You know, the shirt was open three buttons down there.

Mr. WHALEY. No, sir; that is not what I said, but that is the reason I didn't call one at the time and I asked him where he wanted to go. And he said, "500 North Beckley."

Well, I started up, I started to that address, and the police cars, the sirens was going, running crisscrossing everywhere, just a big uproar in that end of town and I said, "What the hell. I wonder what the hell is the uproar?"

And he never said anything. So I figured he was one of these people that don't like to talk so I never said any more to him.

But when I got pretty close to 500 block at Neches and North Beckley which is the 500 block, he said, "This will do fine," and I pulled over to the curb right there. He gave me a dollar bill, the trip was 95 cents. He gave me a dollar bill and didn't say anything, just got out and closed the door and walked around the front of the cab over to the other side of the street. Of course, traffic was moving through there and I put it in gear and moved on, that is the last I saw of him.

Mr. BALL. When you parked your car you parked on what street?

Mr. WHALEY. I wasn't parked, I was pulled to the curb on Neches and North Beckley.

Mr. BALL. Neches, corner of Neches and North Beckley?

Mr. WHALEY. Which is the 500 block.

Mr. WHALEY. I am trying to find Beckley, the green light changed from red to green on Beckley, right here is an intersection; Zangs Boulevard goes on up, and Beckley turns off.

Mr. BALL. Here is Neches right here.

Mr. WHALEY. Let me see where Neches is, is that right? Yes, that is it.

This is the intersection right there.

Mr. BALL. We put an "X" there.

Mr. WHALEY. That is where he got off.

Mr. BALL. That is where you dropped your passenger, is that right?

Mr. WHALEY. That is--as far as I can see that is Neches.

Mr. BALL. That is Neches, that is Beckley.

Mr. WHALEY. Yes, sir; that is right, because that is the 500 block of North Beckley.

Mr. BALL. Now, we will mark the beginning of your trip on the large map as "Y", and where you dropped your passenger as an "X".

Mr. WHALEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. "Y" is the corner of Lamar and Jackson, and "X" is the corner of Neches and Beckley.

Mr. WHALEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. O.K.

David - tried to find this marked map - any ideas cause those two streets do NOT cross... and as he says, he KNOWS the area...

Oswaldcabride.jpg

The CHAIRMAN. The witness has been driving a taxicab in Dallas for 36 years.

Mr. WHALEY. Thirty-seven, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Thirty-seven.

Mr. WHALEY. You name an intersection in the city of Dallas and I will tell you what is on all four corners.

Mr. BALL. That would be--

Mr. WHALEY. Northwest corner.

Mr. BALL. Northwest corner of Neches and Beckley?

Mr. WHALEY. Northwest corner of Neches and Beckley.

ther is no such place David... and the 37 year Dallas veteran doesn't know this?

Now let's add that the first two pages of his testimony do not offer a date, while the last page does:

and out of nowhere Whaley drops Neches completely and is now at Neely...

The testimony of William W. Whaley was taken at 1:50 p.m., on April 8, 1964,

Mr. WHALEY. When I got to Beckley almost to the intersection of Beckley and Neely, he said, "This will do right here." and I pulled up to the curb

Mr. BELIN. Was that the 500 block of North Beckley?

Mr. WHALEY. No, sir; that was the 700 block.

Mr. BELIN. You let him out not at the 500 block but the 700 block of North Beckley?

Mr. WHALEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. BELIN. Had you crossed Neely Street yet when you let him off?

Mr. WHALEY. No, sir.

Mr. BELIN. About how far north of Neely street did you let the man off?

Mr. WHALEY. About 20 feet.

Mr. BELIN. Then you went down to the police station to identify this man?

Mr. WHALEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. BELIN. You saw a lineup?

Mr. WHALEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. BELIN. Do you remember what number he was in the lineup at all?

Mr. WHALEY. There was four of them, sir, and from the right to the left, he was No. 3.

Mr. BELIN. Starting from the right to the left, from his right or your right.

Mr. WHALEY. From your right, sir, which would have been his left. There were numbers above their heads, sir.

Mr. BELIN. Mr. Whaley, what number did you say the man was in the lineup?

Mr. WHALEY. No. 2 Always seems to be #2 - huh?

And now the kicker... David, do police normally have witnesses sign their statements before or after their conclusions and identifications?

Mr. BELIN. "Traveled Zangs to Beckley and turned left and traveled on Beckley until I reached the 500 block of North Beckley. When I got in the 500 block of North Beckley he said this will do and I stopped." Now is that what you told them on that day?

Mr. WHALEY. Yes, sir; that is what I told them on that day.

Mr. BELIN. Well, was that the fact that you drove until you reached the 500 block, or not?

Mr. WHALEY. No, sir, I didn't drive until I reached the 500 block. I drove until I reached Beckley and Neely. If you would be in my place when they took me down there, when they had to force their way through the reporters to get me in the office, they wrote that up, and I signed it, because I told them that the man said he wanted to go to the 500 block of North Beckley.

Mr. BELIN. All right. Now in here it says, "The No. 3 man who I now know is Lee Harvey Oswald was the man who I carried from the Greyhound Bus Station* * *"

Was this the No. 3 or the No. 2 man?

Mr. WHALEY. I signed that statement before they carried me down to see the lineup. I signed this statement, and then they carried me down to the lineup at 2:30 in the afternoon.

Mr. BELIN. You signed this affidavit before you saw the lineup.

Mr. WHALEY. Before I left there, I signed this typewritten, because they had to get, a stenographer typed it up. I had to wait.

Mr. BELIN. But was this before or after you saw the lineup.

Mr. WHALEY. After she typed it up. It was after.

Mr. BELIN. It was after?

Mr. WHALEY. That is when I signed it, after.

Mr. BELIN. Now, when you signed it--what I want to know is, before you went down, had they already put on there a statement that the man you saw was the No. 8 man in the lineup?

Mr. WHALEY. I don't remember that. I don't remember whether it said three or two, or what.

Mr. BELIN. Did they have any statements on there before you went down to the lineup?

Mr. WHALEY. I never saw what they had in there. It was all written out by hand. The statement I saw, I think, was this one, and that could be writing. I might not even seen this one yet. I signed my name because they said that is what I said

Murphy Street no longer exists. It is now a two block crosswalk that no longer intersects Elm Street.

McWatters said he didn't remember picking anyone up at St. Paul & Elm. He remembers Roy Milton Jones who boarded the stop before.

The reason Henry Wade stated the conversation between the elderly woman and "Oswald" was in his list of evidence on the evening of Sunday 24th was because it actually happened. The hole in the evidence was it wasn't Oswald.

Thanks Lee...

and yes - I agree, the point is NOT whether those offering evidence are being truthful... but whether what/who they saw was authentic or not...

a doctor looking at a faked/altered xray will tell you what the Xray says... NOT whether the xray is authentic - we need Mantik for that...

Let's go down this path for a second please Lee - I'd like your take..

How does Oswald REALLY get from Baker/Truly to the theater... and where does he actually stop?

i.e. Roger Craig's (Ruth's) Station Wagon? - So he NEVER goes to his room or does he make the stop... hears the horn... and leaves VIA the police vehicle which takes him to the theater?

I think if we construct a timeline removing all current knowledge from the equation... we need to get our patsy to the theater ahead of the guy that ducks in, the guy Brewer sees....

So first we need to see if he REALLY went to his room...

In the same vein as Beldsoe... could Roberts here have been coached a bit?

This is once again CLASSIC Ball questioning and leading of the witnesses....

Mrs. ROBERTS. He didn't come home on Thursday night that week.

Mr. BALL. And Friday was the day the President was shot? Had you seen him at any time that Friday before the officers came up and knocked on your door?

Mrs. ROBERTS. No.

Mr. BALL. Hadn't he been home?

Mrs. ROBERTS. Oh, let's see--that was the day.

Mr. BALL. That was on a Friday---

Mrs. ROBERTS. Wait a minute, let me think of it.

Mr. BALL. That's on a Friday.

Mrs. ROBERTS. I had better back up a minute---he came home that Friday in an unusual hurry.

Mr. BALL. And about what time was this?

Mrs. ROBERTS. Well, it was after President Kennedy had been shot and I had a friend that said, "Roberts, President Kennedy has been shot," and I said, "Oh, no." She said, "Turn on your television," and I said "What are you trying to do, pull my leg?" And she said, "Well, go turn it on." I went and turned it on and I was trying to clear it up---I could hear them talking but I couldn't get the picture and he come in and I just looked up and I said, "Oh, you are in a hurry." He never said a thing, not nothing. He went on to his room and stayed about 3 or 4 minutes.

Mr. BALL. As he came in, did you say anything else except, "You are in a hurry"?

Mrs. ROBERTS. No.

Mr. BALL. Did you say anything about the President being shot?

Mrs. ROBERTS. No.

I don't think there's any mystery as to who ran into the rooming house at 1026 N. Beckley around 1 p.m. Earlene Roberts' account--that it was Oswald, who ran in, and then ran out, zippering up a jacket he had donned--is in the accounts published in both Dallas newspapers, the New York Times, carried in all the media, and then documented in FBI reports based on interviews that took place promptly.

Why does it matter that, months later, when under oath, there's a minor glitch when, asked a question designed to permit her to tell her story, there's a brief moment of confusion.

I don't believe the passage you've isolated, from the transcript, in any way undercuts the account she provided multiple times, starting on the afternoon of 11/22/63.

DSL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My vote is both Mary Bledsoe and Oswald were on the bus. And then Oswald got off and took the cab.

Over.

Then who is it that Roger Craig sees in the rambler?

What happens to Oswald's jacket? NOT on the bus, yet 2 Jackets in the cab (or at least one that matches his DARK pants...

Mr. BALL. Did you notice how he was dressed?

Mr. WHALEY. Yes, sir. I didn't pay much attention to it right then. But it all came back when I really found out who I had. He was dressed in just ordinary work clothes. It wasn't khaki pants but they were khaki material, blue faded blue color, like a blue uniform made in khaki. Then he had on a brown shirt with a little silverlike stripe on it and he had on some kind of jacket, I didn't notice very close but I think it was a work jacket that almost matched the pants.

He, his shirt was open three buttons down here. He had on a T-shirt. You know, the shirt was open three buttons down there.

and if you see my previous post... Whaley is not exactly a lot of help to your conclusion....

and in the walk from Lamar to Commerce, in the midst of all this... not a single person remembers seeing Oswald.... you'd think people would admit to seeing him on that walk just cause they were there at the time, even if they didn't see him.... but we don't have that story... he just APPEARS ..

Did they ever contact the woman who Whaley called a cab for to corroborate the story?

DJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. BELIN. "Traveled Zangs to Beckley and turned left and traveled on Beckley until I reached the 500 block of North Beckley. When I got in the 500 block of North Beckley he said this will do and I stopped."

Now is that what you told them on that day?

Mr. WHALEY. Yes, sir; that is what I told them on that day.

Mr. BELIN. Well, was that the fact that you drove until you reached the 500 block, or not?

Mr. WHALEY. No, sir, I didn't drive until I reached the 500 block. I drove until I reached Beckley and Neely. If you would be in my place when they took me down there, when they had to force their way through the reporters to get me in the office, they wrote that up, and I signed it, because I told them that the man said he wanted to go to the 500 block of North Beckley.

the 500 block, between W 7th & W Davis is closer to the Tippit murder than the 700 block at Neely

WHY must we make the assumption that Whaley's passenger went NORTH afterward?

Mr. WHALEY. Thank you. I still would like to know where I knew you before. So would I.... :blink:

Mr. BELIN. Sir, I don't know. Now, Mr. Whaley, if you like, you can come back and read this deposition after it is typed, and sign it before you mail it to Washington, or you can waive the signing of it. You have a right to read it and sign it before it goes, or you can waive the reading of it and send it directly to us in Washington.

Mr. WHALEY. Does it make any difference?

Mr. BELIN. It does not make any difference.

Mr. WHALEY. It will all be what you said and what she took down?

Mr. BELIN. What you said?

Mr. WHALEY. Yes, sir; and what I said?

Mr. BELIN. Yes.

Mr. WHALEY. That will be all right. I will waive the signing of it.

You think it possible that NECHES was changes to NEELY from the April 8 deposition?

DJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed Lee... and thanks for stepping back in... the lumps out here do wear us down...

yet your contributions remain stellar

Please keep up the great work

DJ

David J

They contacted no one to guarantee these stories. The elderly woman who talked to Oswald/Jones - not sought (probably because it was Bledsoe). The woman who was late for her train and also allegedly asked for a transfer - not sought (probably because she didn't exist). The old lady who Oswald allegedly offered his cab to - not sought (probably because she didn't exist - she appears at the bottom of Whaley's handwritten affidavit almost as an add-on). Any other passenger who was on that bus - except Bledsoe and the driver - not sought (probably because they may have spoiled the party). The man who told McWatters that JFK had been shot - not sought (probably because he didn't exist).

Let's not forget that it was Fritz who asked Oswald whether he'd taken THE cab. Not "a cab" but "the cab.". And Fritz knew about this cab BEFORE the officers who were sent to pick up Scoggins even knew about the existence of Whaley.

This story, all of it, is BS.

The fact that Roberts and Gladys Johnson both stated that the DPD were at 1026 North Beckley before 2pm was avoided in their Warren Commission testimony.

Whaley's story went through 3 completely different versions.

McWatters didn't I'D Oswald in the line-up but the Officers said he did. His hand-written affidavit changed when typed up and once again the Officers lied about what he said and when he said it. His Waren Commission testimony contains the truth of matters but they really did keep asking him to lie under oath.

There is so much to this one single aspect of the case that the thread I started runs for 14 pages - with most of the contributions, from many different members, really worth reading.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

David... Mr. L.... you, nor anyone else has can say who ran into that house - other than from Roberts' words... none.

No corroboration... no one sees Oswald between this room and the theater... NOONE David - in a residential neighborhood in the 60's with mom's kids and elderly at home... Nothing.

So please... the corroboration of the evidence... the authentication of evidence - which includes FBI reports... is paramount.

Butch Burroughs says he sold popcorn to Oswald at 1:15... his is also an uncorroborated account with the same amount of weight as Roberts... but cause that would mean Oswald did NOT kill Tippit

his story is ripped apart and attacked, like the 1:06 Markham Time...

[snipped]

[snip]

I don't think there's any mystery as to who ran into the rooming house at 1026 N. Beckley around 1 p.m. Earlene Roberts' account--that it was Oswald, who ran in, and then ran out, zippering up a jacket he had donned--is in the accounts published in both Dallas newspapers, the New York Times, carried in all the media, and then documented in FBI reports based on interviews that took place promptly.

Why does it matter that, months later, when under oath, there's a minor glitch when, asked a question designed to permit her to tell her story, there's a brief moment of confusion.

I don't believe the passage you've isolated, from the transcript, in any way undercuts the account she provided multiple times, starting on the afternoon of 11/22/63.

DSL

I don't have time just now to critique each and every claim you make in this post, but let's start with this one:

QUOTE:

Posted Yesterday, 06:42 PM

David... Mr. L.... you, nor anyone else has can say who ran into that house - other than from Roberts' words... none.

No corroboration... no one sees Oswald between this room and the theater... NOONE David - in a residential neighborhood in the 60's with mom's kids and elderly at home... Nothing.

So please... the corroboration of the evidence... the authentication of evidence - which includes FBI reports... is paramount. UNQUOTE

MY RESPONSE:

". . . no one sees Oswald. . ."? ". . . no one. . . "??

I think you're completely wrong. You're conveniently omitting all the Tippit witnesses.

Or have we simply forgotten about that event?

How can you make such a claim when there all those witnesses who identified Oswald, in lineup (and within a day, if not hours, to reporters) as the man seen fleeing from the scene of the Tippit murder?

Do you think this is all contrived? All fabricated?

I'm no fan of David Belin (nor do I believe that Oswald shot Tippit) but the evidence cited in the Warren Report about the man who ran away cannot be dismissed with a wave of the hand (which seems to be your position). Perhaps you ought to review this situation, one witness at a time, before blithely making such assertions.

As I've often said, in discussing this matter with other researchers, it helps to visualize the situation by visualizing it like a movie, and then running it "in reverse". Analyzed that way, it seems pretty evident that Oswald was the person (or at least "a" person) running from the scene, shedding a jacket, and eventually ducking into the theater.

For starters:

Johnny Calvin Brewer--do you doubt his identification of Oswald, who he saw in the vestibule of the shoe store where he worked? (A positive identification made immediately, when Oswald was arrested a short while later, inside the theater).

Then, go back to the parking lot. . and Then from there go back to the scene on the street (at 10th and Patton);

The shooting occurs on 10th, Oswald is seen by witnesses on 10th:

Scoggins, Benavides, Markham, the Davis sisters, etc.

Finally, there is the matter of Oswald's wallet.

FBI agent Bob Barrett (who related all this to Hosty, and talked about it repeatedly in a college class as early as 1983) states that Oswald's wallet was found at the scene, and I personally interviewed Barrett, in detail, about this. I first interviewed him by phone, and then on camera, at his home in Alabama-- in July, 1998. I gave a talk about it, at Lancer, 1998, and showed key parts of the film). FBI Agent Barrett was right there when Capt Westbrook, wallet in hand, read out the contents, saying, "Have you ever heard of (or "Do you know") a Lee Oswald? An Alex Hidell? etc." He related all this to Hosty, who published it in his book "Assignment Oswald," published in 1996.

So, as far as Barrett was concerned, and based on what he personally witnessed and heard Captain Westbrook saying, as he held the wallet in his hand, that was Lee Oswald's wallet.

In making the above statements, I am not claiming Oswald shot Tippit.

I am stating that Oswald was there, that he ran away, and then ducked into the Texas Theater.

These attempts to make it appear that Oswald wasn't there at all, that he didn't run from the scene, that he didn't duck into the theater without paying for a ticket (because, I think, he had handed his wallet, through the window, to Tippit, who was then shot). . I think these attempts are fruitless, and lead nowhere.

If my analysis is correct, Oswald posed a very serious threat to the official story, not only because of any light he could shed on what happened at the TBSD, but because (in addition) he was a critical "Tippit witness" as well.

These attempts to make it appear that he wasn't even there, and that he was was some kind of a schmuck who stupidly "followed orders" and was beguiled into going to the movies (where he could be conveniently "found" after a patrolman was murdered in the area) -- I find this completely implausible and far too hard to believe, although its become apparent, over time, that it is precisely this notion (or some variant) that is what the "two Oswald" theorists apparently subscribe to.

DSL

1/5/11 6 PM PST

Los Angeles, CA

Edited by David Lifton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

David:

Is there not a fourth witness to the wallet?

Another Dallas policeman I think.

I talked to a woman at Lancer who said that she knew of a guy who also was there and saw the wallet.

I think she said you had talked to her.

JIM D

Yes, Jim. You are correct. And the DPD officer was either Jezz or Poe, who told her something to the effect that "Lady, you can take it to the bank. I was there. It was Oswald's wallet" etc. However, in my post, I was just relying on what Barrett (who was there, as Capt. Westbrook held the wallet in his hand) told me what Westbrook said (as he thumbed through the wallet). Barrett related this to me first on the phone, and then in a detailed followup filmed interviewed.

He said that when he arrived at the Tippit murder scene, Captain Westbrook, who he knew, motioned him to come over. He said Westbrook had in his hand a wallet. He didn't show Barrett the contents of the wallet. He saidmply aid "Do you know 'Oswald'? Do you know 'Hidell'?" Barrett said it was clear he was getting the names from the wallet. He said that Westbrook was looking at the wallet as he was asking him these questions. He said that he didn't know where he got the wallet rom, or how he got it, etc. . .he was simply standing there with the wallet in his hand. Barrett told me he had arrived at the Tippit murder scene when the body "had just been taken away."

Of course, this is completely at variance with the position taken by Dale Myers, author of With Malice, who accepts Oswald as Tippit's murderer, and--with regard to the wallet incident--tried to claim Agent Barrett was just confused (i.e., that he was confusing something said later in the day with what he witnessed at the site of the Tippit murder). Barrett found this ludicrous--a point he made very clear in my filmed interview.

Of course, if Barrett is correct, then Dale Myers' entire thesis goes down the drain. It also would mean that the reports made by a clique of DPD officers claiming that they "found" Oswald's wallet in his pocket (on the ride back to the police station) are false, and represent perjury and obstruction of justice.

Of course, the last thing the top level DPD wanted was for Oswald--arrested alive--to be validated as a witness to the Tippit murder, rather than the murderer himself.

The key to understanding Oswald's psychology--and much of what he said after his arrest--is understanding that Oswald was a witness to the Tippit murder, which was probably an event originally intended to end with his death.

Barrett also described to me, on camera, what happened at the theater. And how Oswald was exclaiming, at some point, "I am not resisting arrest!"

DSL

1/5/12; 6:50 PM PST

Los Angeles, CA

Edited by David Lifton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

David:

Is there not a fourth witness to the wallet?

Another Dallas policeman I think.

I talked to a woman at Lancer who said that she knew of a guy who also was there and saw the wallet.

I think she said you had talked to her.

JIM D

Yes, Jim. You are correct. And the DPD officer was either Jezz or Poe, who told her something to the effect that "Lady, you can take it to the bank. I was there. It was Oswald's wallet" etc. However, in my post, I was just relying on what Barrett (who was there, as Capt. Westbrook held the wallet in his hand) told me what Westbrook said (as he thumbed through the wallet). Barrett related this to me first on the phone, and then in a detailed followup filmed interviewed.

He said that when he arrived at the Tippit murder scene, Captain Westbrook, who he knew, motioned him to come over. He said Westbrook had in his hand a wallet. He didn't show Barrett the contents of the wallet. He saidmply aid "Do you know 'Oswald'? Do you know 'Hidell'?" Barrett said it was clear he was getting the names from the wallet. He said that Westbrook was looking at the wallet as he was asking him these questions. He said that he didn't know where he got the wallet rom, or how he got it, etc. . .he was simply standing there with the wallet in his hand. Barrett told me he had arrived at the Tippit murder scene when the body "had just been taken away."

Of course, this is completely at variance with the position taken by Dale Myers, author of With Malice, who accepts Oswald as Tippit's murderer, and--with regard to the wallet incident--tried to claim Agent Barrett was just confused (i.e., that he was confusing something said later in the day with what he witnessed at the site of the Tippit murder). Barrett found this ludicrous--a point he made very clear in my filmed interview.

Of course, if Barrett is correct, then Dale Myers' entire thesis goes down the drain. It also would mean that the reports made by a clique of DPD officers claiming that they "found" Oswald's wallet in his pocket (on the ride back to the police station) are false, and represent perjury and obstruction of justice.

Of course, the last thing the top level DPD wanted was for Oswald--arrested alive--to be validated as a witness to the Tippit murder, rather than the murderer himself.

The key to understanding Oswald's psychology--and much of what he said after his arrest--is understanding that Oswald was a witness to the Tippit murder, which was probably an event originally intended to end with his death.

Barrett also described to me, on camera, what happened at the theater. And how Oswald was exclaiming, at some point, "I am not resisting arrest!"

DSL

1/5/12; 6:50 PM PST

Los Angeles, CA

The only witnesses I know of who saw Oswald walking towards the Tippit murder scene were at the other end of the street and said Oswald walked past them but he was walking in the opposite direction of what the Warren Commission says, and they originally did't come forward because of previous arrests and a warrant, which precluded them from getting involved.

In addition, the reports of Mike Robinson must also be weighed in any discussion of the DPD at the Tippit murder scene, as he claims that he overheard policeman talking in the first floor mens room adjacent to the DPD locker room, and they implied that Tippit was accidentally killed by another policeman. Robinson is alive today.

DSL mentions "perjury" and "obstruction of justice" as crimes people have committed in order to cover up the true facts of Trippit's murder, as it should be possible for the local Dallas county prosecutor to convene a grand jury to interview living witnesses, compile the evidence and determine if there is enough there to indict anyone for crimes related to the murder of Tippit.

BK

JFKcountercoup: JFK Assassination Grand Jury - Basis for Legal Action

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I enjoy the thread guys, some new ways of looking at things have come up here.

A lot of this was fleshed out over at Lancer several years ago (2006). That is why I picked the Jacket to do a essay on it "Oswald and the Amazing Technicolor Jacket". Then another on the wallet "What's In Your Wallet" as a way to show the absurdity of this.

There was a great group at Lancer at that time and that culminated in a lot of research and new ideas. I feel the same about ED Forum now. We got lots of eyes and plenty of stuff between our collective ears to make astounding progress. Okay enough cheer-leading. B)

David your making my brain hurt :(lol (Palin-ism).

I've been thinking many of these same thoughts for years and they always nag at me.

Did Whaley give the killer (not Ossie) a ride. Was he made to 'adjust' his story to fit Lee? How silly the exchanges between counsel and witnesses were. The best comedic writers could never come close to this farce.

Question everything! Every stripe, every star, every word spoken. Everything.

Ed

http://www.jfklancerforum.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=3&topic_id=53665&mesg_id=53665&listing_type=search

http://www.jfklancerforum.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=3&topic_id=53304&mesg_id=53304&listing_type=search

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a matter of interest, what do you guys think caused "LHO" to drop his wallet? Was he involved in a fracas? If as stated, he just shot Officer Tippit, what would cause him to drop his wallet? It would need a steam shovel to get me to drop my wallet. Seems much too convenient for my way of thinking.

Edited by Ray Mitcham
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, as far as Barrett was concerned, and based on what he personally witnessed and heard Captain Westbrook saying, as he held the wallet in his hand, that was Lee Oswald's wallet.

In making the above statements, I am not claiming Oswald shot Tippit.

I am stating that Oswald was there, that he ran away, and then ducked into the Texas Theater.

DSL

1/5/11 6 PM PST

Los Angeles, CA

Then perhaps you'd care to explain why LHO had his wallet on his person when arrested, booked and processed. How many wallets are you in the habit of carrying? And when you do carry a wallet during the commission of a crime, would you carry one that ties you directly to the purchase of the weapons used in the commission of that crime?

It is self evident that the wallet at the Tippit site was a plant, demonstrated by it being surplus to requirements, the counter-intuitive contents, and the crudity of the forged ID, which would have been useless of any identification purposes. How do you explain these details?

It is also true that on the day no single police officer or DA ever used the name HIDELL in any media interviews, let alone construed the use of the HIDELL alias to suggest nefarious intent (the way they automatically did when announcing the O.H. Lee alias) nor displayed the slightest confusion over whom they had arrested. That is because the wallet Oswald possessed upon arrest did not contain the HIDELL papers; they were in the Tippit scene wallet and would later be inserted into the evidence stream as though they had been found upon LHO's person.

Ask yourself: why would DPD forego using as slam-dunk evidence the discovery at the murder scene of the killer's wallet? Why was all knowledge of that wallet made to disappear from the documentary record when it was ironclad prima facie evidence against their man? Please do explain.

It would be helpful to your assertions if you could demonstrate Oswald's fingerprints had ever been found on any of the contents of the wallet found at the Tippit scene, later surreptitiously "transferred" into LHO's actual wallet. But we know why they never conducted such tests if we think about it for more than 30 seconds, don't we?

I won't even belabour the deficiencies of the Tippit "witnesses" as that's already been done to death elsewhere on this Forum.

EDIT: typo

Edited by Robert Charles-Dunne
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a matter of interest, what do you guys think caused "LHO" to drop his wallet? Was he involved in a fracas? If as stated, he just shot Officer Tippit, what would cause him to drop his wallet? It would need a steam shovel to get me to drop my wallet. Seems much too convenient for my way of thinking.

Ray,

I agree. Even if Oswald did take his wallet out of his pocket on the pretense of showing him his ID and then shot him instead, it's unrealistic to think that he wouldn't have taken the time to retrieve it.

BTW, I don't think Oswald killed Tippit.

--Tommy :)

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a matter of interest, what do you guys think caused "LHO" to drop his wallet? Was he involved in a fracas? If as stated, he just shot Officer Tippit, what would cause him to drop his wallet? It would need a steam shovel to get me to drop my wallet. Seems much too convenient for my way of thinking.

Ray,

I agree. Even if Oswald did take his wallet out of his pocket on the pretense of showing him his ID and then shot him instead, it's unrealistic to think that he wouldn't have taken the time to retrieve it.

BTW, I don't think Oswald killed Tippit.

--Tommy :)

Neither do I, Tom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DSL -

Yes Oswald was picked out of line-ups as having fled the Tippit scene... I mis-typed... should read...

"From his room to the Tippit murder scene"

and I believe you understood that... and my point remains the same... almost a mile where few if anyone is walking (save Mrs Markham)

and not a soul sees Oswald taking this BRISK WALK... :huh:

Can you offer ANY EXPLANATION why Oswald would turn EAST ON 10th, to only wind up WEST of that location at the theater?

He could not have seen Tippit come up from behind him...

Could NOT have know Tippit would be on THAT street...

So what was EAST on/of 10th that Oswald would have been going to? Didn't Ruby have an apartment EAST of the Tippit murder?

Regarding the Tippit scene itself... Since the murder is basically time stamped by Markham, Bowley, Wright and the others who were watching TV and saw the time there as the shots were heard...

as happening a between 1:06 and 1:10...

and Scoggins lets up know that Oswald approached from the EAST...

Mr. BELIN. Let me ask you this now. When you first saw this man, had the police car stopped or not?

Mr. SCOGGINS. Yes; he stopped. When I saw he stopped, then I looked to see why he was stopping, you see, and I saw this man with a light-colored jacket on.

Mr. BELIN. Now, you saw a man with a light-colored jacket. With relation to the police car, was the man east of the police car, west of the police car, or kind of.

Mr. SCOGGINS. Just a little east is the best I can remember.

Mr. BELIN. He was a little bit east of the police car?

Mr. SCOGGINS. Yes; he was just a little bit forward. The police car headed east and he was a little bit, maybe not more than the front end of the car.

So as Tippit is DRIVING EAST he comes up on a man FACING HIM... yet to be fair, Helen has this man walking EAST across Patton and Tippit catches up with him...

Scoggins also says he only sees the man after Tippit stops... so he could have easily just turned around...

Mr. BELIN. You thought the man was at the front end of the car?

Mr. SCOGGINS. Yes; approximately.

Mr. BELIN. But by that you mean the front wheel or front bumper area?

Mr. SCOGGINS. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. Was he on the sidewalk?

Mr. SCOGGINS. At the time I saw him; yes.

Mr. BELIN. When you first saw him, I believe you said you saw the man's face, or did you not say that?

Mr. SCOGGINS. I couldn't see the man's face from there. I saw the face when he passed the cab.

Mr. BELIN. What led you to believe that he was walking west?

Mr. SCOGGINS. Well, he was facing west.

Mrs. MARKHAM. He was walking up 10th, away from me.

Mr. BALL. To your left?

Mrs. MARKHAM. Well, he was on the opposite side of the street to me like that.

Mr. BALL. Had he reached the curb yet?

Mrs. MARKHAM. Almost ready to get up on the curb.

Mr. BALL. What did you notice then?

Mrs. MARKHAM. Well, I noticed a police car coming.

Mr. BALL. Where was the police car when you first saw it?

Mrs. MARKHAM. He was driving real slow, almost up to this man, well, say this man, and he kept, this man kept walking, you know, and the police car going real slow now, real slow, and they just kept coming into the curb, and finally they got way up there a little ways up, well, it stopped.

Mr. BALL. The police car stopped?

Mrs. MARKHAM. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. What about the man? Was he still walking?

Mrs. MARKHAM. The man stopped.

Mr. BALL. Then what did you see the man do?

Mrs. MARKHAM. I saw the man come over to the car very slow, leaned and put his arms just like this, he leaned over in this window and looked in this window.

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...