The J.D. Tippit Shooting Evidence

[Antti Hynonen]

Trent Adams Posted Yesterday, 02:16 PM

OK, I am not looking to debate the details of some of the issues in the posts, as I know this has been discussed previously. However, these are some of the things that I believe to be correct, and I would like to be made aware of where I am wrong and/or enlightened as to where some of this evidence can be located. The events surrounding the Tippit murder are of GREAT interest to me.

Therefore, please educate me on my misgivings as I list them here:

- The first report that the gun was an automatic was by Officer Summers around 1:37 pm, based on information from witness Callaway. Callaway based this on how the gunman was holding the gun when he came through the hedge, and his experience with a .45 in the Marine Corp.

- Nobody ever claimed to find a shell near the body of Tippit. I don't know of anyplace that it indicates this occurred.

- Additionally, I don't believe Hill arrived at the scene until after Tippit's body was removed, so it would be somewhat tough for him to see a shell near the body...

- The shells were found at the northwest corner of the building the Davis sisters lived, and this was actually on Patton, not on Tenth.

- Hill, Poe, and Benavides all had differing accounts of how the shells were placed in the cigarette carton. I think they all had a little problem with getting this story correct.

- The first shells were not found or recovered until at least 20 minutes after the shooting. This would be quite remarkable if in fact, there was a shell near the body.

I'm just trying to figure out where this information is, so that I can correct my records, so that I may add some other dots to try and connect.

Thanks in advance!

No shells near the body. Maybe so. Here's an interview of Hill and others.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sh...etc/script.html

Quote from the site above:

Mr. MYERS : After the shooting, police found shells at the scene. They went on the radio and said they were .38 automatics. Later Oswald's arrested with a revolver that fires .38 specials, a shell that's clearly about a quarter inch longer. Besides, they're clearly stamped on the bottom. One says, ".38 special," one says, ".38 automatic."

NARRATOR : Automatic shells would mean Oswald was not there and that the evidence could have been planted.

INTERVIEWER : Did you actually pick up the shells yourself?

Mr. HILL : Yeah, I got a mark in them. I put a mark in them.

INTERVIEWER : But you still mistook the kind of shell it was?

Mr. HILL : Yes, I did. In all the excitement that was going on then, you just looked to see if it was a .38. And if he'd been using an automatic, they could have been ejected. Nobody at this point had told the first officer to arrive that Oswald had stopped, deliberately kicked out shells from a .38 revolver before he left that scene.

NARRATOR : Later, the FBI crime lab found that Tippit was killed by bullets fired from a gun with a bored-out barrel, a barrel just like Oswald's .38. Ballistics tests on bored-out guns can never be completely conclusive. However, marks on the cartridges allegedly recovered at the scene did match the hammer on Oswald's .38 revolver.

End quote.

So Hill says, he actually picked up the shells (note, plural) himself and put a mark in them.

Gracious.

I always thought that if anyone marked any of the Tippit shells it was Poe.

What the hell is going on?

None of the shells entered as evidence contained evidence of markings of any kind. Not by Poe nor by Hill.

Clear as mud.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Quote from the site above:

Mr. MYERS : After the shooting, police found shells at the scene. They went on the radio and said they were .38 automatics. Later Oswald's arrested with a revolver that fires .38 specials, a shell that's clearly about a quarter inch longer. Besides, they're clearly stamped on the bottom. One says, ".38 special," one says, ".38 automatic."

NARRATOR : Automatic shells would mean Oswald was not there and that the evidence could have been planted.

INTERVIEWER : Did you actually pick up the shells yourself?

Mr. HILL : Yeah, I got a mark in them. I put a mark in them.

INTERVIEWER : But you still mistook the kind of shell it was?

Mr. HILL : Yes, I did. In all the excitement that was going on then, you just looked to see if it was a .38. And if he'd been using an automatic, they could have been ejected. Nobody at this point had told the first officer to arrive that Oswald had stopped, deliberately kicked out shells from a .38 revolver before he left that scene.

I always thought that if anyone marked any of the Tippit shells it was Poe.

What the hell is going on?

None of the shells entered as evidence contained evidence of markings of any kind. Not by Poe nor by Hill.

Clear as mud.

Like Jim Garrison, Frontline is trying to complicate a subject that is really quite simple. Instead of showing Hill his Warren Commission testimony and allowing him to refresh his recollection, they ask Hill to remember back 25 years. Of course Hill could not do that with accuracy any more than you or I could.

There is no dispute that Hill made two (2) separate trips to the Tippit crime scene. On his first trip he radiod that the killer was armed with an automatic, based on the (fact that there was a ) shell at the scene. On his second trip, Benavides showed him two shells (Hill said three to the WC). The idiot handling this issue for Frontline did not know that Hill had made two separate trips to the crime scene and therefore did not realize that Hill was conflating two separate incidents into one.

[Edit: Since writing the above I have done some limited research and am no longer certain that Hill's radio call was made on his first trip to the crime scene. Seargent Hill is no one's idea of a perfect witness, and he has actually recanted part of his Warren Commission testimony, but he has been consistent through the years that his radio report of an automatic weapon was not based on an examination of the shell, but rather was an assumption, based on the fact that a shell (or shells) was found at the scene.]

Hill's recollection that he marked the shells is, of course, the exact opposite of what he said in 1963/4. Anyone want to bet that Hill forgot to take his memory pills before he spoke to Frontline? (I could have sworn I turned off that damned stove....)

I repeat that there is no contemporaneus evidence that Hill's radio message was based on an actual examination of a shell or shells, there is no credible evidence that the murder weapon was an automatic, and in fact the overwhelming weight of the evidence is that the killer used a revolver.

The key fact here is that the killer deliberately dropped spent shells at the scene, so who the killer was and why he dropped the shells there are the open questions that need to be resolved.

Edited May 20, 2006 by J. Raymond Carroll

[Trent Adams]

OK, I am not looking to debate the details of some of the issues in the posts, as I know this has been discussed previously. However, these are some of the things that I believe to be correct, and I would like to be made aware of where I am wrong and/or enlightened as to where some of this evidence can be located. The events surrounding the Tippit murder are of GREAT interest to me.

Therefore, please educate me on my misgivings as I list them here:

- The first report that the gun was an automatic was by Officer Summers around 1:37 pm, based on information from witness Callaway. Callaway based this on how the gunman was holding the gun when he came through the hedge, and his experience with a .45 in the Marine Corp.

Did Callaway see the shooter come through the hedge at the northeast corner from his position near the southwest corner, some yards away, or merely see him running down Patton on the opposite side of the street, after he had long since cleared the hedge?

I believe Callaway saw the gunman come through the hedge at the southeast corner of 10th and Patton, which would be the northwest corner of the Davis' dwelling. This is a quote from Callaway:

"When I saw him jump through that hedge, he had his pistol in a raised position and his left hand going to the pistol."

- The shells were found at the northwest corner of the building the Davis sisters lived, and this was actually on Patton, not on Tenth.

This was 'on 10th' if the observer was on 10th, and 'on Patton' if the observer was on Patton. Such is the nature of street corners ....

This is exactly my point regarding "shells at the scene". The shells were actually found on the west side of the building the Davis' lived, which ran along Patton. This is more than 100 feet away from the shooting site AND around the corner.

If the "scene" is the entire area/block/intersection, then technically, they could be "at the scene", but there is NO way they were seen at the site of the shooting.

- Hill, Poe, and Benavides all had differing accounts of how the shells were placed in the cigarette carton. I think they all had a little problem with getting this story correct.

Cigarette wrapper. You think they coordinated the story? I think not. Donnie Benavides wasn't up to the task, not then, not 40 years later.

I don't think they coordinated the story at all. Hill says that he took the last cigarette out of the package and placed the shells in there. Benavides says he used a stick and put them in his cigarette package of his own. Hill later says that Poe shows him a cigarette package with 3 shells in it, that a citizen had given to Poe. Then even later, Hill states that Benavides showed him and Poe the location of the shells, but that Benavides never touched them and only he and Poe picked them up and put them in his cigarette package.

No, I don't think any of the stories make sense, and that the first story of Benavides was the correct version.

- The first shells were not found or recovered until at least 20 minutes after the shooting. This would be quite remarkable if in fact, there was a shell near the body.

I'm just trying to figure out where this information is, so that I can correct my records, so that I may add some other dots to try and connect.

Thanks in advance!

No shell 'near the body' because there was no body. All the shells, according to the Davis sisters-in-law and Benavides, were found off of the street in the Davis' front/side/corner yard.

Side yard, yes. Never found anything regarding the front yard. The only reference I found to "corner" was the "window on the northwest corner of the house", which was actually on the west side of the house.

[Duke Lane]

OK, I am not looking to debate the details of some of the issues in the posts, as I know this has been discussed previously. However, these are some of the things that I believe to be correct, and I would like to be made aware of where I am wrong and/or enlightened as to where some of this evidence can be located. The events surrounding the Tippit murder are of GREAT interest to me.

Therefore, please educate me on my misgivings as I list them here:

- The first report that the gun was an automatic was by Officer Summers around 1:37 pm, based on information from witness Callaway. Callaway based this on how the gunman was holding the gun when he came through the hedge, and his experience with a .45 in the Marine Corp.

Did Callaway see the shooter come through the hedge at the northeast corner from his position near the southwest corner, some yards away, or merely see him running down Patton on the opposite side of the street, after he had long since cleared the hedge?

I believe Callaway saw the gunman come through the hedge at the southeast corner of 10th and Patton, which would be the northwest corner of the Davis' dwelling. This is a quote from Callaway:

"When I saw him jump through that hedge, he had his pistol in a raised position and his left hand going to the pistol."

- The shells were found at the northwest corner of the building the Davis sisters lived, and this was actually on Patton, not on Tenth.

This was 'on 10th' if the observer was on 10th, and 'on Patton' if the observer was on Patton. Such is the nature of street corners ....

This is exactly my point regarding "shells at the scene". The shells were actually found on the west side of the building the Davis' lived, which ran along Patton. This is more than 100 feet away from the shooting site AND around the corner.

If the "scene" is the entire area/block/intersection, then technically, they could be "at the scene", but there is NO way they were seen at the site of the shooting.

- Hill, Poe, and Benavides all had differing accounts of how the shells were placed in the cigarette carton. I think they all had a little problem with getting this story correct.

Cigarette wrapper. You think they coordinated the story? I think not. Donnie Benavides wasn't up to the task, not then, not 40 years later.

I don't think they coordinated the story at all. Hill says that he took the last cigarette out of the package and placed the shells in there. Benavides says he used a stick and put them in his cigarette package of his own. Hill later says that Poe shows him a cigarette package with 3 shells in it, that a citizen had given to Poe. Then even later, Hill states that Benavides showed him and Poe the location of the shells, but that Benavides never touched them and only he and Poe picked them up and put them in his cigarette package.

No, I don't think any of the stories make sense, and that the first story of Benavides was the correct version.

- The first shells were not found or recovered until at least 20 minutes after the shooting. This would be quite remarkable if in fact, there was a shell near the body.

I'm just trying to figure out where this information is, so that I can correct my records, so that I may add some other dots to try and connect.

No shell 'near the body' because there was no body. All the shells, according to the Davis sisters-in-law and Benavides, were found off of the street in the Davis' front/side/corner yard.

Side yard, yes. Never found anything regarding the front yard. The only reference I found to "corner" was the "window on the northwest corner of the house", which was actually on the west side of the house.

I think your first difficulty should be cleared up by expanding your use of the concept of a "crime scene."

Your comment - "The shells were actually found on the west side of the building the Davis' lived, which ran along Patton. This is more than 100 feet away from the shooting site AND around the corner. If the "scene" is the entire area / block / intersection, then technically, they could be "at the scene", but there is NO way they were seen at the site of the shooting" - suggests that the "scene" of Oswald's arrest extended no further than the actual chair he was seated in (which, by extension, could be moved completely out of Dallas, Texas and the United States by the auction of said chair!). The "scene" of an airplane crash, for example, extends backward to where the plane first scraped the tops of trees and extends forwards and sideways to the final resting point of any portion of the plane and/or its occupants. A crime scene extends to the farthest point at which there is anything of evidentiary value, and - for the purposes of security - both examples could have an additional perimeter of a distance open to the discretion of the investigators.

The noun "site" is equally pliable. Now, if someone had said "we found the shells within inches of where the body was," then they're dealing with a much greater degree of exactitude than either "scene" or "site" are. Unless someone is referring to a very finite point in space - which a decent interrogator will ascertain, such as by asking "by 'site' you are referring to the place where the body fell at the time of the shooting, and not where it was at the time you found the shells [which would have been Presbyterian Hospital using my quote above!], is that correct?" - or unless you have a very specific reason for thinking that a seemingly general reference is being so specific, it is best to give latitude to the speaker whom, in most cases, you have no way of questioning for clarification.

At least the same degree of latitude - and probably much more! - should be granted non-professional witnesses in their verbal and unclarified descriptions.

It would otherwise be like calling an officer who was photographed in front of the Texas Theater a "xxxx" because he testified that he (1) was at the 'scene' of Oswald's arrest and (2) never actually stepped into the theater lobby, much less the seating area proper.

This is especially true in the case of Hill's deposition, which could more accurately be termed a "narrative" or "discussion" rather than "testimony" because it was one of the very few such departures from the usual question-and-answer format the vast majority of witnesses were subject to. It was as if Joe Ball had said, "Hi, Jerry, I'm with the Warren Commission, why don't you tell us your story? If I have any questions, I'll let you know." Hill carried on so long between Ball's interjections that any number of questions and clarifications could have been made, but weren't. It was more of a casual conversation than a deposition except that Hill was under oath. For as little as that really mattered ....

It should also be pointed out that Hill was not an investigator, but was merely a patrol officer conveniently wearing civilian clothes while being temporarily assigned to the personnel division, thus being mistaken for a real detective during the primary investigation (the one and only reason Poe even thought to give the shells to him). He was so "visible" during the assassination weekend not because of his authority or expertise, but because prior to becoming a police officer, he was a media person ... "one of our own" to the reporters in Dallas that weekend, a "sympathetic mouthpiece" as it were.

As to your saying that "the events surrounding the Tippit murder are of GREAT interest to me," so should they be to ALL of us. It is, after all, the Rosetta Stone of the assassination ... David Belin's bland assertion to 'prove' a different point notwithstanding.

[Duke Lane]

Did Callaway see the shooter come through the hedge at the northeast corner from his position near the southwest corner, some yards away, or merely see him running down Patton on the opposite side of the street, after he had long since cleared the hedge?

I believe Callaway saw the gunman come through the hedge at the southeast corner of 10th and Patton, which would be the northwest corner of the Davis' dwelling. This is a quote from Callaway:

When I saw him jump through that hedge, he had his pistol in a raised position and his left hand going to the pistol.

- The shells were found at the northwest corner of the building the Davis sisters lived, and this was actually on Patton, not on Tenth.

This was 'on 10th' if the observer was on 10th, and 'on Patton' if the observer was on Patton. Such is the nature of street corners ....

This is exactly my point regarding "shells at the scene". The shells were actually found on the west side of the building the Davis' lived, which ran along Patton. This is more than 100 feet away from the shooting site AND around the corner. If the "scene" is the entire area/block/intersection, then technically, they could be "at the scene", but there is NO way they were seen at the site of the shooting.

Once again trusting to memory, one of the Davis girls testified that the shooter ran past their front door, smiling at them and "shaking the bullets loose from the gun," or words to that effect, meaning that he was in the process of emptying the shells. If Callaway saw him with "his pistol in a raised position and his left hand going to the pistol" as he cleared the hedgerow, he seems to be describing the shooter with the gun in his right hand while his left "went to" the pistol, since it's very difficult for your left hand to "go to" where your left hand already is. Had he said that the shooter "had the gun in his left hand," it would have been an entirely different thing.

So what Callaway and the girls seem to be describing is a man running from the scene while emptying his pistol as he ran by the Davises' door, but having to use his left hand "going to the gun" - probably to get the last shell or two out of the chamber - as he cleared the hedge. If so, they are consistent descriptions.

Accordingly, depending upon when Davis first noticed the man "shaking the bullets loose" (or whatever her exact words were), shells could have been being deposited on the ground even before he'd cleared the front door of the home. The door unquestionably faced 10th.

Am I not also remember correctly someone's description that the shooter was "throwing" or "tossing" the shells as he ran? If so, that would be consistent with the need for his hand to be "going to the gun" to get the last shell(s) out and then throwing them away (over his shoulder, back over the hedge, along the west side of the house?); even on its own, Callaway's description could be describing that as well since ... what do you do with the shells you pull out of the gun after you've pulled them out?

In any case, I'm not entirely certain why the exact position of the shells after they'd been removed from the gun is important to the price of ammo in Dallas. The actions of the gunman are adequately described, and I can't seem to imagine that where they'd landed within a few yards any direction would matter to anyone not a fan of CSI shows: after all, since they weren't ejected from the weapon, but rather dropped, shaken, pulled or otherwise removed from it while the perp was on the run, their location can't pinpoint anything at all about the shooting itself.

But then again ...? You've got me curious now.

[Trent Adams]

OK....I appreciate the detailed response and I agree with the premise of what you are saying. Also, I am quite familiar with aviation disasters, as that is an investigative responsibility I have had for 9 years, and well too often at that. Anyway, you won't get any argument out of me about what you have posted above, and I agree that the Tippit murder is the key to understanding this entire riddle.

Having said that, the specific reason I used "the scene" in the context I have, is based on the earlier posts in this thread. There were comments regarding Hill's statement about the gun being an automatic, and it was stated that it was because he saw the shell(s) next to the body, and this caused him to assume they were from an automatic. I understand how that could cause that mistake, if there were any shells near the body.

My points were that there was no body when Hill arrived, so it would be quite a feat to observe the shell(s) next to the body. Additionally, the theory that the shells were near the actual site of the shooting (I'm being very specific about near the car, or anywhere within let's say 30 feet), because they were ejected from an automatic during the shooting, doesn't hold water. I base this on the fact that the casings were found over 100 feet away and around the corner.

I'm not debating the fact that the gunman might have been unloading the shells as he ran through the yard, through the hedge, or around the corner. What I am saying is that the shells were not visible near the car. No matter what he did with them, they were found on the west side of the house.

These comments were made by me to eliminate the reasons given by other members, as to why Hill reported over the radio that the gun was an automatic. No casings at the site, and they weren't ejected over 100 feet and around a corner. Like I stated earlier, that would make the SBT sound plausible, in comparison.

Whatever reasons he had for saying what he did, those couldn't have been the reasons. At least not in the way he claimed. At least that's my opinion.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

I'm not debating the fact that the gunman might have been unloading the shells as he ran through the yard, through the hedge, or around the corner. What I am saying is that the shells were not visible near the car. No matter what he did with them, they were found on the west side of the house.

These comments were made by me to eliminate the reasons given by other members, as to why Hill reported over the radio that the gun was an automatic. No casings at the site, and they weren't ejected over 100 feet and around a corner. Like I stated earlier, that would make the SBT sound plausible, in comparison.

Whatever reasons he had for saying what he did, those couldn't have been the reasons. At least not in the way he claimed. At least that's my opinion.

There were two separate instances of shells being found.

The first finding was by Benavides, and that was on Tenth Street, more or less in front of the Davis house, if memory serves me right. The second finding was by one of the Davis girls, and may have been over 100 feet from Tippit's car. Trent Adams is referring to the second finding in his post quoted above.

The second finding occurred much later, after the police had left the scene, if memory serves.

Gerald Hill could not have been referring to the second finding when he radiod his report of an automatic. He had to be referring to the Benavides finding. Unless I'm mistaken, Benavides found the shells in front of the Davis house on Tenth Street, but if anyone has contrary evidence, and can cite sources.....

In any event, it appears that, at that point, Hill did not know where the body was found or where the gunman was standing during the shooting. Since Hill was not present when Benavides found the shells (it was officer Poe who showed Hill the cigarette package containing the two shells found by Benavides), his immediate assumption that the weapon was an automatic seems perfectly natural, even if it turned out to be mistaken.

Edited May 21, 2006 by J. Raymond Carroll

[Duke Lane]

OK....I appreciate the detailed response and I agree with the premise of what you are saying. Also, I am quite familiar with aviation disasters, as that is an investigative responsibility I have had for 9 years, and well too often at that. Anyway, you won't get any argument out of me about what you have posted above ...

My experience comes from having been the leader of a land search and rescue team with the Civil Air Patrol, a fact that I very nearly hesitate to mention here(!). It was not in Louisiana, and it wasn't during the '50s, so don't even ask the other questions!!

... the specific reason I used "the scene" in the context I have, is based on the earlier posts in this thread. There were comments regarding Hill's statement about the gun being an automatic, and it was stated that it was because he saw the shell(s) next to the body, and this caused him to assume they were from an automatic. ...

My points were that there was no body when Hill arrived, so it would be quite a feat to observe the shell(s) next to the body. Additionally, the theory that the shells were near the actual site of the shooting (I'm being very specific about near the car, or anywhere within let's say 30 feet), because they were ejected from an automatic during the shooting, doesn't hold water. I base this on the fact that the casings were found over 100 feet away and around the corner.

I'm not debating the fact that the gunman might have been unloading the shells as he ran through the yard, through the hedge, or around the corner. What I am saying is that the shells were not visible near the car. No matter what he did with them, they were found on the west side of the house.

That the gunman was unloading as he left the scene (note that I didn't use the word "fled") is not actually debatable since (1) one of the Davis girls (I always get them confused) said she watched it from very close by and (2) later retrieved one or more of the shells he'd dropped (I'm thinking that th, as well as (3) Ted Callaway describing the very same action - the gun raised in his right (shooting) hand and his left hand "going to the gun" (for what reason other than unloading or loading?) - which he saw from a distance away. That the casings were found a distance farther away than they would or could be ejected from an automatic is merely incident to the other fact.

These comments were made by me to eliminate the reasons given by other members, as to why Hill reported over the radio that the gun was an automatic. No casings at the site, and they weren't ejected over 100 feet and around a corner. Like I stated earlier, that would make the SBT sound plausible, in comparison.

Whatever reasons he had for saying what he did, those couldn't have been the reasons. At least not in the way he claimed. At least that's my opinion.

I don't think in his testimony that Jerry Hill gave any reason for having said the gun was an automatic ... I don't even remember the subject coming up. All the rest - this included! - is mere guesswork. The only question is who might be guessing correctly, and if it's not based on what we know to be facts, then whatever else it may be, it ain't right.

As Ray Carroll said, I also believe that it was one of the Davises who found a shell (or shells ... but I think it was singular) on the west side of the house, and then well after the police had left the scene (they had to dispatch someone to go get it); the other shells were found by Donnie Benavides and put in the cigarette cellophane wrapper and turned over to Poe. Those, I recall, were found in front of the house, or at least along 10th (being very particular in defining 'in front of' as 'directly within the limits of the edges of the house').

See Dave Perry's site for more information about all of this, including the actual bullets.

As to what really went through Jerry's mind when he reported "shells from an automatic rather than a pistol," I'll bet not that not even he knows ...!