Shooting From Behind The Fence With A Revolver?

[Donald Willis]

3 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

Officer/car 550/2, on the police radio transcript, CE1974, is identified as Gerald Hill in that transcript. That is the officer transmission saying a witness is in the car radioing from 12th and Beckley. There are several other transmissions from 550/2.

How is it known that 550/2 is Gerald Hill?

Can someone explain this? Thanks.

 

The most famous of such 550/2 transmissions was the 1:41 "shells at the scene" one.  In "With Malice" (p260), Dale Myers writes, "In a 1986 interview, Hill admitted  being the cop behind the strange broadcast."

[Greg Doudna]

1 hour ago, Donald Willis said:

You say that Brock was not at the Tippit scene.  Here's an excerpt from my earlier "1:22pm DPD radio message...":

"Fourth (getting somewhere) clue:  Dale Myers insists that Walker met and talked to Warren Reynolds at the murder scene:  "Reynolds returned to 10th & Patton at about [1:20], despite Reynolds' testimony to the contrary" (p112).  True, in 1983, Walker told Myers that he did meet Reynolds, about 1:22.  However, he adds, "One of the used car lot operators saw the incident... Warren Reynolds" (p114).  The latter never said that he saw the shooting--Walker's memory fails him here.

And Reynolds would hardly have been the one to tell Walker, "Last seen about 300 block of E. Jefferson".  Ruinously for him, Walker told Myers that it was "Reynolds [who] gave me the description of the gunman" (p114).  Walker was apparently unaware that TV film footage has turned up showing Reynolds telling police at the scene that he last saw a suspicious man going into the back of an old house near the Texaco station (WM p131).  Reynolds, then, could not have been Walker's "300 block of E. Jefferson" witness.  (Reynolds' suspicious man may not have been the gunman at all, but a vigilante trailing the gunman.)  Myers, then, with one hand, was simply extending Walker's witness-identity deception, despite his own text and frame grabs which, with the other hand, expose said deception!  Myers giveth and Myers taketh away.

Fifth (gathering steam) clue:  Myers then "buttresses" the invented Walker/Reynolds confab with yet another out-of-thin-air incident, based on the word of... no one at all:  "Warren Reynolds, who had come with [Sgt. Bud Owens & Assistant DA Bill Alexander] from 10th & Patton, pointed to an old house near the Texaco station..." (p120)  Alexander did not testify to the Warren Commission, and Owens, in his Commission testimony, did not mention bringing along a witness to the Texaco area.  None of the principals, then--Reynolds, Walker, Alexander, Owens--can support Myers' two little vignettes re Reynolds going to and leaving the scene of the crime circa 1:20 and 1:22.  Thin air.

Sixth (Eureka!) clue:  Relocation, relocation, relocation.  Why would Walker and Myers go to so much trouble to falsely identify and relocate a witness?  Well, what other witness or witnesses were "over here on Jefferson"?  (Pat Patterson was with Reynolds, so he was most probably an old-house witness, too.)

Robert and Mary Brock were, in effect the gatekeepers of the parking-lot suspect.  Mary Brock was the only witness who clearly stated that she "last observed [the suspect] in the parking lot directly behind" the service station. (WM p551)  They may have seen the suspect, but not in the parking lot, and certainly not doffing his jacket.  Because at 1:22, he was reported "seen about 300 block of E. Jefferson", still wearing his "white jacket".  Certainly worth Walker's false identification of his witness, and Myers' subsequent, false relocation of him elsewhere.  Two wrongs and no right.
  
And the first transmission--at 1:21--re the Texaco location was the dispatcher's "Subject just passed 401 E. Jefferson" (CE 705p21), the last address, going west, before the 300 block.  One of the Brocks must have been its source, as well as the source for "300 block of E. Jefferson".

Seventh clue:  At 1:26, Sgt. Gerald Hill reported from 12th & Beckley, "Have a man in the car with me that can identify the suspect if anybody gets... one." (CE 1974 p63)  About 1:23, at the Tippit scene, according to Hill's testimony, "Another person came up [and] told us the man had run over into the funeral home parking lot", which was opposite the Texaco station (v7p48).  Sgt. Bud Owens similarly testified that, at the "scene of the shooting... we were informed by a man whom I do not know that the suspect that shot Officer Tippit had run across a vacant lot toward Jefferson" (v7p79).  Someone, then, from the Texaco area--Hill and Owens both garbled the where of it--had run down to where the police were first congregating.  And Hill, clearly, immediately, took this man near to where the man had last seen the suspect, the 300 block of E. Jefferson.

Eighth clue:  But there must have been a big problem--retrospectively--with this witness.  In fact, there is, in Hill's testimony, an implicit, hapless denial that he even had a witness or that he had even radioed from 12th & Beckley, even though it's on the record.  On the record, Gerald!  Both the FBI transcription (see above) and Myers (p124) acknowledge that Hill sent the 1:26 message.  Hill testified, falsely, that, about 1:25, he left the Tippit scene and "whipped around the block.  I went down to the first intersection east of the block where all this incident occurred and made a right turn and traveled one block and came back up on Jefferson", where he met Owens at the Texaco/old-house site (v7p48).  The harried Warren Commission did not have time to check out every DPD-spun tale. 

Who was Hill's radioactive witness, whom, figuratively, he dare not touch, or acknowledge, let alone name?  Myers apparently knew, hence his totally unsupported relocation of that witness (as well as Officer Walker) from Crawford & Jefferson to 10th & Patton.  This is called throwing the hounds off the scent.  But by fallaciously drawing a witness away from the Crawford area, Myers unintentionally draws attention to that area.  And Hill and Owens suggest, clumsily, but perhaps basically accurately, that a person from Texaco ran down to 10th & Patton.

Reynolds was looking east from Crawford area.  But Hill's witness was looking west, towards Beckley.  Now who could have gotten a pretty good look at the fleeing suspect, good enough to have estimated height, weight, race, and age, and described the man's clothing?  Who could have seen him that closely--seen him as, say, he passed the Texaco station?  Robert and/or Mary Brock, of course.  Walker doesn't indicate the sex or number of his witnesses ("We have a description"), so it could have been either of the Brocks who contacted the dispatcher about the same time as did Walker. 

And, just as the WFAA-TV footage of Reynolds exposes the Walker lie, so it exposes the Brocks' lies.  As noted above, Mrs. Brock stated that she informed Reynolds that "she last observed [the suspect] in the parking lot directly behind Ballew's Texaco Service Station".  Clearly, she did *not* so inform him, not without some strong input from Reynolds, who had his own story to tell and was telling it to the cops, that day, and would have told it to her.  But she failed to give herself and her husband a lifeline out of the Reynolds morass.  A frame-grab is worth a thousand words.  Moral:  Don't hitch your wagon to Warren Reynolds.
    
Despite their apparent proximity to the suspect, neither Brock was invited either to attend a lineup or to testify for the Commission.  It might have been too easy, then, for people to connect the dots: "over here on Jefferson", "300 block of E. Jefferson", the Brocks.  As the witnesses closest to both the 300 block of E. Jefferson and to the parking lot, the Brocks had to be downplayed, had to be weaned off Jefferson and weaned onto the parking lot.  (Sgt. Hill didn't just downplay them--he vaporized them, or one of them.)  More publicity would have meant more scrutiny, prickly questions.  (On that same day--Jan. 21, 1964--Reynolds himself was slipping further into the morass:  For his part, he misleadingly told the FBI then that he "last observed the individual to turn north" by the service station:  "[The Brocks] informed him the individual had gone through the parking lot." [FBI interview report/WMp544]  Naively, he apparently thought that the WFAA footage had been deep-sixed.)

In sum:  The jacket was planted, the Texaco jacket witnesses were transplanted, Oswald was, beyond doubt, being framed for Tippit's murder, and Dale Myers was last seen imploding.

Interesting Donald.

The following is not serious. (it is a joke): So, why does Gerald Hill cover up the fact he had someone in his car at 12th and Beckley who could identify the gunman--and that witness is never heard from again from Hill or anyone?

BECAUSE ... (drumroll) ... Hill drove by himself looking for anyone suspicious in response to the information that the gunman was headed west ... Hill SAW a man, asked him if he had seen a gunman, the man says yes he did and offers to help Hill find him! He gets in Hill's car to help Hill look for the gunman! Hill does not realize that man IS the gunman, in the patrol car with him pretending to help "look for the gunman"! They look but surprise surprise can't find the gunman! (since Hill doesn't realize he has him in the car with him) Hill thanks the man for trying to help, lets him out, gunman goes on his way (into the Texas Theatre balcony). 

Hill realizes what happened. This is an even worse blunder than calling .38 Special revolver shell casings automatics.

There: motive for why Hill would never speak of that witness again! 🙂

 

[Greg Doudna]

2 hours ago, Donald Willis said:

In sum:  The jacket was planted, the Texaco jacket witnesses were transplanted, Oswald was, beyond doubt, being framed for Tippit's murder, and Dale Myers was last seen imploding.

If you think it was necessary for there to be an advance plot to plant the jacket back of the Texaco, wouldn't the simplest way for your plotters to do that be for the gunman (who is one of your plotters, right?) to plant it? The gunman brings it to the place it is to be planted, the Texaco, by means of wearing it, takes it off himself, and plants it there at the Texaco?

But how then is that different from the conventional description that the gunman dropped the jacket there as reported?

What's the difference, in your scenario? 

[Greg Doudna]

2 hours ago, Donald Willis said:

The most famous of such 550/2 transmissions was the 1:41 "shells at the scene" one.  In "With Malice" (p260), Dale Myers writes, "In a 1986 interview, Hill admitted  being the cop behind the strange broadcast."

OK yes, that confirms 550/2 calling in from 12th and Beckley is Hill, as already identified in CE 1974.

[Jean Ceulemans]

3 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

Interesting Donald.

The following is not serious. (it is a joke): So, why does Gerald Hill cover up the fact he had someone in his car at 12th and Beckley who could identify the gunman--and that witness is never heard from again from Hill or anyone?

BECAUSE ... (drumroll) ... Hill drove by himself looking for anyone suspicious in response to the information that the gunman was headed west ... Hill SAW a man, asked him if he had seen a gunman, the man says yes he did and offers to help Hill find him! He gets in Hill's car to help Hill look for the gunman! Hill does not realize that man IS the gunman, in the patrol car with him pretending to help "look for the gunman"! They look but surprise surprise can't find the gunman! (since Hill doesn't realize he has him in the car with him) Hill thanks the man for trying to help, lets him out, gunman goes on his way (into the Texas Theatre balcony). 

Hill realizes what happened. This is an even worse blunder than calling .38 Special revolver shell casings automatics.

There: motive for why Hill would never speak of that witness again! 🙂

 

Well... somehow... I can see it all happening.. 😂

[Michael Kalin]

9 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

The following is not serious. (it is a joke): So, why does Gerald Hill cover up the fact he had someone in his car at 12th and Beckley who could identify the gunman--and that witness is never heard from again from Hill or anyone?

BECAUSE ... (drumroll) ... Hill drove by himself looking for anyone suspicious in response to the information that the gunman was headed west ... Hill SAW a man, asked him if he had seen a gunman, the man says yes he did and offers to help Hill find him! He gets in Hill's car to help Hill look for the gunman! Hill does not realize that man IS the gunman, in the patrol car with him pretending to help "look for the gunman"! They look but surprise surprise can't find the gunman! (since Hill doesn't realize he has him in the car with him) Hill thanks the man for trying to help, lets him out, gunman goes on his way (into the Texas Theatre balcony).

You are droll, Greg, but there's at least one element worth taking seriously.

In a lengthy article at Kennedys & King a decade ago, "Gerald Hill and the Framing of Lee Harvey Oswald," Gokay Hasan Yusuf made a solid case that Hill took Valentine's car #207 at TSBD and drove himself to Oak Cliff with an unidentified passenger.

Quote

It is also this writer's belief that Hill was one of the two officers inside [the DPD squad car] seen by Earlene Roberts, the housekeeper of the rooming house located at 1026 North Beckley, where Oswald was allegedly living at the time of the assassination...

The gist is there's no reason to restrict the list of candidates to familiar names.

[Michael Kalin]

13 hours ago, Donald Willis said:

And, just as the WFAA-TV footage of Reynolds exposes the Walker lie, so it exposes the Brocks' lies.  As noted above, Mrs. Brock stated that she informed Reynolds that "she last observed [the suspect] in the parking lot directly behind Ballew's Texaco Service Station".  Clearly, she did *not* so inform him, not without some strong input from Reynolds, who had his own story to tell and was telling it to the cops, that day, and would have told it to her.  But she failed to give herself and her husband a lifeline out of the Reynolds morass.  A frame-grab is worth a thousand words.  Moral:  Don't hitch your wagon to Warren Reynolds.

Exactly, better yet ditch the entire crew of standard Patton/Jefferson flight path witnesses altogether. The alternative is condemnation to perpetually refuting the WR scenario and its derivatives.

Big picture double feature:
1. Two Oswalds left TSBD.
2. Two Oswalds observed near the murder scene (one by Red Smith & the other by Eddie Kinsley).
3. Two potential destinations (library & TT).
4. Two Oswalds at TT.

The library [destination A] was the planned Oswald rubout site. By detouring to the TT [destination B] the patsy delayed his doom.

Edited Friday at 07:07 PM by Michael Kalin

[Bill Brown]

1 hour ago, Michael Kalin said:

Exactly, better yet ditch the entire crew of standard Patton/Jefferson flight path witnesses altogether. The alternative is condemnation to perpetually refuting the WR scenario and its derivatives.

Big picture double feature:
1. Two Oswalds left TSBD.
2. Two Oswalds observed near the murder scene (one by Red Smith & the other by Eddie Kinsley).
3. Two potential destinations (library & TT).
4. Two Oswalds at TT.

The library [destination A] was the planned Oswald rubout site. By detouring to the TT [destination B] the patsy delayed his doom.

 

"The library [destination A] was the planned Oswald rubout site. By detouring to the TT [destination B] the patsy delayed his doom."

 

All of the witnesses who watched Oswald state that he turned west onto Jefferson upon reaching the corner of Patton & Jefferson; nothing about momentarily heading east toward the library.

 

"He proceeded to run toward Jefferson, through this front yard right here (pointing to front yard at NW corner of Patton and Jefferson) and proceeded west on Jefferson." -- Ted Callaway (1986 London trial)

 

"OK; our office is up high where I can have a pretty good view of what was going on. I heard the shots and, when I heard the shots, I went out on this front porch which is, like I say, high, and I saw this man coming down the street with the gun in his hand, swinging it just like he was running. He turned the corner of Patton and Jefferson, going west, and put the gun in his pants and took off, walking." -- Warren Reynolds (Warren Commission testimony)

 

"...a few seconds later they observed a young white man running south on Patton Avenue carrying a pistol or revolver which the individual was attempting to either reload or place in his belt line. Upon reaching the intersection of Patton Avenue and Jefferson Street, the individual stopped running and began walking at a fast pace, heading west on Jefferson." -- 1/22/64 FBI report of interview with Harold Russell

 

"When the individual reached the intersection of Patton Avenue and Jefferson Street, he placed the weapon inside his waistband and began walking west on the north side of Jefferson Street." -- 1/22/64 FBI report of interview with Pat Patterson

 

"Approximately one minute later he observed a white male, approximately thirty years of age, running south on Patton Avenue, carrying either an automatic pistol or a revolver in his hands, and while running was either attempting to reload same or conceal the weapon in his belt line.  Upon reaching the intersection of Patton Avenue and Jefferson Street, Dallas, Texas, the individual then proceeded west on Jefferson..." -- 1/22/64 FBI report of interview with L.J. Lewis

[Michael Kalin]

Yet once more, O ye lubbers, and once more
Ye mugworts brown, with falsehoods never stop,
I come to flush your fibbers harsh and crude,
And with fine facts imbued
Scatter their lies beneath the billowing slop.

Among the first weekend's DPD affidavits only Guinyard's reported seeing the fugitive run west on Jefferson, and nobody saw him crash through the shrubbery. Commandeering Callaway didn't remember which way he went in Scoggins' cab, and the ditzy Davises didn't know which door they watched from. Against Guinyard's dictated statement there's Reynolds' WFAA film, genuine primary evidence to the contrary, not to mention Benavides' discarded statement.

Subsequent SS/FBI/WC plot manipulations are tendentious & secondary.