Ted Callaway & The 1:15 Shooting

[Ian Lloyd]

16 hours ago, Bill Brown said:

"She [Markham] said the bus time was 1:15."

 

No.  She did not say that.  Ball asked her what time she got her bus.  Strange way to ask a question and we cannot determine for ourselves exactly how Markham interpreted the question.  Therefore, we can not know for sure what her answer meant.  She could just as easily be saying that she got to her bus stop at 1:15.  Don't put words in her mouth.

OK, I stand corrected. As you say, it's a matter of interpretation...

Mr. BALL. You know what time you usually get your bus, don't you?

Mrs. MARKHAM. 1:15.

Mr. BALL. So it was before 1:15?

Mrs. MARKHAM. Yes, it was.

 

"We know the bus time was actually 1:12."

 

THE bus?  No, we don't know that.  A bus stopped there at 1:12 and another one stopped there approximately ten minutes later.  She never gives a time of 1:12 or 1:22.

Well, you've stated that a bus stopped there at 1:12. OK. Maybe she didn't necessarily know the exact time a bus would stop there and never said 1:12 but she certainly said 1:15 and that she was at the stop before 1:15. Not sure why she would leave at 1:00 if she intended catching a bus at 1:22 knowing it was only a 6 or 7 minute walk.

"...when he [Bowley] arrived at the Tippit scene and checked his watch, it read 1:10..."

 

The verbal time stamps all throughout the police tapes, combined with Bowley's own descriptions of his actions upon arriving on the scene, completely destroy the idea that Bowley arrived at the scene at 1:10.

Why?

 

[Bill Brown]

14 hours ago, Gil Jesus said:

If I were you, I'd be careful about calling people dishonest or ignorant. You're not in the newsgroups anymore.

I didn't call anyone dishonest or ignorant.  Your reading comprehension is off a bit.

[Bill Brown]

4 hours ago, Gil Jesus said:

After reading it a second time, the 3 or 4 minutes were in reference to the electronic timeclocks used by the employees to punch the time on the call sheets. I misread it and I regret and apologize for the error.

The problem is... this is what a lot of you conspiracy advocates do.  You're irresponsible and others read it like it's gospel. 

Edited July 19, 2022 by Bill Brown

[Bill Brown]

4 hours ago, Gil Jesus said:

And while I'm on the subject of Scoggins, Mr. Brown said that I "misrepresented" Scoggins' testimony that he didn't see the killer's face, this is what Scoggins testified:

Mr. BELIN. When you saw the officer fall, when was the next place that you saw the man, or did you see him at the same time you saw the officer fall, the other man?

Mr. SCOGGINS. No, I saw him coming kind of toward me around that cutoff through there, and he never did look at me. He looked back over his left shoulder like that, as he went by. It seemed like I could see his face, his features and everything plain, you see. ( 3 H 327 )

He never saw the killer's face. It only SEEMED like he could. Scoggins was to the right of the killer as he passed by and the killer looked back over his left shoulder. 

There's nothing to misrepresent there. The witness testified that "it SEEMED like I could see his face", not that he saw his face.

In addition, Scoggins was shown a photograph lineup  which included a picture of Oswald and he picked someone else as the man he saw.

Mr. BELIN. Sometime later, after the lineup, did any of the police officers show you with a picture of anyone and ask you if you could identify him?
 

Mr. SCOGGINS. Yes.
 

Mr. BELIN. Do you remember if he was an FBI man or a Dallas policeman or a Secret Service agent?
 

Mr. SCOGGINS. He was an FBI or a Secret Service.
 

Mr. BELIN. What did he ask you and what did you tell him?
 

Mr. SCOGGINS. He gave me some pictures, showed me several pictures there,, which was, some of them were, pretty well resembled him, and some of them didn't, and they looked like they was kind of old pictures, and I think I picked the wrong picture. I am not too--
 

Mr. BELIN. What did he say to you and what did you say to him, if you remember?
 

Mr. SCOGGINS. I don't really--I know he showed me his credentials.
 

Mr. BELIN. Did he say to you something like "These are pictures we have of Lee Harvey Oswald"? Did he use that name in front of you, or did he say, "Here are some pictures. See if you can identify them"--if you remember?
 

Mr. SCOGGINS. I don't remember, but after I got through looking at them and everything, and I says, I told them one of these two pictures is him, out of this group he showed me, and the one that was actually him looked like an older man than he was to me. Of course, I am not too much on identifying pictures. It wasn't a full shot of him, you know, and then he told me the other one was Oswald. ( 3 H 335 )

When the shooting occurred, Scoggins bailed out of his cab like a scared rabbit and was lying next to it in the street. He never saw the killer's face and that's why he picked the wrong picture.

His "positive identification" of Oswald in lineup # 4 is null and void because Oswald was placed in the lineup with two teenagers and a Mexican. You might have well just hung a sign on Oswald saying "I'm the one".

There's nothing to misrepresent. The testimony is the evidence.

"Mr. Brown said that I "misrepresented" Scoggins' testimony that he didn't see the killer's face..."

 

That's exactly what you've done; you've misrepresented what Scoggins said.

 

 

"The witness testified that "it SEEMED like I could see his face", not that he saw his face."

 

The witness testified that "it SEEMED like I could see his face", not that he didn't see his face.

 

There you go.  I fixed your statement for you.

 

It's amazing to me that you take from it that the witness didn't see the guy's face when he said "it seemed like I could see his face".

 

Scoggins was asked of the killer was wearing glasses.  He said No.  Scoggins was asked how old the killer looked.  He said the guy looked to be 25, 26.

 

You can only determine if a guy is wearing glasses if you're looking at his face.  Also, there is no other way (that I know, anyway) to determine a person's age (who you see for only a few moments and is running straight toward you) other than looking at his face.

 

 

"In addition, Scoggins was shown a photograph lineup  which included a picture of Oswald and he picked someone else as the man he saw."

 

Correct.

 

The man that Scoggins saw running with a gun in his hands just seconds after the shots resembled the man in the lineup who he positively identified one day later as the cop-killer (Oswald).

 

The man that Scoggins saw running with a gun in his hands just seconds after the shots did NOT resemble the photo of Oswald shown to him which was taken during the summer while down in New Orleans.

 

So what?

 

 

"When the shooting occurred, Scoggins bailed out of his cab like a scared rabbit and was lying next to it in the street."

 

Alright.  Scoggins was lying in the street, next to the cab?  You're going to have to cite for this one.  Where in the world did you get that from?  It's a doozy.

 

Scoggins bailed out of his cab.  Yes.  He began to cross the street (away from the approaching killer).  After realizing he had nowhere to hide, he returned to his cab and was ducking behind it, peeking up to see the killer flee.

 

 

"There's nothing to misrepresent."

 

And yet, somehow you managed.

[Sandy Larsen]

30 minutes ago, Bill Brown said:

15 hours ago, Gil Jesus said:

If I were you, I'd be careful about calling people dishonest or ignorant. You're not in the newsgroups anymore.

I didn't call anyone dishonest or ignorant.  Your reading comprehension is off a bit.

 

Other than changing those adjectives to nouns, that's exactly what you did. You said:

"People like Gil Jesus then switch this around to say that the clocks were "2 to 3 minutes off".  Is this dishonesty or ignorance?"

Unless you're trying to claim that the insult was only for people like Gil, not for Gil himself. Oh please!

 

(Disclaimer: I have no problem with calling someone out for dishonesty if they intentionally say or do something dishonest.)

[Sandy Larsen]

45 minutes ago, Bill Brown said:

5 hours ago, Gil Jesus said:

After reading it a second time, the 3 or 4 minutes were in reference to the electronic timeclocks used by the employees to punch the time on the call sheets. I misread it and I regret and apologize for the error.

The problem is... this is what a lot of you conspiracy advocates do.  You're irresponsible and others read it like it's gospel. 

 

Another insult. You're skating on thin ice.

Gil made a mistake, acknowledged it, and corrected it. That is not irresponsible behavior.

And BTW, making a mistake isn't something that only CTers do. LNers do the same.

 

[Bill Brown]

26 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Other than changing those adjectives to nouns, that's exactly what you did. You said:

"People like Gil Jesus then switch this around to say that the clocks were "2 to 3 minutes off".  Is this dishonesty or ignorance?"

Unless you're trying to claim that the insult was only for people like Gil, not for Gil himself. Oh please!

 

(Disclaimer: I have no problem with calling someone out for dishonesty if they intentionally say or do something dishonest.)

I was asking a question.  Thing is, what's the answer?

[Tom Gram]

4 hours ago, Gil Jesus said:

You're absolutely correct Gene and that was the point we were trying to make. The transcripts show that after it arrives at the scene ( Code 6 ) at 1:18pm, 602 ( ambulance with Tippit's body ) tries to call dispatch twice, then never shows up on the transcript. I searched that transcript until 5:22 pm and nothing. In our town, police, fire and ambulance were dispatched from a "Communications Center" manned 24 hrs by civilian and police dispatchers. Everything was logged. And I mean everything. So for me to see that the ambulance disappears from the radio and no documentation of when it was enroute to the hospital, when it arrived and when it cleared, is very strange to me, and at the least very suspicious. It didn't just disappear from the transcript, it disappeared from the radio.

I don’t know how much this helps, and how credible it is since it’s from Gerald Hill thirty years after the fact, but Hill told Larry Sneed that he passed the ambulance on the way to the Tippit murder scene from the TSBD after “a civilian got on the radio to tell us about an officer being shot out in Oak Cliff”:

We took a right across the Commerce Street Viaduct to Beckley, then north on Beckley. Just before we got to the intersection of Beckley and Colorado, the ambulance, which had been a lot closer to the Tippit shooting than we had, passed in front of us going to Methodist Hospital.

Hill also told Sneed that he turned in the revolver to Baker in the Homicide office before heading down to personnel, which is pretty interesting with that document you posted about Fritz and Doughty. 

[Gil Jesus]

32 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Another insult. You're skating on thin ice.

Gil made a mistake, acknowledged it, and corrected it. That is not irresponsible behavior.

And BTW, making a mistake isn't something that only CTers do. LNers do the same.

 

And what he did is a violation of the Forum's "Terms of Usage":

"No member is allowed to make personal insults with regard to another member OR with respect to fellow members opinions." 

"No member is allowed to accuse a fellow member of lying."

 

And he did both.

BTW, Sandy, I'm working on that Dictabelt recording. I'm going to post it as a video with the transcript to go along with it, so folks can read as well as listen, but I'm having a heck of a time trying to get rid of the background noise. I've got it pretty good after 1:22 pm, but I'm having a hard time getting rid of the background noise prior to 1:22.

Any members know of a good software program to eliminate background noise from an audio file ?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Sandy Larsen]

1 hour ago, Gil Jesus said:

BTW, Sandy, I'm working on that Dictabelt recording

 

Hey that's really great Gil!

There are a lot of noise-reduction software programs available, but I don't have any experience with them. And I don't know any way to compare them without actually buying them and trying them out. Some of them will let you try a sample file before you buy  it.

I did a google search on the keywords [audio noise reduction online free] and found the website https://audiodenoise.com/ . I played around with the demo file that you can select... the one with the worst noise (-10 SNR) and it sure does remove all the noise. But the algorithm made the sound sound hollow, so I reduced the amount of sound reduction. Doing that left a little noise in the audio, but the hollow sound disappeared. Problem is, the sound they use for the demo files, while speech like, isn't actually speech. I wish they would have used real speech for the demo files. Doing so would have made the demo much more impressive.

 

[Bill Brown]

5 hours ago, Ian Lloyd said:

"The verbal time stamps all throughout the police tapes, combined with Bowley's own descriptions of his actions upon arriving on the scene, completely destroy the idea that Bowley arrived at the scene at 1:10."

Why?

Because Bowley tells us that he pulled up to the scene, got out of the car, went over to the body and immediately saw that there was nothing he could do for Tippit.  So then he walked the extra five steps and took the mic from Benavides and reported the shooting.  His report was made at 1:17.

[Bill Brown]

2 hours ago, Gil Jesus said:

And what he did is a violation of the Forum's "Terms of Usage":

"No member is allowed to make personal insults with regard to another member OR with respect to fellow members opinions." 

"No member is allowed to accuse a fellow member of lying."

 

And he did both.

 

No.  I didn't violate any terms and I didn't insult you.

Edited July 19, 2022 by Bill Brown

[James DiEugenio]

Do you know what this has done?

My article on the TIppit murder is number one at Kennedys and King, and Jack Meyers' article is also in the top ten, even though they are both years old.

Thanks BB

 

[Sandy Larsen]

13 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Thanks BB

 

 

[James DiEugenio]

In addition to the violation above noted by Gil,  is it OK to call someone a xxxx just by dodging the system by spacing out the letters so they are not detected?

The point is not to call someone that.

BB does it anyway by a trick.