The wallet at the Tippit scene: a simpler solution?

[Jonathan Cohen]

10 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

As for the Wallets...  Here is 2005 "Oswald's Wallet" thread:  there were 5 wallets identified

Posted July 31, 2005
On the WALLETs...all of the above and more.

I wrote articles for the Fourth Decade in the 90s on the wallets.

John Armstrong has the best answers in HARVEY&LEE, pages 862-868.

There were at least four. DPD suppressed photo below. Also, wallet

at Tippit scene.

Jack

The idea that John Armstrong "has the best answers" about ANY subject related to the Kennedy assassination is thoroughly laughable ...

[David G. Healy]

1 hour ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

The idea that John Armstrong "has the best answers" about ANY subject related to the Kennedy assassination is thoroughly laughable ...

Dude, you and 1964 WCR conclusion-supporters have been whining about him (Armstrong) for years... I'd say he owns most of the nutters hereabouts and thereabouts -- and adding to that, he could, I suspect care less about your uninformed opinions....

[David Josephs]

9 minutes ago, David G. Healy said:

Dude, you and 1964 WCR conclusion-supporters have been whining about him (Armstrong) for years... I'd say he owns most of the nutters hereabouts and thereabouts -- and adding to that, he could, I suspect care less about your uninformed opinions....

I know for a fact he could care less. I send him some of the knucklehead comments just so we can have a good laugh together.

Most of the naysayer Nimrods here couldn't tie his shoes let alone debate or discuss the details of the case with him.

Classic low IQ response as well...  "if I don't understand it, I must bash it and keep bashing it until they relent" Trump101

Great to see you posting as always DGH... hope you and yours are well.

DJ 

 

Edited October 6, 2023 by David Josephs

[Bill Brown]

21 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

I know for a fact he could care less. I send him some of the knucklehead comments just so we can have a good laugh together.

Most of the naysayer Nimrods here couldn't tie his shoes let alone debate or discuss the details of the case with him.

Classic low IQ response as well...  "if I don't understand it, I must bash it and keep bashing it until they relent" Trump101

Great to see you posting as always DGH... hope you and yours are well.

DJ 

 

 

"Most of the naysayer Nimrods here couldn't tie his shoes let alone debate or discuss the details of the case with him."

 

"DEWEY DEFEATS TRUMAN"

 

[Michael Kalin]

On 10/6/2023 at 11:21 AM, David Josephs said:

YOU turned it.

LOL -- guilty as charged!

Don Willis' unexpected appearance on this forum set the ball rolling. Years ago I discovered material on an acorn file server he had posted at JFKPLACE (I think that's the name of an old listserv). Guess what showed up there that set my curiosity running wild? -- "The 10th St. Witnesses Who Were Not Even There: Benavides." Later on there was evidence of a possible change of mind (can't remember where I encountered it) for reasons that were unclear.

He popped up occasionally on newsgroup bestiaries, at times moving away from Tippit matters. That rough & tumble environment frightened me, more stroggs than you can shake a stick at, but I may have already received my fair share of abuse here. So much for sheltering in place.

This forum is prominent. Don waited a long time before joining, and there was no guarantee he would continue to post actively. I could not bring myself to let the opportunity slip. Already his voice may have gone silent. A shame, his departure would be our loss. I hope he returns.

When Greg linked the gun to the wallet the cab ride was just a shot away, from there to Benavides another shot away, and lo! the answer boiled down to a critical comparison of the Leavelle/Dhority SOR with the Poe/Jez report.

Immediately, H2H, advantage Leavelle/Dhority. The "church lawn" of Poe/Jez is absurd. So the search was on to find other evidence that Benavides was actually at the scene at the time of the killing, but (except for gathering the hulls after the fact) he was hors de combat until the WC hearings. The rest I shan't repeat to avoid hard feelings, which I regret, and remain an admirer of your extensive work.

Greg, I apologize for this digression.

Re the wallet -- I've never read anything that came close to convincing me it was the personal property of any of the usual suspects named over the years, this thread included.

 

Edited October 7, 2023 by Michael Kalin

[David Josephs]

14 minutes ago, Michael Kalin said:

Re the wallet -- I've never read anything that came close to convincing me it was the personal property of any of the usual suspects named over the years, this thread included.

Thanks for taking the time Mike... not many would do that.  .  More on DB at the bottom of the post.

re: the Wallet(s)...  Go on.

Can you please define your "usual suspects" and "personal property".  These are kind of vague and not what I asked, really.

By the late afternoon - according to the evidence - of 11/22 certain members of the DPD and FBI were aware of an ID "found" on Oswald in the name HIDELL with a photo of Ozzie basically pasted on.  SA Robert BARRETT being one of them, WESTBROOK, CROY and OWENS being others.

Croy says "an unidentified man came up and gave me a wallet". Croy in turn gave it to WESTBROOK and HIDELL is born.

IMO HILL was led by the WC lawyers to say the wallet in the car also had HIDELL ID:

Mr. BELIN. Would the name Hidell mean anything? Alek Hidell?
Mr. HILL. That would be similar. I couldn't say specifically that is what it was, because this was a conversation and I never did see it written down, but that sounds like the name that I heard.
Mr. BELIN. Was this the first time you learned of the name?
Mr. HILL. Yes; it was.

It is much, much more likely that there was no wallet on Oswald - considering he left his main wallet in Irving - in the car as there is no evidence this wallet ever made it out of the police car.

Yet as mentioned, you will not find a wallet in evidence as "found at the Tippit scene" and here is a photo of the items they claim come from the "Irving wallet".  These are Oswald's reflecting correct dates and personal possessions... Again... FOUND IN IRVING and listed on the FBI B1 WCD345.

If there was no wallet at the Tippit scene, then one must explain the crazy conflicts these wallets from different locations create.  Oswald leaves what is the one and only item of evidence with his photo and the name HIDELL which connects the purchase of the Rifle and Pistol to his doorstep?  And that explanation sits well with anyone?

Wallet = Hidell = Oswald = Tippit murder.  There is not a single other item of fabricated evidence which visually connects the man to the name...  and it's the one and only item falling out of Oswald's clothing.

=====

In your reading of Willis, is it that there is not enough evidence that he was there, or is there evidence he was somewhere else?

Willis post:  https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/hmMsbPMYfSA?pli=1

How? Poe testified that Benavides had told him that [the gunman] "was running out across this lawn. He was unloading his pistol as he ran." (v7p68) Hill echoed Poe re this :"running" and "unloading" in his own testimony.

But Benavides, in a little-remarked portion of his WC testimony, contradicted Poe:

Belin: "When the officers came out there, did you tell them what you had seen?"
Benavides: "No, sir."
Belin: "What did you do?"
Benavides: "I left right after." (v6p451)

According to Benavides, then, he did NOT tell Poe that he saw anyone running or unloading. Where, then, did Poe get his information? Why would he, as it seems, have made up such a story?

The better, apparently, to buttress the official story re a man with a revolver.. But Poe's inventions actually tend to undercut the official story.

dcw. May 15, 2021, 1:41:59 PM

Again Mike, seems a bit of a stretch to use these 4 lines as prima facia evidence the man wasn't there, because months later DB claims he did or didn't mention anything the man running away as he hands Poe the shells.   POE offers a more detailed story. DB, not as much.   

I firmly see this as Willis jumping way to high and with specific intention to squeeze a round conclusion into a square question.

Mr. BALL. And what happened after that?
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.
Mr. BALL. Did you put any markings on the hulls?
Mr. POE. I couldn't swear to it; no, sir.
Mr. BALL. What did you do with the hulls?
Mr. POE. I turned the hulls into the crime lab, which was at the scene.
Mr. BALL. Do you know the name of the man with the crime lab or from the crime lab?
Mr. POE. I couldn't swear to it. I believe Pete Barnes, but I wouldn't swear to it.

Furthermore, it is a bit disingenuous to stop the quoted discussion before he says something that contradicts the premise:

Mr. BELIN - Do you remember the name of the officer?
Mr. BENAVIDES - No, sir; I didn't even ask him. I just told him that this was the shells that he had fired, and I handed them to him. Seemed like he was a young guy, maybe 24.

Mr. BENAVIDES - I left right after. I give the shells to the officer. I turned around and went back and we returned to work.   (DJ: dcw's entire argument hinges on whether months later DB does not mention "talking" to POE. C'mon man)
Mr. BELIN - Then what happened? Did the officers ever get in touch with you?
Mr. BENAVIDES - Later on that evening, about 4 o'clock, there was two officers came by and asked for me, Mr. Callaway asked me---I had told them that I had seen the officer (suppose that would be POE?), and the reporters were there and I was trying to hide from the reporters because they will just bother you all the time.
Then I found out that they thought this was the guy that killed the President. At the time I didn't know the President was dead or he had been shot.
I was just trying to hide from the reporters and everything, and these two officers came around and asked me if I'd seen him, and I told him yes, and told them what I had seen, and they asked me if I could identify him, and I said I don't think I could. It this time I was sure, I wasn't sure that I could or not. I wasn't going to say I could identify and go down and couldn't have.
Mr. BELIN - Did he ever take you to the police station and ask you if you could identify him?
Mr. BENAVIDES - No; they didn't.

3rd paragraph.  Since Poe cannot find his self-confessed etched initials in the 4 hulls - does that POE too wasn't there?  Poe is said to say that he received "two similar cartridge cases on Nov 22 from DOMINGO BENAVIDES"

From this he AND YOU can conclude DB wasn't there?  And then not offer any reason...  Say, to plant the correct shells into evidence...  I wrote a paper showing the paths of the 2 pistols at the DPD that afternoon.  And once again WESTBROOK and HILL are involved.  We've also traded the pistol back to the same Canadian company who had "2766" a Carcano FC rifle identical to the one "found" on the 6th floor.

My point here Mike, if you are using Don to bolster the argument DB wasn't there for some nefarious reason like getting the planted shells into evidence... Say so.  Explain how you see that working and why.

Like Bart and many other proving no 2nd floor lunchroom interaction... a fabrication.

POE is not sure if he marked the shells... maybe.  Yet one wonders why the FBI would write such a report claiming that POE marked them before giving to Barnes and then say Poe's initials aren't there.  Barnes claims to have marked the shells as well with a diamond tip tool.

BARNES does not say POE marked the shells too...  does not saying something mean it never happened, or simply suggests it may have never happened?

FWIW I see too much contortion to get the assumption to fit the situation.  DB was there.  The conspiracy encapsulated on that street offers many more clues to who was doing what than whether POE over stated or DB under-

 

 

[Michael Kalin]

5 hours ago, David Josephs said:

Can you please define your "usual suspects" and "personal property".  These are kind of vague and not what I asked, really.

Off the top of my head the wallet's been assigned to Scoggins, Callaway & even Tippit, possibly others but research into this is not worth the bother. Nothing has ever persuaded me it is not part of the LHO throwdown frame kit, originating from Westbrook with equestrian Croy doing the throwing. Not sure, but my take on this may derive from Jim Hargrove's Harvey & Lee website.

5 hours ago, David Josephs said:

In your reading of Willis, is it that there is not enough evidence that he was there, or is there evidence he was somewhere else?

I cannot speak for Don. I hoped he would open up on this issue, but my fear is he's gone.

In broad outline here are the milestones over a dozen years or so in the evolution of my thinking, all several years apart.

1. Don's "The 10th St. Witnesses Who Were Not Even There: Benavides" JFKPLACE post.
2. The existence of the Leavelle/Dhority SOR.
3. Evidence that Benavides gave a report to the FBI on 11/22/63.

So, what was an interesting proposition (#1), acquired plausibility with #2, and greater probability with #3. Look at it this way. It might be just possible DPD accidentally lost Benavides' affidavit of 11/22/63, but the FBI also accidentally losing its report of even date? No dice. A fix was in.

We know Benavides was subbed in for Bowley relative to the citizen call, not much of a leap to blow him up into full-fledged murder eyewitness. The weird Poe/Jez report encouraged this. The Leavelle/Dhority SOR that said he "did not see suspect" was swept aside. I have not seen the original of the SOR, only scans of crappy copies.

Except for the Poe/Jez report there is no evidence to indicate that the gathering of the spent shells is related to the question of Benavides' murder eyewitness status.

I find his WC testimony comical & engaging, but full of big lies:
1. He did not make the citizen call.
2. He did appear at DPD HQ on 11/22.
3. He gave an affidavit on 11/22.

And there's the matter of Guinyard's observation of Benavides' arrival at the scene several minutes after the shooting occurred, effortlessly & erroneously glossed over and discounted into insignificance by almost everybody.

I lack your ability to quickly muster massive amounts of documentation. Tell me what you want and I'll dig it up. It doesn't help that some major repositories have tarted up their interfaces while offering cruddy search facilities, reorganizing & renumbering files without bothering to furnish redirects, thereby breaking many links.