Jump to content
The Education Forum

Raw television footage of Oswald's murder


Recommended Posts

David, thanks for posting this on your site and here.


Oh, boy I never fail to get a kick out of old Will Fritz doing his slow, casual walk ahead of LHO, breaking the 4-point security ring of Oswald. Even the guy standing right next to Fritz is startled by the shot after it's fired, but not old Will.


Right after the shot, it looks like Fritz doesn't even want to turn around and look to see what had just happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right after the shot, it looks like Fritz doesn't even want to turn around and look to see what had just happened.
It's fairly obvious to me that Fritz' reflexes were pretty slow. He was 68 years old in November of '63, which isn't exactly ancient, but he sure looks much older than just 68 to me.
Anyway, to think that Captain Fritz would have participated in some plot to allow Ruby to get in there and kill Oswald (and, hence, apply a permanent black eye to Fritz' "legacy" and to his Dallas police force) is a theory that's too ridiculous to even contemplate, IMO.
But, as usual, nothing is too ridiculous for most Internet CTers, not even that preposterous theory about Captain John Will Fritz being a plotter.
Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

DVP: But, as usual, nothing is too ridiculous for most Internet CTers, not even that preposterous theory about Captain John Will Fritz being a plotter.


David,


I never said Fritz was part of a plot. I'm merely pointing out what you'd call interesting behavior from a 30-year police veteran who was charged with protecting the most important criminal suspect of his career - the alleged murderer of the president and one of his own - the casual stroll down the hall feet in front of the suspect instead of staying in front of him to protect him (while his entire police force is lined up as an outer ring of protection and watching their colleague as he shows them how it's done); the cool as a cucumber reaction to the gunshot while the kid next to him jumps out of his pants; the "aw, shucks, do I have to turn around and look at the dirty deed?" reaction.


Just like it was also interesting behavior for police to allow their so-called sandwich man Jack Ruby to get into the basement, which was supposedly sealed off, to pull the trigger.


And it was also an amazing incident when they find a wallet with Oswald's ID card in it lying right next to the victim ("Hello!") while Oswald had a second wallet on him, and yet he had a third at his rooming house.


I could go on - a literally intact bullet that suppposedly went through two bodies causing extensive bone damage to the second victim; a guy who takes photos of the so-called fleeing suspect riding on a bus after the shooting, and who happens to also be there taking photos when he's arrested, gives the FBI permission to develop the photos, then flees himself to Panama, of all places.


Generally, people in life get a break or two and either go with it or not, which can lead to success or failure. If you're rich, well, you'll get more breaks ("money talks"). But for November 22-24, 1963, it's always been mind-boggling to me how so many, many coincidences and interesting events took place that weekend.


But I digress about it being a plot :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right after the shot, it looks like Fritz doesn't even want to turn around and look to see what had just happened.
It's fairly obvious to me that Fritz' reflexes were pretty slow. He was 68 years old in November of '63, which isn't exactly ancient, but he sure looks much older than just 68 to me.
Anyway, to think that Captain Fritz would have participated in some plot to allow Ruby to get in there and kill Oswald (and, hence, apply a permanent black eye to Fritz' "legacy" and to his Dallas police force) is a theory that's too ridiculous to even contemplate, IMO.
But, as usual, nothing is too ridiculous for most Internet CTers, not even that preposterous theory about Captain John Will Fritz being a plotter.

It's fairly obvious that Fritz is not in charge. Neither he nor the other hat-wearing detective are needed out there to direct traffic or control the crowd when uniformed officers are available, yet that is the extent of their performance before and after the shooting. Meanwhile Oswald's entire front is undefended, when he should be surrounded by uniformed cops. This looks like a staged show.

Why is there an ambulance on the scene, in the garage area behind the armored car? Were ambulances routinely garaged there?

Edited by David Andrews
Link to comment
Share on other sites

DA: It's fairly obvious that Fritz is not in charge. Neither he nor the...


Yes, David Andrews, more interesting events and observations. But it's all just one big coincidence and can be chalked up to sheer happenstance. ;-)


Another mere coincidence - the Wade press conference when he says LHO belonged to the anti-Castro organization. Then off-camera grieving sandwich man Jack Ruby, bumbling idiot that he was, corrects him. And oh, my goodness, why would a run-of-the-mill nightclub owner and sandwich man even care which organization LHO belonged to?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael,

You're not going to sit there and suggest that all of the things you brought up in Post #6 above have NOT been explained by various people in non-conspiratorial ways....are you? Because they most certainly have been....many times over.

Although, I'll admit, this one below is a new one on me. Never heard this one before in my life....

"A guy who takes photos of the so-called fleeing suspect riding on a bus after the shooting, and who happens to also be there taking photos when he's arrested, gives the FBI permission to develop the photos, then flees himself to Panama, of all places."

Are you talking about a photographer named Reid there, Michael? Or is it somebody else? ~shrug~

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

DVP: you're not going to sit there and suggest that all of the things you brought up in Post #6 above have NOT been explained...


David,


I know it may be hard for you to believe, but try to keep in mind that all of the people who refute the evidence of a conspiracy in this case are basically doing their job. It's what they do. The army of lawyers, clerks and administrators, from the day Katzenbach and Hoover sent out the letter shutting down any vigorous pursuit of the truth in this case, gave everyone on down the line their marching orders - NO conspiracy. One man did it. Period.


And I hate to say it, and I know you find it hard to believe, but the media was in cahoots with them. All you have to do is watch Rather's disgraceful description on live TV (11/25) of the "head falling down" description instead of describing *everything.* Or even worst, why not just let the public see the Z film right then and there? I know you're going to say "Well, that's not a conspiracy" and on and on. I, and many others, happen to believe it is. It may not be the smoking gun part of the conspiracy, but it does show that the government, in cahoots with the media, was trying very, very hard that early in the game to keep the whole truth from the public.


All you have to do is go to the thread about the guy who exposed the bullcrap that CBS pulled on the public.




Meanwhile, it's been done before. Look how the Pat Tillman case was handled. The big sorrowful funeral service, the fireworks and plastering his face everywhere that he was this huge hero. Only we're to find he was shot by one of his own.


And on a much smaller and local scale, look at the Mel Ignatow case. This case is the exact opposite of Oswald. Unlike Oswald, a man who was literally handheld from the TSBD to the theater to his murder in front of the entire DPD police force, Ignatow was guilty as sin and you'd have to be a complete ignoramus to think otherwise. But like the JFK case, the lawyers went to work, fudging and twisting the truth. And of course, they were able to do so enough to fool some pretty gullible (and in my opinion, stupid) jurors into acquitting him.


And if you're familiar with the case, we all know the shocking post trial conclusion. Believe me when I say, this case did have a shocking smoking gun result; if you're not familiar, go here and here. If you watch the video story of the case, the jurors interviewed there really remind me of people who continue to fall for the JFK Lone Nut theory of the case. All wide-eyed and "Oh, the lawyers say that's how it happened," and "there simply was not enough evidence," and so on and so forth.


But unlike Ignatow, Lee Oswald never got his day in court, and I read elsewhere that when the WC started, they pulled some kind of legal thing stating that there'd be absolutely no rebuttal of the evidence the army of lawyers working for the WC would present. If that's not putting the cart before the horse I don't know what is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never said Fritz was part of a plot.

Then why even bring up the subject of Fritz' activity in the basement at all? What useful purpose is served by mentioning it? We all know the DPD blew it (big time) by letting their prisoner get shot in the gut with 70 of their armed officers right there nearby. So that's not exactly "bombshell news".

Re: Dan Rather....

https://app.box.com/s/1a0mhnrp3fc77lb470de

(And, yes, I wrote the caption to that audio file.)

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

Very interesting footage, DVP. Thanks for posting it. A few things that stuck out to me:

1. The reporters thought that Ruby was.a Secret Service agent. Why? Because he didn't dress like a cop and didn't identify himself as a newsman? Or perhaps did he tell a reporter or two that he was SS?

2. Someone said there were no reporters standing in the area Ruby was. But the policeman standing next to Ruby said he thought Ruby was a newsman.

3. Two days after the assassination, the on-camera reporter was still mistakenly referring to 'Lee Harold Oswald' the entire telecast.

4. The car horn right before Oswald walked out didn't seem nearly as ominous after hearing all of the other times the car horns beeped.

5. The police officer being interviewed towards the end knew the reporter by name. And he clearly knew who Ruby was,must was unwilling to say anything specially about him on camera.

6. I'll have to go back and watch it again, but I couldn't catch a glimpse of Ruby before it happened. Anyone else see him in the crowd?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

David A. and Michael W. - the question of who was in charge came up in your posts. Since it was a city of Dallas jail, the Dallas Mayor had jurisdiction there. When Lee Harvey Oswald said he was just the Patsy, he signaled he was not going to play that role for much longer and that is when the conspirators knew that had to murder LHO. The Mayor of Dallas at the time was Earle Cabell, whose brother was Charles Cabell, who was fired by JFK, along with Alan Dulles, for the Bay of Pigs fiasco. A. Dulles and C. Cabell conspired to kill JFK and knew LHO could point his finger in the direction of the CIA. The murder of LHO could more easily be done in a City of

Dallas Jail, where Earl Cabell could tell Chief of Police what to do since the Chief reported to the Mayor. Here are some aspects of this :

Dallas Mayor Cabell's Nov. 24, 1963 Call To Dallas Police Chief Curry

At the very moment Lee Oswald was silenced by Jack Ruby, "Chief Curry, ludicrously, was upstairs in his office, responding to a phone call from Dallas mayor Earle Cabell, and had not checked for himself to see if orders were being carried out properly in the basement," according to Who Was Jack Ruby? by Seth Kantor.

And according to High Treason by Robert J. Groden and Harrison Livingstone, "Jesse Curry, the Chief of Police, was about to go down to the basement of the police station to supervise the transfer of Oswald to the County Jail when his phone rang, and the mayor, Earle Cabell, kept him on the line until Oswald had been shot by Ruby."

Yet according to Cabell Exhibit No.1 of the Warren Commission, "Copy of an FBI Report of an interview with Mayor Earle Cabell dated Dec. 12, 1963," former CIA Deputy Director Cabell's brother originally told the FBI Special Agent that after Ruby shot Oswald:

"He received a telephone call from a friend of his, whom he did not name, that Oswald had been shot and to turn his television set on, which he did. He then received a call from Chief Curry advising that Oswald had been shot. Mayor Cabell relates that he then told Chief Curry that he was watching television regarding the incident at that moment.."

And when he testified before the Warren Commission on July 13, 1964, former CIA Deputy Director Cabell's brother again claimed that Dallas Police Chief Curry telephoned him at the very moment Oswald was being transferred:

Mr. CABELL: "He called me...I was in the den where I was sitting and taking these telephone calls and then just as I get it turned on, they still had not removed Oswald at the time because this was just a matter of a minute or two from the actual shooting. Then Chief Curry called and said, `They have just shot Oswald.' And I said, `Yes, I have it on tv now'..."

Why do you think Dallas Mayor Cabell apparently didn't want to admit that just prior to Oswald's silencing, he just apparently happened to telephone Dallas Police Chief Curry?

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...