Oswald's Wallet

[Guest John Gillespie]

Hi all

Just a thought.  Is it possible that Oswald had more than one wallet?  That he dropped one at the Tippett murder scene and had the other one on him at the movie theatre?  Is it not credible for a man who goes by an alias or aliases to carry more than one wallet, and to produce that wallet that would contain the identification he wants seen at the moment he is stopped?

Chris

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Chris, that is not an invalid theory. Though I don't know of anyone who has used an alias to have done that, one never knows how operations evolve and what bizarre tactics develop.

Regards,

Johng

[Guest John Gillespie]

" Do not believe anything said by Dave Perry and Gary Mack."

Isn't it interesting, if that's an appropriate mot, how Mack seemingly has 'flipped' ever since he became Curator of the Sixth Floor Museum, a dubious distinction to be sure.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

J. Raymond Carroll wrote:

This wallet is an active topic on the McAdams forum, where Donald Willis argues that the wallet belonged to cabdriver Scoggins.

'McAdams' forum? How convenient that is -- lmao! This thread is heading downhill, quickly!

IMO

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

David, Is it true that you are a longtime poster on the McAdams forum, using an alias? If so, could you kindly explain what meaning we should ascribe to your post on this thread? Do you mean to denigrate the research of Donald Willis just because he posts (inter alia) on the McAdams forum?

[David G. Healy]

J. Raymond Carroll wrote:

This wallet is an active topic on the McAdams forum, where Donald Willis argues that the wallet belonged to cabdriver Scoggins.

'McAdams' forum? How convenient that is -- lmao! This thread is heading downhill, quickly!

IMO

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

David, Is it true that you are a longtime poster on the McAdams forum, using an alias? If so, could you kindly explain what meaning we should ascribe to your post on this thread? Do you mean to denigrate the research of Donald Willis just because he posts (inter alia) on the McAdams forum?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Mr. Carroll what is true: I am NOT a logtime poster on .johns forum, quite the contrary -- I believe 2 or 3 post of mine got through to his forum over the past 10 years I suspect someone was asleep at the wheel. Gordydee (-gd), Aeffects&-Aeffects01, and David Healy are signatures used by me, all for at least 5 years, one over 10 years -- I can also be found in Jim Fetzer's recent JFK book - The Great Zparuder Film HOAX, I'm also the photo moderator at Rich DellaRosa's JFK Research Forum, have been for years now... if there's a good reason for me to hide under a alias - please speak up...

I post on the 'OTHER' BBS JFK board, a board where relatively few posters thrash foolish Lone Neuter's with the few things they profess to believe; the SBT theory; WCR and attendent documents -- And yes, after 40+ years I'm still a CTer...

Assuming posters on ANY internet board are of goodwill, is foolish -- "debating through their asses," notwithstanding -- especially on JFK related boards...

I'll question any research that spawns from the .john forum, regardless of who posts it.

Say hello to Gary - Martin and the other worshippers of the Zapruder film for me, Mr. Carroll....

David Healy

[Guest John Gillespie]

I would like to apologize to the great Gary Mack for a 'flip' (yes, pun intended as usual) remark I made a few dispatches ago. Gary has done remarkable work over the years - on "The Men Who Killed Kennedy" and on the recent Oswald/Tippett entry by the Discovery Channel (I hope I recall that correctly), as good as it gets.

There's an old expression about 'becoming the thing you hate.' I've been careful not to shoot from the hip but I succumbed to being lulled into it by the chat nature of the format. My bad. I wish there were a thousand Gary Macks from whom to learn.

Besides, I have a picture of him in my...wallet.

Yours Truly,

John Gillespie

[Jack White]

2. Earline Roberts testified that LHO departed NORTHWARD from 1026

and stood at the northbound bus stop at the corner of Beckley and Zang.

Since she did not see him go south on Beckley, he therefore went NORTH.

the next street east is Crawford, so if he took Zang to Crawford, and then

turned south past the park, he could have walked uphill to Davis

and continued on Crawford to Tenth (or taken Davis to Patton).

However, Markham said he was going east on Tenth, not south on Patton.

Markham had been going south on Patton, so LHO had to be going east

on Tenth. The Crawford route is considerably longer than if he took

Beckley. I have DRIVEN this route SLOWLY (about 10mph) many times

with a car full of researchers, who timed the route DRIVING...and even in

a car, we could not match the LHO time. I do not know where you get

the EASILY DOABLE opinion. It is more than a 15 minute walk, mostly

UPHILL. I once walked DOWNHILL from Neely (cab dropoff) to 1026

Beckley, and it took about 5 minutes. Uphill would take lots longer.

In your test, did you WALK THE DISTANCE UPHILL? What times did

you use for 1026 DEPARTURE and Tenth and Patton ARRIVAL?

He left 1026 AFTER 1 pm AND STOOD AT THE BUS STOP, and arrived

at the Tippit site BEFORE 1:16. He then conversed with Tippit for some

time at the window of the car. I estimate 1:03 departure, 1:14 arrival...

about 11 minutes to reach the site. What amount of time are you

using?

EVERY RESEARCHER that I have driven over  the Crawford route says

it is impossible to do in the official time.

Jack

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In an affidavitt filed with the Warren Commission, Mrs. Roberts said "Oswald went out the front door. A moment later I looked out the window. I saw Lee Oswald standing on the curb at the bus stop just to the right, and on the same side of the street as our house. I just glanced out the window that once. I don't know how long Lee Oswald stood at the curb nor did I see which direction he went when he left there..."

TO THE RIGHT OF 1026 BECKLEY IS NORTH, AS I HAVE SAID. IN ADDITION,

THE BUS STOP IS AT LEAST 100 FEET NORTH, AT ZANG. IF HE DID NOT GO

SOUTH ON BECKLEY OR CROSS THE STREET TO ZANG, HE HAD TO CIRCLE THE

BLOCK TO CRAWFORD...ADDING TO THE DISTANCE.

You are correct, however, that it was Markham who said he was heading east on 10th. The Discovery Channel simulation, by the way, timed the trek as 16:11 in order for Oswald to be heading west on 10th (thus, too long), and 11:10 for him to be heading east (just right, according to your own calculations.) My own simulation was not actually a test. A friend of mine drove the distance at around 10 miles per hour. As I recall it took less than 5 minutes. It was more to get a feel than to try and test the thing. I'm 6'4 with long legs and walk at a fairly brisk pace. It seemed to me that for someone my size and shape the walk would be easily do-able. The Discovery Channel used someone of Oswald's age and weight, and found it was just that.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Pat Speer]

Since she did not see him go south on Beckley, he therefore went NORTH.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In an affidavitt filed with the Warren Commission, Mrs. Roberts said "Oswald went out the front door. A moment later I looked out the window. I saw Lee Oswald standing on the curb at the bus stop just to the right, and on the same side of the street as our house. I just glanced out the window that once. I don't know how long Lee Oswald stood at the curb nor did I see which direction he went when he left there..."

TO THE RIGHT OF 1026 BECKLEY IS NORTH, AS I HAVE SAID. IN ADDITION,

THE BUS STOP IS AT LEAST 100 FEET NORTH, AT ZANG. IF HE DID NOT GO

SOUTH ON BECKLEY OR CROSS THE STREET TO ZANG, HE HAD TO CIRCLE THE

BLOCK TO CRAWFORD...ADDING TO THE DISTANCE.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Jack, you'veadded the "if he did not go south on Beckley" into your statements. Earlier you insisted he must have went North. The route tested was of Oswald heading south. You are almost certainly correct in your assertion that if Oswald went around the long block to the North he couldn't have arrived at the Tippit site in time. But we have no reason to believe he did that. Roberts said she just saw him the one time. There is no reason to doubt he went south.

[Pat Speer]

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."

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.

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.

[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."

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.

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.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Here are some of Harry D. Holmes' recollection of the relevant events. To track Oswald the FBI used a network of informants. One of the ones in New Orleans was codenamed T4. I have read a report that this T4 was with Oswald when he was handing out leaflets. Harry was FBI informant "Dallas T7". I believe that the guy who came and was with Harry when he discovered the magazine was Sorrell?

"Shortly after the assassination the FBI assigned a man to sit in my office to, I assume, second guess me. You just don’t know what the FBI is up to. I never was an admirer of the FBI, not that there was any jealousy between us, but I always felt like they didn’t rank. For example, in the case of postal inspector, when I would pick up a suspect I could take him to a state or federal court, or I could turn him loose; I might even just sit on my bottom. But the FBI couldn’t do anything but report it to headquarters and they would tell them what to do. Individually they didn’t know themselves what they’re up to; they had to ask somebody higher up. They had no independent opinion or judgment about anything. We did and would carry it to the bitter end. But in this case, I knew the guy assigned to my office, had worked with him around Dallas for a long time, and were good friends, so I didn’t try to hold anything back from him.

The next morning, on Saturday, when I came in, the inspector who was on duty in the lobby watching the boxes told me, “You’ve got an inspector up there sitting in your office.”

I said, “Well, I guess it’s so and so”; I’ve since forgotten his name.

When I arrived in the office, he said, “Harry, if you wanted to find an original postal money order, where would you go to get it?”

I said, :Well, Washington if you knew that number it was and could identify it.”

He said, “You mean it’s not in Kansas City?”

“No,” I replied, “it used to be. It was out on Hardesty Street in Kansas City until about two months ago. I don’t know exactly why but they transferred the money order center back to Washington. Why, is there something I can help you with?”

“Well, maybe,” he said. “You know, we got the owner of Klein’s Sporting Goods out of bed about 2:00 or 3:00 in the morning and took him down.” Somehow they had run this gun number to Italy, and this particular gun had been shipped to Klein’s Sporting Goods in Chicago. He also said, “We’ve got another man out in California to find out where this California scope was that was on the rifle. But he says he checked his records there and they show that a money order was sent in payment, but it didn’t say postal money order or bank money order; it just said a money order sent in payment. Well, he ran all that down. Meanwhile we got in touch with a bunch of agents in Kansas City who didn’t know the money order wasn’t still there. So, we hit a dead end.”

I told him, “Well, of course, it’s not there.”

So he said, “Well, if it were issued, it had to have been issued if it was a postal money order here in Dallas.” So I immediately put a crew to work on it.

In those days, postal money orders were issued in a book of paper money orders which, when you bought a money order, the clerk put the amount and the date, then you had a template that you put on that tore off at $10, not more than $15, or whatever. The clerk then ripped that off and handed it to the customer while the stub was retained which matched the money. All this was to be filled out in your own handwriting.

So I said, “Well, how much was it?” They didn’t have a number for the money order, but they had an amount. They had me looking for a money order issued in the amount of $18.95 which we couldn’t turn up. I had all the manpower and I wanted to examine all these stubs. I said, “Where did you get your information?”

“Out of a sporting goods magazine,” they told me.

So I gave one of my secretaries a $10 bill and sent her next door to Union Station which had one of those rotating things they used to have in railroad stations with postcards and magazines. I told her, “You buy every sporting magazine you can find over there and bring them back.” So she brought about six of them back, something like that, and I assigned each one of them to whoever was around, inspectors and secretaries, and took one myself. “Now you thumb through those,” I said, “and when you come to Klein’s Sporting Goods, let’s see what it looks like.”

It wasn’t but a couple of minutes that one of the girls hollered, “Here it is!” So I looked at it and down at the bottom of the ad it said that that particular rifle was such and such amount. But if it could not be carried on a person, such as a pistol, like a shotgun or a rifle, then it was $1.25 or $1.37 extra. Shipping charges were also added, so I added those together, took that figure and called around to all the different stations and the main office where these crews were checking stubs.

It wasn’t ten minutes that they hollered, “Eureka!” They had the stub!

I called it in immediately to the chief on the open line to Washington and said, “I’ve got the money order number that Oswald used to buy this gun, and according to the records up there, they had shipped it to this box that he had rented at the main office in Dallas at that time, which he later closed and opened another at the Terminal Annex because it was closer to the School Book Depository.”

So he said, “Well, we’ll run that right through the correlators or whatever they do up there.” In about an hour, he called back and said, “We’ve got it! Both the FBI and the Secret Service labs have positively identified the handwriting as being that of Oswald.”

I had previously furnished headquarters, because everybody wanted them, copies of box rental applications that he had to fill out in his own handwriting. Those I had sent up on Friday night after I had gotten that information, so that they had enough there on file. I figured that that was one of the very few pieces of actual evidence, not just circumstantial, that they would have been ready to go on the stand with and swear, and their testimony was just as authentic and viable as fingerprints or handwriting in federal court. Both agencies were ready to testify that that was his handwriting, that he ordered that gun in his own handwriting, and that it came to his post office box in Dallas. That’s good evidence!"

late at Oswalds last interview :

"At that time, the evidence was being gathered but he didn’t have to confess. They’re turning them off of murderer’s row because all they had was a confession. If a guy says, “I did it,” that doesn’t mean anything because they won’t take it. But in the case of Oswald, I don’t think that he would have ever confessed; he was that adamant. He was so direct. He’d look you right in the eye and ask you a question. He had an uncanny ability to determine or guess when I had evidence or when I was fishing. You would keep coming back to something such as the rifle and he’d give you the same answer. It was just like he had been trained. In fact, I kind of thought in my own head that probably in Russia he had been trained to evade questions and be able to keep himself composed to guard what he wanted to keep secret. Either that or maybe it was just his nature. He was very mannerly and only became rattled when Captain Fritz asked him about this Hidell. I was talking about the rifle coming in the name Hidell at the post office and Oswald said, “Well, I don’t know anything about any of it.”

“Ever use the name Hidell?” I asked.

“No,” he said. In reality he had used it in New Orleans and in two or three other places, but he just plain denied it.

Captain Fritz then interjected, “Well, what about this card that was taken out of your billfold when we picked you up?” (I don’t recall whether it was a Social Security card or some other kind of identification, but it looked like it was old and pocket worn, had been erased, and had the name Hidell on it or something to that effect.)

He looked at it and that’s when he became testy and responded, “Now I have told you all I’m going to tell you about that card. Now just forget about it!” He would not admit that the name meant anything to him, that he had never seen it before. That was the only time that he ever got a little sassy."

[John Dolva]

Hi all

Just a thought.  Is it possible that Oswald had more than one wallet?  That he dropped one at the Tippett murder scene and had the other one on him at the movie theatre?  Is it not credible for a man who goes by an alias or aliases to carry more than one wallet, and to produce that wallet that would contain the identification he wants seen at the moment he is stopped?

Chris

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Chris, that is not an invalid theory. Though I don't know of anyone who has used an alias to have done that, one never knows how operations evolve and what bizarre tactics develop.

Regards,

Johng

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A loooong time ago I knew an anarchist who on one of his little escapades was caught with 5 ID's.

He was really known to me as an excentric but harmless fellow, given to imaginative protests. I don't know why he would have been so silly on this occasion as to carry 5. I don't think he was expecting to get caught.*

*(Philatelists may look up stamps from 'The Sultanate of Okusso-Umbeno', a little country off the coast of his mind. He also enjoyed his ambassadorship to this 'country' in ringing assorted Leaders around the world. He did get through to Idi Amin, established trade relations with another African Nation, but unfortunately he wasn't successful in convincing the american President to change foreign policy.)

[Robert Charles-Dunne]

According to Robert and Greg, we are to believe

I cannot speak for Greg, but for myself, I don't insist that you believe anything, Pat.  Honestly, I really don't care, as I'm not seeking converts to a new religion.  Mark Knight asked a general question of forum members, and I put forth my thoughts.  You're free to disagree as much as you'd like, but since this is a scholarly forum for those who share an interest in the topic, it is assumed that when one responds, that response will be backed up with a modicum of actual evidence and research, not merely intemperate naysaying.  Consequently, when you declare that my hypothesis is impossible, I think I'm within my rights to ask what you have based your conclusion upon.  That is miles away from insisting that you should "believe" anything.

that because none of the officers mentioned the Hidell ID in their original reports we should believe that they never saw the ID in Oswald's wallet, no matter what they testified to later, or told Larry Sneed.

That would be the natural conclusion one would draw.  As I already mentioned, I puzzled over this since the late 1960s, for even you must admit that this is a strange omission, doubly so when it seems the contagion struck all the officers involved.  I have asked you to hypothesize an alternate reason for their uniform failure to have mentioned this detail on paper or by word of mouth, and you've honestly admitted that you can't.  Fair enough.  Nor could I, until it became apparent where the second wallet Fritz sent to FBI five days later actually came from.  I have consistently referred to this as a hypothesis, precisely because I don't feel it is definitively demonstrable as fact.  If and when you can come up with something more convincing and compelling, I'll be the first to welcome it.

And YET, Robert Barrett never mentioned the discovery of Oswald's wallet in any of his reports either, and we are supposed to believe that he did indeed see Oswald's wallet. Why is it that when one group of men exclude something from their report, it's proof something did not happen, but when someone else excludes it from his report, well, never mind?????  That Barrett may have said something about it later has no bearing on this.  After all, when the DPD officers said something about it later, Robert and Greg chose to disbelieve THEM. If their words have no credibility even 30 years later, then neither do Barrett's.

These are perfectly legitimate questions, and I expected them to be raised significantly earlier.  First, we must recall the chronology of events.  Barrett didn't find the wallet; that is attributed to Capt. Westbrook, who while handling the Tippit scene wallet asked Barrett what he knew about an "Oswald" or a "Hidell."  Presumably Barrett knew nothing of significance about either, given that Oswald had been the file ridden by his friend James Hosty.  [And they were such good friends that when Hosty was "punished" by Hoover (being sent to Kansas City), Barrett bought Hosty's house.]

Consequently, while Barrett should perhaps have included this datum in his subsequent reports, the actual person we might rightfully expect to see mention this in his subsequent reports was Capt. Westbrook.  [it was DPD's jurisdiction, after all, not FBI's.]  However, the amnesia contagion within DPD seems to have struck Westbrook too. 

All this said, though, it is important to remember that Barrett didn't wait 30-plus years to relate this tale to his friend Hosty; but that Hosty waited 30-plus years to share that information in his book.  Is this unfortunate and regrettable?  Obviously, yes.  However, without this late-coming revelation, we would still know nothing about a wallet at the Tippit crime scene.  For whatever reason, neither DPD nor FBI seemed anxious to admit that such a wallet was found, which is itself most odd because - as you keep pointing out, Pat - it was damning evidence against Oswald re: Tippit's murder.  And would surely have been used, had Oswald not been arrested in possession of his own wallet. 

So, what happened to the Tippit crime scene wallet?  For a closer examination, I'll refer readers to a John Armstrong presentation on the topic, a condensed version of which appeared in an old copy of John Kelin's much-missed "Fair Play" mag.  John Armstrong has done something that nobody else I know has bothered to do [including Dale Myers, apparently], which is to seek out the actual FBI photos of the evidence taken from DPD possession and compare it to the written manifest of that evidence.  Here's the pertinent section of that presentation:

"The last example of evidence alteration I will discuss is the most difficult to follow. It involves the two Oswald wallets found in Oak Cliff and is detailed in Dale Myers' new book With Malice.

"A wallet was found at the scene of the Tippit murder by Dallas Police which contained identification for Lee Harvey Oswald and Alik Hidell. Twenty minutes later a different wallet was taken from Oswald's left rear pocket by Detective Paul Bentley. This wallet, the 'arrest wallet,' also contained identification for Lee Harvey Oswald and Alik Hidell. Both wallets remained in custody of the Dallas Police from November 22nd until November 26th."

Bentley turned over Oswalds "arrest wallet" to Lt. Baker. The wallet and contents were kept in the property room until turned over to the FBI. Photographs of the "arrest wallet" and contents were taken by the Dallas Police on November 23rd and given to the FBI and Secret Service. The wallet found at the Tippit murder scene turned up in Captain Fritz's desk drawer where it remained until November 27th.

On November 25th, Oswald's possessions were returned from Washington to be inventoried and photographed. The FBI inventory listed two wallets --- items #114 and #382 --- yet neither was "Oswald's arrest wallet" or the "wallet from Tippit murder scene". These inventory sheets showed the wallets coming from Ruth Paine's house. But neither wallet was initialed by Dallas Police. Neither wallet was listed on the Dallas Police handwritten inventory completed at Ruth Paine's house. Neither wallet was listed on the Dallas Police typed inventory --- which became Warren Commission exhibits. Neither wallet was photographed among Oswald's possessions on the floor of the Dallas Police station. Yet two wallets were listed on the FBI inventory. Where did they come from? Were they on the Dallas Police evidence film?

"To answer that question, I looked at the two rolls of film returned to the Dallas Police by the FBI," Armstrong said. "Item #114 was listed as 'brown billfold with Marine group photograph.' But negative #114 showed only the Marine group photo...

"Item #382 was listed on the FBI inventory as 'red billfold and one scrap of white paper with Russian script'. But negative #382 showed only the paper with Russian script." When a photograph was made from this negative the red billfold, allegedly from Ruth Paine's house, disappeared.

"Both negatives were altered between the time the Dallas police turned over their original undeveloped film to the FBI and the FBI returned copies of that film to the police. Why cause the wallets in the original film to disappear? Because the original photos taken by the Dallas Police were probably photographs of the 'arrest wallet' and the 'Tippit murder scene wallet' --- two wallets which contained identification for Oswald and Hidell which would have been unexplainable.

"To find out what happened to 'Oswald's arrest wallet' and the 'Tippit murder scene wallet' we must again look at the Dallas Police film. The 2nd roll of film begins in the middle of negative #361 and ends in the middle of negative #451. All of the negative images after #451, with one exception, were ruined. The one exception is the negative image of a wallet. When the negative image is developed into a photograph you can see that it is 'Oswald's arrest wallet...'"

With the "Oswald arrest wallet" in Washington, the "Tippit murder scene wallet" remained in Captain Fritz's desk drawer. On November 27th, James Hosty picked up the "Tippit murder scene wallet" from Fritz and gave Fritz a signed receipt. Hosty then took that wallet and other items obtained from Fritz to the Dallas FBI office. According to Hosty, these items were neither photogaphed nor inventoried. They were placed in a box and flown to Washington by Warren DeBreuys. Two days later the Dallas Police notified the FBl they had failed to photograph the wallet and contents and wanted photos. The FBI ignored this request and never photographed the "Tippit murder scene wallet". The only known photos of this wallet are from the WFAA newsreel film.

When the FBI finished altering Oswald's possessions, Hoover sent a March, 1964 memo stating, "the Bureau has re-photographed all of the material in possession of the Bureau and will send a complete set of these photographs to you by separate mail." Included among the hundreds of new FBI photographs were items #114 and #382. These two wallets were substituted for "Oswalds arrest wallet" and the "Tippit murder scene wallet."

We know that DPD personnel failed to note anything about "Hidell" ID being found on Oswald when arrested, and that they uniformly neglected to mention this contention to the press, while nevertheless passing on to the media the far less damning information about Oswald renting a room under the alias "O.H. Lee."  For whatever reason, DPD neglected to photograph the Tippit crime scene wallet and its contents.  Now, we see that FBI not only colluded in the suppression of the second wallet, but actually substituted two entirely different wallets in the photographic record.  Apparently, FBI agreed that the wallet issue was so incendiary that it, too, engaged in the falsification of evidence.

If Barrett's reports fail to disclose the very same things that DPD's reports fail to disclose, can you now fashion a hypothesis that explains both omissions, Pat?  Apparently, others can.  

 

Similarly, a number of witnesses to emerge much much later without any yardstick to measure their credibility have been given instant credibility,

Why is it that when one has no answer for something, one resorts to turning the specific into the general, or the general into the specific?  Other witnesses who emerge much later have no bearing on the instance at hand, so why bring them up?

but a number of men like Westbrook and Bentley, who have been fairly consistent from day one, are to be automatically doubted. 

You're taking some liberties with the facts here, Pat.  In order for Westbrook and Bentley to have been "consistent" from day one, they should have reported their observations from day one.  If you can locate a Westbrook report from 1963 indicating he found or handled a wallet at the Tippit crime scene, I'd welcome that just as much as I'd welcome any indication from 1963 that Bentley found "Hidell" ID on Oswald at the time of his arrest.  I haven't found either.  Perhaps you can.

Simply because their initial reports did not say what Robert thought they should say.  This reflects his bias. IMO

Actually, it reflects sloppy police work, at best, and tampering with evidence, at worst.  But if you'd rather chastise me than the police, that's your prerogative.

In the meantime, I suspect what's really rattled your cage is not that the hypothesis outlined in this thread is so preposterous as you claim [without benefit of the slightest evidence for your assertions], but that this two-wallet hypothesis forces you confront you own bias, and your own conclusions about Oswald' guilt in killing Tippit, which you've admitted having reached without doing much actual research.  More's the pity, as they say. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Robert Charles-Dunne]

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}>

[Jack White]

All of you discussing the ordering of the rifle from Klines are NOT UP TO SPEED

unless you are THOROUGHLY familiar with PAGES 431-487 of Armstrong's

Harvey&Lee, which is the ACCURATE STORY as opposed to the OFFICIAL STORY.

Read those pages, AND THEN RESUME YOUR DISCUSSION!

Jack

[Greg Parker]

This wallet is an active topic on the McAdams forum, where Donald Willis argues that the wallet belonged to cabdriver Scoggins. Willis believes that Scoggins had taken Tippits pistol and pursued the killer. On his return to the murder scene police questioned him and checked his ID.

I think it is highly unlikely that the wallet was "found" at the scene. How could the first witnesses - Benavides and the Davies sisters -- manage to find items as small as a revolver bullet, and not notice something as large as a wallet?

-J Raymond Carroll

J, I've already mentioned this as being one of the theories floating around. I admire much of Don's work on the case, but this is one of two main areas where we do disagree. Had Scoggins or any of the cops mentioned this happening as Don describes -- I may not be here now debating on the wallet. To make his theory work, Don surmises that Barrett was confused about when and where he was told about the dual ID.

As for why wasn't it found by any of the witnesses... perhaps it was under Tippit's body?

[Greg Parker]

"Item #382 was listed on the FBI inventory as 'red billfold and one scrap of white paper with Russian script'. But negative #382 showed only the paper with Russian script." When a photograph was made from this negative the red billfold, allegedly from Ruth Paine's house, disappeared.

- RC-D quoting Armstrong.

Hmmm.

This wouldn't be a slip of white paper "inadvertantly" caught up in the evidence taken from Oswald's wallet during his August arrest, would it -- that is to say - the very SAME evidence Quigley testified that Oswald Personally showed him?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes; I have. On November 29, 1963, I went to the first district station in New Orleans Police Department to confer with Lieutenant Martello. At this time he informed me that on November 23, 1963, a representative of the Secret Service had contacted him about 3 o'clock in the morning, told him that he was conducting an official investigation with regard to the assassination of the President, and desired to talk to him.

Arrangements were made the following or that same day, to meet at the first district station. At approximately 3 o'clock the Secret Service representative met there. At this time, Lieutenant Martello went to his files, removed from the files the evidence that had been taken from Oswald on August 9, 1963. In going through these documents, he noted this piece of paper that had what appeared to him to be foreign writing, he felt that it probably was Russian but he did not know. He turned this over to the Secret Service. He related to me that at the time he had questioned Oswald on August 10, 1963, prior to the time that he had called the FBI office, that he had gone through items in Oswald's wallet, which is a normal procedure for the police to do, for background identification, and so forth, and among the items in his wallet was this piece of paper, and in the discussion that pursued, apparently this particular document and a small photograph of Oswald inadvertently became involved with the evidence that was being handled in the case at the time, and the file was then put away, and it was not gone back into, as I understand it, until this interview of the 23d, when he discovered this document.

Mr. DULLES. And the photograph?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. DULLES. In addition to the writing was among these other papers?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, sir.

From Martello's testimony:

"I then took my notes, along with several copies of the literature of OSWALD, and placed them in a file folder, in the file

"The day after the assassination of President JOHN F. KENNEDY, Mr. ADRIAN G. VIAL, U.S. Secret Service, who had spoken to me earlier at about 3 a.m. Saturday morning, November 23, 1963, wherein he had obtained information regarding my interview with OSWALD, came to the First District Station on Saturday, November 23, 1963 at about 3 p.m. and told me the Secret Service was conducting an official investigation regarding the assassination of the President of the United States. At the outset of the interview I got out the original file folder on LEE HARVEY OSWALD, opened it and gave Mr. VIAL all of the literature I had obtained from OSWALD, which consisted of some pamphlets, leaflets and booklets put out by the Fair Play for Cuba Committee headquarters. Upon going through these pamphlets I discovered a photograph of LEE HARVEY OSWALD which appeared to be a passport photograph, and a small piece of white paper containing handwritten notes on same. This photograph and paper had inadvertently become misplaced with ' the literature during the interview I had with OSWALD. This piece of paper, which was folded over twice and was about 2" by 3" in size, contained some English writing and some writing which appeared to me to be in a foreign language which I could not identify. Before I gave this paper to Mr. VIAL, I made a copy of the information, which is as follows: [see Commission Exhibit No. 827.]

And the passport size photo couldn't be the one that ended up on an oviously fake Selective Service Card issued in the name of Hidell, could it?