Oswald's Wallet

[Shanet Clark]

A frame M.O.

[John Simkin]

I am extremely aware of the fact that there is a widespread and justifiable criticism of Armstrong's work, some of this criticism is based on how far he carries the two Oswalds thesis, I do not subscribe to the two Oswalds thesis to the degree that John Armstrong does, but I, as many researchers am aware that the Oswald "impersonations" are based in immutable fact "Garland Slack, et al...Other criticism's again, I think, justified, are that the finished print version leaves something to be desired, as to quality and editing issues.....i.e. disjointed is a word that come up. But, Joan Mellen's book reinforces the validity of the Oswald impersonations to the point that Armstrong's book has to be taken into the picture. Do not throw the baby out with the bathwater....

I do not have a copy of Armstrong's book. Does he say anything about the Sylvia Odio meeting in Dallas? Could this explain why he was also identified as being in Mexico at the same time as this meeting?

[Ron Ecker]

John,

Armstrong says that Lee (the bigger, friendlier Oswald) was on the bus enroute to Mexico City on Sept 26, while Harvey apparently traveled from NO to Dallas on the evening of Sept 25 with Leopoldo and Angelo in a red car. He was seen on the morning of the 26th at the TEC in Dallas by Henry McCluskey, and that night by Sylvia and Annie Odio (p. 623-625).

Interestingly he says that Sylvia described "Angelo" as 5'7", 170 lbs, about 34, and "he was very Mexican looking with lots of thick hair and a lot of hair on his chest." Amaury Murgado has stated that his father in no way looks Mexican. The description seems to fit Ed Collins judging by the photos I've seen. Has anyone ever claimed that Collins was Angelo?

Ron

[Pat Speer]

John,

Armstrong says that Lee (the bigger, friendlier Oswald) was on the bus enroute to Mexico City on Sept 26, while Harvey apparently traveled from NO to Dallas on the evening of Sept 25 with Leopoldo and Angelo in a red car. He was seen on the morning of the 26th at the TEC in Dallas by Henry McCluskey, and that night by Sylvia and Annie Odio (p. 623-625).

Interestingly he says that Sylvia described "Angelo" as 5'7", 170 lbs, about 34, and "he was very Mexican looking with lots of thick hair and a lot of hair on his chest." Amaury Murgado has stated that his father in no way looks Mexican. The description seems to fit Ed Collins judging by the photos I've seen. Has anyone ever claimed that Collins was Angelo?

Ron

On another thread, John Simkin has theorized that Collins was Angelo.

Edited November 13, 2005 by Pat Speer

[John Simkin]

Interestingly he says that Sylvia described "Angelo" as 5'7", 170 lbs, about 34, and "he was very Mexican looking with lots of thick hair and a lot of hair on his chest." Amaury Murgado has stated that his father in no way looks Mexican. The description seems to fit Ed Collins judging by the photos I've seen. Has anyone ever claimed that Collins was Angelo?

See the thread on Murgado where I have posted a picture of Collins and De Torres together. I will be arguing that Collins was Angelo in my speech in Dallas. Sylvia says that Angelo could have been Cuban or Mexican.

I have asked Amaury to post a picture of his father in 1963. He is unwilling to do this but admits he does not look like the description given by Sylvia.

[Gerry Hemming]

John,

Armstrong says that Lee (the bigger, friendlier Oswald) was on the bus enroute to Mexico City on Sept 26, while Harvey apparently traveled from NO to Dallas on the evening of Sept 25 with Leopoldo and Angelo in a red car. He was seen on the morning of the 26th at the TEC in Dallas by Henry McCluskey, and that night by Sylvia and Annie Odio (p. 623-625).

Interestingly he says that Sylvia described "Angelo" as 5'7", 170 lbs, about 34, and "he was very Mexican looking with lots of thick hair and a lot of hair on his chest." Amaury Murgado has stated that his father in no way looks Mexican. The description seems to fit Ed Collins judging by the photos I've seen. Has anyone ever claimed that Collins was Angelo?

Ron

------------------------

Once again. Eddy Collins was with us alongside Air Force One at Miami Int'l A/P on the afternoon of 18th November, 1963.

When a Latino [they don't like "Hispanic"] -- especially a Cuban says: "Mexican Looking" they mean STRONG indian facial features, i.e.: Toltec, Zapotec, etc. -- indian rather than Euro-Spaniard features.

"Mexican Sounding" means the "unique-to-Mexico" indian "sing-song" accent found nowhere else in the Western Hemisphere !!

When a "Mexi-Beaner" opens his yap, he immediately reveals to ALL that he originates from the United States of Mexico. What was Collins doing during the Sept. / Oct. 1963 "Time-Window" -- working UC for the FBI Miami Field Office !!

Better get some better pix, don't want Eddy's ghost to get pissed off about his having resembled some "Hairy Mexi-Beaner" now, would we ??!!

GPH

____________________

[John Dolva]

Another inconsistency in the thinking of some of those here comes from their acceptance of some of what Hosty says, and complete disregard for the rest. 

On page 36, he says that on Saturday the 23rd Shanklin told him "one of our agents in New Orleans, DeBrueys, discovered that one of Oswald's aliases was A. J. Hidell.  This alias was given to all FBI offices YESTERDAY. Someone found out that rifles like the one found in the depository are advertised in certain magazines and can be mail ordered from Chicago.  BY USING BOTH OSWALD'S TRUE NAME AND HIS ALIAS, the Chicago agents made a hit and traced the ownership to Oswald."

The foregoing is a mix of fact and supposition, albeit with good basis.  Yes, from combing Klein's files in Chicago, FBI learned in the wee hours of 11/23 that a weapon had been ordered by a "Hidell" and it had been sent to the post office box maintained by Oswald.  Though FBI had no prior knowledge [in the extant record, then or now] that Hidell was an Oswald alias, by tracing the weapon to his post box, it certainly seemed as though Oswald must have used Hidell as an alias.  Confirmation for their perfectly valid supposition would have come when they located the receipt signed by whomever picked up the rifle at that post office box in Dallas, but that receipt seems to have gone astray, in contravention of USPS protocols.  Hence, there's nothing unusual about what Hosty related, or what Shanklin apparently stated.  The proof for that FBI supposition, of course, disappeared.  Each person can read what they wish to into that receipt's evaporation.

Moreover, if anyone could locate a copy of the Bureau-wide bulletin that DeBrueys allegedly sent out indicating Hidell was discovered to be an Oswald alias on the day of the assassination [but, oddly, not sooner???], we might be entitled to ask some additional questions about this alleged "discovery."  

So here Hosty tells us of what Shanklin said, every bit as credible as what Hosty said Barrett said, and it contradicts some of what has been theorized-- that the Hidell card was used to show that Oswald was Hidell. Consequently, it gets overlooked.

Not at all.  As noted above, there is no glaring discrepancy to overlook.  FBI agent DeBrueys -  a man whom New Orleans garage owner Adrian Alba and barkeep Orest Pena both asserted had been seen with Oswald - combed through local files and found the name Hidell was associated with Oswald, based on the FPCC card found on him when arrested the prior August.  No doubt DeBrueys alerted all Bureau offices of this fact, as well he should have done.  It smelled like an Oswald alias when FBI traced the rifle to Klein's and from there to Oswald's PO box. 

Now, if somebody could locate an FBI file, report, memo or other document indicating that the New Orleans office knew Hidell was an Oswald alias, that would be most helpful, and would confirm the portion that Pat has quoted.  To date, no such document has emerged, to the best of my knowledge.  However, given that DeBrueys was the FBI agent in New Orleans who was at least twice reported in Oswald's company, his knowledge of this alleged fact - perhaps based on an intimate knowledge not reflected in the FBI's own paper trail - may explain why no such document has yet surfaced.

While it is possible the conspirators created a fake Hidell ID and left this at the Tippit site with the intention of setting up Oswald, and linking him to the rifle, this was by no means logical or necessary, as it seems clear the FBI, MI, etc already knew Oswald was Hidell and were re-acting accordingly.

Then we have the right, nay the responsibility, to question how "FBI, MI, etc. already knew Oswald was Hidell," since there's nothing in the paper trail indicating that this was true.  I don't contend it was impossible for them to know such a thing; only that nothing in the known record demonstrates this.  Now if Oswald were one of theirs.... it would certainly explain how they had such knowledge, and why the paper trail evidence confirming that knowledge was scrubbed from the extant record.  But then, "FBI, MI, etc." would have to explain a lot more than how they came to know such a fact, wouldn't they? 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

On page 36, he says that on Saturday the 23rd Shanklin told him "one of our agents in New Orleans, DeBrueys, discovered that one of Oswald's aliases was A. J. Hidell. This alias was given to all FBI offices YESTERDAY. Someone (Harry)found out that rifles like the one found in the depository are advertised in certain magazines and can be mail ordered from Chicago. BY USING BOTH OSWALD'S TRUE NAME AND HIS ALIAS, the Chicago agents made a hit and traced the ownership to Oswald."

The foregoing is a mix of fact and supposition, albeit with good basis. Yes, from combing Klein's files in Chicago, FBI learned in the wee hours of 11/23 that a weapon had been ordered by a "Hidell" and it had been sent to the post office box maintained by Oswald(Harry). Though FBI had no prior knowledge [in the extant record, then or now] that Hidell was an Oswald alias, by tracing the weapon to his post box(Harry), it certainly seemed as though Oswald must have used Hidell as an alias. Confirmation for their perfectly valid supposition would have come when they located the receipt (Harry) signed by whomever picked up the rifle at that post office box in Dallas, but that receipt seems to have gone astray (Harry), in contravention of USPS protocols. Hence, there's nothing unusual about what Hosty related, or what Shanklin apparently stated. The proof for that FBI supposition, of course, disappeared. Each person can read what they wish to into that receipt's evaporation.

Moreover, if anyone could locate a copy of the Bureau-wide bulletin that DeBrueys allegedly sent out indicating Hidell was discovered to be an Oswald alias on the day of the assassination [but, oddly, not sooner???], we might be entitled to ask some additional questions about this alleged "discovery." PostOffice records?

[William Kelly]

While my investigation into the allegation that Oswald's wallet was found at the Tippit murder scene is too detailed to repeat in this limited format (see With Malice, pp.287-304), the essential elements are this:

FBI agent Robert M. Barrett observed Dallas police handling a wallet at the Tippit murder scene shortly before Oswald's arrest. WFAA-TV news footage shot at the scene supports this basic fact. Barrett recalled that Dallas police Captain W.R. Westbrook asked him at the scene whether he knew a "Lee Harvey Oswald" or an "Alek Hidell?" While Barrett assumed the names were taken from identification in the wallet, he never saw the identification or handled the wallet.

Despite Barrett's credibilty, his account runs counter to the documented version of events which show that Oswald's wallet was removed from his pants pocket following his arrest at the Texas Theater. Identification in the names "Oswald" and "Hidell" were discovered at that time.

A comparison of the wallet filmed at the Tippit murder scene by WFAA-TV and the wallet removed from Oswald's pocket shows the two wallets to be similar in style, but not identical. The only thing connecting Oswald to the wallet filmed by WFAA-TV is Barrett's recollection that Captain Westbrook asked him about the names "Oswald" and "Hidell" while at the shooting scene. Yet the circumstances surrounding the discovery of the Oswald/Hidell identification suggests that Barrett was asked the questions at City Hall, long after Oswald's arrest, not at the shooting scene. (See With Malice)

So, I guess it's a tossup whether you want to believe that Barrett was told that at the scene, or not until later at the station.

Steve Thomas

I'm just re-reading this important and interesting thread....and whoa...! isn't Barrett the man identified as the FBI man in the Plaza looking at, reaching for and picking up something in the grass near the road...many think a bullet?! How the hell did he get to the Tippit shooting area to witness a wallet handover...did certain folks have a script of what was to happen where and when?!.....

Thanks for bringing this up again Peter,

But I must correct one of Steve Thomas' statements.

"Conspiracy critics have since taken the facts I presented in With Malice and spun them into a series of distortions and half-truths that have transformed the wallet filmed by WFAA-TV as a "plant," designed to frame Oswald for Tippit's murder. The suggestion is preposterous and flies in the face of an avalanche of indisputable facts that prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Oswald murdered Tippit."

Steve, it isn't Conspiracy critics who have spun what facts are presented in With Malice, it is Myers who presents a series of distortions and half-truths and transforms them into an "avalanche of indisputable facts that prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Oswald murdered Tippit."

I don't know if Oswald murdered Tippit, but I do know that wallets stories are significant, the DPD failed to maintain evidence in the case(s) and that the Tippit murder is related to what happened at Dealey Plaza, not via LHO but via Tippit's conneciton to JM/WAVE, none of which you will read in With Malice.

The complete book of JD Tippit of the DPD and his murder has yet to be written.

BK

[Charles Black]

"Bungled ? " or "Mastered ? "

"That is the question" !

I don't know which ocurred ! Either the handling and reporting of nearly ALL of the evidence in this case was either "completely bungled" by incompetence......OR......was "masterfully handled" by conspirators !

Nearly 44 years later we are unable to determine what is real or what is false in this case.

Arguably, the most important murder in recorded history !

I cannot believe personally, that the general muddling of very nearly ALL evidence, including JFK's body, was a result of incompetence !

I think that it may be the most masterful conspiracy since the U.S. entry into World War II. Perhaps the most masterful conspiracy ever !

Charles Black

[Nick Bartetzko]

I'm just re-reading this important and interesting thread....and whoa...! isn't Barrett the man identified as the FBI man in the Plaza looking at, reaching for and picking up something in the grass near the road...many think a bullet?! How the hell did he get to the Tippit shooting area to witness a wallet handover...did certain folks have a script of what was to happen where and when?!.....

I've read this thread again and it doesn't appear that Barrett's identity in DP was ever confirmed....although long suspected. I believe he has also denied it. IIRC, some time ago there was a thread (maybe on Rich DellaRosa's site) on the mystery man showing the photos of him putting something/nothing in his pocket. I believe Leavelle said he knows who the man is, but will not reveal the name to respect the man's privacy. I am presuming no one has shown those interesting/suspicious photos to Leavelle, otherwise he might change his mind.

Nick

[Tony Austin]

But as we know there was a screw-up regarding Oswald, he did not vanish but got himself arrested, and consequently the wallet that was supposed to help frame him in absentia had to disappear, since he had a wallet on him.

Ron

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I've been trying to figure out why this story of the planted wallet fails to pass my "smell" test, and I think I've figured out why. It's because the wrong wallet disappeared! If there was a mass plot to frame Oswald and cover up the existence of two wallets, involving mass perjury by the DPD, the right call would have been for them to accept the wallet found at the Tippit site and deny the one found on Oswald. After all, no one filmed them with a wallet at the theater. Furthermore, by denying the existence of the wallet at the Tippit site they would have been denying themselves a valuable piece of evidence, without which establishing Oswald's presence at the Tippit site would become much more difficult. Since the decision to hide the wallet at the Tippit site would have to have been made within hours, before Oswald's death, they would have been denying themselves a link in the chain with which they hoped to hang Oswald for the murder of a cop, in exchange for what? that Oswald had his wallet on him... how incriminating is that? If they'd have agreed on the story that the wallet was found at the site, on the other hand, they could have used Oswald's sneaking into the theater as supporting evidence, and EVERYONE would have bought it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Pat, who said anything about a mass plot?

The following has been established so far in this thread (at least to the satifaction of most involved in the discussion):

1. The wallet could not have belonged to Tippit. Do you accept that? Do you even accept yet that what is shown in the film is a wallet?

2. Not one of the five officers who escorted Oswald to City Hall mentioned anything about dual IDs in their earliest statements. Do you accept that this is highly unusual -- if indeed Oswald actually had dual ID on him?

3. Bentley (who was the one LATER specifically credited with finding the dual ID on Oswald in the squad car) was not called to give evidence before the WC, and the only officer who attested to the Hidell alias being found in this way had to be led in questioning to arrive at that damning statement. So why wasn't Bentley called? He supposedly not only found this evidence, but was also involved in the actual arrest.

3. Fritz did not question Oswald until the Saturday about the alleged Hidell alias. Do you accept that this was at the very least, curious - especially given that for all Fritz supposedly knew... there may have actually been a real "Hidell" out there who was either in league with Oswald, or had vital information about him?

4. Barrett has consistently maintained that wallet was Oswald's. Why do you cast aspersions at Hosty over Barrett's claim?

I can now add that researcher, Martha Moyer, in the late '90s interviewed another cop present when the wallet was found - Leonard Jez. He confirmed to Martha that the wallet was Oswald's.

Once it is accepted that Oswald did not have any ID on his person, other than his own (and I accept it on the basis that it is inconceivable that all of the cops in the car had simultaneous memory loss on the day they gave their statements, and equally inconceivable that they all decided it was not worth mentioning in those statements), you have to take the next step: where did the Hidell ID come from, if not from Oswald's arrest wallet? The logical place is the place where a wallet, said by an FBI agent and a Dallas cop to contain such ID, was found.

As for Dallas cops wanting to avenge Tippit's murder by finding the REAL culprit/s -forget it. Ever wonder why Tippit was never promoted? If the shooter DID say "poor dumb cop", it may be because he knew him. Read his personnel files in the DPD records. It wasn't just an expression - it was (even if just by accident), an apt description. He was a loner, and not bright (among other evidence for this is that others had to write his police reports). Oh, and he possibly suffered PTSD from his experiences in Korea, judging from comments made by neighbours who were questioned about his character for entry into the DPD. In short, if any cop was expendable to other cops, it was Tippit.

[Tony Austin]

But as we know there was a screw-up regarding Oswald, he did not vanish but got himself arrested, and consequently the wallet that was supposed to help frame him in absentia had to disappear, since he had a wallet on him.

Ron

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I've been trying to figure out why this story of the planted wallet fails to pass my "smell" test, and I think I've figured out why. It's because the wrong wallet disappeared! If there was a mass plot to frame Oswald and cover up the existence of two wallets, involving mass perjury by the DPD, the right call would have been for them to accept the wallet found at the Tippit site and deny the one found on Oswald. After all, no one filmed them with a wallet at the theater. Furthermore, by denying the existence of the wallet at the Tippit site they would have been denying themselves a valuable piece of evidence, without which establishing Oswald's presence at the Tippit site would become much more difficult. Since the decision to hide the wallet at the Tippit site would have to have been made within hours, before Oswald's death, they would have been denying themselves a link in the chain with which they hoped to hang Oswald for the murder of a cop, in exchange for what? that Oswald had his wallet on him... how incriminating is that? If they'd have agreed on the story that the wallet was found at the site, on the other hand, they could have used Oswald's sneaking into the theater as supporting evidence, and EVERYONE would have bought it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Pat, who said anything about a mass plot?

The following has been established so far in this thread (at least to the satifaction of most involved in the discussion):

1. The wallet could not have belonged to Tippit. Do you accept that? Do you even accept yet that what is shown in the film is a wallet?

2. Not one of the five officers who escorted Oswald to City Hall mentioned anything about dual IDs in their earliest statements. Do you accept that this is highly unusual -- if indeed Oswald actually had dual ID on him?

3. Bentley (who was the one LATER specifically credited with finding the dual ID on Oswald in the squad car) was not called to give evidence before the WC, and the only officer who attested to the Hidell alias being found in this way had to be led in questioning to arrive at that damning statement. So why wasn't Bentley called? He supposedly not only found this evidence, but was also involved in the actual arrest.

3. Fritz did not question Oswald until the Saturday about the alleged Hidell alias. Do you accept that this was at the very least, curious - especially given that for all Fritz supposedly knew... there may have actually been a real "Hidell" out there who was either in league with Oswald, or had vital information about him?

4. Barrett has consistently maintained that wallet was Oswald's. Why do you cast aspersions at Hosty over Barrett's claim?

I can now add that researcher, Martha Moyer, in the late '90s interviewed another cop present when the wallet was found - Leonard Jez. He confirmed to Martha that the wallet was Oswald's.

Once it is accepted that Oswald did not have any ID on his person, other than his own (and I accept it on the basis that it is inconceivable that all of the cops in the car had simultaneous memory loss on the day they gave their statements, and equally inconceivable that they all decided it was not worth mentioning in those statements), you have to take the next step: where did the Hidell ID come from, if not from Oswald's arrest wallet? The logical place is the place where a wallet, said by an FBI agent and a Dallas cop to contain such ID, was found.

As for Dallas cops wanting to avenge Tippit's murder by finding the REAL culprit/s -forget it. Ever wonder why Tippit was never promoted? If the shooter DID say "poor dumb cop", it may be because he knew him. Read his personnel files in the DPD records. It wasn't just an expression - it was (even if just by accident), an apt description. He was a loner, and not bright (among other evidence for this is that others had to write his police reports). Oh, and he possibly suffered PTSD from his experiences in Korea, judging from comments made by neighbours who were questioned about his character for entry into the DPD. In short, if any cop was expendable to other cops, it was Tippit.

[Tony Austin]

But as we know there was a screw-up regarding Oswald, he did not vanish but got himself arrested, and consequently the wallet that was supposed to help frame him in absentia had to disappear, since he had a wallet on him.

Ron

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I've been trying to figure out why this story of the planted wallet fails to pass my "smell" test, and I think I've figured out why. It's because the wrong wallet disappeared! If there was a mass plot to frame Oswald and cover up the existence of two wallets, involving mass perjury by the DPD, the right call would have been for them to accept the wallet found at the Tippit site and deny the one found on Oswald. After all, no one filmed them with a wallet at the theater. Furthermore, by denying the existence of the wallet at the Tippit site they would have been denying themselves a valuable piece of evidence, without which establishing Oswald's presence at the Tippit site would become much more difficult. Since the decision to hide the wallet at the Tippit site would have to have been made within hours, before Oswald's death, they would have been denying themselves a link in the chain with which they hoped to hang Oswald for the murder of a cop, in exchange for what? that Oswald had his wallet on him... how incriminating is that? If they'd have agreed on the story that the wallet was found at the site, on the other hand, they could have used Oswald's sneaking into the theater as supporting evidence, and EVERYONE would have bought it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Pat, who said anything about a mass plot?

The following has been established so far in this thread (at least to the satifaction of most involved in the discussion):

1. The wallet could not have belonged to Tippit. Do you accept that? Do you even accept yet that what is shown in the film is a wallet?

2. Not one of the five officers who escorted Oswald to City Hall mentioned anything about dual IDs in their earliest statements. Do you accept that this is highly unusual -- if indeed Oswald actually had dual ID on him?

3. Bentley (who was the one LATER specifically credited with finding the dual ID on Oswald in the squad car) was not called to give evidence before the WC, and the only officer who attested to the Hidell alias being found in this way had to be led in questioning to arrive at that damning statement. So why wasn't Bentley called? He supposedly not only found this evidence, but was also involved in the actual arrest.

3. Fritz did not question Oswald until the Saturday about the alleged Hidell alias. Do you accept that this was at the very least, curious - especially given that for all Fritz supposedly knew... there may have actually been a real "Hidell" out there who was either in league with Oswald, or had vital information about him?

4. Barrett has consistently maintained that wallet was Oswald's. Why do you cast aspersions at Hosty over Barrett's claim?

I can now add that researcher, Martha Moyer, in the late '90s interviewed another cop present when the wallet was found - Leonard Jez. He confirmed to Martha that the wallet was Oswald's.

Once it is accepted that Oswald did not have any ID on his person, other than his own (and I accept it on the basis that it is inconceivable that all of the cops in the car had simultaneous memory loss on the day they gave their statements, and equally inconceivable that they all decided it was not worth mentioning in those statements), you have to take the next step: where did the Hidell ID come from, if not from Oswald's arrest wallet? The logical place is the place where a wallet, said by an FBI agent and a Dallas cop to contain such ID, was found.

As for Dallas cops wanting to avenge Tippit's murder by finding the REAL culprit/s -forget it. Ever wonder why Tippit was never promoted? If the shooter DID say "poor dumb cop", it may be because he knew him. Read his personnel files in the DPD records. It wasn't just an expression - it was (even if just by accident), an apt description. He was a loner, and not bright (among other evidence for this is that others had to write his police reports). Oh, and he possibly suffered PTSD from his experiences in Korea, judging from comments made by neighbours who were questioned about his character for entry into the DPD. In short, if any cop was expendable to other cops, it was Tippit.

Greg,

I am interested in the reference to Martha Moyer interviewing Leonard Jez and Jez saying the wallet belonged to Oswald. Do you have any references for this material?

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Greg,

I am interested in the reference to Martha Moyer interviewing Leonard Jez and Jez saying the wallet belonged to Oswald. Do you have any references for this material?

Tony: I believe this is a reference to a Q. & A session with Jez at Lancer's NID 1999. You can order a tape of this session for ten bucks here:

http://www.jfklancer.com/catalog/nidmedia/Dallas99.html

NID99-10 DALLAS RESIDENTS & WITNESSES

• Shari Angel, Ed Hoffman, Connie Kritzberg, Beverly Oliver, Leonard Jaz, Toni Foster (tape), Bobby Hargis (tape)

I was present at that session (organized by Ian Griggs) and have no recollection of the wallet being discussed, but that is probably only because I was anxiously waiting an opportunity to ask Jez a question about a different topic entirely, and the wallet story was simply not on my radar screen at the time. I can say, however, that Jez was suffering from a severe case of CRS (Can't Remember Squat) about nearly everything he was asked, and I wouldn't give you tuppence for Jez's 1999 memories of 11/22/63

Of course I do not doubt Martha Moyer's word on this or any other assassination-related subject (Martha is probably the most meticulous researcher since Sylvia Meagher), but I feel confident in repeating what I said in post No. 106 earlier on this thread, namely that agent Barret's wallet story as related to agent Hosty, is just another of the many wild goose stories that continue to waste the time of valuable researchers like yourself.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...4572&st=105

[Tony Austin]

Greg,

I am interested in the reference to Martha Moyer interviewing Leonard Jez and Jez saying the wallet belonged to Oswald. Do you have any references for this material?

Tony: I believe this is a reference to a Q. & A session with Jez at Lancer's NID 1999. You can order a tape of this session for ten bucks here:

http://www.jfklancer.com/catalog/nidmedia/Dallas99.html

NID99-10 DALLAS RESIDENTS & WITNESSES

• Shari Angel, Ed Hoffman, Connie Kritzberg, Beverly Oliver, Leonard Jaz, Toni Foster (tape), Bobby Hargis (tape)

I was present at that session (organized by Ian Griggs) and have no recollection of the wallet being discussed, but that is probably only because I was anxiously waiting an opportunity to ask Jez a question about a different topic entirely, and the wallet story was simply not on my radar screen at the time. I can say, however, that Jez was suffering from a severe case of CRS (Can't Remember Squat) about nearly everything he was asked, and I wouldn't give you tuppence for Jez's 1999 memories of 11/22/63

Of course I do not doubt Martha Moyer's word on this or any other assassination-related subject (Martha is probably the most meticulous researcher since Sylvia Meagher), but I feel confident in repeating what I said in post No. 106 earlier on this thread, namely that agent Barret's wallet story as related to agent Hosty, is just another of the many wild goose stories that continue to waste the time of valuable researchers like yourself.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...4572&st=105

Thanks for the information Raymond.

Perhaps I am on a 'wild goose chase' with this one. I find the whole episode of the wallet being found at the murder scene of Tippit very strange because:

1) There is no statement of any members of the public who were around at that time in which they state that they found the wallet, they saw somebody else find the wallet or that they saw police officers looking at the wallet.

2) There is statement from any police officer or FBI agent in which they mention that a wallet was found at the murder scene. This means there is no information as to where the wallet was found, who found the wallet and who the wallet belonged to.

3) Non of the crime scene photographs show where the wallet was found in relation to the car. None of the photographs were marked to show were the wallet was found having been already picked up when the photographer arrived as was done in the case of the long paper bag found on the sixth floor of the depository (assuming of course there was a bag found there!)

4) The Warren Commission never questioned any members of the public, police officers or FBI agents about the wallet. The Commission appeared to be unaware that a wallet had been found (probably due to 1) and 2) above)

5) There are numerous paper records/receipts in the archives relating to items of personal propery which recorded when items were passed from one person to another by police officers, FBI agents etc and yet there are no paper records relating to the wallet that was found at the Tippit murder scene.

All these things and yet we know that a wallet was found at the murder scene because WFAA-TV camerman Ron Reiland filmed police officers examining it soon after the murder.

Very strange....