The wallet at the Tippit scene: a simpler solution?

[Michael Kalin]

2 hours ago, Donald Willis said:

BENAVIDES WAS ABSENT ALL OF 1963, AND NOT JUST FROM THE SS FILES.  I DON'T SEE ANY FBI INTERVIEWS OR NEWSPAPER INTERVIEWS FOR HIM EITHER.  NOR ANY COUNTY/CITY AFFIDAVITS.  NOTHING BUT 2ND-HAND POLICE REPORTS MENTIONING HIM.  HE HAD APPARENTLY NOT YET BEEN INFORMED OF HIS ROLE IN THE STORY.  DET. LEAVELLE, THOUGH, HAS SUGGESTED THAT HE DID AN AFFIDAVIT ON 11/22.  IF SO, IT'S GONE, ALONG WITH JAMES TAGUE'S POLICE AFFIDAVIT (WHICH TAGUE MENTIONS DURING HIS WC TESTIMONY) AND BOB JACKSON'S AFFIDAVIT FOR THE SHERIFF'S, WHICH LUMMIE LEWIS NOTED IN HIS REPORT THAT WEEKEND.  DON'T HOLD YOUR BREATH (AS I HAVE) WAITING FOR THE RELEASE OF THESE DOCUMENTS!

DCW

Benavides gave a "statement to the FBI on the date of the assassination."

Here's the quote from a later FBI report (typos in the original) based on a snitch phone call he made after meeting Vaganov:

Quote

It was BENAVIDES belief that BERENDT was trying to place VAGANOV at the scene possibly as the mand in the "red Ford" which he (BENAVIDES) had eluded to in his statement to the FBI on the date of the assassination.
http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg Subject Index Files/B Disk/Benavides Domingo/Item 01.pdf

The FBI statement went the way of the DPD affidavit probably about the same time. Obvious explanation -- both were detrimental to subbing in Benavides for Bowley and elevating him to major eyewitness status.

Edited September 29, 2023 by Michael Kalin

[David Josephs]

17 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

Three wallets.  Maybe an article at K & K?  At least two is a sure thing.  I thought there was a thread on the forum.  One in the car on the way to the DPD HQ, one at the Tippit murder and one in Irving.  The assistance of AI suggests only one.

three wallets oswald education forum - Search (bing.com)  

In all there were 5 wallets: 

This thread seems to have gone sideways into "Hill and TSBD" somehow... all good - yet in the wallet conversation - the existence, disappearance and provenance of 2 wallets, Tippit/Arrest, and the attributing of HIDELL ID to an Irving wallet which already has its own inventory, & the fact WESTBROOK and CROY are intimately involved in the only overt mention of HIDELL=OSWALD. (BALL, I think, puts the words into HILL's mouth)

Connecting OSWALD to HIDELL within an hour, and the rifle bought by HIDELL is proven fraudulent by the terrible KLEIN's and MONEY ORDER evidence... again HIDELL.

HIDELL ID was inserted into the scene primarily related to the death of Tippit... the wallet at that scene and the arrest wallet of the man who supposedly killed him.  Could that have been the real and only reason for Tippit? To pick up Oswald with this "discovered" ID?   Would it not have been easier to simply find HIDELL in his wallet in Irving since it was months since he supposedly used it.  I mean, why would Oswald have the fake ID which can only tie him to the newly found evidence for the rifle, on him that day with the variety of other things in that wallet; conversation for another day

Tracing the wallets and finding the crossroads being FRITZ's office at some point that afternoon as it is he who provides CLEMENTS with a photo of the SSS card with OSWALD's photo.  It is also FRITZ, we surmise, who has to decide what to do with 2 wallets from Irving and 2 more wallets that very day.  Looking into FRITZ we found his willingness to do what was necessary to maintain his near perfect conviction record.  Items from all the wallets (except the Marine photo whcih should be there) are then mixed together over that weekend with a few minor changes between Fri and Sun (see reports below).

The wallets are a blatant example of the evidence tampering FRITZ oversaw while the FBI condoned.  In the infamous Lafitte notes there is mention of "poor Tippit".  Without the HIDELL=OSWALD connection, the murder weapons cannot be connected to Oswald.

This seems to refer to the 16 "original" items as everything else says "photo of"

5 wallets:

1-Tippit, 2-Arrest, 3-#114-Brn w/Marine photo, 4-#382-Red (Both Irving) and below 5-a "studded" wallet. 
Below that is another DPD evidence photo post FBI "inking/Nov 26th" of items attributed in FBI B1 as contents of this wallet which the DPD says came from Irving.  The Hidell SSS card is offered as comparison

D71, the SSS Notice of Classification with photo, was discussed on the 22nd and written about by FBI SA CLEMENTS in his report as a "Photo of the SSS card" -  

 

Studded wallet - DPD Archives (Irving)

 

DPD ARCHIVE Items in IRVING Wallet.  FBI took all evidence on 22nd and returned over 200 more items than taken, most with these fingerprint testing ink stains.  These items are from Oswald's life and are listed in FBI B1.  There is another page or two of these images which overlap as you can see the items cut off at the top.

 

WCD345 FBI Evidence inventory lists

 

 

CLEMENTS v BOOKOUT Wallet contents reports.  Slight differences.  Bookout all photos from FRITZ

 

 

[Donald Willis]

4 hours ago, Michael Kalin said:

Benavides gave a "statement to the FBI on the date of the assassination."

Here's the quote from a later FBI report (typos in the original) based on a snitch phone call he made after meeting Vaganov:

The FBI statement went the way of the DPD affidavit probably about the same time. Obvious explanation -- both were detrimental to subbing in Benavides for Bowley and elevating him to major eyewitness status.

 

[Donald Willis]

1 minute ago, Donald Willis said:

 

The centerpiece of Benavides' testimony was the cigarette pack with the two shells.  Until then, all the public had to go on was the Poe/Jez 11/22 report to Curry.  And the contradictory report by Leavelle/Dhority.  The latter stated that Benavides did NOT see the suspect; the former, that he did see him reloading.  "With Malice" pp487 & 449.  The delay in Benavides own voice suggests that the story told the Commission was not the real one.

 

[Michael Kalin]

7 hours ago, Donald Willis said:

The centerpiece of Benavides' testimony was the cigarette pack with the two shells.  Until then, all the public had to go on was the Poe/Jez 11/22 report to Curry.  And the contradictory report by Leavelle/Dhority.  The latter stated that Benavides did NOT see the suspect; the former, that he did see him reloading.  "With Malice" pp487 & 449.  The delay in Benavides own voice suggests that the story told the Commission was not the real one.

Much of what Benavides said before his strange interlude in the alley [6H449] is fiction. This is followed by his funny description of the killer, modeled after Belin. Puzzling why he didn't bone up on this beforehand. Either he's a loose cannon or his subornation instructor inculcated principles of creative narration, allowing him to forget that he gave an affidavit at DPD HQ on 11/22.

There's also his dig at Callaway, directing him south on Patton, but come to find out eleven days later Ted went west on Tenth after all.

Guinyard told the truth. Benavides was not at the scene at the time of the murder.

[Donald Willis]

6 hours ago, Michael Kalin said:

Much of what Benavides said before his strange interlude in the alley [6H449] is fiction. This is followed by his funny description of the killer, modeled after Belin. Puzzling why he didn't bone up on this beforehand. Either he's a loose cannon or his subornation instructor inculcated principles of creative narration, allowing him to forget that he gave an affidavit at DPD HQ on 11/22.

There's also his dig at Callaway, directing him south on Patton, but come to find out eleven days later Ted went west on Tenth after all.

Guinyard told the truth. Benavides was not at the scene at the time of the murder.

If so, then Leavelle/Dhority was right, Poe/Jez was wrong.

[Bill Brown]

9 hours ago, Michael Kalin said:

Much of what Benavides said before his strange interlude in the alley [6H449] is fiction. This is followed by his funny description of the killer, modeled after Belin. Puzzling why he didn't bone up on this beforehand. Either he's a loose cannon or his subornation instructor inculcated principles of creative narration, allowing him to forget that he gave an affidavit at DPD HQ on 11/22.

There's also his dig at Callaway, directing him south on Patton, but come to find out eleven days later Ted went west on Tenth after all.

Guinyard told the truth. Benavides was not at the scene at the time of the murder.

 

"Benavides was not at the scene at the time of the murder."

 

Then who was keying the patrol car radio mic for about ninety seconds before Bowley got on?

 

[Michael Kalin]

13 hours ago, Bill Brown said:

Then who was keying the patrol car radio mic for about ninety seconds before Bowley got on?

Benavides "mashed the button" in #10 while lead flew across the windshield? Now there's an eyewitness!

Back on ignore. The sound of silence resonates with sagacity compared to this nonsense.

[Bill Brown]

5 hours ago, Michael Kalin said:

Benavides "mashed the button" in #10 while lead flew across the windshield? Now there's an eyewitness!

Back on ignore. The sound of silence resonates with sagacity compared to this nonsense.

 

You have np idea what you're talking about (again).  Someone was keying the mic for about ninety seconds before Bowley made his report.  You'd rather run away than learn something.

 

[Gil Jesus]

20 hours ago, Bill Brown said:

 

You have np idea what you're talking about (again).  Someone was keying the mic for about ninety seconds before Bowley made his report.  You'd rather run away than learn something.

 

As someone who has had years of experience using two-way communications, including police radios, I suggest it is YOU who has no idea what you're talking about.

Here's the dictabelt recording 31 seconds before Bowley called on the radio. There was no one keying the mic for 90 seconds before his call. The transmissions were loud and clear, which they would not have been had someone been keying the mic. 

https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/bowley-call.mp3

[Greg Doudna]

37 minutes ago, Gil Jesus said:

As someone who has had years of experience using two-way communications, including police radios, I suggest it is YOU who has no idea what you're talking about.

Here's the dictabelt recording 31 seconds before Bowley called on the radio. There was no one keying the mic for 90 seconds before his call. The transmissions were loud and clear, which they would not have been had someone been keying the mic. 

https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/bowley-call.mp3

Interesting, thanks Gil. 

A “factoid” debunked? 

I don’t doubt Benavides was there, because he says he was and his account of picking up and handing over shell hulls where he saw the killer toss them is corroborated, but it is good to not have misinformation contaminating things. 

What about you Bill—willing to consider (and thank Gil) for this minor correction of fact in Myers?

[Michael Kalin]

On 9/30/2023 at 12:03 PM, Donald Willis said:

If so, then Leavelle/Dhority was right, Poe/Jez was wrong.

Donald -- they certainly appear to be at loggerheads, reconciliation difficult if not altogether impossible. One faint hope -- Poe/Jez did not name (or even describe) the "unidentified witness" who handed over the "two empty hulls."

The earliest identification of Benavides I can find occurred when Guinyard fingered him in his WC testimony the morning of 4/2/64. Benavides testified later the same day. Leavelle, Hill & Poe testified the next week.

Do you know of earlier references to an identification of Benavides as Poe/Jez' "unidentified witness?" It may head off a painstaking foray into the esoterica of WC testimony.

[Greg Doudna]

It is just needless mystification to suppose Benavides wasn't where he said he was at the Tippit crime scene, for no good reason or evidence, dismissal of the most important Tippit crime scene witness in terms of physical description of the Tippit killer--credible because of how close Benavides was to the killer.

Benavides' physical description of the killer is exculpatory in favor of Oswald's innocence on three specific matters of description from a witness who was only ca. fifteen feet away from the killer, in excellent position to have gotten these three points right.

• Benavides testified the Tippit killer, though a white man, was darker than average complexion for a white man, about like his own Latino complexion. Oswald was light-skinned.
• Benavides testified the Tippit killer had a block cut hairline in the back of his head. Oswald had a tapered, not block cut, hairline in back, from all photos that weekend. 
• Benavides testified the Tippit killer had "curly" hair. Oswald's hair was in no way curly.

What is this business of implying or suggesting Benavides--an average working man with no record of criminal behavior--was suborned to wholesale perjury, suborned to fabricate his testimony out of whole cloth, by never-identified shadowy marionette-string-pulling conspirators wanting so badly to have Oswald exculpated by Benavides' physical description testimony?

Does that make sense as a plausible conspiracy theory? Invisible handlers intent on having Benavides give fabricated testimony showing Oswald was innocent?

On the radio transmission, Gil Jesus's experience with police radio as a police officer is good enough for me to settle that point, that the notion of 90 seconds of mashing of the radio heard on the police radio tapes is a myth. 

But Benavides was there at that police radio trying to figure out how to radio for help before Bowley took over and radioed in the call with Bowley's voice heard on the police tapes.

That is just fact.

Because it is not just that Benavides told of it. Bowley told of it too, and what reason would there be for Bowley to lie? Who else is the "Mexican man" spoken of by Bowley than Benavides? 

"Bowley advised that on the afternoon of November 22, 1963, the day President Kennedy was assassinated ... <tells of driving by and seeing the fallen officer near the patrol car, and stopping> ...

"[Bowley] noticed other people in the neighborhood beginning to gather near the car and body. Bowley stated that he and another man, who he described as a Mexican male, were the first ones to go to the assistance of the man on the ground. He also remembered seeing a white female wearing a white uniform and a nurse type name place ... The radio of the scout car was on and the Mexican man was attempting to use it to call for help. Bowley informed the man that he was familiar with two-way radio's and if he'd let him, he could get the call for help through. Using the police radio in the scout car, Bowley notified the police dispatcher that an officer had been shot and gave his location ..." (HSCA interview of Bowley, https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=149247#relPageId=4)  

[Michael Kalin]

A look at WC testimony regarding the identification of Benavides as Poe's witness, which was preceded in the four months between murder & hearings by little or no evidence on point. No surprise, Benavides' statements to DPD & FBI were discarded, much like the telephone call sheets, essentially writing him out of the murder scene until a sudden appearance as major eyewitness at the WC hearings. The testimony follows in chronological order. Note: fumbling with the microphone is irrelevant.

****************************************
Guinyard

Ball got the ball rolling with a leading question and immediately dropped the ball. Evidently he forgot Benavides was supposed to be present at the scene at the time the murder occurred. Bad day for Ball continued as he eventually tried to lead Guinyard into the bushes, but Sam wasn't buying it.

Mr. BALL. Were you there when the truck came up that was driven by Benavides?
Mr. GUINYARD. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. He came up right after this?
Mr. GUINYARD. Yes; he came up from the east side---going west.
Mr. BALL. And then what did you do after that?
Mr. GUINYARD. Well, we stood there a while and talked and I called him Donnie, he picked up all them empty hulls that come out of the gun.
Mr. BALL. Who did--Benavides?
Mr. GUINYARD. Yes.
Mr. BALL. Did you pick them up---any of them?
Mr. GUINYARD. He picked them up--I didn't pick them up---I was there with him.
Mr. BALL. You were there?
Mr. GUINYARD. I was there with him.
Mr. BALL. You were there when he picked them up?
Mr. GUINYARD. Yes.
Mr. BALL. Where were they?
Mr. GUINYARD. Laying across the yard as he kicked them out all around the sidewalk.
Mr. BALL. Were they anywhere near the bushes?
Mr. GUINYARD. No, sir; there was just this little old shrub that was in the yard just laying down through the yard--that little old shrub that was there.
Mr. BALL. Later that day, did you go down to the police department?
4/2/64 10:15 a.m.

****************************************
Benavides

Belin debuted the star witness with a lead that gave away the rehearsed nature of everything that followed. This episode is seldom doubted despite mega-fibs elsewhere in Benavides' testimony that day. Not entirely smooth sailing for Belin, who had to redirect Benavides' fugitive away from the corner into the bush.

Mr. BELIN - When you went back, what did you do? First of all, was there anything up to that time that you saw there or that you did that you haven't related here that you can think of right now?
Mr. BENAVIDES - Well, I started--I seen him throw the shells and I started to stop and pick them up, and I thought I'd better not so when I came back, after I had gotten back, I picked up the shells.
Mr. BELIN - All right. Now, you said you saw the man with the gun throw the shells?
Mr. BENAVIDES - Yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN - Well, did you see the man empty his gun?
Mr. BENAVIDES - That is what he was doing. He took one out and threw it.
Mr. BELIN - Do you remember in which hand he was holding his gun?
Mr. BENAVIDES - No; I sure don't.
Mr. BELIN - Do you remember if he was trying to put anything in the gun also?
Mr. BENAVIDES - Yes. As he turned the corner he was putting another shell in his gun.
Mr. BELIN - You saw him?
Mr. BENAVIDES - I mean, he was acting like. I didn't see him actually put a shell in his gun, but he acted like he was trying to reload it. Maybe he was trying to take out another shell, but he could have been reloading it or something.
Mr. BELIN - Let me ask you now, I would like to have you relate again the action of the man with the gun as you saw him now.
Mr. BENAVIDES - As I saw him, I really---I mean really got a good view of the man after the bullets were fired, he had just tuned. He was just turning away. In other words, he was pointing toward the officer, and he had just turned away to his left, and then he started. There was a big tree, and it seemed like he started back going to the curb of the street and into the sidewalk, and then he turned and went down the sidewalk to, well, until he got in front of the corner house, and then he turned to the left there and went on down Patton Street.
Mr. BELIN - When he got in front of the corner, when you say he turned to his left, did he cut across the yard of the house, or did he go clear to the corner and turn off?
Mr. BENAVIDES - There is a big bush and he catty-cornered across the yard.
Mr. BELIN - He kitty-cornered across the yard?
Mr. BENAVIDES - Yes. In other words, he didn't go all the way on the sidewalk. He just cut across the yard.
Mr. BELIN - Where was he when you saw him throwing shells? Had he already started across the yard?
Mr. BENAVIDES - No, sir. He had just got back to the sidewalk when he threw the first one and when he threw the second one, he had already cut back into the yard. He just sort of cut across.
Mr. BELIN - Now you saw him throw two shells?
Mr. BENAVIDES - Yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN - You saw where he threw the shells?
Mr. BENAVIDES - Yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN - Did you later go back in that area and try and find the shells?
Mr. BENAVIDES - Yes. Well, right after that I went back and I knew exactly where they was at, and I went over and picked up one in my hand, not thinking and I dropped it, that maybe they want fingerprints off it, so I took out an empty pack of cigarettes I had and picked them up with a little stick and put them in this cigarette package; a chrome looking shell.
Mr. BELIN - A chrome looking shell?
Mr. BENAVIDES - Yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN - About how long did it take you to locate the shells once you started looking for them?
Mr. BENAVIDES - Just a minute. I mean not very long at all. Just walked directly to them.
Mr. BELIN - You saw where he had thrown them?
Mr. BENAVIDES - One of them went down inside of a bush, and the other one was by the bush.
4/2/64 2:30 p.m.

****************************************
Leavelle

Ball's bad luck streak continued. Leavelle was a tough nut to crack, but played ball after a fashion. Lying was not a problem, ignoring his SOR about Benavides' appearance at DPD HQ same day as Callaway & Guinyard and the fact that he gave an affidavit. Not a total victory for Ball, who had to apply pressure to get Leavelle to hedge his testimony that Benavides "never saw the man actually."

Mr. BALL. You also talked to Domingo Benavides?
Mr. LEAVELLE. yes.
Mr. BALL. D-o-m-i-n-g-o B-e-n-a-v-i-d-e-s [spelling]. I would think it would be spelled differently.
Mr. LEAVELLE. He was supposed to be Mexican descent but that Benavides is actually an Italian name, I believe.
Mr. BALL. Well, did you talk to him also?
Mr. LEAVELLE. I talked with him but I do not believe we ever took an affidavit off him that I recall--may have.
Mr. BALL. Didn't he tell you that he picked up some empty hulls?
Mr. LEAVELLE. Yes, he told me he picked them up and gave them to the officer. I remember the officer told me he had gotten the hulls from someone who gave them to him, and when I talked to Domingo, he said he was the one picked them up and give them to the officer.
Mr. BALL. Did you bring any of these men downtown?
Mr. LEAVELLE. No.
Mr. BALL. Did you ask them----
Mr. LEAVELLE. I called later--Ted Callaway--bring the others down; however, I think the Negro porter there, whatever his name is, is the only one he brought.
Mr. BALL. You say you told him to bring the others down? Who did you tell to bring down?
Mr. LEAVELLE. The porter and this Domingo.
Mr. BALL. But he only brought----
Mr. LEAVELLE. Sam Guinyard.
Mr. BALL. Do you know why Domingo Benavides was never brought down for the showup?
Mr. LEAVELLE. I think he said he never saw the man actually. I believe he said later on he did not see the man.
Mr. BALL. He testified here he saw the man running.
Mr. LEAVELLE. But he---either that or he told me he could not recognize him, one or the other.
4/7/64

****************************************
Hill

Not much here. Hill miscounted the spent shells and omitted the shrub, but Belin didn't mind.

Mr. HILL. I got back in 105's car, went back around to the original scene, gave him his car keys back, and left his ear there, and at this point he came up to me with a Winston cigarette package.
Mr. BELIN. Who was this?
Mr. HILL. This was Poe.
Mr. BELIN. You went back to the Tippit scene?
Mr. HILL. Right.
Mr. BELIN. You went back to 400 East 10th Street?
Mr. HILL. Right. And Poe showed me a Winston cigarette package that contained three spent jackets from shells that he said a citizen had pointed out to him where the suspect had reloaded his gun and dropped these in the grass, and that the citizen had picked them up and put them in the Winston package. I told Poe to maintain the chain of evidence as small as possible, for him to retain these at that time, and to be sure and mark them for evidence, and then turn them over to the crime lab when he got there, or to homicide.
4/8/64

****************************************
Poe

The truth at last -- it was the Singing Nun at the height of her fame! Poe mistook the habit for a male Spaniard's physiog.

Mr. POE. I talked to a Spanish man, but I don't remember his name. Dominique, I believe.
Mr. BALL. Domingo Benavides?
Mr. POE. I believe that is correct; yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. What did he tell you?
Mr. POE. He told me, give me the same, or similar description of the man, and told me he was running out across this lawn. He was unloading his pistol as he ran, and he picked the shells up.
Mr. BALL. Domingo told you who was running across the lawn?
Mr. POE. A man, white man.
Mr. BALL. What was he doing?
Mr. POE. He was unloading his pistol as he run.
Mr. BALL. And what did he say?
Mr. POE. He said he picked the two hulls up.
Mr. BALL. Did he hand you the hulls?
Mr. POE. Yes, sir.
4/9/64

****************************************

In summation this is a screwball mess, in no wise adequate to overturn the validity of the Leavelle/Dhority SOR.

[Greg Doudna]

Michael K., you’ve just quoted testimony from Guinyard, who worked with Benavides and knew him well, Benavides himself, and Poe, three witnesses, telling of Benavides giving shell hulls to Poe, and no contrary evidence. What are you on about acting like there is some deep mystery over the man’s identity who gave shell hulls to Poe?

What does covered up police and FBI early reporting of Benavides, the contents of which no one knows—if that happened and are not misstatements—have to do with it? Is it possible Benavides’ physical description of the Tippit killer could prompt downplaying of Benavides at the beginning? 

Isn’t Guinyard’s statement obviously a reference to telling of Benavides and his truck having driven up and parked his truck coming west, before Guinyard got there and saw Benavides there? Which is more likely: that Guinyard was a little confused (he seemed a little confusable anyway) or heard the question wrong, or that unseen forces suborned Benavides into, or he engaged on his own in wholesale conscious perjured testimony? Testimony that if correct on the physical description exculpates Oswald?

You have been on about this for a long time and I still do not know what your point is. Why be so dead set on discrediting one of the strongest witnesses in Oswald’s favor at the Tippit crime scene, on no substantial evidence? Benavides may have made minor nitpick-level mistakes in testimony months later as witnesses commonly do, but why the irrational desire to make him into a large-scale fabricator? To what end? I don’t think he was lying in his testimony.

Edited October 4, 2023 by Greg Doudna