Jump to content
The Education Forum

A blast from the past -- Was the conduct of the Police Lineups proof of Oswald's Innocence ?

Recommended Posts

Was the Conduct of the Oswald Lineups Proof of His Innocence ?
by Gil Jesus ( 2009 )


A police lineup is a process by which a crime victim or witness's putative identification of a suspect is confirmed to a level that can count as evidence at trial.

The suspect, along with several other individuals ( which I will be referring to as "fillers" ) of similar height, complexion and build stand both facing and in profile. This is sometimes done in a special room which includes details like a height measurement grade on the wall to aid identifying the person's height. The person making the identification views from behind a one-way mirror or similar protection to guarantee the suspect identified by the witness cannot know the identity of the witness. If the victim or witness successfully identifies the suspect from among the fillers, the  identification is considered valid.

For evidence from a lineup to be admissible in court, the lineup itself must be conducted fairly. The police may not say or do anything that persuades the witness to identify the suspect that they prefer. This includes loading the lineup with people who look very dissimilar to the suspect.


There are two common types of lineups: simultaneous and sequential. In a simultaneous lineup, the eyewitness views all the people or photos at the same time.

In a sequential lineup, people or photographs are presented to the witness one at a time. The Dallas Police used a simultaneous type for the live lineups in this case.

Typically, the law enforcement official or lineup administrator knows who the suspect is. Experts suggest that lineup administrators might— whether purposefully or inadvertently—give the witness verbal or nonverbal cues as to the identity of the suspect. For instance, if an eyewitness utters the number of a filler, the lineup administrator may
say to the witness, “Take your time . . . . Make sure you look at all of them.” Such a statement may effectively lead the witness away from the filler.

According to the National Institute of Justice, which is the research and development agency of the US Department of Justice, several variables might effect the validity of police lineups.

1. Whether the person administering the lineup knows which person in the lineup is the suspect.

2. Instructions given to the witness, including saying or implying that the suspect will be present.

3. Use of lineup "fillers" who do not resemble the suspect, thus making the suspect stand out. For example, the suspect has dark hair, but only one of five people in the lineup has dark hair.


And finally, multiple witnesses viewing the same lineup must do so separately----not together.

Were the Dallas Police Department's lineups valid ?


The three other participants in the first two lineups were Dallas Police employees. William Perry and Richard Clark were detectives in the Vice Division and Don Ables was a clerk in the jail.

Detective L. C. Graves told the Warren Commission that the way "fillers" were selected for lineups was that the homicide division would call down to the jail office, tell them which prisoner they wanted to show and ask them to provide two, three or four other prisoners who were the approximate age and size as the prisoner they were showing.
( 7 H 253 )

But this is not the way that the "fillers" were selected for the first two lineups in this case.

William Perry testified that Capt. Fritz called the vice unit, not the jail, and requested two officers ( 7 H 233 )

Perry's partner Clark confirmed it was Fritz who made the request ( 7 H 236 )

Detective Jim Leavelle testified that the Dallas Police "didn't normally" use police officers in lineups ( 7 H 262 )

Fritz testified that he "borrowed those officers" because he feared other prisoners would harm Oswald and that "we didn't have an officer in my office the right size to show with him so I asked two of the special service officers if they would help me". ( 4 H 212 )

Less than 4 hours later, however, at the 7:55 pm lineup, Oswald was handcuffed to two other prisoners. In Saturday's lineup, ALL of the fillers were prisoners.

So much for Fritz's fear for Oswald's safety.


" I know in all cases we usually try to have them dressed as alike as possible, the same as each other."
--- Sgt. James Leavelle ( 7 H 265 )

Capt. Fritz testified that the three police "fillers" "took off their coats and neckties and fixed themselves where they would look like prisoners" and were not dressed any better than Oswald. ( 4 H 212 )

But when questioned by the WC, "filler" William Perry testified that he put on a brown sports coat for both lineups.
( 7 H 233 )

"Filler" RL Clark testified that he was wearing a white short sleeved shirt and a red vest for both lineups. He also testified that he got the red vest and Perry got the brown sports coat FROM THE HOMICIDE OFFICE. ( 7 H 236 )

Don Ables testified that he had on a white shirt and a grey knit sweater for both lineups. ( 7 H 240 )

But Oswald was wearing Commission Exhibit 150 for both lineups, the shirt that has a frayed hole in the elbow.
( 4 H 73 )

Detective Elmer Boyd admitted under oath that the three police employees WERE dressed better than Oswald.
( 7 H 127 )

Fritz lied to the Commission when he testified that the police officers "fixed themselves where they would look like prisoners" . Prisoners don't wear red vests or brown sport coats. And it's not a mistake that Fritz could have made unintentionally because Fritz testified that he was present at the first lineup for Helen Markham ( 4 H 212 ) and Det. Clark testified that those items of clothing were taken from the homicide office.


Jim Leavelle conducted lineup #'s 1,3 and 4 and spoke to the witnesses prior to lineup 2. Leavelle indicated in testimony that he knew that two officers from the Vice Unit and a jail clerk had been used for the first lineup.
( 7 H 263-264 )

Leavelle also testified that he had seen Oswald, " the first day he was arrested and when they brought him in and out of the office taking him to and from the jail, and of course, I had saw him at the lineups, what-have-you ". ( 7 H 268 )

So Leavelle, by his own admission, was more than aware that Oswald was the suspect.

He knew it.

Detective Sims conducted lineup # 2 at 6:30 pm on Friday. According to Capt. Fritz, Sims was present at the first interrogation session between 2:15 and 4:05 ( 4 H 209 ) and thus knew that Oswald was the suspect prior to his conducting the 6:30 lineup.

In addition, Sims testified that he KNEW ALL THREE OF THE POLICE FILLERS that were used in the lineup he conducted.
( 7 H 179 )


In his testimony, Callaway quoted what Detective Jim Leavelle told himself, Guinyard and McWatters before they viewed lineup # 2 :

Mr. CALLAWAY. We first went into the room. There was Jim Leavelle, the detective, Sam Guinyard, and then this busdriver and myself......and
Jim told us, "When I show you these guys, be sure, take your time, see if you can make a positive identification.........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."
( 3 H 355 )

Leavelle was telling them that the suspect in Tippit's killing was in the lineup they were about to see.


"Let me say this, that it would be very unusual if we had a showup and .........if they put anything other than men that fit their approximate size and age in there with them......because we just don't operate that way." --- Dallas Detective L. C. Graves ( 7 H 253 )

Mrs. Markham's description of the Tippit killer as given to Officer J.M. Poe was a white male, about 25, about 5 feet 8, brown hair, medium build . ( 7 H 68 ) She also testified that the man who she saw shoot Tippit "wasn't too heavy."
( 3 H 317-318 )

And she gave a completely different description of the killer to FBI Agent Bardwell D. Odum. She told him that the killer was a white male, about 18, black hair, red complexion

( 3 H 318 )

Ted Callaway, who viewed the exact same lineup as Mrs. Markham about two hours later, described the killer as a man with dark hair and a fair complexion ( 3 H 356 )

Howard Brennan described the Kennedy killer as early 30's , fair complexion, slender.

So how did the physical attributes of the "fillers" in the first two lineups compare to the descriptions given by the witnesses who viewed them ?

Perry was 34 yo 5-11 150 brown hair dark complexion ( 7 H 235, 7 H 168 )

Clark was 31 yo 5-11 177 blond hair ruddy complexion ( 7 H 239, 7 H 168 )

Ables was 26 yo 5-9 165 dark hair ruddy complexion ( 7 H 242-243, 7 H 168 )

Elmer Boyd told the Commission that they "always tell them to get the same color". ( 7 H 131 )

But Sam Guinyard testified that the men in the second lineup ( who were the same men as was in the first ) were NOT the same color ( 7 H 399 )

Markham, Guinyard, Callaway and even Brennan all viewed the exact same lineup, with the exact same "fillers" in the exact same positions, dressed exactly the same. The fillers were all too dark, too blond and too heavy with the completely wrong complexion to match the descriptions of the witnesses.

As if having one blond in the first two lineups was not enough, the Dallas Police put TWO blonds in the lineup with Oswald and Ables for lineup # 3.
( 7 H 179 )

In this lineup, the witnesses, Barbara and Virginia Davis described the man they saw running across their lawn as a white male, slender, light complexion, with either light brown or
black hair ( 3 H 349 ) ( 6 H 457 ).

But both fillers Richard Walter Borchgardt and Ellis Carl Brazel had blond hair, and a ruddy complexion. ( 7 H 179 )
And Ables also had a ruddy complexion ( 7 H 242-243, 7 H 168 )

In his testimony, taxicab driver William Scoggins described the murderer of Tippit as a white male, light complexion, 25-26, medium height and weight, with either medium brown or dark hair ( 3 H 333 )

But Lineup # 4 "filler" John Thurman Horne was 17 and "filler" David Edmond Knapp was 18. ( 7 H 200 )

The final "filler" for the fourth lineup was Daniel Lujan, a 26 year old Mexican who was on the heavy side at 5-8 and 170. ( 7 H 245 )

This is what the NIJ says about providing fillers for police lineups :
"Fillers who do not resemble the witness’s description of the perpetrator may cause a suspect to stand out."


Ya think ?



In the second, third and fourth lineups, the witnesses were allowed to view the lineups as a group, rather than separately.

Sam Guinyard testified that during the second lineup he and Ted Callaway sat only 3-4 feet apart from one another. ( 7 H 400 )

Virginia Davis testified that during the third lineup, Barbara was sitting right next to her. ( 6 H 462 )

Whaley and Scoggins viewed the fourth lineup together. ( 3 H 337 )


Scoggins testified that he saw Oswald's picture in the morning paper. ( 3 H 334-335 )

Brennan testified that he saw Oswald on TV. ( 3 H 155 )


Detective Clark testified that Don Ables was NOT handcuffed to him for the first lineup. ( 7 H 237 )

As soon as he says that, they immediately go off the record for a "discussion".

Joseph Ball asked Ables if he were ever handcuffed to Oswald. ( 7 H 242 )

But he never asked Ables if he was handcuffed to Clark.

Instead, he asked Capt. Fritz, and detectives Boyd and Sims,

Fritz, who was present for the first lineup, said he "didn't remember for sure". ( 4 H 212 )

Then Boyd was asked if it was usual to have all the participants handcuffed with the suspect. His response was that it was. When he was asked if he knew why it wasn't done in this case his response was that he did not know. ( 7 H 125 )

But two pages later, Boyd is again asked if they were all handcuffed together. He takes the cue from Ball and says they were. His partner, Richard Sims said that all the participants were handcuffed together. ( 7 H 167 )

By not having Ables handcuffed to Clark, the authorities created the image of prisoner Oswald being handcuffed to a police officer on either side, rather than the image of four prisoners handcuffed together.


Dr. Gary Wells, an Iowa State University psychologist who has researched identifications by witnesses since the mid-1970s describes what a witness sees in a lineup. He says, "The tendency is to pick the one who looks most like the person you saw. It becomes more about reasoning than memory."

"...... the reason I say that he looked like the man, because the rest of them were larger men ........The only one I could identify at all would be the smaller man on account he was the only one who could come near fitting the description." ---- Cecil McWatters ( 2 H 281 )

When Howard Brennan viewed the second lineup on November 22nd, he chose Oswald as the one who "most resembled" the man he saw. ( 3 H 154-155 )

This phenomena of choosing the one who "looks like" rather than one who "is" is supported by research published in 1998 by a Wells-led team. In that research, subjects were shown a grainy film of a staged crime, then handed six photos. They weren't told whether the "criminal" they had seen was in the group of pictures.

He wasn't, but nearly all of the subjects chose a picture anyway.



Helen Markham testified to the pressure she was receiving at the first lineup:

"When I saw this man I wasn't sure....and they kept asking me, 'which one, which one ? '...." ( 3 H 311 )


They did it at least 19 other times that we know of. The proof of that has been the 19 convictions, 17 of those having occurred under former DA Henry Wade's regime, which have been
overturned by DNA evidence since the 1980's . Wade's justice system in Dallas County was more interested in closing cases than it was in bringing the true perpetrators of crimes to
"Now in hindsight, we're finding lots of places where detectives in those cases, they kind of trimmed the corners to just get the case done," said Michelle Moore, a Dallas County public defender and president of the Innocence Project of Texas. "Whether that's the fault of the detectives or the DA's, I don't know." Typical Wade cases "were riddled with shoddy investigations, evidence was ignored and defense lawyers were kept in the dark". John Stickels, a University of Texas at Arlington criminology professor and a director of the Innocence Project of Texas, blames a culture of "win at all costs." "When someone was arrested, it was assumed they were guilty," he said. "I think prosecutors and investigators basically ignored all evidence to the contrary and decided they were going to convict these guys."


It didn't matter that there were killers out there still at large. As far as the authorities were concerned, once they made an arrest for a crime, they had the right man.


Most law enforcement officers and prosecutors are honest and trustworthy. But criminal justice is a human endeavor and the possibility for corruption always exists.

The testimony from the hearings indicate that the Dallas Police had a procedure for the selection of "fillers" in their lineups. The testimony also shows that the police deviated from that procedure for the first two lineups because there was no one "the right size" to show with Oswald. The police then solved this dilemma by putting "fillers" in the lineups who, not only weren't even close to the descriptions given by the witnesses, they didn't even come close to resembling Oswald.

They put guys in there who were darker skinned, heavier, had the wrong hair color, the wrong complexion, younger and older than either the witness descriptions of the killer, or the suspect Oswald. They put teenagers in the lineups. They put blonds in the lineups.

They even put a minority in the last lineup.

The purpose for such "selections" of "Fillers" was to insure that Oswald was the only one who even came close to matching the description of the killer and thus making him the only choice POSSIBLE.

In the first lineup, the men were not all handcuffed together, only numbers 1-3 were handcuffed and since Oswald was # 2, this presented the mental image of prisoner Oswald between two better dressed detectives.

Before the second lineup, Leavelle tipped off Callaway, Guinyard and McWatters that the Tippit killer was in the lineup.

In the second, third and fourth lineups, the witnesses were allowed to view the lineup together, rather than separately.

Both Davis women each claimed to have identified Oswald first, ( 3 H 350 ) ( 6 H 462 ) and since they were seated next to each other,
it is a strong indication that they identified Oswald together.

The Dallas Police did everything they possibly could do to influence the selection of Oswald, short of hanging a sign on him that said, "pick me" or showing him with three officers in uniform.

That's how ridiculously biased these lineups were.

Nowhere are the authorities efforts to lead the witnesses more blatant and obvious than on pages 310-311 of Volume 3 of the Hearings. Joseph Ball is trying to get Helen Markham to say that the # 2 man in the lineup was the one she saw kill Tippit. But Markham is not cooperating, insisting that she didn't recognize any of the men in the lineup "by their face". Frustrated, Ball asks the following leading question:

"Was there a # 2 man in there ? "

This seemingly ridiculous question ( of course there'd be a number 2 man in a four man lineup ) was used to lead witness Markham right to Oswald, and proves my point that not only did the authorities influence, but they even LED the witnesses in their identifications.

If Oswald WAS guilty, the Dallas Police didn't NEED to put into the lineups men and boys who matched neither the description of the killer, nor Oswald.

They didn't NEED to lie about how the lineup participants were similar or similarly dressed when in fact they were not.

They didn't NEED to tip the witnesses that the suspect was in the lineup before they viewed it.

They didn't NEED to have the witnesses view the lineups as a group.

They didn't NEED to influence witness identifications or to lead witnesses in testimony.

If Oswald WAS guilty, then none of these extremes were necessary and because they WERE taken, they can only lead us to one conclusion:


When the lineups are not valid, the identifications made from those lineups are likewise not valid. Therefore, the identifications made by Markham, Callaway, Guinyard, the Davises and Scoggins cannot be accepted as "positive identifications". I believe that all of these extreme steps, collectively, were not a series of coincidences nor were they the result of "good police work", but rather are the proof that Lee Harvey Oswald killed no one and that he was being framed for the murders of JD Tippit and John Fitzgerald Kennedy.

What did the Commission say in its Report about the police lineups ?

"The Commission is satisfied that the lineups were conducted fairly."
( Chap. 4 pg. 169 )

The evidence and testimony, however, does NOT support that conclusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was all about timing to pick your suspect number;

Mr. BELIN. What number was over his head? 
Mr. WHALEY. Well, they--when they walked over the line and they stopped him, No. 2 was over his head, but he was pulling on both of the other men on each side and arguing with this detective, so he didn't stay under any certain number.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very interesting subject.

Also, the DPD allowed their building to become a complete circus with frantic packed press people, cameras and cable stretched everywhere soon after Oswald was processed ... right inside their most important inner office areas.

I once heard Jim Levealle state in an interview he had to literally fight through press people inside the DPD to move from one department place to another soon after Oswald was in custody. I think he related it to a mad house.

At one point, a camera wielding press person actually squeezed his upper body between Levealle's legs to try to get a photo shot, and Levealle chuckled as he described his kicking the reporter so hard he flew back several feet!

That press mob scene was beyond any excuse of simple naivete. It was beyond innocent and even ignorant negligence.

It was criminal negligence imo. 

The DPD building should have been in complete lockdown the second Oswald was brought into it. With only authorized police and other police agency personnel allowed access.

For years I've always said, the DPD department heads and Chief Curry himself should have been fired for all those insane security incompetence scenes...ending with one of the most negligent acts of security breakdown in their history ( and America's history ) with Lee Harvey Oswald shot and killed while handcuffed to two DPD officers...right inside their own PD building!



Edited by Joe Bauer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Gil Jesus said:

As if having one blond in the first two lineups was not enough, the Dallas Police put TWO blonds in the lineup with Oswald and Ables for lineup # 3.
( 7 H 179 )

But both fillers Richard Walter Borchgardt and Ellis Carl Brazel had blond hair, and a ruddy complexion. ( 7 H 179 )


In November, 1963, Kenneth L. Anderton was a Patrolman in the Patrol Division, Second Platoon, Captained by Cecil Talbert. Partnered with John P. Adamcik.

Bachelor Exhibit 5002 page 8 of pdf file



In his after-action Report, Anderton said that on November 22nd, he was on vacation, but that after JFK was shot, Lt. Wells called him and told him to report to work. When he got there, his partner, J. P. Adamcik was “out with other detectives”.

DPD Archives Box 3, Folder# 2, Item# 1.



Police Officers Adamcik (7H202), Rose (7H227) and Stovall (7H186) are unanimous in saying that Captain Fritz dispatched them to Irving at 2:30 PM. They are also unanimous in saying that when they arrived at this address at about 3:00 PM, they had to wait for 35-40 minutes for the Deputy Sheriffs to arrive since Irving was outside their jurisdiction.

Anderton also took an affidavit from James Worrell.

DPD Archives Box 3, Folder# 2, Item# 1.



Anderton and Adamcik talked to Floyd Davis, the owner of the Sportsdrome Gun Range on December 2, 1963. Mr. Harold Price, who worked for Mr. Davis told Davis that Oswald had been at the gun range on November 9th, 10th, and 17th.

This report is tacked on to the end of a Report by L.C. Graves.

DPD Archives Box 1, Folder# 6, Item# 22 page 2


On December 1, 1963 Richard Borchgardt (who had appeared in a lineup alongside Lee Harvey Oswald) told Patrolman Kenneth Anderton that he had information that Jack Ruby was involved in a gun running scheme involving Lawrence Miller, et.al.

Portal to Texas History John F. Kennedy Memorial Collection



Though Anderton is listed in the Batchelor’s Exhibit 5002 as a Patrolman in the Patrol Division, his obituary said that he worked in Homicide.

Kenneth L. "Andy" Anderton

Dallas Morning News May 21, 2005.



ANDERTON, KENNETH "Andy" L. 72 of Eustace, TX. passed away May 29, in Tyler, TX. Grew up in the Dallas area. Worked for Ford Motor Co. for a short time. Served in the US Marine Corp. as a flight instructor. After the service he joined and retired after 23 years of service with the Dallas Police Force in the homicide department where he was involved in the investigation during the time President Kennedy was assassinated . He left homicide and joined the intelligence division and was involved in many special projects, some with the FBI. He was a Master Mason at the East Dallas #1200 Lodge. After retirement he worked at Cornerstone Granite & Marble where he coordinated the building of the playground at Scottish Rite Hospital. Survived by his wife, Deane Anderton, son, Mark Anderton, step-sons, Michael Wayne & Patrick Wayne, half brother, Phillip Anderton.


William Allen Harper gave the Harper fragment to Dallas FBI Agent James W. Anderton.


Any relation to Kenneth L. Anderton?

Kenneth L. Anderton wedding photo Dallas Morning News. August 8, 1952 page 11.


Compare the Borchgardt/Anderton story to the account of John Elrod in


Page 2

Steve Thomas


Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Tony Krome said:

Mr. BELIN. What number was over his head? 
Mr. WHALEY. Well, they--when they walked over the line and they stopped him, No. 2 was over his head, but he was pulling on both of the other men on each side and arguing with this detective, so he didn't stay under any certain number.

Was Oswald himself trying to queer the ID, hoping to beat it in court?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did an examination of the lineup in connection with the 2017 CAPA mock trial with the judge who presided over the mock trial. We concluded that the lineup was constitutionally deficient and that Oswald's rights were violated. Former WC attorney Burt Griffin came to a similar conclusion with his own presentation at a Cleveland-area  law school. The slides to my presentation are available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gil, first, your work on here from years ago was one of the reasons when I found this site I kept reading and finally joined, after you'd stopped posting.  Glad to see you doing so again.  Second, just my opinion but I think the police lineups are (also) proof that the DPD was in on the cover up from day one.  They were basically telling witnesses with their actions, this is the guy.  As you have so well demonstrated.  Justice?  My ass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

Gil, first, your work on here from years ago was one of the reasons when I found this site I kept reading and finally joined, after you'd stopped posting.  Glad to see you doing so again.  Second, just my opinion but I think the police lineups are (also) proof that the DPD was in on the cover up from day one.  They were basically telling witnesses with their actions, this is the guy.  As you have so well demonstrated.  Justice?  My ass.

Thank You. The point I'm trying to make here is that if the case was cinched as Will Fritz said it was, why would the authorities have to intimidate witnesses, change testimony, or lie under oath ? Why, almost 60 years later, are there so many unanswered questions ? The only way these lineups would have been more ridiculous was to have Oswald standing with 4 officers WEARING THEIR UNIFORMS. It was THAT bad.

Edited by Gil Jesus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's say Oswald went to court;

The Whaley lineup is invalid, he picked out the wrong number.

The McWatters lineup is invalid, he picked out a man that he thought most closely matched teenager Milton Jones.

Bledsoe has Oswald wearing the shirt he is supposed to change into after he got home.

There goes the prosecution's escape route, the whole thing is invalid.

So the defense calls Curry and asks him if he knew about a bus transfer found on Oswald on Friday. "Well, no, I told reporters on Saturday that I had no idea about a bus, in fact we were searching for a negro chauffeur"

Then Roger Craig is called up. "I seen him enter a station wagon, in fact, Oswald agreed with me"

Oswald walks free

Edited by Tony Krome
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
  • Create New...