Jump to content
The Education Forum

Oswald's Jacket

Gil Jesus

By Gil Jesus
in JFK Assassination Debate

 Share

Recommended Posts

Gil Jesus Mentor

Gil Jesus

Posted
Posted (edited)

Oswald's Jacket
By Gil Jesus ( 2021 )
 


"The jacket that Oswald was wearing at the time of the slaying of Tippit was a light-gray jacket....The jacket that was subsequently found in a parking lot and identified as Oswald's was a light-gray one." ( Report, pg. 653 )

Another lie. The jacket found was identified as a white one. I'll get into that later.
With regard to Commission Exhibit 162, the Commission printed all of its photographic evidence in black and white. In doing so, it could claim that the jacket in the photograph was gray. But years later, color photographs were released of the jacket showing the color to be tan.
 


Even with the change of color, the Warren Commission apologists continue to call this jacket gray and contended that it belonged to Lee Harvey Oswald.

The Commission concluded that Oswald was wearing this jacket at the time of the Tippit shooting. It's finding was based on 1.) the jacket being described and identified by witnesses at or near the scene, 2.) its finding by Captain W.R.Westbrook of the Dallas Police minutes after the shooting under a parked car about a half a block from the murder scene and 3.) its identification by Marina Oswald as having been her husband's.

But a closer examination of the evidence indicates that 1.) the witnesses identifications of the killer's jacket do NOT match the jacket in evidence and those witnesses could not identify CE 162 as the jacket they saw, 2.) the jacket was NOT found by Captain Westbrook, 3.) Oswald's ownership of the jacket was never established beyond a reasonable doubt and 4.) Witness testimony showed the jacket was nowhere near the Tippit murder scene.

The witnesses

Two witnesses described the jacket that the killer wore as a white jacket: Helen Markham and Barbara Jean Davis. When shown the CE 162 jacket, Mrs. Markham said that she had never seen it before ( 3 H 312) and Mrs. Davis, when asked if it was the jacket worn by Tippit's killer replied, "No."( 3 H 347 )

Domingo Benevides identified Oswald's BLUE jacket ( CE 163 ) as the one the killer wore. ( 6 H 453 )

Cab driver William Scoggins failed to identify CE 162 as the jacket he saw. ( 3 H 328 )

Virginia Davis was never asked to identify CE 162 as the jacket the killer wore.

Ted Callaway failed to identify CE 162 as the jacket the man with the gun was wearing. ( 3 H 356 )

William Arthur Smith remembered that the killer wore "..a sport coat of some kind...." ( 7 H 85 )

The Commission ignored the fact that two witnesses remembered the jacket as a sport coat or sport jacket although it was impossible for anyone to confuse the jacket in evidence as a sport coat.
 


Only Sam Guinyard, who lied under oath, identified the jacket CE 162 as the jacket the man with the gun wore.

The other seven witnesses either did not describe the gray jacket accurately, failed to identify it as the jacket the killer wore or identified the wrong jacket.

Because the witnesses' descriptions of the jacket were so wide ranging, the Commission was forced to admit that "the eyewitnesses vary in their identification of the jacket" ( Report, 175-176 )

The Commission failed to report, however, that witnesses had described the jacket as a sport jacket, dark in color and of a rough fabric, all descriptions that did not match the jacket in evidence.

The Commission also failed to report that this same group of witnesses failed to identify Oswald's shirt ( CE 150 ) as the one the killer wore.

In addition, three witnesses who were not at the Tippit murder scene were asked to identify the "gray" jacket.
William Whaley identified the jacket as the one Oswald was wearing in his cab before he got to his roominghouse, where he actually put it on. ( 2 H 260 )

Housekeeper Earlene Roberts failed to identify the jacket as the one Oswald put on when he left his room, testifying that Oswald's jacket was darker. ( 6 H 439 )

Buell Wesley Frazier, a co-worker who gave Oswald rides to Irving on Friday nights, was unable to recognize the jacket as being Oswald's. ( 2 H 238 )

The Commission failed to report that ten of the eleven witnesses who were asked to identify CE 162 either did not describe it accurately, failed to identify it as the jacket the killer wore, identified the wrong jacket or could not recognize the jacket as having been Oswald's.

Such a failure in reporting allowed the Commission to assert that "there is no doubt, however... that the man who killed Tippit was wearing a light-colored jacket." (Report, pg. 176 )

Discovery

Central to the discovery of evidence in a murder case is the establishing of who found the evidence. This is the foundation for the creation of a "chain of custody" of the evidence. It is imperative for a witness or the discoverer of evidence to mark that evidence for future identification.

The idea behind recording the chain of custody is to establish that the alleged evidence is in fact related to the alleged crime, rather than having, for example, been "planted" fraudulently to make someone appear guilty.

The documentation of evidence is key for maintaining a chain of custody because everything that is done to the piece of evidence must be listed and whoever came in contact with that piece of evidence is accountable for what happens to it.
 


The Commission credited Captain W.R. Westbrook of the Dallas Police with finding the jacket.

"Westbrook walked through the parking lot behind the service station and found a light-colored jacket lying under the rear of one of the cars. Westbrook identified Commission Exhibit 162 as the light-colored jacket which he discovered underneath the automobile." ( Report, pg. 175 )

But in his testimony, Westbrook denied having been the one who found it. He claimed that someone, who may or may not have been a police officer, pointed it out to him. ( 7 H 115 )

The Report also does not mention that another police officer, T.A.Hutson, witnessed the discovery of the jacket:

"...while we were searching the rear of the house in the 400 block of East Jefferson...a white jacket was picked up by another officer. I observed him as he picked it up and it was stated that this was probably the suspect's jacket..." ( 7H 30-33 )

Hutson testified that he did not know who the officer was who picked it up. ( 7 H 33 )

Robert Brock, a mechanic at the Ballew Texaco Station who helped search the parking lot told the FBI that " a Dallas,Texas police officer, name unknown, had located a jacket underneath a 1954 Oldsmobile which was parked in parking space # 17." ( 19 H 182 )

In his written report of December 3, 1963, Hutson failed to mention the finding of this jacket. ( 24 H 239-240 )Likewise, Westbrook failed to mention the jacket in his report. ( ibid., pg. 246 )

In fact, there is no report from any police officer who claimed to have found the jacket or was present when the jacket was found.

According to the transcript of the police radio broadcasts, the first mention of the discovery of the jacket comes from Dallas unit # 279, Officer J.T. Griffin of the second platoon, Traffic Division at 1:25 pm. ( 20 H 490 )

The second platoon consisted of 12 motorcycle officers including J.T.Griffin and T.A.Hutson. ( 19 H 131 )

If Griffin found the jacket, how could Hutson not know him if they were part of the same 12 man platoon ?
And why didn't Griffin make a report of the jacket ?

Dallas Police Captain George M. Doughty told the FBI that it was Westbrook who found the jacket "on an open parking lot west of Patton St". ( CD 205, pg. 206 )

But the transcript of the police broadcasts show that Westbrook ( Unit # 550 ) was at the library at Marsalis just before 1:40 pm and did not know that the jacket had been recovered.
 


This evidence means that Westbrook was NOT present when the jacket was discovered.
In addition, there are only two sets of initials from the Dallas Police on the jacket: those of Capt. Doughty and Sgt. W.E. "Pete" Barnes.
Westbrook's initials are not on it.
 


I was shocked to find that Doughty was never called to give testimony, never asked to give an affidavit and during his testimony, Barnes was never asked a question about the jacket.

That's your chain of possession: no one knows who found it and the people in whose possession it was were never asked about it.

That's some evidence.

Evidence ?

If CE 162 is legitimate, it was in the hands of the Dallas Police 20 minutes before Oswald was arrested. But the police never confronted him with the jacket.

https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/CE-162-front-and-rear.gif

If they had the jacket and suspected that he had worn it during the Tippit murder, why didn't they let him wear it during the police lineups when he was complaining about not having a jacket to wear ? ( Report, pg. 625 )

It certainly would have been to their advantage and helped the witnesses identify him.

And why didn't the police show the CE 162 jacket to the witnesses who came to view the lineups ?

Of course it makes sense that they wouldn't have done that if they 1.) knew it wasn't the jacket the Tippit killer was wearing or 2.) they didn't have it in their possession.

During his interrogation, Oswald told Capt. Fritz that he had gone to his apartment to change his shirt and trousers. ( Report. 604-605 )

Fritz never asked him about wearing a jacket. Why not ?

In fact, during the lineups and the interrogation, the Dallas Police acted as though there were no jacket, grey, tan or white.

A weak case of ownership

"The jacket belonged to Lee Harvey Oswald. Marina Oswald stated that her husband owned only two jackets, one blue and the other grey. The blue jacket was found in the Texas School Book Depository and was identified by Marina Oswald as her husband's. Marina Oswald also identified Commission Exhibit 162, the jacket found by Captain Westbrook, as her husband's second jacket." ( Report, pg. 175 )

An unsupported identification by Marina Oswald, who changed her testimony on other matters, is hardly enough to make a case for ownership.

Even though she admitted that he owned a grey and a blue jacket, she "cannot recall that Oswald ever sent either of these jackets to a laundry or cleaners anywhere. She said she can recall washing them herself." ( CE 1843 , 23 H 521 )

If there was ever evidence that proved CE 162 was not Oswald's jacket, it was the laundry tags.

The laundry tags

CE 162 contains two laundry tags, a dry cleaning tag marked "B9738" on the bottom of the jacket and a laundry tag marked "030" on the collar.

If Marina identified the grey jacket as Oswald's and said she washed it herself, how could she not have seen the tags when she washed it ?

And if she recognized them, why didn't she identify it by the tags ?

The FBI tried to trace the tags and found that the B9738 tag had been printed by a Tag-O-Lectric tagging machine and the 030 tag had been printed with a National Laundry tagging machine. ( CD 868 )

Their investigation covered 424 laundries in the Dallas-Fort Worth area and another 293 in the New Orleans area. Not only was the FBI unable to locate the origin of the laundry marks, they were unable to establish that Oswald ever took the jacket to any of those cleaners.

In effect, their failure to connect the jacket with a laundry weakened their case that the jacket belonged to Oswald.

In addition, their investigation showed that none of Oswald's other clothing contained any tags from a laundry, and thus there was no evidence that Oswald ever used a a laundry or dry cleaning service. ( CD 868, pg. 5 )

Not satisfied with the outcome of their investigation and hellbent to prove Oswald guilty for the murder of Tippit, the FBI turned their efforts onto the manufacturer of the jacket, Maurice Holman.

They were hoping the manufacturer could tell them where the jacket was purchased, but they found out that the jacket was sold almost exclusively on the West Coast, with the exception of one large department store in Philadelphia.

There's no evidence that Oswald had ever been to Philadelphia and the only time he was on the West Coast was when he was wearing fatigues in the Marine Corps.

Why did this long, exhaustive and unsuccessful effort to link the tan jacket to Oswald fail to do so ? Was it just impossible to trace or was it that the jacket belonged to someone else ?

The white jacket
 


Initial police broadcasts described the Tippit killer as wearing a white jacket. These broadcasts were based on the descriptions given by Helen Markham and Barbara Davis to Officer J.M. Poe.

On my youtube channel I have a video from which the above photo was taken, showing a Dallas Police officer with the jacket found. The jacket appears to be white and after haggling with experts in the field of light, shadows and photography, I decided to do a little test of my own.

Behind the jacket to the right is a 1959 Oldsmobile. I took the exterior color chart for the '59 Olds and changed it to greyscale. I found that only two colors available on that year Oldsmobile could come close to the jacket.

They were Crystal Green and Polaris White. ( red stars )
 


Unless the jacket in the picture was light green, it was white.

More evidence that the jacket recovered was white comes from the transcript of the Dallas Police broadcasts. At 1:25 PM, motorcycle officer J.T. Griffin ( 279 ) reports that they "got his white jacket... he had a white jacket on... we believe this is it." ( 17 H 411 )

Officer T.A. Hutson was present when the jacket was found and also described it as white.
...a white jacket was picked up by another officer. I observed him as he picked it up and it was stated that this was probably the suspect's jacket..." ( 7H 30-33 )

That's two police officers describing a jacket that they're looking at with their own two eyes. One has the jacket in his possession.

They described it as white. Not tan, not grey.

This is not an error they could have made.

The Dallas Police Coverup

On November 28, 1963, the Dallas Police released evidence to FBI Agent Vincent E. Drain. Among those items listed on the evidence sheet was the "grey" jacket.

A comparison of the Dallas Police and FBI copies of that sheet indicate that the Dallas Police covered up when it was submitted. The FBI copy, found on page 253 in Volume 24, has a Dallas Police notation covering over the time and date when the evidence was submitted. ( red circle )
 


Its notation said, "This is a list of evidence that was released to the FBI from our crime lab 11-28-63."

But the Dallas Police copy ( above, right ) notes the time and date as 3pm on November 22, 1963.
It's obvious that the Dallas Police tried to cover up when the jacket was found. There may have been a reason for that.

Witness testimony puts Oswald's grey jacket nowhere near the Tippit murder scene

Wesley Frazier told the FBI that on the evening before the assassination, he gave Oswald a ride to Irving and that Oswald was wearing "....a reddish shirt and a grey jacket, waist length". ( CD 7, pg. 294 )

Marina Oswald confirmed that Lee was wearing the grey jacket when he arrived at the Paine residence on the evening of Thursday, November 21st ( 1 H 122 ).

Marina testified that she did not see Oswald dress on the morning of the 22nd, but she told him to "put on something warm on the way to work" and could only say that it was "quite possible" that Oswald wore his heavier BLUE jacket to work on the morning of the 22nd ( ibid. ).

The evidence, however, leaves little doubt that he did.

Linnie Mae Randle, Frazier's sister, testified that Oswald's blue jacket ( CE 163 ) was the jacket he was wearing when he came to her house on the morning of the 22nd for a ride to work. ( 2 H 250 )

In addition, Randle's testimony is supported by the fact that Oswald's blue jacket was found in the Texas School Book Depository on December 16, 1963 when the "Domino Room" was being cleaned. ( CD 205, pg. 209 ).

If the witnesses are correct and Oswald wore his grey jacket to Irving on the evening of the 21st and switched jackets to the heavier blue jacket on the morning of the 22nd, then there's no way his grey jacket could have ended up under an Oldsmobile in a parking lot.
It was at the Paine residence in Irving, where the Dallas Police were searching at around the same time Oswald's "grey" jacket was being entered into evidence

Coincidence ? Or is this what the Dallas Police tried to hide from the FBI ?

Detective Guy F. Rose led the search of the Paine residence on the afternoon of November 22nd. He testified that he "called Captain Fritz on the phone and told him what I had found out there." ( 7 H 229 )

What did he find, a grey jacket ? Did Oswald tell them the grey jacket was out there ? Was Rose calling to say they found it ? 

The Commission never asked.

Conclusion


CE 162 is not grey, it is not Oswald's and it was not found by Capt. Westbrook.

It was not sold in any of the cities where Oswald lived. The FBI searched 717 laundries in the Dallas-Fort Worth area and in New Orleans and could not connect the jacket with any laundry in those cities.

The witnesses who knew Oswald had never seen him wearing it. The housekeeper at his roominghouse who saw him that day could not identify it as the jacket he wore when he left.

When shown the jacket, ten of the eleven witnesses who saw Tippit's killer during or immediately after the murder, described a jacket that was either darker or lighter.

Not CE 162.

The Commission's only "proof" that the jacket belonged to Oswald was the identifcation by Marina. But for a couple of reasons, this identification is not on solid ground.

First of all, Marina's testimony would have been inadmissible had Oswald gone to trial.

Secondly, she admitted that she made false statements to federal agents, thus damaging her credibility:
"Most of the questions were put to me by the FBI. I do not like them too much. I didn't want to be too sincere with them. Though I was quite sincere and answered most of their questions. They questioned me a great deal and I was very tired of them." ( 1 H 28 )


To the Warren Commission, Marina Oswald implied that she lied to the FBI agents because she disliked the FBI.

One of those lies involved her preposterous claim that Oswald attempted to assassinate Richard Nixon at a time when Nixon was nowhere near Dallas. Her version was that only her restraining him in the bathroom prevented him from satisfying his bloodlust.

And although this story fell apart at every point, the Commission never questioned Marina's credibility because it needed her to burn Oswald on the public record.

None of Marina's allegations or identifications should be accepted as truth unless it is backed up by convincing independent evidence.
In the case of CE 162, it is not.

In addition, the investigation of the laundry tags revealed that the owner of the CE 162 jacket was not from the Dallas-Fort Worth area.

Neither was he from New Orleans.

In short, in spite of the FBI's best efforts, there's no evidence that the jacket is connected to Oswald.
The overwhelming evidence is conclusive that the tan CE 162 jacket 1.) DID NOT belong to Oswald and 2.) was NOT found by Capt. Westbrook.

Edited by Gil Jesus
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Gil Jesus changed the title to Oswald's Jacket
  • 2 years later...
  • Replies 43
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Posted Images

Bill Simpich Enthusiast

Bill Simpich

Posted
Posted

I don't know why no one picked up on Gil's work here - here are my notes supporting him for the most part.   

Gil's work would explain why most researchers believe that officer with call number #279 still has not been identified.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=16237#relPageId=24&search=griffin - Sylvia Meagher figured out 40-50 years ago that 279 is J. T. Griffin

Lawrence Ex 2 - Copy of personnel assignments for the Presidential motorcade made by Perdue W. Lawrence, dated November ...
 
Personnel assignments confirm this - Purdue Lawrence
 
 
A good question I haven't resolved here is whether J. R. Mackey should also be considered, who allegedly also used the #279 radio call sign.  https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=16253#relPageId=14&search=279_and%20griffin
 
Found in: JFK Books
The Warren Commission did none of those things, although it is easy enough, simply by studying its own exhibits, to determine that No. 279 was J. T. Griffin of the second platoon, Traffic Division, Dallas Police.
(Lawrence Exhibit 2, p. 2; Batchelor Exhibit 5002, p. 14) The second platoon consists of 12 three-wheel motorcycle officers, including  J. T. Griffin.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ed LeDoux Explorer

Ed LeDoux

Posted
Posted

Great work. Jacket was one of first evidentiary items I focused on early.

Gary Mack tried to con me into believing Oz picked it up at a garage sale.

I asked Gary if that fit Oswalds MO.

Gary had to admit the MEDIUM size jacket was not something bought second hand as Oswald did not buy used clothing and Lee was size SMALL and bought new clothing.

No other piece of the wardrobe is MED.

Crow was delish I'm guessing as it nary slowed Gary.

The witness accounts are useful in identifying the killer and his clothing.

Seeing as they dont match Oswalds that should have been the end of it,,,if Oswald had even slightly effective counsel. 

The DPD rolled over on Lee seeing he was defenseless. Adding late arriving fingerprints and nitrate tests to convince the public Lee was a fugative on the run from Kennedy's murder. (laughable)

The jacket should have been an anchor to their case, it wasnt going anywhere with exculpatory evidence, so they pin it on Lee.

Problem solved. 

 

Its been a few since Ive tracked a call number,..since 2004, but what  shift did Mackey work vs Griffin?

Was it similar situation as 261, being used at 7am by Stanfield but later in afternoon by Barnhart?

Batchelor Exhibit stuff....

Cheers, Ed

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Greg Doudna Veteran

Greg Doudna

Posted
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, Ed LeDoux said:

Lee was size SMALL and bought new clothing.

No other piece of the wardrobe is MED.

Hey Ed—no reflection on you since this has so often been stated (including I believe by Marina in testimony), and there was no way before 2016 for anyone to have known differently, but that is factually not correct that no item of Oswald’s clothing was “M”, that Oswald never wore Medium size.

Check a color photo closeup of the light maroon button-down dress shirt of Oswald (the one Oswald and TSBD coworkers said Oswald wore to work the morning of Nov 22), CE 151, shown on Pat Speer’s website. An inside collar photo closeup shows it is size “M”, medium. Pat Speer was the first to obtain a color photo of that shirt from the National Archives in 2016 (https://www.patspeer.com/chapter-4b-threads-of-evidence). The collar reads: "Briarloom Traditional by Enro. M/ 15-15 1/2. An original design. All fine cotton."

I don’t think that jacket was Oswald’s either (though I do think it was the Tippit killer’s). But not because Oswald never wore size Medium, since that point is now settled from the color photo obtained and published by Speer. 

Edited by Greg Doudna
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ed LeDoux Explorer

Ed LeDoux

Posted
Posted

Thanks Greg.

Yes there was no way to know that then, as the listings didnt include Medium except for that jacket.

They did include size small....

His Grey Jacket was not Medium and thats a good standard as far as sizing for killers jackets go.

Some shirts run small. That one fit him obviously, correct or no?

Any idea where he bought the shirt?

Any other items other than the lone outcast shirt (used for work?)

Perhaps I can speculate like Gary and claim it was a gift from Marina or Mama. Borrowed from Brother.

Still the one off.

Cheers, Ed

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ed LeDoux Explorer

Ed LeDoux

Posted
Posted

Couple of notes.

COMMISSION EXHIBIT NO. 3042

Does include sizes of tshirts.

Most are small, 34-38

one is 38-40.

There is a dirty size 36, indicating usage, but no idea if the Medium size 38-40 was ever worn or perhaps shrunk down to a 36.

Some mediums fit like a small.

And

Lullian Murrett said John gave Lee a shirt and tie, they didnt fit John.

They were the shirt and tie Lee was wearing when arrested in NO.

...

Mrs. MURRET - No; not that I saw. What struck me as odd that was that Lee didn't seem to have anything to wear. I told him, "Lee, you don't look too presentable. I am going to buy you some clothes." My boys were all big all over 6 feet, so nothing they had would fit Lee, so he said no, that he had a lot of things, but that they were all packed. He said that's all right, but all he had on at the time was a T-shirt and pants, and I think he had only about two T-shirts with him.
Mr. JENNER - You say he had no suit coat?
Mrs. MURRET - No; and only one pair of shoes. I even offered to buy him a pair of shoes, but he said no, that he had some shoes packed away.
 

Lillian's clothing offer was rebuffed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bill Brown Mentor

Bill Brown

Posted
Posted

Oswald left the rooming house zipping up a jacket as he went out the door.

Oswald is seen by Johnny Brewer standing in front of the shoe store on Jefferson with no jacket.

Forget for a moment the murder of Tippit.  Forget Tenth and Patton.  Forget anything found under a car behind the Texaco station.

Why did Oswald ditch his jacket between the rooming house on Beckley and the shoe store on Jefferson?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Greg Doudna Veteran

Greg Doudna

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Bill Brown said:

Oswald left the rooming house zipping up a jacket as he went out the door.

Oswald is seen by Johnny Brewer standing in front of the shoe store on Jefferson with no jacket.

Forget for a moment the murder of Tippit.  Forget Tenth and Patton.  Forget anything found under a car behind the Texaco station.

Why did Oswald ditch his jacket between the rooming house on Beckley and the shoe store on Jefferson?

Jack Davis inside the theatre said Oswald was inside the theater on the main seating level sitting next to him during the film’s opening credits which ended about 1:20, which is 15 minutes before Brewer. Oswald was already without his jacket at 1:20 in the theater. He must have taken it off either before or after he entered the theater. Most folks take their jackets off after entering a theater. Which do you think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bill Brown Mentor

Bill Brown

Posted
Posted
43 minutes ago, Greg Doudna said:

Jack Davis inside the theatre said Oswald was inside the theater on the main seating level sitting next to him during the film’s opening credits which ended about 1:20, which is 15 minutes before Brewer. Oswald was already without his jacket at 1:20 in the theater. He must have taken it off either before or after he entered the theater. Most folks take their jackets off after entering a theater. Which do you think?

First, cite for Davis saying Oswald was ever sitting next to him.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Greg Doudna Veteran

Greg Doudna

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, Bill Brown said:

First, cite for Davis saying Oswald was ever sitting next to him.

You really don’t know, Bill? It’s in Marrs citing direct interview, Douglass citing another direct interview, and Davis himself videotaped in his oral history for the Sixth Floor Museum.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bill Brown Mentor

Bill Brown

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

You really don’t know, Bill? It’s in Marrs citing direct interview, Douglass citing another direct interview, and Davis himself videotaped in his oral history for the Sixth Floor Museum.  

 

I watched Jack Davis' Oral History interview with Gary Mack for the Sixth Floor Museum long ago.  He certainly didn't say that Oswald was sitting next to him during the opening credits.  In fact, he never said that Oswald sat next to him at all.  He said Oswald started to sit right next to him but then ended up sitting a couple seats away.  Also, Davis says nothing about Oswald sitting next to him during the "film's opening credits".  I'm not sure where you got that from.

 

As for Crossfire and Jim Marrs (I read the book over 30 years ago), when you consider the Sixth Floor Museum interview with Jack Davis where Davis never says Oswald sat right next to him, it becomes obvious that Marrs is misquoting Davis a bit (or Davis changed his story by the time he sat down with Gary Mack for the Museum interview).

 

The bottom line is, in the interview Davis gives with Gary Mack for the Museum, he does not say that Oswald sat next to him and he certainly doesn't say that Oswald was sitting beside him during the film's opening credits.  Maybe YOU should go watch the interview again.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Greg Doudna Veteran

Greg Doudna

Posted
Posted (edited)

Bill, 

6 hours ago, Bill Brown said:

I watched Jack Davis' Oral History interview with Gary Mack for the Sixth Floor Museum long ago.  He certainly didn't say that Oswald was sitting next to him during the opening credits.  In fact, he never said that Oswald sat next to him at all.  He said Oswald started to sit right next to him but then ended up sitting a couple seats away.  Also, Davis says nothing about Oswald sitting next to him during the "film's opening credits".  I'm not sure where you got that from.

As for Crossfire and Jim Marrs (I read the book over 30 years ago), when you consider the Sixth Floor Museum interview with Jack Davis where Davis never says Oswald sat right next to him, it becomes obvious that Marrs is misquoting Davis a bit (or Davis changed his story by the time he sat down with Gary Mack for the Museum interview).

The bottom line is, in the interview Davis gives with Gary Mack for the Museum, he does not say that Oswald sat next to him and he certainly doesn't say that Oswald was sitting beside him during the film's opening credits.  Maybe YOU should go watch the interview again.

As Stu says, Davis says at 8:00, "he set down by me--close to me", before he got up and moved to sit by someone else.

6 hours ago, Bill Brown said:

he certainly doesn't say that Oswald was sitting beside him during the film's opening credits.  Maybe YOU should go watch the interview again.

The "opening credits" is in either the Marrs or Burroughs interview of Davis. In this Sixth Museum video he says at 7:18 concerning the timing that he thought Oswald had sat near him when the movie was just about to come on: "the movie had already come on--had--just about to come on I think it was--and this person came in, and almost sat down behind me ... he was like going down in a sitting motion, changed his mind and moved two seats over ... to my right ... he set down by me--close to me"

Edited by Greg Doudna
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
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...