How Oswald was Framed for the Murder of Tippit

[Bill Brown]

2 hours ago, Sean Coleman said:

Yeah guys, use your heads!! All witnesses are reliable omg am I surrounded by fools…

 

 

Obvious confusion during her testimony on exactly what Ball was trying to ask her.  But, I'm curious.  What does any of the above have to do with the fact that she identified Oswald back on 11/22/63?  What if she never testified to the Warren Commission?  Before Markham ever heard of Joseph Ball, she picked Oswald on the afternoon of the murder.

 

"Number two is the one I picked." -- Helen Markham

"Number two was the man I saw shoot the policeman." -- Helen Markham

 

Edited September 8, 2023 by Bill Brown

[Sean Coleman]

1 hour ago, Bill Brown said:

 

Obvious confusion during her testimony on exactly what Ball was trying to ask her.  But, I'm curious.  What does any of the above have to do with the fact that she identified Oswald back on 11/22/63?  What if she never testified to the Warren Commission?  Before Markham ever heard of Joseph Ball, she picked Oswald on the afternoon of the murder.

 

"Number two is the one I picked." -- Helen Markham

"Number two was the man I saw shoot the policeman." -- Helen Markham

 

mmmmm…..yeah……obvious confusion….

But, haha, she was as mad as a box of frogs

[Michael Kalin]

19 hours ago, Bill Brown said:

You guys need to use your heads.

 

"I realized that there was one thing that made him stand out; and that was his mouth that curled up.  I couldn't mistake that.  Kind of a smile.  And I was within ten to fifteen feet of that individual." -- Jack Tatum

I'd say same to you but it's not entirely necessary. You only need to use your ears, following the narrative sequence, just like Jack Myers.

"I put my car in gear and drove forward...watching through the rear view mirror...I saw him very clearly...and I was within 10-15 feet of that individual..." -- Jack Tatum

If and when you decide to use your head proceed with extreme caution. It may lead to a change of guru. Tatum's interviewer, Dale Myers, is the same guy whose book (both editions) falsely claimed that Tatum said Tippit was shot "in the head." Tatum never said this. DM fooled cerebral types for over 20 years.

How long did he fool you?

[Bill Brown]

15 hours ago, Sean Coleman said:

mmmmm…..yeah……obvious confusion….

But, haha, she was as mad as a box of frogs

 

Why not simply answer my question?

What does any of the above (her testimony in 1964) have to do with the fact that she identified Oswald back on 11/22/63?

 

[Bill Brown]

4 hours ago, Michael Kalin said:

I'd say same to you but it's not entirely necessary. You only need to use your ears, following the narrative sequence, just like Jack Myers.

"I put my car in gear and drove forward...watching through the rear view mirror...I saw him very clearly...and I was within 10-15 feet of that individual..." -- Jack Tatum

If and when you decide to use your head proceed with extreme caution. It may lead to a change of guru. Tatum's interviewer, Dale Myers, is the same guy whose book (both editions) falsely claimed that Tatum said Tippit was shot "in the head." Tatum never said this. DM fooled cerebral types for over 20 years.

How long did he fool you?

 

Myers didn't interview Tatum in the Frontline special.  You don't know what the hell you're talking about.  Just like when you argued for a week that Bowley squeezed past the body lying in the street before parking in the 300 block of East Tenth.

 

Edited September 9, 2023 by Bill Brown

[Bill Brown]

4 hours ago, Michael Kalin said:

Tatum's interviewer, Dale Myers, is the same guy whose book (both editions) falsely claimed that Tatum said Tippit was shot "in the head." Tatum never said this. DM fooled cerebral types for over 20 years.

 

First, you do realize that Tippit was indeed shot in the head.  Right?

 

Second, you do realize that Tatum has the killer going out into the street and fire off a final shot.  Right?

 

I'm just trying to find out what you do know and don't know, since you've shown in the past that you're pretty much clueless about the events in Oak Cliff.  No offense intended.

 

[Michael Kalin]

17 hours ago, Bill Brown said:

Myers didn't interview Tatum in the Frontline special.  You don't know what the hell you're talking about.

OK, thanks for the correction. DM did the research, and you misrepresented what Tatum said by ignoring the context. A shabby trick.

Is this your indirect way of admitting you were fooled the entire 20 years?

[Michael Kalin]

16 hours ago, Bill Brown said:

First, you do realize that Tippit was indeed shot in the head.  Right?

 

Second, you do realize that Tatum has the killer going out into the street and fire off a final shot.  Right?

 

I'm just trying to find out what you do know and don't know, since you've shown in the past that you're pretty much clueless about the events in Oak Cliff.  No offense intended.

 

I realize that With Malice fooled its readers for many years, and continues to do so. When did you wake up to the truth?

[Bill Brown]

On 9/10/2023 at 4:38 AM, Michael Kalin said:

OK, thanks for the correction. DM did the research, and you misrepresented what Tatum said by ignoring the context. A shabby trick.

Is this your indirect way of admitting you were fooled the entire 20 years?

 

You're just trolling.

 

"To be ignorant of one's ignorance is the malady of the ignorant." - Amos Bronson Alcott

 

 

Edited September 12, 2023 by Bill Brown

[Michael Kalin]

11 hours ago, Bill Brown said:

"To be ignorant of one's ignorance is the malady of the ignorant." - Amos Bronson Alcott

Interesting, let's see how this affliction ran its course.

Quote

Jack Myers' mistake is that when Tatum says he was "within ten to fifteen feet" of the killer, Tatum is referring to the moment he (Tatum) drove past the stopped patrol car at the time Tippit and his killer were having their brief conversation.  This is when Tatum noticed the way the killer's "mouth curled up"; not as Tatum saw the killer running from the scene moments later after the shooting.

This was wrong. You made this mistake because you were ignorant of Jack Myers' source.

After being made aware of Jack Myers' source, you quoted it as follows:

Quote

"I realized that there was one thing that made him stand out; and that was his mouth that curled up.  I couldn't mistake that.  Kind of a smile.  And I was within ten to fifteen feet of that individual." -- Jack Tatum

It was probably not a sign of ignorance, but devious cherry picking to deflect attention from your previously revealed ignorance. In this case the distortion was also easily exposed.

Then you were asked how long you were ignorant of Dale Myers' misquote of Jack Tatum in With Malice, but you do not answer this question, presumably because you cannot reckon the number of years of your ignorance.

What is interesting is that DM slipstreamed the correction in an article at his JFK fiction weblog. It might have passed unnoticed were it not for a vigilant reader's question:

Quote

Anonymous said...

    Why in the almighty universe did you write here that “Tatum never said that the final shot was fired into Tippit’s skull”??? IN YOUR VERY BOOK, you quote him telling you: “He didn’t walk back, he hurried back, and cautiously approached him, and then shot him again—in the head.” (WM, p. 71) So what’s going on here?
    November 6, 2020 at 1:08 AM
    https://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2018/11/jack-ray-tatum.html

I'm ignorant of the identity of "Anonymous" but the bilious tone makes me think of you. Not likely, though, based on content. DM blamed his blunder on Jack Moriarty, which brings the Jack Tatum tall tale back to its creator, the primal source of all error relative to this subject.

There is an almost pathological dread among Tippit analysts & researchers of facing up to their errors.

Bill Brown, why is this so? Are we not all human, and therefore make mistakes? Who's exempt from occasionally lapsing into bilge?

Edited September 12, 2023 by Michael Kalin

[Evan Marshall]

I don't understand why people cannot disagree without being disagreeable.

[Bill Brown]

15 hours ago, Michael Kalin said:

Interesting, let's see how this affliction ran its course.

This was wrong. You made this mistake because you were ignorant of Jack Myers' source.

After being made aware of Jack Myers' source, you quoted it as follows:

It was probably not a sign of ignorance, but devious cherry picking to deflect attention from your previously revealed ignorance. In this case the distortion was also easily exposed.

Then you were asked how long you were ignorant of Dale Myers' misquote of Jack Tatum in With Malice, but you do not answer this question, presumably because you cannot reckon the number of years of your ignorance.

What is interesting is that DM slipstreamed the correction in an article at his JFK fiction weblog. It might have passed unnoticed were it not for a vigilant reader's question:

I'm ignorant of the identity of "Anonymous" but the bilious tone makes me think of you. Not likely, though, based on content. DM blamed his blunder on Jack Moriarty, which brings the Jack Tatum tall tale back to its creator, the primal source of all error relative to this subject.

There is an almost pathological dread among Tippit analysts & researchers of facing up to their errors.

Bill Brown, why is this so? Are we not all human, and therefore make mistakes? Who's exempt from occasionally lapsing into bilge?

 

"This was wrong. You made this mistake because you were ignorant of Jack Myers' source.

After being made aware of Jack Myers' source, you quoted it as follows..."

 

No Sir.  You have made a foolish statement (most likely because of your own ignorance, again).

I was fully aware of Jack Myers' source (since anyone who knows anything about the Tippit case is fully aware of the Tatum interview for the 1993 Frontline special).  Also, I discussed this specific point with Jack Myers long before I ever posted here on the Ed Forum.  Seriously, stop trolling.

 

By the way, Once I pointed it out to him, Jack Myers accepted that he was wrong and that Tatum is saying that he noticed the curling of Oswald's mouth as he passed within ten to fifteen feet of Oswald as Oswald and Tippit were talking through the window.  You wouldn't know this, though, because you're ignorant of the facts (just as you were, regarding your ludicrous claim about how T.F. Bowley drove past Tippit's body lying in the street before parking one block west of the scene, when the reality is that Bowley pulled over east of the scene and never drove past the body lying in the street).

 

You should be embarrassed but you don't know any better.

 

 

 

Edited September 13, 2023 by Bill Brown

[Evan Marshall]

We need to remember that in 1963 Texas was awash in guns and there was no need to acquire ones with a paper trail UNLESS that was your goal. The FBI? If you'll reflect on the integrity of their first director their current behavior seems logical.

 

[Michael Griffith]

On 9/8/2023 at 6:07 PM, Bill Brown said:

 

Obvious confusion during her testimony on exactly what Ball was trying to ask her.  But, I'm curious.  What does any of the above have to do with the fact that she identified Oswald back on 11/22/63?  What if she never testified to the Warren Commission?  Before Markham ever heard of Joseph Ball, she picked Oswald on the afternoon of the murder.

"Number two is the one I picked." -- Helen Markham

"Number two was the man I saw shoot the policeman." -- Helen Markham

You can't be serious. Surely you know it is misleading--grossly misleading--to simply claim that Markham "identified" Oswald on the day of the shooting. Surely you know that such a claim would have been destroyed under cross examination in a trial.

For example, in her press interviews, Markham described the gunman as short, a little chunky/kind of heavy, and with bushy black hair. Oswald was 5’9”, downright skinny (if not almost anorexic), and had thinning brown hair.

She told the WC that she did NOT identify Oswald by his face but because he gave her the "chills."

Shall we mention that Markham was at least 90 feet away when the shooting occurred, and that she said that after the killer fled, she spoke with Tippit for several minutes? Tippit, of course, was quite dead when the killer fled.

Shall we mention that the one guy who was actually close to the shooting when it occurred, Domingo Benavides, said that the gunman had a squared-off (blocked) haircut that ended on the back of his neck above his "Eisenhower" jacket, and that photos taken on 11/22/63 clearly show that Oswald’s hair was tapered in the back and would have extended below the neckline on a similar jacket?

And on and on we could go.

Edited September 13, 2023 by Michael Griffith

[Greg Doudna]

23 minutes ago, Michael Griffith said:

You can't be serious. Surely you know it is misleading--grossly misleading--to simply claim that Markham "identified" Oswald on the day of the shooting. Surely you know that such a claim would have been destroyed under cross examination in a trial.

For example, in her press interviews, Markham described the gunman as short, a little chunky/kind of heavy, and with bushy black hair. Oswald was 5’9”, downright skinny (if not almost anorexic), and had thinning brown hair.

She told the WC that she did NOT identify Oswald by his face but because he gave her the "chills."

Shall we mention that Markham was at least 90 feet away when the shooting occurred, and that she said that after the killer fled, she spoke with Tippit for several minutes? Tippit, of course, was quite dead when the killer fled.

Shall we mention that the one guy who was actually close to the shooting when it occurred, Domingo Benavides, said that the gunman had a squared-off (blocked) haircut that ended on the back of his neck above his "Eisenhower" jacket, and that photos taken on 11/22/63 clearly show that Oswald’s hair was tapered in the back and would have extended below the neckline on a similar jacket?

And on and on we could go.

Yes. It’s just so obvious that Helen Markham was an emotional wreck (understandably), had seen the killer shoot Tippit from ca 90 feet away, said she was terrified covering her face with her hands as the killer went past her to the other side of the street, and then identified Oswald in that lineup not because of recognition of his face but because he gave her “cold chills” looking at him. That was how she knew he was the one.

One of the Leavelle affidavits even says he/they brought her direct to that lineup from the “infirmary” at the police station where she was receiving medical attention from being so distraught. Other stories told of smelling salts reviving her from fainting. Makes a perfect witness to ID a man for a capital crime out of a lineup! Would it have made any difference in her identification if Oswald was actually innocent? No. 

And you are right, her descriptions of the killer’s hair to police and reporters do not agree with Oswald. 

Her physical descriptions of the killer to reporters do however sound like approximate descriptions of someone matching in description Curtis Craford, in his hair and his somewhat heavier weight—Craford who was otherwise “routinely” mistaken for Oswald by witnesses who didn’t know any better who had seen him with Ruby and freaked out when later seeing Oswald on television thinking Craford they had seen had been Oswald. 

If it wasn’t that the FBI lab in D.C. identified shell hulls the Dallas Police sent them, labeled the ones from the scene of the crime, as from Oswald’s revolver which the Dallas Police also had in custody, it actually might have been an open question in court whether Oswald did it.

And the block cut rear hairline on the killer from the best witness, a different witness, with a perfect view of the back of the killer from a close distance only ca. 15 feet away. Not Oswald’s hairline. That detail of testimony alone should have received significant attention from the Warren Commission but it did not receive any. 

But emotional mess Helen Markham revived back to consciousness with smelling salts, sees Oswald and feels cold chills, and realizes by that means it was him. 

According to the Innocence Project, about half of actually innocent persons exonerated after wrongful convictions were positively identified by eyewitnesses who were mistaken in those identifications.

And in this case it is not just conjecture but already on the table as fact that another suspect, complete with association with another possible murder weapon covered up by the Dallas Police, who unlike Oswald had self-confessed experience in contract killing, who was at the time of the Tippit killing in the direct employ of Oswald’s own killer, who may have been overnight in Ruby’s apartment the night before the Tippit killing which occurred only several blocks’ walk away by a killer who walked there from that direction, who left Dallas leaving no contact information or goodby hours after Tippit was killed, was frequently misidentified as Oswald by witnesses.