Jump to content
The Education Forum

What Helen Markum didn't see


Jim Feemster
 Share

Recommended Posts

w ould someone commit on the direction the murderer of Tippit was traveling when spotted by Markum?

If this man was walking from west to east Markum must have seen hjm cross the street in front of her as she approached the intersection of 10th and Patton.

and

the cab driver having his lunch near the same intersection on the southwest side must have seen this man pass directly in front of his cab if he was walking from west to east.

this means to me he was coming from the west. can we agree on this as a fact?

jim feemster

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 76
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

w ould someone commit on the direction the murderer of Tippit was traveling when spotted by Markum?

If this man was walking from west to east Markum must have seen hjm cross the street in front of her as she approached the intersection of 10th and Patton.

and

the cab driver having his lunch near the same intersection on the southwest side must have seen this man pass directly in front of his cab if he was walking from west to east.

this means to me he was coming from the west. can we agree on this as a fact?

jim feemster

Jim, I remember reading this somewhere a few years ago, but dont remember where, or who came up with this answer. It was explained, simply enough, that Oswald was walking, lets say east [for the sake of arguement], and was walking along. He saw the police car approching, and turned around and proceeded in the opposite direction [lets say west]. It is a simple answer, and is one that would fit the scenerio. If someone is trying to avoid being obvious, and unnoticed, sometimes people will do that..........change direction, so as not to be seen directly in the face, or what ever reason, or make some other change to avoid a confrontation with whoever it is they want to avoid. So simply said, he was walking down the street one way, saw the police car, turned directly around and continued in the opposite direction to keep from being seen directly, or draw attention to himself by getting further away from the police car. This is the best answer I have heard yet as to why two different people [or maybe more] saw Oswald walking in two different directions. Sometimes the best answer is the simplest, and thats why we dont ever see it. Hope this helps. Just my opinion FWIW.

thanks-smitty

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael G. Smith Posted Yesterday, 01:58 PM

QUOTE(Jim Feemster @ Feb 5 2007, 07:04 AM)

w ould someone commit on the direction the murderer of Tippit was traveling when spotted by Markum?

If this man was walking from west to east Markum must have seen hjm cross the street in front of her as she approached the intersection of 10th and Patton.

and

the cab driver having his lunch near the same intersection on the southwest side must have seen this man pass directly in front of his cab if he was walking from west to east.

this means to me he was coming from the west. can we agree on this as a fact?

jim feemster

Jim, I remember reading this somewhere a few years ago, but dont remember where, or who came up with this answer. It was explained, simply enough, that Oswald was walking, lets say east [for the sake of arguement], and was walking along. He saw the police car approching, and turned around and proceeded in the opposite direction [lets say west]. It is a simple answer, and is one that would fit the scenerio. If someone is trying to avoid being obvious, and unnoticed, sometimes people will do that..........change direction, so as not to be seen directly in the face, or what ever reason, or make some other change to avoid a confrontation with whoever it is they want to avoid. So simply said, he was walking down the street one way, saw the police car, turned directly around and continued in the opposite direction to keep from being seen directly, or draw attention to himself by getting further away from the police car. This is the best answer I have heard yet as to why two different people [or maybe more] saw Oswald walking in two different directions. Sometimes the best answer is the simplest, and thats why we dont ever see it. Hope this helps. Just my opinion FWIW.

thanks-smitty

Gentlemen, I would like to say that I read about this too and in fact according to my memeory it was in the testimony of one of the eye witnesses from the scene. To take it a step further, I would say that the poor fellow (whoever he was) actually drew more attention toward himself by turning around, rather than just walking in the initial direction. Cops are trained to look out for presicely such behavior.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

w ould someone commit on the direction the murderer of Tippit was traveling when spotted by Markum?

If this man was walking from west to east Markum must have seen hjm cross the street in front of her as she approached the intersection of 10th and Patton.

and

the cab driver having his lunch near the same intersection on the southwest side must have seen this man pass directly in front of his cab if he was walking from west to east.

this means to me he was coming from the west. can we agree on this as a fact?

jim feemster

Jim, I remember reading this somewhere a few years ago, but dont remember where, or who came up with this answer. It was explained, simply enough, that Oswald was walking, lets say east [for the sake of arguement], and was walking along. He saw the police car approching, and turned around and proceeded in the opposite direction [lets say west]. It is a simple answer, and is one that would fit the scenerio. If someone is trying to avoid being obvious, and unnoticed, sometimes people will do that..........change direction, so as not to be seen directly in the face, or what ever reason, or make some other change to avoid a confrontation with whoever it is they want to avoid. So simply said, he was walking down the street one way, saw the police car, turned directly around and continued in the opposite direction to keep from being seen directly, or draw attention to himself by getting further away from the police car. This is the best answer I have heard yet as to why two different people [or maybe more] saw Oswald walking in two different directions. Sometimes the best answer is the simplest, and thats why we dont ever see it. Hope this helps. Just my opinion FWIW.

thanks-smitty

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thanks for responding guys,

Smitty, this is my point.

From where Tippit's car is parked to the intersection of 10 th and Patton is only about 3 or 4 car links to the east of 10 th and Patton. So if the killer was walking East and turned to walk west as Tippit's squad approached from the west then why did not Markum or the cab driver see him cross their path as he was walking east to begin with.

As Markum appraoched 10th and Patton she would have seen the cab driver parked across the intersection and anyone crossing Patton to her front.

The cab driver would have seen the killer pass directly in front of his cab as he crossed Patton.

Fom the time Markum got onto Patton { a full block to 10 th } she would have had to have been looking at her feet all the way up to 10 th. w/o seeing the killer while the killer only walked less than half of the block he was in before the incident with Tippit.

So since niether witness sees him walking from the east to begin with I contend he must have been coming from the West. Which IMO pretty much rules out the patsied Mr. Oswald as having been the villian.

jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thanks for responding guys,

Smitty, this is my point.

From where Tippit's car is parked to the intersection of 10 th and Patton is only about 3 or 4 car links to the east of 10 th and Patton. So if the killer was walking East and turned to walk west as Tippit's squad approached from the west then why did not Markum or the cab driver see him cross their path as he was walking east to begin with.

As Markum appraoched 10th and Patton she would have seen the cab driver parked across the intersection and anyone crossing Patton to her front.

The cab driver would have seen the killer pass directly in front of his cab as he crossed Patton.

Fom the time Markum got onto Patton { a full block to 10 th } she would have had to have been looking at her feet all the way up to 10 th. w/o seeing the killer while the killer only walked less than half of the block he was in before the incident with Tippit.

So since niether witness sees him walking from the east to begin with I contend he must have been coming from the West. Which IMO pretty much rules out the patsied Mr. Oswald as having been the villian.

jim

Jim, I understand your point. I didnt want to get into this thread really, I just wanted to help give an explanation as too what I felt was the best explanation I had heard of why he was seen traveling in two different directions. You are right. I never have beleived it was Oswald either. He was probably at his room and left. The people [assigned to take out Oswald] were the one [or ones seen] by the few witnesses there that day. It may have been two different people who were seen [witness claimed to have seen two people leave the scene??] traveling in two different directions. I dont believe Tippit was involved, and was killed for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. People were there to kill Oswald, I beleive, and ended up killing Tippit. As far as witnesses go, Markum, in my opinion, was a few beers short of a full six pack. I dont think she even knew what she was saying, and as far as what she saw, I dont think you can believe anything she said she witnessed. I think this is why there is so much confusion over what happened and what was seen that afternoon, because she was the one who supposedly saw most of what happened, and was taken at her word, and was used as the main witness as to what happened. Either way, Oswald was long gone, and his ordered killer, or killers, got jammed up, and ended up killing Tippit. This is just speculation on my part, and is just my opinon FWIW.

thanks-smitty

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Markum (sic), in my opinion, was a few beers short of a full six pack. I dont think she even knew what she was saying, and as far as what she saw, I dont think you can believe anything she said she witnessed.

Helen Markham is a crucial witness, whether anyone likes her testimony or not. Her estimate of the time of the killing completely eliminates Lee Oswald as a suspect in the Tippit murder, and Mrs. Markham had good reason to be extremely time-conscious, because she was scared to be late for work, according to her testimony.

Her testimony about the identification deserves to be read carefully and must be viewed in context. In his book NO CASE TO ANSWER Ian Griggs makes a persuasive case that the lineups were not legitimate. Ian is more than qualified to comment on the lineups, and Mrs. Markham's mistaken identification by no means disqualifies her a reliable witness to the circumstances of the shooting. Some writers have mistakenly referred to Markham as the prosecution's star witness. In fact her testimony, with the exception of her mistaken identification, is entirely pro-defense. She did not see everything, of course, but she saw more than any other witness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Antti: ............actually drew more attention toward himself by turning around, rather than just walking in the initial direction. Cops are trained to look out for presicely such behavior."

True, and I don't know who saw what, when, but a consideration (IMO) is as Tippit progressed along the street the trees would hide large areas where whoever could do the hokey pokey while seeing the police car itself but being hidden from the driver.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Antti: ............actually drew more attention toward himself by turning around, rather than just walking in the initial direction. Cops are trained to look out for presicely such behavior."

True, and I don't know who saw what, when, but a consideration (IMO) is as Tippit progressed along the street the trees would hide large areas where whoever could do the hokey pokey while seeing the police car itself but being hidden from the driver.

Raymond, no disrespect intended to Ms. Markum, but I beleive she was so unstable and shaken [wheather just at that time or not we dont know] that her testimony had holes in it. Depending on how much you can be assured was truth or not, just adds to the confusion of the different testimonies taken from the people in the area at the time. Her time line, may have been correct [?], but putting all of it together, and using her the way they did as a witness, more or less threw alot of the other testimonies into confusion. That is why I believe there was so much confusion over who saw what and when. When you consider how widely, in some cases, the testimonies were from witnesses there that day, it seems like completely different stories. If you beleive that the Dallas PD were involved, that even throws another wrench into the spokes, as they could have tampered with quite a few things that afternoon. Just consider the shell casings for one, and who knows how else they may have messed with witnesses or maybe even testimonies from people at the scene. [influencing witnesses while being interveiwed for example] As I said, this is just speculation on my part here, and Im not saying that this is what happened, but I think it is a possibility considering what a mess it was concerning what happened at 10th and Patton. Also considering what happened after the Tippit shooting, and other testimonies, Oswald could have been at the theatre for some time, going by other peoples testimonies and time lines. Who really knows?? Just my opinion FWIW.

thanks-smitty

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest John Gillespie
Markum (sic), in my opinion, was a few beers short of a full six pack. I dont think she even knew what she was saying, and as far as what she saw, I dont think you can believe anything she said she witnessed.

Helen Markham is a crucial witness, whether anyone likes her testimony or not. Her estimate of the time of the killing completely eliminates Lee Oswald as a suspect in the Tippit murder, and Mrs. Markham had good reason to be extremely time-conscious, because she was scared to be late for work, according to her testimony.

Her testimony about the identification deserves to be read carefully and must be viewed in context. In his book NO CASE TO ANSWER Ian Griggs makes a persuasive case that the lineups were not legitimate. Ian is more than qualified to comment on the lineups, and Mrs. Markham's mistaken identification by no means disqualifies her a reliable witness to the circumstances of the shooting. Some writers have mistakenly referred to Markham as the prosecution's star witness. In fact her testimony, with the exception of her mistaken identification, is entirely pro-defense. She did not see everything, of course, but she saw more than any other witness.

_______________________________________

That's trash, as usual, with the requisite selectivity of some facts and omission of others. Trash. As usual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Raymond, no disrespect intended to Ms. Markum, but I beleive she was so unstable and shaken [wheather just at that time or not we dont know] that her testimony had holes in it.

No question Mrs Markham experienced a tremendous shock when she saw the shooting, in front of her eyes. Her memory for what she saw up to the moment of the shooting, though, appears to be perfectly sound, and remains uncontradicted. She was probably still in shock when she was hauled in to view the lineup, though not as shocked as she must have been when she saw the killer lope away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At some point in the past, I remember documenting that several members of the W.C. thought Helen to be a complete loon.

What concerns me even more however are some other factors. 1) Would the real Oswald have stood over the body and fired a coup de grace so that he couldn't be identified......but leave his wallet at the scene ? 2) If this were a planned murder of Oswald, why was the assassin(s) "walking"? 3) Why was Tippitt, if he did not know Oswald, drawing his gun? 4) Was the wallet a plant? 5) Was Tippit a part of the plot and was to pick up Oswald,

but was foiled by Oz realizing that he was a Patsy and firing first. 6) Was the Tippitt murder unrelated to JFK? 7) If the wallet was not a plant, did Oswald usually carry two wallets to work, both having the same ID's?

There is very much wrong here, not even mentioning things such as automatic pistol shell casings, the handling of Tippit's pistol, reports of two killers, illegal line up ID's, and dissimilar reports of the murderer(s) by different eye witnesses.

With all of these inconsistencies, why was "looney tunes" Helen Markham the W.C."s primary witness?

And then think of the solid witnesses that were not called before the W.C......then further imagine Jack Ruby begging to be taken into federal custody, stating that he had important information and being DENIED by the Chief Justice USSC. Helen Markham was more important than Jack Ruby !

Charlie Black

Link to comment
Share on other sites

would someone commit on the direction the murderer of Tippit was traveling when spotted by Markum?

If this man was walking from west to east Markum must have seen hjm cross the street in front of her as she approached the intersection of 10th and Patton.

and

the cab driver having his lunch near the same intersection on the southwest side must have seen this man pass directly in front of his cab if he was walking from west to east.

this means to me he was coming from the west. can we agree on this as a fact?

thanks for responding guys,

Smitty, this is my point.

From where Tippit's car is parked to the intersection of 10 th and Patton is only about 3 or 4 car links to the east of 10 th and Patton. So if the killer was walking East and turned to walk west as Tippit's squad approached from the west then why did not Markum or the cab driver see him cross their path as he was walking east to begin with.

As Markum appraoched 10th and Patton she would have seen the cab driver parked across the intersection and anyone crossing Patton to her front.

The cab driver would have seen the killer pass directly in front of his cab as he crossed Patton.

Fom the time Markum got onto Patton { a full block to 10 th } she would have had to have been looking at her feet all the way up to 10 th. w/o seeing the killer while the killer only walked less than half of the block he was in before the incident with Tippit.

So since niether witness sees him walking from the east to begin with I contend he must have been coming from the West. Which IMO pretty much rules out the patsied Mr. Oswald as having been the villian.

I fear you've got your directions turned around and head over heels!

Walking to the east is the same as walking from the west, or "from west to east." Your argument seems to be that since nobody saw him walking to the east, then he must have been coming from the west. If he was coming "from the west," he would've had to cross Patton to get to where Tippit stopped his car, yet you say that the fact that nobody saw him cross the street proves that he crossed the street?!?

Or is it that he only came from the direction he'd have had to cross the street, but didn't cross the street, and the fact that he didn't do what you'd expect (cross Patton) proves that he came from where he'd have come from if he did do what you'd expect?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At some point in the past, I remember documenting that several members of the W.C. thought Helen to be a complete loon.

Charlie Black

I'm sure the views of W.C. members are treated here with all the respect they deserve. If Mrs. Markham was a loon to them it was because she was QUITE CERTAIN that the murder happened at 1.07 --1.08. The same WC members ignored TF Bowley because he was loony enough to be equally certain that it was exactly 1.10 when he arrived, after the gunman had fled.

These WC members knew quite well that if Markham & Bowley were correct about the time (and no witness ever contradicted them, as best I recall) then someone other than Lee Oswald was the cold-blooded murderer of JD Tippit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few years ago the Discovery Channel did a re-enactment and concluded that there would not have been enough time for Oswald to get from his rooming house to the location unless he was walking from West to East. If this is so, he had walked roughly 1 mile and was still walking towards Ruby's apartment, a half mile away. Coincidence?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...