POLICE CAR IN THE ALLEY? NOPE.

[Ron Bulman]

I re read Meyers a couple of days ago. A little of Radical Right, a little more of Into the Nightmare, this thread and more.  Doris Holan and Sam Guinard's assertions of a cop car in the driveway/alley cannot be dismissed out of hand.  Nor can hers of seeing two men.  Both are supported by other witnesses.

Frank Wright tried to tell the DPD what he saw, he was ignored.  Others in the case from Dealy Plaza to Oak Cliff had their stories changed.  What ever happened to Acquilla Clemons?  In the middle of it.  Never questioned. Told to shut up or else.  Talked to Mark Lane and more.  Disappeared.  Who was the guy that couldn't identify Oswald until he was shot in the head and recuperated?

If Doris Holan tried to tell what she saw in 1963 might she have been told to shut up as well?  And took the advise until questioned late in life?  

Sam Guinard not mentioning a cop car in the alley in 1963/4?  He had a 6th grade education, had spent 13 of his 28 years "compressing" cotton in Plainview Texas and was washing/waxing cars in a car lot in Oak Cliff.  More especially if he might have been black, would he have ever mentioned this at the time?

Read his testimony.  Almost eloquent at times for a sixth grader, sounds almost coached, rehearsed.

John F. Kennedy Assassination Homepage :: Warren Commission :: Hearings :: Volume VII :: Page 396 (jfk-assassination.eu)

Edited August 29, 2023 by Ron Bulman

[Michael Crane]

51 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

Who was the guy that couldn't identify Oswald until he was shot in the head and recuperated?

Warren Reynolds.

[Bill Brown]

 

Before he was ever shot in the head, Warren Reynolds told the FBI that he was of the opinion that the man he saw was Lee Oswald.

[Greg Doudna]

On 8/28/2023 at 2:07 PM, Paul Jolliffe said:

"Did Doris Holan (no matter how much Brownlow and Pulte garbled her story) actually see a cop car in the alley?"

The fact that a Dallas official confirmed to Dale Myers himself that an officer really was there at that moment is deeply troubling. 

While it's conceivable that there is an "innocent" explanation, in this case, we should not accept that on its own. 

Paul, yes, "while it's conceivable that there is an 'innocent' explanation, in this case, we should not accept that on its own". See what you think of this.

One of the most odd facts, and in this case uncontested (nobody even disputes it as a fact) is that a phone number in Jack Ruby's/Craford's notebook attributed to one Leona Miller, is the exact--exact--phone number of Virginia Davis, the young, 16-year old sister-in-law of Barbara Davis, address 400 E. 10th, scene of the Tippit killing (https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=48723#relPageId=22).

This has never been adequately explained in any terms other than the most freakish of coincidences or accidents. 

Leona Miller's identity is known--she is a woman known to Ruby, no known connection to anything, and never lived at 400 E. 10th. The number isn't hers, no evidence it ever was. 

That phone number in Ruby's/Craford's notebook goes to 400 E. 10th, the residence of Virginia Davis, Tippit crime scene.

Virginia Davis was only 16 years old at the time, even though already married. Let's brainstorm this a bit. Assume Bill Courson is the mystery officer at the scene of the crime who fled in a patrol car in the alley, for reasons previously given. Assume the "affair" claim of Myers' source is accurate mainly based on the detail that Courson in Oak Cliff on Nov 22 was wearing yesterday's, Thursday's, plain clothes. He was married and had a home far away from Oak Cliff. Yet he was wearing yesterday's clothes in Oak Cliff on Nov 22 indicating he had spent the night away from home.

Could it be the affair was with Barbara Davis, and occurred, with young Virginia's witting cooperation, in Virginia Davis's apartment? And that is the apartment from which Courson fled, going to his car perhaps parked not directly behind the 400 house but in the alley nearby, runs to the car, does the strange forward-and-backward movements of the car in the alley seen by Mrs. Holan, leaves?

A close look at both Davis sisters-in-law's testimonies strikes some odd notes. Virginia's testimony in particular has long been noted as containing oddities which nobody has explained. Here is a possible explanation: young Virginia is doing her level best to cover for her older sister-in-law, and just isn't up to the job of doing it perfectly. The oddities may become explained in that light. 

Both the husbands are gone working during the day. The two couples live in the two separate apartments on the ground floor of 400, Barbara's facing 10th, Virginia's with a side entrance facing Patton. Virginia has no children, older Barbara has two children. 

At the time Tippit was killed, both Virginia and Barbara claim they were either all sleeping in the same bed with Barbara's two children; in one bed and one sofa (Virginia on the sofa); or on two beds and the sofa (Barbara on one bed, the two children on the other, Virginia on the sofa), depending on testimony.

First odd point: this was a living room. How many normal people living in apartments with four persons (Barbara and husband and two children) have two separate beds and a sofa in the living room?

I don't know the floor plan, but I doubt it was four people living in a studio apartment. More likely (just assuming), maybe it was one or two bedrooms, plus a kitchen and living room, something like that. Say one bedroom for Barbara and husband; and if there was no second bedroom then there could be a bed in addition to the sofa in the living room for the two children. The point being one bed is believable, but two beds seems a bit much, in addition to the sofa. 

Why was Virginia in Barbara's place? Let us consider that she was there babysitting Barbara's children, while Barbara was actually utilizing the privacy of Virginia's empty apartment for a meeting with a male visitor, the officer, let us say Courson. 

Neither of these women would have anything to do with the killing of Tippit or the assassination. Courson, the officer, however, not so sure what he may have been up to. Let's continue. 

Barbara testified that when she heard the shots, she first put on her shoes before running to the door. Virginia however says they both ran to the door immediately. Virginia in one place says they went out on the porch and saw "Oswald" go by and Helen Markham across the street screaming. Virginia in her Warren Commission testimony says no, she saw all that from inside the house through a closed screen door. Virginia is almost all over the map in her changing details of what and when.

There is a mention of seeing from the side door, when the front door is what Virginia is supposed to say. There is Virginia mentioning seeing the patrol car of the officer, Tippit, where he lived next door, then later saying she did not mean that (even though she did say it). There is Virginia insisting in her Warren Commission testimony, repeatedly, that she and Barbara went outside the house only after Barbara had called the police from the phone in her apartment. That contradicted what Virginia had said before, and only after repeated, repeated questioning from WC counsel did that counsel finally manage to get Virginia to say she was mistaken and it was the reverse sequence. 

So here is a possibility: Barbara was not in her living room of her apartment with her children at the time of the shots, but was in the side apartment, Virginia's apartment. Courson was there. Virginia is babysitting the children in Barbara's apartment: Virginia resting on the sofa, the children on a bed in the living room taking a nap. The shots happen. Virginia is startled and runs to the front door but does not stupidly open it and go out on the porch as sometimes testified (with a live shooter out front?) Virginia does nothing more at this point, but probably does see (not very clearly, and very unlikely clearly enough to make a valid positive identification) the gunman go by out front of the house, from inside the house through the door. Virginia does nothing further until, after the killer is gone, Barbara emerges on the front porch and enters.

In the side apartment, meanwhile, the shots are heard. Courson and Barbara are startled but do nothing immediately other than look out to see if they see anything. Within a few moments they do see something--the gunman going by on Patton. After the gunman has passed, realizing something is terribly wrong, Courson tells Barbara to return to her apartment and call the police but don't mention he was there. Then Courson hightails it out of there as fast as he can to get into his patrol car and drive away.

Barbara does so. It is safe for Barbara to walk out the side door on the Patton side from Virginia's apartment, because the gunman has gone past. Barbara goes around to the front, hearing Helen Markham screaming across the street. Barbara goes in the front door to her own apartment where Virginia and her children are. Barbara phones the police. Then Barbara, and now for the first time Virginia, with Barbara, go outside the front door, which is why Virginia, frazzled under WC questioning, struggling to keep her stories straight to protect her sister-in-law, fails to keep things straight and tells the truth, which is that they went outside the house after Barbara had phoned the police.

But what about the extreme oddity of a phone number in the Ruby/Craford notebook at the Carousel Club going to 400 E. 10th, the phone of Virginia Davis? (Not Barbara Davis's phone, not the phone which Barbara used to call the police, her own phone, but the phone in Virginia Davis's apartment.)

This is not because Virginia Davis has anything to do with anything other than loyalty to her older sister-in-law and doing her best to cover for her. Virginia Davis has nothing to do with Ruby or the Carousel Club.

But Courson does. 

And this provides for the first time ever, a possible explanation for how Virginia Davis's phone number ended up in Jack Ruby's/Craford's phone book at the Carousel Club. 

It was Courson, who knew Jack Ruby and spent time in the Carousel Club as part of his job, paid to fraternize with and hang out with known criminals for Sheriff Decker's intelligence purposes, and by his own account hung out at the Carousel Club two or three evenings in the week or two prior to the assassination. 

It would be Courson, not Virginia or Barbara Davis, who would have given Virginia's apartment phone number to Ruby, as a place where a message could be gotten to Courson, or something like that. Courson, a known contact of Ruby, gave that phone number to Ruby, because he was spending time in that apartment. 

So that would explain that phone number mystery, never previously explained!

But why is the Virginia Davis phone number in the Ruby/Craford phone book in the name of "Leona Miller"? A possible explanation is that Leona Miller (who was a real person part of Ruby's synagogue, and had no connection to Virginia Davis or 400 E. 10th St. or the phone number) had nothing to do with it, but was a code name to disguise a phone number for some other purpose. There are supposedly other examples of this in Ruby's phone book.

That the name "Miller" may be code for something could possibly be suggested by a separate unusual notation in the Ruby/Craford notebook, handwritten reading "Mr. Miller. Friday. 15 people. Collins Radio Co." (https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=48723#relPageId=22). There is no phone number and no calendar date--maybe the "Friday" was the same week that message was phoned in, maybe the week of the assassination? "Friday" could be Friday Nov 22, the day of the assassination. "Collins Radio Co." could be something to do with Carl Mather from Collins Radio Co. (and also Tippit family friend) sighted on N. Beckley in Oak Cliff on Fri Nov 22 at about 2 pm, a long, long way from Mather's home, sitting in a car just parked and watching, for no explicable reason, perhaps--who knows (lacking any other rational explanation)--waiting for a planned meeting with Oswald in the nearby Texas Theatre perhaps set for 3 pm, 1500 hours military time, 15 "people" (or, where Carl Mather was parked, looking out on N. Beckley, was such that if Oswald was walking from his rooming house to the Texas Theatre, Mather could have seen him and met him before then). The message involving Collins Radio Co. in Ruby's/Craford's notebook was written down as from "Mr. Miller", the same "Miller" name used in Ruby's phone book for the phone number of Courson's contact number at Virginia Davis's apartment.

According to Myers' official who told him of the officer with the affair present at the time of the Tippit killing, that official told Myers that that officer had seen Oswald and could positively identify Oswald as the killer (even though this officer never came forward, his identity covered up by police and/or local officials in Dallas). 

Under this scenario that would be exactly correct, understanding "Oswald" to mean the gunman. The officer, Courson, would be located in the apartment of Virginia Davis facing Patton, and he, with Barbara, would have been in position looking out the window to see the gunman go by.

Edited August 31, 2023 by Greg Doudna

[Ron Bulman]

Courson was Sherrif's Office, late on the scene, not involved.  You do tend to ramble, in a debate, a bit Greg.

 

[Greg Doudna]

Why do you think you know Courson was “late on the scene”, Ron? Where do you get that? Source?

[Greg Doudna]

Ron the point is there is no documentation on when Courson was first at the Tippit crime scene that day. No report, nothing in writing, nada, nothing. Will you own up to that and retract your claim of knowledge when you don't know, or post another music video? (Bill if you're reading this, as much as I disagree with you on some things I am beginning to sympathize.) 

[Paul Jolliffe]

12 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

Paul, yes, "while it's conceivable that there is an 'innocent' explanation, in this case, we should not accept that on its own". See what you think of this.

One of the most odd facts, and in this case uncontested (nobody even disputes it as a fact) is that a phone number in Jack Ruby's/Craford's notebook attributed to one Leona Miller, is the exact--exact--phone number of Virginia Davis, the young, 16-year old sister-in-law of Barbara Davis, address 400 E. 10th, scene of the Tippit killing (https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=48723#relPageId=22).

This has never been adequately explained in any terms other than the most freakish of coincidences or accidents. 

Leona Miller's identity is known--she is a woman known to Ruby, no known connection to anything, and never lived at 400 E. 10th. The number isn't hers, no evidence it ever was. 

That phone number in Ruby's/Craford's notebook goes to 400 E. 10th, the residence of Virginia Davis, Tippit crime scene.

Virginia Davis was only 16 years old at the time, even though already married. Let's brainstorm this a bit. Assume Bill Courson is the mystery officer at the scene of the crime who fled in a patrol car in the alley, for reasons previously given. Assume the "affair" claim of Myers' source is accurate mainly based on the detail that Courson in Oak Cliff on Nov 22 was wearing yesterday's, Thursday's, plain clothes. He was married and had a home far away from Oak Cliff. Yet he was wearing yesterday's clothes in Oak Cliff on Nov 22 indicating he had spent the night away from home.

Could it be the affair was with Barbara Davis, and occurred, with young Virginia's witting cooperation, in Virginia Davis's apartment? And that is the apartment from which Courson fled, going to his car perhaps parked not directly behind the 400 house but in the alley nearby, runs to the car, does the strange forward-and-backward movements of the car in the alley seen by Mrs. Holan, leaves?

A close look at both Davis sisters-in-law's testimonies strikes some odd notes. Virginia's testimony in particular has long been noted as containing oddities which nobody has explained. Here is a possible explanation: young Virginia is doing her level best to cover for her older sister-in-law, and just isn't up to the job of doing it perfectly. The oddities may become explained in that light. 

Both the husbands are gone working during the day. The two couples live in the two separate apartments on the ground floor of 400, Barbara's facing 10th, Virginia's with a side entrance facing Patton. Virginia has no children, older Barbara has two children. 

At the time Tippit was killed, both Virginia and Barbara claim they were either all sleeping in the same bed with Barbara's two children; in one bed and one sofa (Virginia on the sofa); or on two beds and the sofa (Barbara on one bed, the two children on the other, Virginia on the sofa), depending on testimony.

First odd point: this was a living room. How many normal people living in apartments with four persons (Barbara and husband and two children) have two separate beds and a sofa in the living room?

I don't know the floor plan, but I doubt it was four people living in a studio apartment. More likely (just assuming), maybe it was one or two bedrooms, plus a kitchen and living room, something like that. Say one bedroom for Barbara and husband; and if there was no second bedroom then there could be a bed in addition to the sofa in the living room for the two children. The point being one bed is believable, but two beds seems a bit much, in addition to the sofa. 

Why was Virginia in Barbara's place? Let us consider that she was there babysitting Barbara's children, while Barbara was actually utilizing the privacy of Virginia's empty apartment for a meeting with a male visitor, the officer, let us say Courson. 

Neither of these women would have anything to do with the killing of Tippit or the assassination. Courson, the officer, however, not so sure what he may have been up to. Let's continue. 

Barbara testified that when she heard the shots, she first put on her shoes before running to the door. Virginia however says they both ran to the door immediately. Virginia in one place says they went out on the porch and saw "Oswald" go by and Helen Markham across the street screaming. Virginia in her Warren Commission testimony says no, she saw all that from inside the house through a closed screen door. Virginia is almost all over the map in her changing details of what and when.

There is a mention of seeing from the side door, when the front door is what Virginia is supposed to say. There is Virginia mentioning seeing the patrol car of the officer, Tippit, where he lived next door, then later saying she did not mean that (even though she did say it). There is Virginia insisting in her Warren Commission testimony, repeatedly, that she and Barbara went outside the house only after Barbara had called the police from the phone in her apartment. That contradicted what Virginia had said before, and only after repeated, repeated questioning from WC counsel did that counsel finally manage to get Virginia to say she was mistaken and it was the reverse sequence. 

So here is a possibility: Barbara was not in her living room of her apartment with her children at the time of the shots, but was in the side apartment, Virginia's apartment. Courson was there. Virginia is babysitting the children in Barbara's apartment: Virginia resting on the sofa, the children on a bed in the living room taking a nap. The shots happen. Virginia is startled and runs to the front door but does not stupidly open it and go out on the porch as sometimes testified (with a live shooter out front?) Virginia does nothing more at this point, but probably does see (not very clearly, and very unlikely clearly enough to make a valid positive identification) the gunman go by out front of the house, from inside the house through the door. Virginia does nothing further until, after the killer is gone, Barbara emerges on the front porch and enters.

In the side apartment, meanwhile, the shots are heard. Courson and Barbara are startled but do nothing immediately other than look out to see if they see anything. Within a few moments they do see something--the gunman going by on Patton. After the gunman has passed, realizing something is terribly wrong, Courson tells Barbara to return to her apartment and call the police but don't mention he was there. Then Courson hightails it out of there as fast as he can to get into his patrol car and drive away.

Barbara does so. It is safe for Barbara to walk out the side door on the Patton side from Virginia's apartment, because the gunman has gone past. Barbara goes around to the front, hearing Helen Markham screaming across the street. Barbara goes in the front door to her own apartment where Virginia and her children are. Barbara phones the police. Then Barbara, and now for the first time Virginia, with Barbara, go outside the front door, which is why Virginia, frazzled under WC questioning, struggling to keep her stories straight to protect her sister-in-law, fails to keep things straight and tells the truth, which is that they went outside the house after Barbara had phoned the police.

But what about the extreme oddity of a phone number in the Ruby/Craford notebook at the Carousel Club going to 400 E. 10th, the phone of Virginia Davis? (Not Barbara Davis's phone, not the phone which Barbara used to call the police, her own phone, but the phone in Virginia Davis's apartment.)

This is not because Virginia Davis has anything to do with anything other than loyalty to her older sister-in-law and doing her best to cover for her. Virginia Davis has nothing to do with Ruby or the Carousel Club.

But Courson does. 

And this provides for the first time ever, a possible explanation for how Virginia Davis's phone number ended up in Jack Ruby's/Craford's phone book at the Carousel Club. 

It was Courson, who knew Jack Ruby and spent time in the Carousel Club as part of his job, paid to fraternize with and hang out with known criminals for Sheriff Decker's intelligence purposes, and by his own account hung out at the Carousel Club two or three evenings in the week or two prior to the assassination. 

It would be Courson, not Virginia or Barbara Davis, who would have given Virginia's apartment phone number to Ruby, as a place where a message could be gotten to Courson, or something like that. Courson, a known contact of Ruby, gave that phone number to Ruby, because he was spending time in that apartment. 

So that would explain that phone number mystery, never previously explained!

But why is the Virginia Davis phone number in the Ruby/Craford phone book in the name of "Leona Miller"? A possible explanation is that Leona Miller (who was a real person part of Ruby's synagogue, and had no connection to Virginia Davis or 400 E. 10th St. or the phone number) had nothing to do with it, but was a code name to disguise a phone number for some other purpose. There are supposedly other examples of this in Ruby's phone book.

That the name "Miller" may be code for something could possibly be suggested by a separate unusual notation in the Ruby/Craford notebook, handwritten reading "Mr. Miller. Friday. 15 people. Collins Radio Co." (https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=48723#relPageId=22). There is no phone number and no calendar date--maybe the "Friday" was the same week that message was phoned in, maybe the week of the assassination? "Friday" could be Friday Nov 22, the day of the assassination. "Collins Radio Co." could be something to do with Carl Mather from Collins Radio Co. (and also Tippit family friend) sighted on N. Beckley in Oak Cliff on Fri Nov 22 at about 2 pm, a long, long way from Mather's home, sitting in a car just parked and watching, for no explicable reason, perhaps--who knows (lacking any other rational explanation)--waiting for a planned meeting with Oswald in the nearby Texas Theatre perhaps set for 3 pm, 1500 hours military time, 15 "people" (or, where Carl Mather was parked, looking out on N. Beckley, was such that if Oswald was walking from his rooming house to the Texas Theatre, Mather could have seen him and met him before then). The message involving Collins Radio Co. in Ruby's/Craford's notebook was written down as from "Mr. Miller", the same "Miller" name used in Ruby's phone book for the phone number of Courson's contact number at Virginia Davis's apartment.

According to Myers' official who told him of the officer with the affair present at the time of the Tippit killing, that official told Myers that that officer had seen Oswald and could positively identify Oswald as the killer (even though this officer never came forward, his identity covered up by police and/or local officials in Dallas). 

Under this scenario that would be exactly correct, understanding "Oswald" to mean the gunman. The officer, Courson, would be located in the apartment of Virginia Davis facing Patton, and he, with Barbara, would have been in position looking out the window to see the gunman go by.

Hmm.

Greg, your theory should not be dismissed out of hand as impossible by anyone, and you are to be commended for your creativity (I assume it is your theory, right?)

Mrs. Charlie Virginia Davis's testimony is a doozy: she couldn't get the timeline straight at all. Belin finally got what he wanted her to say: Barbara called the police AFTER they had seen the gunman cross the yard. But man! It took forever to get to that point. 

Honestly, I believe Belin was smart enough to quit her testimony immediately after he got her to that point. If he kept at it, she'd have changed her timeline again! (And he gave up trying to reconcile what she said in her two affidavits . . .)

I too have long wondered how Virginia Davis's phone number would up in Ruby's notebook. You refer to it as "Ruby/Crafard notebook" which implies that it had entries in it from Larry Crafard, right?

I have always wondered, like many people, if Dallas strip club owner Jack Ruby had the phone number for 16-year-old, childless, (bored, stay-at-home housewife dreaming of extra money?) Virginia Davis because she, or someone acting on her behalf, had given it to him for reasons at which (I presume) the readership here is worldly enough to guess. 

But you have come up with a creative "innocent" alternative, and of course, none of us can know now what the truth was. You might be right, but I have a couple of questions:

If Courson did spend any time at all in Virginia Davis's apartment (for whatever reasons), why would he use that phone number as a way for Ruby to contact him? Your theory implies that Ruby needed to be able to get ahold of Courson at a moment's notice, and surely Courson couldn't have been there (theoretically) that often, right?

I mean, Barbara Davis's husband, Troy Lee Davis, did live there with Barbara and their two kids! He was there that afternoon to take Virginia and Barbara down to the lineups at the police station late that afternoon. Troy Lee Davis wasn't off somewhere else on November 22- he was a local roofer right there in Oak Cliff. (Further, roofing is a daytime, not a nighttime business.)

Courson's contact with Ruby was presumably due to "official" police business. Ruby surely could contact Courson anytime through the Dallas Sheriff's Department and they could get ahold of Courson very quickly.

But Courson was absolutely "off duty" if he was whiling away the hours with Barbara Davis in Virginia Davis's apartment. If Ruby tried to reach Courson at Virginia Davis's apartment, there was a very real chance that her husband, Mr. Charles Davis (the brother of Troy Lee Davis) would answer the phone!

And that would be a complete disaster for both Courson and Barbara Davis, and very likely a disaster for Virginia Davis. 

So, clever as your theory is, that part simply doesn't work for me.

We do agree that the name "Leona Miller" was a cover next to Virginia Davis's phone number.

But for now, I think the simpler explanation is more likely. "Leona Miller" was the name Ruby assigned to cover the number from the person who gave him that number: Virginia Davis herself.

 

 

 

 

[Ron Bulman]

6 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

Why do you think you know Courson was “late on the scene”, Ron? Where do you get that? Source?

No More Silence, Larry Sneed, pgs. 482-486.

My wife phoned from downtown Dallas and told me the president had been shot. . . . I usually went in 3:00-4:00.  In five minutes, I was headed downtown.  Lots of chatter on the radio, confusion, running in different directions.

I had a suspect in mind out in Grand Prairie when I learned of the shooting.  He had made a statement I'd learned of "he hoped Kennedy got his damned head blown off while he was in Dallas."  . . . just a week or two prior . . .  So, I thought if there's that many officers downtown there's no use in my going down there, so I thought I'd go out Jefferson to Grand Prairie and pick up the suspect.

He had two frequencies on his radio but could not monitor the two frequencies used by the DPD.  "Our dispatcher had to monitor their frequency and pass it on to us."

The first part of this is confusing.  In any case, I hadn't gotten up to Jefferson and Zang around Twelfth when I received a call that a suspect had been seen running into the library at Marsalis and Jefferson.  In the meantime, I had also gotten a call that a Dallas police officer had been shot near that area.  As I was coming up Jefferson (?) . . . there was an island in the center of Jefferson . . . I made a right turn and went down to the library.

As I stepped out of the car, a uniformed officer who had seen the red lights . . . hollered at me and said it was a false alarm.  He said it was just a young man who had run in to tell his mother the president had been shot.  So, I left there and went to the location where the officer, Tippit, had been shot.

As I pulled up . . . there was another uniformed officer at the location who was evidently waiting for the wrecker to come ang get Tippit's car. (???)  As I stepped out of the car, the call came in on Tippit's radio, which was still on, that "The suspect, . . . has been seen running into the balcony of the Texas Theater."

We were only a few blocks from the theater, but I had to back up and turn to get back on Jefferson.  Another officer was headed the same way, so he and I ran a race, my going backwards and his going forward to see who could make that turn to get on Jefferson first.  He was in front of me . . .  I pulled up . . . flashed my badge, then walked on to the stairs.

(At this point he thinks he encountered Oswald casually coming down the stairs, without a white jacket on, so he didn't stop him.  He thinks Oswald didn't shoot him because his own revolver was in his pocket.)

Anyway, I went into the balcony, had the projectionist flip on the lights, I didn't see anybody that fit the description . . . I found a room that was dark, but I couldn't find a light switch.  There was a ladder going down, no stairway . . . so I came out and ran downstairs to grab a flashlight out of my squad car.  . . . as I started back in, the doors opened and several Dallas police officers came out with Oswald after they had captured him downstairs.  

So, he was late to the library, late on the scene of the Tippit shooting, and missed out on the capture of Oswald.  The last because he, and I guess only he, believed the radio report of a suspect in the balcony and searched there, to no avail.

[Greg Doudna]

OK Ron, that is what I thought, nothing documentary from 1963. What you are quoting is oral history he gave probably in the late 1980s (because he died 1990), published 1998, decades after the fact, no corroboration. 

If he was not the patrol car that Mrs. Holan saw leaving in the alley, the officer told to Myers present at the scene, the story might be true as it stands.

But if Courson was that officer, the officer that Myers' source said was protected in a coverup from revelation of his identity ... do you think he is going to blab to Sneed about how he was the officer who fled the scene of the crime that way?

Of course not. In fact, since the Sneed story is his only account of that day in his entire life, if he was the covered-up officer of the Tippit crime scene he would be expected not to volunteer that aspect.

And in your excerpted quotations, one of the ellipses parts is Courson saying how he is (he says) at home, he says his wife phones him and tells him JFK has been shot. Then he does the logical thing any officer called at home will do, puts on yesterday's used shirt and yesterday's clothes, to report for duty leaving home! 

Does that make sense?

Then he ends up going in the direction of Oak Cliff which is neither where he lives nor his normal place of work nor where he says he was headed when he left home (downtown), before receiving, by coincidence, after already turned to head toward Oak Cliff, the news of Tippit being shot in Oak Cliff! 

And on top of those and more anomalies as previously discussed, for unknown reason he is never asked to submit a written report like other DPD and Sheriff's Dept officers did that day. But he is in Oak Cliff within minutes of when Tippit was shot. And then at the Texas Theatre at Oswald's arrest.

The point: your reliance upon Courson himself as he tells it to Sneed twenty-five years later as "clearing" Courson from being possibly the officer of the affair at the scene of the crime--is pretty naive.

Over two decades later, his sole sayso ... good enough for you, that settles it, he wasn't there twenty minutes before he says he was on that day a quarter of a century earlier?

I say Courson's account of being at home and getting dressed by putting on yesterday's clothes to go to work is off-key and suggests Courson's story is not altogether accurate, that maybe he was not at home at the time of the JFK assassination as claimed.  

[Greg Doudna]

On 8/31/2023 at 12:53 PM, Paul Jolliffe said:

Hmm.

Greg, your theory should not be dismissed out of hand as impossible by anyone, and you are to be commended for your creativity (I assume it is your theory, right?)

Yes it is my thinking.

On 8/31/2023 at 12:53 PM, Paul Jolliffe said:

Mrs. Charlie Virginia Davis's testimony is a doozy: she couldn't get the timeline straight at all. Belin finally got what he wanted her to say: Barbara called the police AFTER they had seen the gunman cross the yard. But man! It took forever to get to that point. 

Honestly, I believe Belin was smart enough to quit her testimony immediately after he got her to that point. If he kept at it, she'd have changed her timeline again! (And he gave up trying to reconcile what she said in her two affidavits . . .)

I too have long wondered how Virginia Davis's phone number would up in Ruby's notebook. You refer to it as "Ruby/Crafard notebook" which implies that it had entries in it from Larry Crafard, right?

As I understand it the notebook was all Ruby phone numbers and messages (not Craford's) but Craford took many of the messages in his handwriting.

On 8/31/2023 at 12:53 PM, Paul Jolliffe said:

I have always wondered, like many people, if Dallas strip club owner Jack Ruby had the phone number for 16-year-old, childless, (bored, stay-at-home housewife dreaming of extra money?) Virginia Davis because she, or someone acting on her behalf, had given it to him for reasons at which (I presume) the readership here is worldly enough to guess. 

But you have come up with a creative "innocent" alternative, and of course, none of us can know now what the truth was. You might be right, but I have a couple of questions:

If Courson did spend any time at all in Virginia Davis's apartment (for whatever reasons), why would he use that phone number as a way for Ruby to contact him? Your theory implies that Ruby needed to be able to get ahold of Courson at a moment's notice, and surely Courson couldn't have been there (theoretically) that often, right?

I mean, Barbara Davis's husband, Troy Lee Davis, did live there with Barbara and their two kids! He was there that afternoon to take Virginia and Barbara down to the lineups at the police station late that afternoon. Troy Lee Davis wasn't off somewhere else on November 22- he was a local roofer right there in Oak Cliff. (Further, roofing is a daytime, not a nighttime business.)

Courson's contact with Ruby was presumably due to "official" police business. Ruby surely could contact Courson anytime through the Dallas Sheriff's Department and they could get ahold of Courson very quickly.

But Courson was absolutely "off duty" if he was whiling away the hours with Barbara Davis in Virginia Davis's apartment. If Ruby tried to reach Courson at Virginia Davis's apartment, there was a very real chance that her husband, Mr. Charles Davis (the brother of Troy Lee Davis) would answer the phone!

And that would be a complete disaster for both Courson and Barbara Davis, and very likely a disaster for Virginia Davis. 

So, clever as your theory is, that part simply doesn't work for me.

We do agree that the name "Leona Miller" was a cover next to Virginia Davis's phone number.

But for now, I think the simpler explanation is more likely. "Leona Miller" was the name Ruby assigned to cover the number from the person who gave him that number: Virginia Davis herself.

You make good points Paul, to which I can add one more: I have cited Courson's day-old clothes as suggesting he might have been the officer of the affair but the day-old clothes assumes an overnight, which cannot have involved either Barbara or Virginia Davis's apartments because as you note, they each had husbands who lived there and were there at night. 

Then you question the plausibility of Courson giving Virginia Davis's phone number. My suggestion on the Virginia Davis phone number implied that Courson had crossed the line and was operating "bent" with one or more of the targets of his job to surveil, such as Ruby. As part of the "bent" aspect, some mechanism of getting a message to him via phone call to that number asking for "Leona Miller" (becomes a wrong number if someone unwitting answered the phone).

However you suggest a different explanation, that Virginia Davis (not Courson) gave her phone number to Ruby for interest in prostitution. One objection to that is Virginia was only 16, seems a bit young, but maybe Ruby didn't know she was only 16. 

But the phone inquiry could be about a job as a waitress or server at the Carousel Club. This would agree with how Craford explained that phone number in his WC testimony.

Mr. GRIFFIN. There is a line under that telephone number, "UN-3" and then "UN-3" is scratched out and then on the following line there is a name written. What is that name? 
Mr. CRAFARD. Leona Miller. 
Mr. GRIFFIN. Who was she? 
Mr. CRAFARD. I believe she was a girl that called in connection with or in answer to an ad that Jack Ruby had in the paper for waitresses. 

But what about the name "Leona Miller" which goes with a woman long known to Ruby who was in his synagogue? The connection of that name is with Ruby, not Virginia Davis.

Imagine: Virginia or Barbara calls asking about a job. Craford takes the call, talks to her. Woman caller has never worked in a club before, doesn't want to be called back due to nervousness of what her husband will think. Craford suggests a solution: gives her a name, which is the name of some other acquaintance of Ruby, "Leona Miller", and assures Virginia if there is call back to her from Ruby they will ask for "Leona Miller" and if she answers the phone it will be for her. Problem solved. Explains how that got written in the notebook and why.

A Carousel Club job employment meeting pretext scenario

This is what I suggest: Barbara Davis is the one, even though married with two children, making the call to the Carousel Club asking if there is waitress work or other employment.

Barbara Davis uses her sister-in-law Virginia's phone because she wants to keep this from becoming an issue with her husband until there is something concrete to discuss with and explain to him, such as starting to work at the Carousel Club, that conversation. Barbara makes the call from Virginia's number, agrees with Craford on the other end to have the name "Leona Miller" as the name any return call will ask for (at Virginia's number), and if Virginia answers the phone she will go get Barbara the intended person to be reached. 

Was Courson visiting Barbara on behalf of Ruby? A discussion of possible employment?

Ruby lived only a few blocks away, and Ruby was Craford's ride home from the Vegas Club the night before and a restaurant where Ruby and Craford were seen together after that at 2-3 am Nov 22. Ruby and George Senator told in their testimony that Ruby occasionally brought employees to his home overnight--maybe Craford the night of Nov 21/22 was one such. George Senator left that morning from his separate room in the apartment, would not necessarily know that Craford was sleeping in Ruby's room if Craford was, and George Senator was gone all day until that evening. Ruby also left the morning of Nov 22. That could leave Craford alone in Ruby's apartment by late morning. (The sole claim of evidence that Craford was anywhere else on Nov 22 was Craford's own claim, and the testimony of fellow Carousel employee, faithful loyal Andy Armstrong, who said Craford was at the Carousel Club, also Ruby. Nobody unrelated to those three though.)

So it could be--hypothetically--that Craford was within easy walking distance of 10th and Patton on Nov 22, from Ruby's apartment, consistent with witnesses seeing the gunman, who looked a lot like Craford, walking to the Tippit crime scene coming from a direction consistent from having started walking from Ruby's apartment.

Did Craford call the Virginia Davis phone, answered by Virginia, and set up a meeting with Barbara at a certain time, to take place at Virginia's apartment?

Was Courson in touch with Ruby and/or Craford and also there as part of that meeting? (This would not be an affair scenario, but a job interview pretext scenario?) 

Unexplained: how would Tippit be lured there at the right time, if the ambush was an intent by Craford to kill Tippit there?

No known contacts between Tippit and Ruby, Craford, Courson, or the Davis sisters-in-law. Unless there was a Tippit contact that is unknown.

Say there was some contact between Ruby/Craford and Tippit, and Craford called Tippit and said "meet me at 1:15 in front of 404 E. 10th", on some pretext. That would bring Tippit there at 1:15, whereupon Craford ambushes and kills him.

And Craford would have a place to "go", an alibi for why went there at all, and Barbara, meeting in an apartment alone with a strange man would feel more safe in the meeting with an officer present, three in all, not just her alone with the unknown man from the Carousel Club representing Ruby. 

And if Tippit was late, or didn't show, or delayed, Craford would have a legitimate alibi for hanging out and being present at that location (10th and Patton) until Tippit did get there. But as it happened, Craford is walking there and sees Tippit pulling up just as Craford arrives and Craford flags down Tippit from the sidewalk ... and the rest is history. 

In this scenario, Craford knows he is going to kill Tippit, but Barbara Davis, Virginia Davis, and Courson do not know that. Hence, in this scenario, when Courson hears the shots, he is not only spooked but he also has a pretty good idea of who might have just got killed, one of those two, and the other possibly the shooter, even without seeing. 

In this scenario Courson--who is fully dressed (there is no affair in this scenario or delay in needing to get dressed) takes off like a bolt and hightails it out of there. He would not have shown up in a marked cruiser if he was party to the murder in the first place. He is innocent of the murder, but he is in deep dooky if he sticks around because he has been doing off-job dealings with the criminal world in the persons of Ruby and Craford. Plus, he was party to (even though he did not realize it until after the fact) the setup of Tippit! How would that be explained? Courson's solution was to be somewhere else in a hurry and not get caught up in it. 

(One could also envision, depending on the timing, Courson in the alley, car parked, in plain clothes, perhaps standing somewhere in the alley, waiting for the time of the planned meeting, and Barbara Davis still in her own house, just before she would have walked around to the side apartment of Virginia, all set up with Virginia doing babysitting. All of this with the shooting happening just before the meeting would have taken place, such that Barbara would still be in her own apartment with Virginia as testified, there was no marital unfaithfulness in this episode, and Courson had an even faster start in his getaway if he heard the shots while already in the alley not far from his car.)  

OK Paul, this is my modified scenario in light of your good comments. Your objections to Courson providing the Virginia Davis phone number to Ruby have merit, now corrected. In this scenario, the phone call to the Carousel Club from Virginia Davis's phone, duly written down by Craford in the notebook, would have come from one of the two Davis women, and of the two I believe Barbara is the more likely, enlisting young Virginia as a witting helper in Barbara's interest in a club employment. Courson is present at the scene in this scenario but there is no affair. 

If this was the scenario, Courson was involved with the killing of Tippit though he was not witting in advance that Tippit was going to be murdered. But his unwitting involvement in the killing of Tippit, rather than an affair, would motivate Courson to flee rather than stay on the scene and attempt to assist in apprehending the otherwise-unknown killer. 

When Courson went to the Texas Theatre and went up to the balcony to find the suspected killer of Tippit said to be in the balcony, he let a man coming from the balcony walk down the stairs past him without stopping him. By this scenario, that man could indeed have been the killer of Tippit, Craford, who after killing Tippit had reloaded and fled on foot, had gone past Brewer's store, ran by Julia Postal and up into the balcony, there intent upon killing Oswald next seated in the main seating area below, with a running vehicle with the keys in the ignition and engine running out the back door set for the escape after killing Oswald (but Oswald's life was saved by the police arrival and arrest).  

In this scenario, it could be Courson recognized the man he let walk by him coming from the location where police radio said the suspect was. By that time Courson knew that a police officer had been killed, meaning Tippit was dead and not Craford, from the shots Courson may have heard at 10th and Patton. Then Courson encounters Craford, who by this reconstruction Courson may have known (Courson did after all hang out in the Carousel Club), the suspect in the balcony. But Courson does not stop or arrest him.

Now Courson, by that action, even though he was not party to the murder of officer Tippit, is in even deeper, for he knew and yet he let the man go when he could have stopped him. 

Myers' source told Myers that there was a coverup of the officer's presence. The coverup may be true but the affair explanation for that coverup could be smoke and untrue. It sounds like a plausible explanation, but the affair may have been a fiction designed to make a good alibi, when the actual coverup was that it was not a coincidence that an officer was having an affair exactly where Tippit showed up to get shot, but that the officer's, Courson's, presence was part of Tippit getting shot, in the sense of (unwitting) involvement in Tippit being lured there. 

If this scenario were correct, would Courson have told higher-ups the truth of what happened there that day?

We would not know for sure, but let me take a guess and say, yes, he would tell Decker, his immediate superior. He was in good relationship and confidence with Sheriff Decker. Courson was essentially Decker's right-hand man, with there being something of a rivalry between Courson and Walthers for who Decker would pick or favor to be sheriff after Decker (from several of the accounts in Sneed, also Roger Craig's book).  

This would mean Decker knew (maybe). Not that Decker did it, but that Decker knew. Then there was a decision to cover up, which looks like it would come from Decker (the decision). And that would be the coverup told to Myers. Closely held, successful. This would explain why Decker never had Courson write any report. It would explain why Courson stayed completely under the radar of everything, no interviews to anyone whatsoever (known to me anyway) until Courson gives a single, sole, prepared "cover story" to Sneed, shortly after which he conveniently expires at the ripe old age of 60, following which someone in the know tells Myers a version of the truth being covered up, of the officer's presence (which was Courson), sanitizing it saying it was because of an affair, and the reason for the coverup was to "protect the woman's reputation". Sounds good, sounds plausible! But it was not the truth of why the coverup. 

I will be interested in your assessment of this Paul.

For the record, this scenario assumes priorly that the killer of Tippit was Craford/Ruby related and that the killing of Tippit was an ambush and an execution. It assumes two studies I have developed separately on the Tippit case, "Were the Tippit crime scene shell hulls fired from the revolver of Lee Harvey Oswald?" and "Lee Harvey Oswald's two jackets and why the Tippit killer's jacket was not one of them" at my website: https://www.scrollery.com/?page_id=1581.

Edited September 1, 2023 by Greg Doudna

[Ron Bulman]

2 minutes ago, Greg Doudna said:

Yes it is my thinking.

As I understand it the notebook was all Ruby phone numbers and messages (not Craford's) but Craford took many of the messages in his handwriting.

You make good points Paul, to which I can add one more: I have cited Courson's day-old clothes as suggesting he might have been the officer of the affair but the day-old clothes assumes an overnight, which cannot have involved either Barbara or Virginia Davis's apartments because as you note, they each had husbands who lived there and were there at night. 

Then you question the plausibility of Courson giving Virginia Davis's phone number. A question of uncertainty to me is whether Courson's evening outings--as part of his job--hanging out in night clubs fraternizing with known criminals, was undercover or overt. He did not go out in those evenings in uniform. My suggestion on the Virginia Davis phone number implied that Courson had crossed the line and was operating "bent" with one or more of the targets of his job to surveil, such as Ruby. As part of the "bent" aspect, some mechanism of getting a message to him via phone call to that number asking for "Leona Miller" (becomes a wrong number if someone unwitting answered the phone).

However you suggest a different explanation, that Virginia Davis (not Courson) gave her phone number to Ruby for interest in prostitution. One objection to that is Virginia was only 16, seems a bit young, but maybe Ruby didn't know she was only 16. 

Or maybe Virginia was seeking a job with Ruby, not for prostitution but as a waitress or server at the Carousel Club. This would agree with how Craford explained that phone number in his WC testimony.

Mr. GRIFFIN. There is a line under that telephone number, "UN-3" and then "UN-3" is scratched out and then on the following line there is a name written. What is that name? 
Mr. CRAFARD. Leona Miller. 
Mr. GRIFFIN. Who was she? 
Mr. CRAFARD. I believe she was a girl that called in connection with or in answer to an ad that Jack Ruby had in the paper for waitresses. 

So could it be: Virginia is new in Dallas, young, no children, husband gone all day, bored. Checks the want ads for any interesting work. Considers working in a club. Calls the Carousel Club. That would explain the phone number ending up with Ruby. But not the name "Leona Miller". Did that name come from Virginia too as not her real name? Did she not want her husband to know if the Carousel Club/Ruby called back for her (if her husband answered it would sound like a wrong number)? 

But how would Virginia, new to town, use the name "Leona Miller" which goes with a woman long known to Ruby who was in his synagogue? The connection of that name is with Ruby, not Virginia Davis.

Or to imagine further: Virginia calls asking about a job. Craford takes the call, talks to her. Virginia has never worked in a club before, doesn't want to be called back due to nervousness of what her husband will think. Craford, resourceful and thinking on his feet, suggests a solution: gives her the first name that comes to his mind, some acquaintance of Ruby that he somehow remembered, "Leona Miller". and assures Virginia if there is call back to her from Ruby they will ask for "Leona Miller" and if she answers the phone it will be for her. Problem solved. Explains how that got written in the notebook and why?

A Carousel Club job employment meeting pretext scenario

But better yet, consider a variant on the above (this is what I suggest): Barbara Davis is the one, even though married with two children, making the call to the Carousel Club asking if there is waitress work or other employment.

Barbara Davis uses her sister-in-law Virginia's phone because she wants to keep this from becoming an issue with her husband until there is something concrete to discuss with and explain to him, such as starting to work at the Carousel Club, that conversation. Barbara makes the call from Virginia's number, agrees with Craford on the other end to have the name "Leona Miller" as the name any return call will ask for (at Virginia's number), and if Virginia answers the phone she will go get Barbara the intended person to be reached. 

Was Courson visiting Barbara on behalf of Ruby? A discussion of possible employment?

Ruby lived only a few blocks away, and Ruby was Craford's ride home from the Vegas Club the night before and a restaurant where Ruby and Craford were seen together after that at 2-3 am Nov 22. Ruby and George Senator told in their testimony that Ruby occasionally brought employees to his home overnight--maybe Craford the night of Nov 21/22 was one such. George Senator left that morning from his separate room in the apartment, would not necessarily know that Craford was sleeping in Ruby's room if Craford was, and George Senator was gone all day until that evening. Ruby also left the morning of Nov 22. That could leave Craford alone in Ruby's apartment by late morning. (The sole claim of evidence that Craford was anywhere else on Nov 22 was Craford's own claim, and the testimony of fellow Carousel employee, faithful loyal Andy Armstrong, who said Craford was at the Carousel Club, also Ruby. Nobody unrelated to those three though.)

So it could be--hypothetically--that Craford was within easy walking distance of 10th and Patton on Nov 22, from Ruby's apartment, consistent with witnesses seeing the gunman, who looked a lot like Craford, walking to the Tippit crime scene coming from a direction consistent from having started walking from Ruby's apartment.

Did Craford call the Virginia Davis phone, answered by Virginia, and set up a meeting with Barbara at a certain time, to take place at Virginia's apartment?

Was Courson in touch with Ruby and/or Craford and also there as part of that meeting? (This would not be an affair scenario, but a job interview pretext scenario?) 

Unexplained: how would Tippit be lured there at the right time, if the ambush was an intent by Craford to kill Tippit there?

No known contacts between Tippit and Ruby, Craford, Courson, or the Davis sisters-in-law. Unless there was a Tippit contact that is unknown.

Say there was some contact between Ruby/Craford and Tippit, and Craford called Tippit and said "meet me at 1:15 in front of 404 E. 10th", on some pretext. That would bring Tippit there at 1:15, whereupon Craford ambushes and kills him.

And Craford would have a place to "go", an alibi for why went there at all, and Barbara, meeting in an apartment alone with a strange man would feel more safe in the meeting with an officer present, three in all, not just her alone with the unknown man from the Carousel Club representing Ruby. 

And if Tippit was late, or didn't show, or delayed, Craford would have a legitimate alibi for hanging out and being present at that location (10th and Patton) until Tippit did get there. But as it happened, Craford is walking there and sees Tippit pulling up just as Craford arrives and Craford flags down Tippit from the sidewalk ... and the rest is history. 

In this scenario, Craford knows he is going to kill Tippit, but Barbara Davis, Virginia Davis, and Courson do not know that. Hence, in this scenario, when Courson hears the shots, he is not only spooked but he also has a pretty good idea of who might have just got killed, one of those two, and the other possibly the shooter, even without seeing. 

In this scenario Courson--who is fully dressed (there is no affair in this scenario or delay in needing to get dressed) takes off like a bolt and hightails it out of there. He would not have shown up in a marked cruiser if he was party to the murder in the first place. He is innocent of the murder, but he is in deep dooky if he sticks around because he has been doing off-job dealings with the criminal world in the persons of Ruby and Craford. Plus, he was party to (even though he did not realize it until after the fact) the setup of Tippit! How would that be explained? Courson's solution was to be somewhere else in a hurry and not get caught up in it. 

(One could also envision, depending on the timing, Courson in the alley, car parked, in plain clothes, perhaps standing somewhere in the alley, waiting for the time of the planned meeting, and Barbara Davis still in her own house, just before she would have walked around to the side apartment of Virginia, all set up with Virginia doing babysitting. All of this with the shooting happening just before the meeting would have taken place, such that Barbara would still be in her own apartment with Virginia as testified, there was no marital unfaithfulness in this episode, and Courson had an even faster start in his getaway if he heard the shots while already in the alley not far from his car.)  

OK Paul, this is my modified scenario in light of your good comments. Your objections to Courson providing the Virginia Davis phone number to Ruby have merit, now corrected. In this scenario, the phone call to the Carousel Club from Virginia Davis's phone, duly written down by Craford in the notebook, would have come from one of the two Davis women, and of the two I believe Barbara is the more likely, enlisting young Virginia as a witting helper in Barbara's interest in a club employment. Courson is present at the scene in this scenario but there is no affair. 

If this was the scenario, Courson was involved with the killing of Tippit though he was not witting in advance that Tippit was going to be murdered. But his unwitting involvement in the killing of Tippit, rather than an affair, would motivate Courson to flee rather than stay on the scene and attempt to assist in apprehending the otherwise-unknown killer. 

When Courson went to the Texas Theatre and went up to the balcony to find the suspected killer of Tippit said to be in the balcony, he let a man coming from the balcony walk down the stairs past him without stopping him. By this scenario, that man could indeed have been the killer of Tippit, Craford, who after killing Tippit had reloaded and fled on foot, had gone past Brewer's store, ran by Julia Postal and up into the balcony, there intent upon killing Oswald next seated in the main seating area below, with a running vehicle with the keys in the ignition and engine running out the back door set for the escape after killing Oswald (but Oswald's life was saved by the police arrival and arrest).  

In this scenario, it could be Courson recognized the man he let walk by him coming from the location where police radio said the suspect was. By that time Courson knew that a police officer had been killed, meaning Tippit was dead and not Craford, from the shots Courson may have heard at 10th and Patton. Then Courson encounters Craford, who by this reconstruction Courson may have known (Courson did after all hang out in the Carousel Club), the suspect in the balcony. But Courson does not stop or arrest him.

Now Courson, by that action, even though he was not party to the murder of officer Tippit, is in even deeper, for he knew and yet he let the man go when he could have stopped him. 

Myers' source told Myers that there was a coverup of the officer's presence. The coverup may be true but the affair explanation for that coverup could be smoke and untrue. It sounds like a plausible explanation, but the affair may have been a fiction designed to make a good alibi, when the actual coverup was that it was not a coincidence that an officer was having an affair exactly where Tippit showed up to get shot, but that the officer's, Courson's, presence was part of Tippit getting shot, in the sense of (unwitting) involvement in Tippit being lured there. 

If this scenario were correct, would Courson have told higher-ups the truth of what happened there that day?

We would not know for sure, but let me take a guess and say, yes, he would tell Decker, his immediate superior. He was in good relationship and confidence with Sheriff Decker. Courson was essentially Decker's right-hand man, with there being something of a rivalry between Courson and Walthers for who Decker would pick or favor to be sheriff after Decker (from several of the accounts in Sneed, also Roger Craig's book).  

This would mean Decker knew (maybe). Not that Decker did it, but that Decker knew. Then there was a decision to cover up, which looks like it would come from Decker (the decision). And that would be the coverup told to Myers. Closely held, successful. This would explain why Decker never had Courson write any report. It would explain why Courson stayed completely under the radar of everything, no interviews to anyone whatsoever (known to me anyway) until Courson gives a single, sole, prepared "cover story" to Sneed, shortly after which he conveniently expires at the ripe old age of 60, following which someone in the know tells Myers a version of the truth being covered up, of the officer's presence (which was Courson), sanitizing it saying it was because of an affair, and the reason for the coverup was to "protect the woman's reputation". Sounds good, sounds plausible! But it was not the truth of why the coverup. 

I will be interested in your assessment of this Paul.

For the record, this scenario assumes priorly that the killer of Tippit was Craford/Ruby related and that the killing of Tippit was an ambush and an execution (for reason unknown; a missing gap in the scenario for which I know no explanation to offer, other than the usual reason for mob hits was witnesses possessing deadly knowledge, though it remains a mystery what deadly knowledge Tippit could have had).

(Craford and not Oswald as killer of Tippit requires the prior supposition of law enforcement malfeasance, whether on the part of DPD or Dallas FBI or both, in the reported match of Oswald's revolver to the shell casings found at the Tippit crime scene, and also with the brands of bullets reported taken from Oswald's revolver. I have two articles on my website addressing these issues. The first is "Were the Tippit crime scene shell hulls fired from the revolver of Lee Harvey Oswald?" [May 4, 2023], https://www.scrollery.com/?page_id=1581. The second is, "Lee Harvey Oswald's two jackets and why the Tippit killer's jacket was not one of them" [June 2, 2023], https://www.scrollery.com/?page_id=1581. This second article discusses a range of issues other than jackets, including the paper-bag revolver, what happened at the Texas Theatre, and the mixtures of brands of bullets in Oswald's revolver.)

There you go again with the rambling.

 

[Ron Bulman]

2 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

I say Courson's account of being at home and getting dressed by putting on yesterday's clothes to go to work is off-key and suggests Courson's story is not altogether accurate, that maybe he was not at home at the time of the JFK assassination as claimed.  

If I was a Dallas County Sheriff's officer on 1/22/63 who normally went in 3-4 pm and my wife called at (12:40-45?) and said the president's been shot in down town.  Yeah, I'd put on my rumpled suit from last night and head to downtown, initially.

[Greg Doudna]

56 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

There you go again with the rambling.

I'll try to ramp up the quantity a bit more just to get more of your great music videos. Its like stuttering, I am what I am. If my discussion with Paul bothers you such that you're unable to gracefully skip over what is not to taste, do you want to go away or should I go away?   

[Ron Bulman]

Taste has noting to do with it, Truth is the purpose.

For now maybe should we all be ready to . . .