Jump to content
The Education Forum

What did William Scoggins see ?


Gil Jesus
 Share

Recommended Posts

Gil Jesus' attempt at discrediting William W. Scoggins' positive identification of Lee Harvey Oswald as the gunman at 10th & Patton is a futile and desperate attempt by a conspiracy theorist to avoid the obvious fact that Oswald was present (with a gun) at Tenth and Patton on 11/22/63.

Gil's attempt is futile because there are so many OTHER witnesses who ALSO fingered Lee Oswald as the Tenth Street gunman. So where can an "Anybody But Oswald" type of conspiracist like Gil really go with his Scoggins' article? Answer: Not very far.

Or would Gil like to create similar webpages on Barbara Davis....and Virginia Davis....and Ted Callaway....and Sam Guinyard?

All four of those above-named witnesses ALSO positively identified none other than Lee Harvey Oswald as the man they each saw leaving the scene of J.D. Tippit's murder--with a gun in his hand--immediately after Officer Tippit was shot and killed on Tenth Street.

What can Gil possibly do to discredit and undermine the positive identification of Oswald made by all four of those witnesses (not to mention several others--like Patterson, Searcy, Russell, and Lewis).

And I won't even place Helen Markham on the list of Tippit witnesses, due to her "screwball" nature.

But even without Mrs. Markham, Gil Jesus doesn't have a leg to stand on. Not even a wobbly leg. Because there's too much corroboration of Oswald's guilt in the Tippit murder for him to possibly be innocent. Way too much.

What can a conspiracy theorist possibly do with Ted Callaway, who is a witness who unquestionably saw the exact same gunman that William Scoggins saw on 11/22/63?

And even Gil Jesus would surely stipulate to the fact that WHOEVER Scoggins saw cutting through the shrubbery on the corner of Tenth & Patton on November 22, it was, indeed, the very same person seen by Ted Callaway (and the Davis girls and Guinyard too).

And since we know beyond all reasonable doubt, via the testimony of several other (non-Scoggins) witnesses, that the man cutting through the shrubbery was positively Lee Harvey Oswald, it can only mean one thing:

The man Scoggins saw cutting through that same shrubbery with a gun on Nov. 22 was also Lee Harvey Oswald. Given these facts, Scoggins could not possibly have seen anyone OTHER than Lee Harvey Oswald that day.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cz1-3JmSbzk

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

Hardly a month goes by without another exoneration

of an innocent man, and nearly every case involves mistaken eyewitness identification.

Six people identified Lee Oswald as being in Alice, Texas

at a time when he was not there,

and I am sure David you not believe the six or seven witnesses

who swore they saw Lee Oswald in Clinton with Clay Shaw.

So your faith in Scoggins & Co. sounds to me

like whistling in a graveyard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hardly a month goes by without another exoneration of an innocent man, and nearly every case involves mistaken eyewitness identification.

Six people identified Lee Oswald as being in Alice, Texas at a time when he was not there, and I am sure David you [do] not believe the six or seven witnesses who swore they saw Lee Oswald in Clinton with Clay Shaw.

So your faith in Scoggins & Co. sounds to me like whistling in a graveyard.

No graveyard whistling coming from me, J. Raymond. I couldn't be more confident of Oswald's guilt in the Tippit murder. And you should be too (of course).

Because we don't JUST have to rely on the eyewitnesses (who are, indeed, strong and plentiful), but we can COMBINE those eyewitness accounts with the physical evidence (the bullet shells littering the Davis yard at 10th & Patton) that ALSO proves Oswald's guilt beyond all possible doubt.

And if you want to, throw away the two Poe shells. Doesn't matter one bit. There are still two other shells that didn't go through J.M. Poe's hands on Nov. 22. And guess what gun those other two shells came out of?

So we've got several eyewitnesses who all said: It was Oswald.

And we've got ballistics proof in the form of those bullet shells dropped at the crime scene that says: It was Oswald's gun that killed Tippit, to the exclusion of all other guns on the planet.

And we've got that gun still in Oswald's hands when he was arrested 35 minutes after Tippit was killed with that gun. (And Oswald tried to kill more policemen with that same gun in the theater too, which is another thing that often gets completely overlooked by the Anybody-But-Oswald fantasists. I guess they think Oswald was fighting like a wild man and brandishing his pistol just for the sport of doing it, while at the same time uttering one or two phrases that can only be looked upon as words being spoken by a man with a guilty state of mind.)

All of that stuff above is a hard combination of facts for the ABO crowd to combat (although they try desperately to combat it on a daily basis as they continue to put forth the mindless assertion that Oswald wasn't even at the scene of the murder when Tippit was slain).

Still think I'm whistling in that cemetery, Ray?

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

Still think I'm whistling in that cemetery, Ray?

'Fraid so, David.

The eyewitness identification is useless,

the shells were deliberately dropped

and the killer was a professional.

I have just been spending time with a Swedish gentleman

and the subject of Olaf Palme's murder came up.

Two shots to the body, one to the head

tells you it was a professional job.

The Tippit murder was even more professional,

but keep on whistling if it feels good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Robert Morrow

In 2010 I and a friend went to 10th and Patton, the scene of the Tippit murder. We were parked in my car precisely at the spot Tippit died. Then an older man - in his 70's walked by and I motioned him over to my car. I asked the man if he knew anything about the murder of Officer Tippit.

The old man said that in 1963 he lived in this exact neighborhood. Then the next words out of his mouth were that there were TWO people who shot Officer Tippit. I did not asking a "leading question" -- those literally were the first words out of this elderly Hispanic man's mouth. He was a young man, in his 20's, at the time of the JFK assassination.

He did not say he witnessed the Tippit murder, just that there were two men who shot and killed Tippit. Apparently, this was common knowledge in the neighborhood around Tenth and Patton.

Edited by Robert Morrow
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Robert Morrow

Still think I'm whistling in that cemetery, Ray?

'Fraid so, David.

The eyewitness identification is useless,

the shells were deliberately dropped

and the killer was a professional.

I have just been spending time with a Swedish gentleman

and the subject of Olaf Palme's murder came up.

Two shots to the body, one to the head

tells you it was a professional job.

The Tippit murder was even more professional,

but keep on whistling if it feels good.

I think George Herbert Walker Bush and Oliver North, US intelligence in general, were behind the Olof Palme murder:

1) http://www.leopoldreport.com/JohnA.html

2) http://www.leopoldreport.com/Pegasus.html

Google "Chip Tatum Olof Palme"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two shooters. Yes. At last two men involved. Aquilla Clemens saw the stocky built killer waving to another man across the street, after Tippit was gunned down...like: job done, go away...I think this was why Helen Markham thought, the killer was waving to her...

KK

PS And, yes, two shots in the body one in the head...like Olof Palme. That was the job of an expert-killer...

Edited by Karl Kinaski
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two shooters. Yes. At last two men involved. Aquilla Clemens saw the stocky built killer waving to another man across the street, after Tippit was gunned down...like: job down, go away...I think this was why Helen Markham thought, the killer was waving to her...

KK

PS And, yes, two shots in the body one in the head...like Olof Palme. That was the job of an expert-killer...

Another piece of evidence that points to two shooters is that two different brands of ammunition was used. That says two different shooters. If Oswald had been "between" boxes of ammunition, the remnant of the second box should have been found in the search of his room. It was not. And don't tell me that they found two different types of bullets in his pocket. I'm not buying that BS story. Maybe David Von Pein believes that they could arrest an armed man and not search his person for almost two hours, but I'm not buying it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And if you want to, throw away the two Poe shells. Doesn't matter one bit. There are still two other shells that didn't go through J.M. Poe's hands on Nov. 22. And guess what gun those other two shells came out of?

So we've got several eyewitnesses who all said: It was Oswald.

And we've got ballistics proof in the form of those bullet shells dropped at the crime scene that says: It was Oswald's gun that killed Tippit, to the exclusion of all other guns on the planet.

Here's some news for ya.

The shells didn't kill Tippit. The bullets did.

Establish a chain of custody for those shells.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or would Gil like to create similar webpages on Barbara Davis....and Virginia Davis....and Ted Callaway....and Sam Guinyard?

What can Gil possibly do to discredit and undermine the positive identification of Oswald made by all four of those witnesses (not to mention several others--like Patterson, Searcy, Russell, and Lewis).

Hang on, they're coming.

You mean Barbara Davis who said the shooter was wearing a dark jacket ?

You mean Virginia Davis who said the shooter was 18 years old ?

You mean Callaway and Guinyard who viewed a police lineup with Oswald and three police employees ?

You mean Patterson, who was supposed to have identified Oswald from a photograph, but told the Commission he was never shown a photograph ?

You mean Russell who identified Oswald from a mugshot and the "backyard photo" ?

You mean Searcy who was never interviewed and Lewis who was never close enough to identify the shooter ?

How about Reynolds, who couldn't identify Oswald until after he was shot in the head ? Now THERE'S a witness so credible the Dallas Police didn't believe him.

Mr. FRITZ. I didn't talk to him very long because I didn't have to talk to him long or I didn't have to talk to him very long but he told me two or three different stories and I could tell he was a sick man and he had no doubt brain damage from that bullet and he is apt to say anything.

Mr. BALL. What did he say?

Mr. FRITZ. He told me that--he told me two or three stories, one story he told me when they first brought him into me, for me to talk to him, he told me that he saw this Ruby coming down there and he told him--he said he followed him up and saw which way he went.

Mr. BALL. Ruby?

Mr. FRITZ. Saw Oswald.

Mr. BALL. Oswald?

Mr. FRITZ. Yes, Oswald, and I questioned him further and I asked him, how far, how close was the closest you were ever to him, how far were you from him? He said, well, from that car lot across the street there. Well, of course, if he had been at a car lot across the street it would be difficult to follow him on the sidewalk. It would be quite difficult so I talked to him for just a short time and I didn't bother with him any more.

I already had some history on him because the other bureau, the forgery bureau had been handling him and they had already told me a lot about him. They discounted anything that he told.

( 4 H 235 )

You got some great witnesses there, Dave.

Oh yeah those pages are coming.

Edited by Gil Jesus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this is really good Gil. I mean, after this, what is Scoggins worth as a witness?

And your site is coming along really well.

Thanks, Jim. I've been slacking off due to the holidays and now tax time, but now that I've gotten all of the distractions out of the way, I'm starting to research the issue again.

Mr. Von Pein's "fall back " position is that even though the witnesses may be less than perfect, the physical evidence proves Oswald guilty. In this instance, he cites the four spent shells the Commission said were found at the Tippit murder scene. The Commission said that these shells were fired from Oswald's revolver to the exclusion of all other weapons.

My question to Mr. Von Pein requires nothing more than a simple yes or no answer. Four shells were found by three different people. Domingo Benavides found two, Barbara Davis and Virginia Davis each found one.

Did any of these three witnesses ever identify any of the four shells currently in evidence as the shell or shells they found ?

Yes or no ?

Just in case Mr. Von Pein answers "yes", to that question, let me have a follow up:

Which witnesses found the Remington-Peters shells and which ones found the Westerns ?

Edited by Gil Jesus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Robert Morrow

"Know how she got there? She was appointed. See, in my neck of the woods, the northeast, you got chosen for the grand jury at random from voting rolls. Not in the south, because of the segregation and racist issue. Therefore only trusted members got appointed to the grand jury. Know who appointed her? Guy by the name of Joe Dealey. Of the Dallas Morning News and Belo Corporation. Belo is running he Dealey Plaza restoration project. "

I don't know how or if Joe Dealey was related to Ted Dealey - but here is what Ted Dealey, the publisher of the Dallas Morning News thought of JFK in 1961:

Dallas Morning News publisher Ted Dealey on John Kennedy:

"The general opinion of the grassroots thinking in this country is that you and your administration are weak sisters," Dealey read to the president. "If we stand firm, there will be no war. The Russians will back down. We need a man on horseback to lead this nation, and many people in Texas and the Southwest think that you are riding Caroline's tricycle."

In October 1961 Ted joined a group of nineteen Texas publishers for a Friday lunch at the White House. It was a typical presidential courting ritual: an elegant bite to eat, an off-the-record briefing, and a bit of pleasant conversation, all harmless enough. But this time was to be different.

After lunch Kennedy spoke to the publishers about foreign affairs and then asked if any of his guests had anything to say. One publisher got up and delivered the best wishes of his local citizenry. Then Ted Dealey rose, pulling out a prepared statement. Since Kennedy's election, the News' editorial page had leveled an unrelenting attack on the president: he was a buffoon, a thief, thirty times a fool. Now, face to face, Dealey continued the assault. "The general opinion of the grassroots thinking in this country is that you and your administration are weak sisters," Dealey read to the president. "If we stand firm, there will be no war. The Russians will back down. We need a man on horseback to lead this nation, and many people in Texas and the Southwest think that you are riding Caroline's tricycle."

The other publishers were aghast. "Mr. President," said Jim Chambers, publisher of the Times Herald (Dallas' afternoon paper) and a man who knew Ted Dealey well, "I think you should know that Mr. Dealey does not express the sentiments of all the publishers around this table." The incident produced a national media fire storm, and the News relished every moment. Around the state and the country, Ted Dealey was condemned as a reactionary and a boor. But in Dallas, the News received more than 2,000 letters, and 1700 of them voiced approval of his actions. In Dallas it was Jim Chambers who fielded the stacks of hate mail (towards JFK).

Edited by Robert Morrow
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The chain of possession issue is a joke in the TIppit case.

You bring up the issue of the ridiculous idea that no one frisked Oswald for two hours.

Baloney. And the late Roger Feinman proved this was baloney with the excerpts he got through the discovery process when he internally protested the one sidedness of the CBS 1967 special.

The Dallas Police Department was simply a disgrace at that time. One of the very worst in the country. And the Wade/Fritz regime encouraged that kind of crap. God knows how many innocent men went to jail on phoney charges. I mean what is the count today that have been proven innocent, like over 30? Would we have ever learned of this if Watkins had not been elected DA?

Absolutely not. Their power was such that NO defense lawyer in Dallas dared step forward to take Oswald's case. Last I knew, 25 people who had been convicted under the Wade tenure had had their convictions overturned by DNA evidence. The credibility of the Dallas prosecutory system in 1963 was garbage, from the police all the way up to the DA.

But you'll never see David Von Pein or the Warren Commission apologists address that.

Knowing what I know today, I believe that Ruby killed Oswald in order to prevent him from going to trial. IMO, that's why Ruby couldn't talk in Dallas. He needed to get away from there in order to tell the truth.

I think it's absolutely shameful that the Commission declined to take him to Washington, but had no problem paying for plane tickets for right-wing nuts like Revilo Oliver and Edwin Walker, who had NOTHING of evidence in the assassination.

When you arrest a suspect, ESPECIALLY WHEN HE'S ARMED, you frisk him before you put him in the cruiser, not two hours later as he's going to a lineup. Anybody who's seen an episode of COPS can tell you that. We always emptied out their pockets and inventoried what we found so they couldn't say we stole something from them.

Another thing that shocks me about this case is how poorly informed the Chief of Police was. We always kept our chief informed of all aspects of our investigations. When Curry testified, he didn't know this and didn't know that. He was never at the lineups, he was never at the interrogations and he seems to have been so detached from the whole investigation. He was more of a PR man.

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...