Two Oswalds in the Texas Theater

[Jeremy Bojczuk]

As has been obvious for some time, the 'Harvey and Lee' interpretation of the Texas Theater incident is based on flimsy and contradictory evidence. As has also been obvious for some time, it is very difficult to get any straight answers from the theory's evasive chief proponent. So far, Jim Hargrove has been reluctant to acknowledge either the flimsiness of the evidence or the fact that it is contradictory. Let's try a slightly different approach, and see if this allows us to prise a straight answer out of him at last.

Jim writes:

Quote

I have offered at least three times earlier in this very thread the analysis of James Douglass

And I have pointed out each time (see here, for example) that Douglass's "analysis" is pure, 100% speculation, and that there are good reasons to doubt that his speculation is credible.

Douglass speculated that the fake Oswald who, according to the police reports, was arrested in the balcony came down to the ground floor "either on his own or already accompanied by police", where Burroughs saw the man arrested again. Douglass doesn't tell us how someone who had just been arrested in the balcony would be able to come down "on his own" rather than "accompanied by police", so I assume he thinks the second speculative option is the more likely.

Douglass's speculation makes one thing clear: Burroughs' sighting of the fake Oswald's arrest took place on the ground floor. Douglass writes "By the time Burroughs witnessed the Oswald double’s arrest, he [the fake Oswald] had also come down the balcony stairs". This is consistent with a couple of things we know about Burroughs: he never claimed to have gone up to the balcony, and he could not have seen into the balcony from his position on the ground floor. Since Jim has quoted the passage with approval several times now, it seems fair to assume that he agrees with this bit of Douglass's speculation, and that he too believes that the fake Oswald was arrested on the ground floor.

Douglass doesn't state it outright, but he implies that the fake Oswald who, according to the police reports, was arrested in the balcony was identical to the person whom Burroughs claimed to have seen arrested from his position on the ground floor.

The problem with all of this speculation is that Douglass's (and presumably Jim's) interpretation implies that the fake Oswald was arrested twice: first in the balcony and then on the ground floor. But this cannot be! It is contrary to the infallible word of truth: 'Harvey and Lee' doctrine claims that the fake Oswald was only arrested once in the Texas Theater (at least, I assume that's what the holy book says; I really can't be bothered to check). It is also contrary to common sense: why would the police not only arrest the same person twice, once on each floor of the same building, but also fail to notice that the guy they arrested once and the guy they arrested twice had the same name?

Douglass's speculative account is clear on two points: the incident which Burroughs interpreted, 30 years later, as an arrest happened on the ground floor, and this arrest happened after the fake Oswald had descended from the balcony. But the police reports are also clear; they state unambiguously that someone named Oswald was arrested in the balcony. Ergo, two fake Oswalds. And two fake Oswalds plus one real-life, historical Lee Harvey Oswald equals three Oswalds. But this cannot be! It is contrary to the infallible word of truth: 'Harvey and Lee' doctrine claims that there were only two Oswalds (unless the holy book has recently been rewritten and the second edition is called Harvey and Lee and Harlee).

Even Jim must be starting to realise by now that either Burroughs or the police reports must be mistaken, or ... heaven forbid! ... both of them are mistaken. The problem is: there are perfectly good reasons why each could be mistaken. Once he admits that one of them is mistaken and he loses his grip on it and watches it drop into the abyss, how does he stop the other one slipping from  his grasp? And if both are mistaken, we can say goodbye to yet another piece of evidence for the 'Harvey and Lee' fantasy.

At least one of Jim's sources for the arrest of a fake Oswald must be wrong. Which option would Jim like to endorse:

1 - The police reports were mistaken, and Burroughs and Douglass were correct. The one fake Oswald was arrested only once, on the ground floor.

2 - The police reports were correct, and Burroughs and Douglass were mistaken. The one fake Oswald was arrested only once, in the balcony.

3 - The police reports and Burroughs were correct, and Douglass was mistaken. Two fake Oswalds were arrested, once each and one on each floor.

4 - The police reports and Burroughs and Douglass were all correct, and no-one was mistaken. One fake Oswald was arrested twice, firstly in the balcony and then on the ground floor.

5 - The police reports and Burroughs and Douglass were all mistaken. No fake Oswalds were arrested. As has been clear to most of us for some time now, George Applin was the man Burroughs mistakenly assumed, three decades after the event, that he saw being arrested on the ground floor.

To make his beliefs clear, perhaps Jim could answer these two simple questions about his fake Oswald, the man Burroughs saw being escorted out of the rear of the building:

1 - How many times was the fake Oswald arrested: once or twice?

2 - If was once, where did the arrest take place: in the balcony or on the ground floor?

I realise that Jim finds it very difficult to give a straight answer on this point, and I'm sure we all understand his reasons, but let's see if he can manage it this time.

You know what, I think we need to change the subject, urgently. Quick, look over there! Did you know about the Bolton Ford incident? And don't forget about those school records ....

P.S. I'm sorry Jim is displeased about people being given the opportunity to follow links to Greg Parker's debunking of the 'Harvey and Lee' nonsense. Just to please Jim, here instead are a couple of links to Tracy Parnell's debunking of the 'Harvey and Lee' nonsense:

http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/p/p.html

http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/search/label/Harvey%20%26%20Lee

[Jim Hargrove]

Mr. B. continuously tries to tell us that a balcony arrest of a second Oswald is inconsistent with the observations of Butch Burroughs, but it simply isn’t true.  As I’ve noted time and time again, James Douglass, who interviewed Burroughs, wrote: “By the time Burroughs witnessed the Oswald double’s arrest, he had also come down the balcony stairs on the far side of the lobby, either on his own or already accompanied by police who had been checking the balcony. [JFK and the Unspeakable, p. 461]

What Mr. B. wants us to believe is that the second Oswald, who Burroughs and Haire both thought they saw arrested, was actually George Applin.  In fact, he states this as if it were a known fact:

• even though he doesn’t have the slightest idea if Applin looked anything at all like Classic Oswald®,
• even though he doesn’t know if Applin left by the back entrance, as the man both Burroughs and Haire witnessed did, or the front entrance,
• and even though Applin left the theater only after police had locked down the building and interviewed every theater patron, by most estimates approaching twenty people.

Mr. B. points to a couple of sites that attempt to debunk John A’s research, but I’m sure he’ll be delighted to know there are some actually POPULAR web locations that promote John’s research.

On Black Op Radio, Len Osanic has featured perhaps a dozen or more interviews with John Armstrong.

Interviews and presentations based on John Armstrong’s research, some featuring interviews on Black Op Radio, are all over YouTube.  One entitled Captain Westbrook, officer Tippit and Oswald’s double lasts more than two and a half hours and has had more than 317,000 views since it was put up in July 2017.

The YouTube video “Who Impersonated Lee Harvey Oswald,” based on a lengthy interview with John Armstrong, has had more than 260,000 views.
 

[Jim Hargrove]

10 hours ago, Karl Hilliard said:

I located this info..... Eddy Benavides was shot in 1965.

Karl,

Thanks for the correction.  Penn Jones was obviously off by a year in his statement about when Eddy Benavides was killed.

But the point for this thread is not when his brother was killed but what Domingo Benavides actually saw that afternoon at 10th and Patton.  And it appears pretty clear that Mr. Benavides, probably the closest witness who saw Tippit killed, thought the man who shot Tippit looked like Lee Harvey Oswald, except for a difference in the haircut.

Mr. BELIN - You used the name Oswald. How did you know this man was Oswald?
Mr. BENAVIDES - From the pictures I had seen. It looked like a guy, resembled the guy. That was the reason I figured it was Oswald.
Mr. BELIN - Were they newspaper pictures or television pictures, or both, or neither?
Mr. BENAVIDES - Well, television pictures and newspaper pictures. The thing lasted about a month, I believe, it seemed like.
Mr. BELIN - Pardon.
Mr. BENAVIDES - I showed--I believe they showed pictures of him every day for a long time there.

. . . . .

Mr. BELIN - Okay, well, I thank you. I was flying from St. Louis to Des Moines, Iowa. at about this time. Is there anything else?
Mr. BENAVIDES - I remember the back of his head seemed like his hairline was sort of--looked like his hairline sort of went square instead of tapered off. and he looked like he needed a haircut for about 2 weeks, but his hair didn't taper off, it kind of went down and squared off and made his head look fiat in back.

The evidence suggests that, according to the nearest witness, an Oswald lookalike killed Tippit, and then minutes later an Oswald lookalike was arrested at the Texas Theater. Add to that the enormous amount of evidence that an Oswald lookalike got into a Nash Rambler station wagon in Dealey Plaza at about the same time another Oswald boarded a bus, and there is an obvious pattern of two Oswalds leaving Dealey Plaza that awful afternoon.

Mr. BENAVIDES - I remember the back of his head seemed like his hairline was sort of--looked like his hairline sort of went square instead of tapered off. and he looked like he needed a haircut for about 2 weeks, but his hair didn't taper off, it kind of went down and squared off and made his head look fiat in back.

 

Edited September 18, 2019 by Jim Hargrove
Added photo

[John Butler]

One DNA test.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Karl,

Thanks for the correction.  Penn Jones was obviously off by a year in his statement about when Eddy Benavides was killed.

But the point for this thread is not when his brother was killed but what Domingo Benavides actually saw that afternoon at 10th and Patton.  And it appears pretty clear that Mr. Benavides, probably the closest witness who saw Tippit killed, thought the man who shot Tippit looked like Lee Harvey Oswald, except for a difference in the haircut.

Mr. BELIN - You used the name Oswald. How did you know this man was Oswald?
Mr. BENAVIDES - From the pictures I had seen. It looked like a guy, resembled the guy. That was the reason I figured it was Oswald.
Mr. BELIN - Were they newspaper pictures or television pictures, or both, or neither?
Mr. BENAVIDES - Well, television pictures and newspaper pictures. The thing lasted about a month, I believe, it seemed like.
Mr. BELIN - Pardon.
Mr. BENAVIDES - I showed--I believe they showed pictures of him every day for a long time there.

. . . . .

Mr. BELIN - Okay, well, I thank you. I was flying from St. Louis to Des Moines, Iowa. at about this time. Is there anything else?
Mr. BENAVIDES - I remember the back of his head seemed like his hairline was sort of--looked like his hairline sort of went square instead of tapered off. and he looked like he needed a haircut for about 2 weeks, but his hair didn't taper off, it kind of went down and squared off and made his head look fiat in back.

The evidence suggests that, according to the nearest witness, an Oswald lookalike killed Tippit, and then minutes later an Oswald lookalike was arrested at the Texas Theater. Add to that the enormous amount of evidence that an Oswald lookalike got into a Nash Rambler station wagon in Dealey Plaza at about the same time another Oswald boarded a bus, and there is an obvious pattern of two Oswalds leaving Dealey Plaza that awful afternoon.

Mr. BENAVIDES - I remember the back of his head seemed like his hairline was sort of--looked like his hairline sort of went square instead of tapered off. and he looked like he needed a haircut for about 2 weeks, but his hair didn't taper off, it kind of went down and squared off and made his head look fiat in back.

 

Lee Oswald was the one running down the slope and getting in the Rambler and no one else.

Benavides' W.C. testimony was useless, if he was THAT speciifc about the hair on Nov 22nd then he would have been seeing Oswald being paraded in front of him, instead he was not used at all.

An eyeball witness go figure.

Edited September 18, 2019 by Bart Kamp

[Karl Hilliard]

14 hours ago, Cory Santos said:

The article is about "the strange fate of those who saw Kennedy shot".  Many of these people were not even in Dealey Plaza that day lol.  Also, please, Jim Koethe was not killed by a karate chop.  I have yet to find any basis for this.  When these unacademic articles repeat these outlandish comments it diminishes serious research and allows w.c. fans to laugh.  They just keep repeating things and repeating things.

[Karl Hilliard]

3 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

   what Domingo Benavides actually saw that afternoon at 10th and Patton.

 

Did not seem all that sure did he?

Quote

Mr. BELIN - What did you see then?
Mr. BENAVIDES - I then pulled on up and I seen this officer standing by the door. The door was open to the car, and I was pretty close to him, and I seen Oswald, or the man that shot him, standing on the other side of the car.

Mr. BELIN - You used the name Oswald. How did you know this man was Oswald?
Mr. BENAVIDES - From the pictures I had seen. It looked like a guy, resembled the guy. That was the reason I figured it was Oswald.
Mr. BELIN - Were they newspaper pictures or television pictures, or both, or neither?
Mr. BENAVIDES - Well, television pictures and newspaper pictures. The thing lasted about a month, I believe, it seemed like.
Mr. BELIN - Pardon.
Mr. BENAVIDES - I showed--I believe they showed pictures of him every day for a long time there.

A television line up...this is the guy that did it --you want to identify him?

[Karl Hilliard]

Above I posted the amended death certificate of Jim Koethe. This was the original before the autopsy. Certainly if he was karate chopped the cause of death would be a broken neck rather than suffocation. It remains an unsolved homicide. There are literally dozens upon dozens of links referring to the karate chop. 

[John Butler]

Spartacus Educational

 

 

 

Jim Koethe

Jim Koethe worked as a reporter for the Dallas Times Herald. He was involved in the investigation of the killing of President John F. Kennedy. On 24th November, 1963, Koethe and Bill Hunter of the Long Beach Press Telegram interviewed George Senator. Also there was the attorney Tom Howard. Earlier that day Senator and Howard had both visited Jack Ruby in jail. That evening Senator arranged for Koethe, Hunter and Howard to search Ruby's apartment.

It is not known what the journalists found but on 23rd April 1964, Bill Hunter was shot dead by Creighton Wiggins, a policeman in the pressroom of a Long Beach police station. Wiggins initially claimed that his gun fired when he dropped it and tried to pick it up. In court this was discovered that this was impossible and it was decided that Hunter had been murdered. Wiggins finally admitted he was playing a game of quick draw with his fellow officer. The other officer, Errol F. Greenleaf, testified he had his back turned when the shooting took place. In January 1965, both were convicted and sentenced to three years probation.

Jim Koethe decided to write a book about the assassination of John F. Kennedy. However, he died on 21st September, 1964. It seems that a man broke into his Dallas apartment and killed him by a karate chop to the throat. Tom Howard died of a heart-attack, aged 48, in March, 1965.

Assassination of John F. Kennedy Encyclopedia

 

I guess more than one person is making this error about the karate chop.  I notice that in the amended copy of the death certificate that the injury occurred at home.  The first copy omits this information.  The amended copy lists the cause as strangulation.     

If your throat is crushed I would guess you would die of strangulation.

Karl says there "are dozens and dozens" of references to the karate chop. 

Edited September 18, 2019 by John Butler

[John Butler]

This photo also shows the lack of a mastoid surgery scar behind the ear.

[Jim Hargrove]

John,

Yeah, but I’m told a surgical scar that old would be pretty faint.  I’m pretty sure John A. doesn’t agree with me, but I think it was the Russian-speaking Oswald all along who had the mastoidectomy.  Hoover knew it, and just faked a page or two to make it seem as if the American-born Oswald had the operation.

[Jim Hargrove]

8 hours ago, Bart Kamp said:

Lee Oswald was the one running down the slope and getting in the Rambler and no one else.

Benavides' W.C. testimony was useless, if he was THAT speciifc about the hair on Nov 22nd then he would have been seeing Oswald being paraded in front of him, instead he was not used at all.

An eyeball witness go figure.

Bart,

You’re hardly alone here believing the Marsalis bus and the taxi ride never happened, but you know there is a lot of evidence for it.  Besides what the WC wanted us to believe, it’s pretty obvious from his actions at the Gloco station that Tippit expected Oswald to be on that bus. 

Even more significant, it’s clear that Stuart Reed was told Oswald would be on the bus.  Otherwise, why would he take two photos of the Marsalis bus approaching Dealey Plaza, along with shots of the Book Depository, Burt’s Shoes, and the actual arrest of Oswald at the theater?  

[Karl Hilliard]

5 hours ago, John Butler said:

    The amended copy lists the cause as strangulation. If your throat is crushed I would guess you would die of strangulation.   

I would certainly concur with that assessment. But why not a rope or belt? I would imagine that if a severe chop to the throat was observed [horrible bruising and such] that it  would have been mentioned in the coroner's report. Besides, how could anyone have possibly known that there was actually a karate chop involved? A 2X4 would produce the same result.

[John Butler]

Karl,

Your right.  Could be a rope or belt or a 2 x 4 or a crowbar or lead pipe. 

The death certificate does not provide enough information.  Maybe the autopsy report if available would be more conclusive.

[John Butler]

1 hour ago, Jim Hargrove said:

John,

Yeah, but I’m told a surgical scar that old would be pretty faint.  I’m pretty sure John A. doesn’t agree with me, but I think it was the Russian-speaking Oswald all along who had the mastoidectomy.  Hoover knew it, and just faked a page or two to make it seem as if the American-born Oswald had the operation.

Jim,

Correct me if I am wrong.  I don't trust my memory much anymore.  It gets me into to much trouble.

But, didn't the autopsy of Harvey fail to list a mastoid scar behind his left ear.  If so, I don't think a trained examiner would have missed that at the autopsy since he listed scars as small as 1/4 inch.