Jump to content
The Education Forum

Tippit Motive and Rifle Chain of Evidence, looking for some guidance.


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 150
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

6 hours ago, Joseph McBride said:

Armstrong proves in exhaustive detail that

Oswald didn't own the rifle or handgun submitted

into what Oswald aptly called the "so-called evidence."

Yes he does, I believe with one of David Joseph's articles at Kennedys and King along with his and others comments on this site Armstrong's work is taken further and becomes even more convincing.

David's link of the portion in Harvey and Lee on the Tippit killing gives further cause to wonder about Westbrook, and Croy.

http://harveyandlee.net/Tippit/Tippit.html

Whether one accepts two Oswald's going back to the early 1950's or not the part on Westbrook is really important imho.  Given their stories to the Warren Omission they were missing for 40 - 50 minutes shortly after the assassination.  There Is a unmarked car (Westbrooks, the only possibility?) parked in front of the entrance to the Texas Theater in the picture. The pistol to his office not Fritz/Homicide, then being marked by Hill, Bentley(?) and another.  Much more.  It sure looks like Westbrook had an ulterior motive given his position in the Personnel department.  Maybe prior knowledge, an agenda if you will.  Given the Cabell brothers cia presence in Dallas I have to wonder if it's influence didn't go deeper.  Cynical, pessimist me wonders, who was his handler?

Edited by Ron Bulman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is the correct procedure when you exit you're patrol car?

You call it in.

Tippit demonstrates he did follow the correct procedure;

"Be out of the car a minute, 4100 block of Bonnie View"

So here he was again, at 10th, about to exit his patrol car.

Prior to stopping, Tippit was cruising real slow, he was cautious, he had his wits about him.

He pulls up across an alley exit. Why? Because there's a guy right there he wants to talk to..

He chats with this guy on 10th through the passenger window.

Tippit could see the other police car facing him from the alley.

But a chat wasn't enough, was it?

The guy was suspicious to Tippit.

Two police cars blocked his escape.

He asks the guy to step back from the side of his patrol car.

Time to get out, unclasp his weapon, call it in

radio call omitted

We don't want that pesky early radio call stuffing up the super assassin's public transport escape timeframe do we?

Tippit exits and slowly moves towards the front left side of his patrol car, he has his gun down by his side, his eyes warily watching the suspect.

Tippit was a crack shot, very handy with a weapon, but so was his adversary.

The suspect suddenly reached for his weapon, Tippit saw the move.

But he was no match, his opponent was a regular gunslinger, shooting from the hip, at belt level.

Three quick shots to Tippit's torso, two of which penetrated at an upward angle, the other hits his buckle.

Tippit clutched his stomach as he falls on his left side to the 10th street pavement.

He's wounded badly, but still alive ........ one more shot to the head to make sure.

The gunslinger empties his chamber and mutters as he walks away "poor dumb cop"

But wait .... there's cops in the alley right? They'll give chase and dish out Texas style justice to the person that killed their comrade!

Nope ..... one walks forward to confirm the kill, then retreats back up the alley.

Edited by Tony Krome
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Joseph McBride said:

Armstrong proves in exhaustive detail that

Oswald didn't own the rifle or handgun submitted

into what Oswald aptly called the "so-called evidence."

Regarding the rifle, it seems to me that tying Oswald to it quickly was absolutely essential, whether it was to frame him, or simply for DPD to look like they were working fast to catch the killer.

This is why, prior to any fingerprint analysis or paper trail, Marina's identification of the rifle is essential to Oswald being charged on the day, and remaining in custody while they "Build their case".

The thing is, how familiar was Marina with the rifle and rifles in general. The fact that the police showed her ONE rifle, and said "Is this your husbands rifle" is no better than sticking Oswald in a lineup with him shouting about how unfair the line up is. 

I don't own a gun, but I've always been a bit of a collector of medieval swords, daggers, and so on. We were at a medieval fayre years ago, when I only had the one sword and dagger set mounted on the wall... my good lady saw a guy in a suit of armour carrying a sword and said "Oh, that's the same as yours..."

What I WANTED to say was, "Actually the quillons are longer and straighter, the blade is about 3" longer, the fuller is broader but more shallow, mine has a stippled pommel, and the taper on his blade starts closer to the tip... other than that, yeah... they're identical"

Being of sound mind, what I actually said was, "Yes.. it is..."

Now my sword hung on our wall, on DISPLAY, in the dining room and my wife had walked past it thousands of times. 

God forbid anyone think I am make a sweeping generalisation about the observational skills of married women. Hell no! I'm saying that anyone who does not take a particular interest in something can easily miss the more technical specificities when it comes to being able to tell one thing from another. For instance I have often been told, "they look nothing alike" when I have commented on how a garment or piece of footwear in a shop window looks "Like" one that my wife or daughter own, while to me the two things look identical.

All that waffle does lead to an actual question... if Oswald had lived, is there anything in American Law about spousal testimony, allowing a husband or wife to simply decline when asked to testify against their other half? If she could have been compelled this line of thought has no further merit, but if she could have refused, would they have been able to use her initial statement about the rifle in any actual prosecution of LHO? Or would a good defence lawyer have been able to strike it from the evidence?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alfredda Scobey was an Atlanta attorney who Richard Russell brought up to his office to be his assistant on the Commission.  Russell did not trust what the Commission was doing.  Very early he saw that the fix was in.  So he decided he would not attend meetings, but only read the testimony and pass it on to Scobey.  

After the dog and pony show was over, Scobey wrote an article for a legal journal.  This is what she said about Marina:

"There must first be deleted the testimony of his wife, Marina, for although she testified on three occasions and was questioned by the press and investigative agencies on scores of others, it is difficult to find any statement which would not be more hurtful than helpful to her husband. Under Texas law, “The husband and wife may, in all criminal actions, be witnesses for each other; but they shall in no case testify against each other except in a criminal prosecution for an offense committed by one against the other.” [9] Considering the transcript and exhibits as the “brief of evidence” on a trial, there are many facts which appear only in the uncorroborated testimony of Marina Oswald. Chief among them are facts laying the basis for the admission of other criminal transactions—the attempt on the life of Major Edwin A. Walker on April 10, 1963, and the reputed threat to make some assault on former Vice President Richard Nixon. Whether either of these transactions would have been admissible in any event is extremely doubtful."

In fact, while she was being held at the Inn of the SIx Flags, Marina refused to go along with what the Secret Service wanted her to say on two key points.  She said that Oswald never told her anything about visiting Mexico CIty, and she did not recognize the rifle they wanted her to say was Oswald's.

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

David:

You are saying it did not go all the way through then?

Second, are you saying Callaway was lying?

 

The driveway between the houses where Tippit was parked ran back to the Alley, no to Jefferson.  

img_1317_511_300.png

Going West at the Alley would be the easiest way for a car to get to a real street yet it was not blocked off back there with a wall or fence, just the back end of the businesses which lined Jefferson.

What I wrote was there are conflicts to the route as told by some of the witnesses which makes it into the WCR... and by others who had multiple suspects and at least one who sees the man run down the alley before he gets to Jefferson...  which would indeed make Calloway's story a bit off...

If we add TATUM's account - from his affidavit:

Although I did not remember the exact time I remember it was early in the afternoon on Friday, November 22, 1963. I was driving XXXX north on Denver and stopped at 10th St. when I first saw the squad car and men walking on the sidewalk near the squad car. Both the squad car and this young white male were coming in my direction (East on 10th Street). At the time I was just approaching the squad car, I noticed this young white male with both hands in the pockets of his zippered jacket leaning over the passenger side of the squad car. This young white male was looking into the squad car from the passenger side. The next thing I knew I heard something that sounded like gun shots as I approached the intersection. (10th & Patton). I heard three shots in rapid (illegible)I went right through the intersection, stopped my car and turned to look back. I then saw the officer lying on the street and saw this young white man standing near the front of the squad car. Next. this man with a gun in his hand ran toward the back of the squad car, but instead of running away he stepped into the street and shot the police officer who was lying in the street. At that point this young man looked around him and then started to walk away in my direction and as he started to break into a small run in my direction, I sped off in my auto. All I saw him to the intersection and run south on Patton towards Jefferson.

"SMITH" (MW corner 9th and Denver) jumped in the car with BURT and also came down 10th (amazingly busy street - no?) claiming they parked on the south side of 10th facing Tippit's car.  Burt claimed the person ran to the intersection of 10th and Patton and make a left down Patton crossing over to the West side....  then turning right down the alley....  he also claims that when arriving at the scene as the suspect fled, 2 women approached Tippit, no one else was there.

And without a doubt an interesting take on the scene is offered by Jasper Butler ambulance driver claiming they were there in 5 mins from what would be THEIR call about Tippit... (need to ask McBride if there is a timestamp there)....  400 E Jefferson (still Hughes) is 1 block west of Patton and Jefferson... so 5 mins is very acceptable yet...

Blue coat?

Laying on his front, face by front left tire with body running toward the rear of the car...   compare this to Markham...

... and we have to thank McBride again for making sense of this hot mess....

 

1681665498_QandATippitAmbulancedriverJASPERCLAYTONBULTERp1of4-smaller-talksofpolicehotline.thumb.jpg.f0d14189ef8055027e1d0d47d6a57e2c.jpg1108185884_QandATippitAmbulancedriverJASPERCLAYTONBULTERp1of4-RoyalbluecoatoverTippit.jpg.dd7dc1d36ce2f333fbd4780b26209191.jpg2075829242_QandATippitAmbulancedriverJASPERCLAYTONBULTERp3of4-Tippitbodyposition-notpossibleforafronttobackheadshotpertatum.jpg.4f9ea03539ad596d0d367869425917ab.jpg

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Alfredda Scobey was an Atlanta attorney who Richard Russell brought up to his office to be his assistant on the Commission.  Russell did not trust what the Commission was doing.  Very early he saw that the fix was in.  So he decided he would not attend meetings, but only read the testimony and pass it on to Scobey.  

After the dog and pony show was over, Scobey wrote an article for a legal journal.  This is what she said about Marina:

"There must first be deleted the testimony of his wife, Marina, for although she testified on three occasions and was questioned by the press and investigative agencies on scores of others, it is difficult to find any statement which would not be more hurtful than helpful to her husband. Under Texas law, “The husband and wife may, in all criminal actions, be witnesses for each other; but they shall in no case testify against each other except in a criminal prosecution for an offense committed by one against the other.” [9] Considering the transcript and exhibits as the “brief of evidence” on a trial, there are many facts which appear only in the uncorroborated testimony of Marina Oswald. Chief among them are facts laying the basis for the admission of other criminal transactions—the attempt on the life of Major Edwin A. Walker on April 10, 1963, and the reputed threat to make some assault on former Vice President Richard Nixon. Whether either of these transactions would have been admissible in any event is extremely doubtful."

In fact, while she was being held at the Inn of the SIx Flags, Marina refused to go along with what the Secret Service wanted her to say on two key points.  She said that Oswald never told her anything about visiting Mexico CIty, and she did not recognize the rifle they wanted her to say was Oswald's.

Wow. Thanks Jim. 

So in a trial, which on the evening of the 22nd must have been the majority of the DPD/FBI's assumption was going to happen, the forensic evidence on the rifle would have been absolutely essential in convincing a jury. There's no way they could have been unaware of that particular State law. Now I begin to understand exactly WHY that palm print would have been of such great importance once the trigger guard prints came back as either "inconclusive" or perhaps even exculpatory.

Of course, a federal enquiry with a mandate from the President would carry no such caveat. Making Marina fair game...

They were SO lucky that Ruby shot Oswald...

The next piece of my mental jigsaw puzzle is "How long did it take for the paper trail on the gun to be tracked down"? Was that part of the initial DPD/FBI enquiry?

Was it like the Neutron Activation tests on the bullets? Something that the FBI felt was OK to investigate only AFTER Oswald died?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bowley - rolled Tippit over, grabbed his gun and placed it on the front seat of Tippit's car

Callaway - rolled Tippit over, grabbed his gun and placed it on the hood of Tippit's car

Butler - noticed a gun on the street behind his ambulance by Tippit's left wheel, picked it up and placed it on the hood of Tippit's car

Benavides - Callaway grabbed the gun out of Tippit's hand and went over to Scoggin's cab

Markham - Somebody turned Tippit over, grabbed his gun and left

Callaway - Somebody put the gun on the front seat of Tippit's car

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tony Krome said:

Callaway - rolled Tippit over, grabbed his gun and placed it on the hood of Tippit's car

Callaway - Somebody put the gun on the front seat of Tippit's car

Tony,

From Callaway's Deposition taken on 11/22/63

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/callaway.htm

"I got the officer's gun and hollered at a cab driver to come on, We might catch the man."

Corroborates Benevides

Quite the vigilante wasn't he?

Steve Thomas

Edited by Steve Thomas
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Tommy:

I assume you mean the paper trail of the rifle.

That was done beginning that night. David did a good study on that issue:

https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/the-klein-s-rifle

 

Yes Jim, sorry for any confusion. I really shouldn't go round pointing fingers at the DPD/FBI over lack of clarity when I say something as vague as "the gun" 🤔

 

I had a strange thought last night... is there a record or transcript of the phone call between the Movie Theatre cashier (Ms/Mrs) Postal and the DPD call handler? 

I just wonder if there was a possible breakdown in communication, since she apparently didn't see Oswald, yet was able to give a description that matched the guy the police were looking for. If she said, following Johnny B's assertions that he matched the description, that "there'a guy in my movie theatre matches the description on the radio" that someone assumed that included the 303 rifle???? And THAT was why instead of a couple of cops turning up to check out one of multiple leads, they descended on the place like an active shooter had opened up on the audience of the movie with a AK-47.

I'm stretching here to give as much possible credence to the official story as I can. Just, Devils Advocate etc. 

I saw an interview with Laevelle on Youtube yesterday and he kept talking about how Oswald was arrested at the TMT for shooting Tippit, when Brewer has quite clearly said, (including on TV for the whole world to see to this day...) that he reported what he thought was a man who matched the description of the Dealey Plaza shooting.

Laevelle talked about how he hadn't been given a specific assignment on the day,  basically told to just to hang around and catch anything else that comes in, which is why he pulled the Tippit case, and how HIS suspect was LATER identified as the guy missing from the TSBD roll call and was taken off him by Fritz (I think it was Fritz...) to be interviewed about the Kennedy shooting.

Is there anything in the record that clears up that discrepancy, or was it all hand waved away in a display of "We got our man, so it doesn't matter."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/11/2020 at 2:38 AM, James DiEugenio said:

  you saying Callaway was lying?

 

Quote

Mr. BALL. Tell us what happened.
Mr. CALLAWAY. We first went into the room. There was Jim Leavelle, the detective, Sam Guinyard, and then this busdriver and myself. We waited down there for probably 20 or 30 minutes. And Jim told us, "When I show you these guys, be sure,. take your time, see if you can make a positive identification."
Mr. BALL. Had you known him before?
Mr. CALLAWAY. No. And he said, "We want to be sure, we want to try to wrap him up real tight on killing this officer. We think he is the same one that shot the President. But if we can wrap him up tight on killing this officer, we have got him." So they brought four men in.
I stepped to the back of the room, so I could kind of see him from the same distance which I had seen him before. And when he came out, I knew him.
Mr. BALL. You mean he looked like the same man?
Mr. CALLAWAY. Yes.
Mr. BALL. About what distance was he away from you--the closest that he ever was to you?
Mr. CALLAWAY. About 56 feet.

The perp looked like Oswald [from almost 60 feet anyway] Like Johnny Brewer-- Callaway wanted to be a part of it all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice one Karl.

Here is the Postal affidavit:

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338516/m1/1/

Please note the date on it. Almost two weeks after the assassination.

There are so many problems with this affidavit. I do not even know where to start. She could not have given a description to the cops since she never had a a good look at the guy who ran in the theater. She did not even know about the Tippit murder. If Brewer had not come down the street, she would have never called in the first place. She had to ask the police for a description.

But yet, despite all of that, six cruiser cars show up.  And they include Hill and Westbrook.

Edited by James DiEugenio
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...