What Helen Markum didn't see

[Duke Lane]

Duke,

I do not wish to divert this thread but what do you know about Markham's son, James? A few months before the assassination he had been paroled from Huntsville doing time on a burglary conviction and since had been sought for parole violations. Helen Markham was supposedly under quite some stress at the time. I believe James was eventually nabbed in early 1964.

James

One would think that a mother would have resigned herself to her son's criminal tendencies by then. Concerned? Yes. Stressed out? Dubious. But it does make for a good excuse or rationale, if one is looking for it!

I guess I phrased the question rather badly. The late Larry Ray Harris took me to the scene years ago and I made some video, including the view Markham would have had while waiting to cross the street. But at the time I did not think to videotape the view Markham would have had from further back, as she approached the intersection. I have a vague recollection that there is an uphill slope part of the way from Markham's apartment building going towards the intersection, and that the intersection does not become visible to a walker until he/she reaches the top of that hill.

What I would like to ascertain is how close to (or how far from) the intersection a person (anyone with normal or corrected vision who was looking straight ahead) would be when the intersection first comes comes into view.

Now that is something that is seemingly do-able, and should probably be a part of the same project to replicate the Unsolved History walk from 1026 to 10&P, wouldn't you think?

As to that particular angle, I don't have any particular doubt that a normal, healthy person can walk the requisite distance in a reasonable time, nor that the conjectured timings could place someone leaving 1026 at 10&P by 1:16 ... I've calculated the time (30" stride x 90 steps per minute, what the military calls "quick time" and what some of us lay folk might call "power walking" these days) and found it reasonable if not conclusive.

I suppose it would be interesting to determine for myself how long it might actually take. I have differences with Unsolved History's use of a fitness trainer to show that scrawny Oswald could have accomplished the same thing (as I do their use of a hip-shooting marksman to duplicate "Maggie's drawers" Oswald's shooting prowess!), and despite being twice LHO's age at the time, I figure I'm in maybe the same shape overall (especially after a quad bypass!!). Even still, I don't think there will be a significant difference.

Of course, I'd much prefer to do it with a witness who, quite incidentally, could also drive my truck along instead of me leaving it somewhere in not-so-upscale Oak Cliff!! (grin)

The most direct (if not the most likely or "logical," to occasionally side with Jack White!) route might be this one on Yahoo ... tho' Mapquest seems to think that this one is the "better" route, tho' I'd have to say that we'd need to rule that one out because it would have "Oswald" almost walking alongside Helen Markham on the way to the shooting. Respectively, the two map services put the distance at .8 and .74 miles (the lesser mileage equating to approximately 17 minutes at the aforementioned "quick time").

An interesting perspective:

A route that would have "Oswald" approaching 10&P is frequently "ruled out" because it would "take too much time" for him to get there from the rooming house 3/4 mile away. Yet if the preponderance of evidence shows that that's exactly what happened - that is, the shooter came from the east - then it rules out that Oswald was said shooter, nicht wahr?

In reality, this is all a gargantuan waste of time because any fool can quickly figure out that someone other than Oswald shot Tippit sometime before 1:16, and with time before that for several people to do different things, like Benavides to decide the coast was clear to get out of his truck, Bowley to arrive on scene and wait for Benavides to stop fumbling with the radio, and not-so-young Frank Wright to scoot a block from his house to the crime scene.

Of course, it all could have happened instantaneously, couldn't it?

[Dixie Dea]

James posted.....

Duke,

I do not wish to divert this thread but what do you know about Markham's son, James? A few months before the assassination he had been paroled from Huntsville doing time on a burglary conviction and since had been sought for parole violations. Helen Markham was supposedly under quite some stress at the time.

I believe James was eventually nabbed in early 1964.

James

__________________________________

James

Maybe I can answer some of your questions and maybe Duke will have additional information! It is just one of the things I have attempted to check out.

James Markham and Jimmy Burt, (a Tippit witness) were friends. Both were on parole, after being involved in a Car Theft Ring. On June 30, 1964, the police showed up at Helen Markham's door to question James about a Conceszions Burglery from the Zoo. Helen showed them a lot of items that James had showed up with recently. The cops arrested James and he ask if he could first use the restroom, before being handcuffed. While in the bathroom, he jumped out the bathroom window, 20 feet to the ground and busted up his head. An ambulance was called and he was taken to Parkland Hospital. I don't believe he was there very long though...a few hours anyway. Then he was taken to jail and already with a warrant for Parole violations he was charged with Burglery. On July 30. 64, he was awaiting trial. He later claimed the cops pushed him out the window!

I have not been able to find out the Judges ruling of his court case or even when it actually occurred!

However, Helen Markham testified for the WC on March 26, 64 (Morning and afternoon session) and later on July 23, 64.

Is there some thoughts to consider regarding Helens WC Testimony and her son's court outcoome? I don't know, but it has occurred to me as a possibility. She certainly did lie in her testimony. Although, a lot of the final testimony had to do with her denials of ever taking to Mark Lane. Even with the conversation recorded, she still tried to deny it was her voice. I believe she did finally admit it though.

Mark Lane also took Marguerete Oswald to Helen's house to speak to her. But, Helen refused to talk with them. She had another son, I am thinking his name was William. He lived out of state at the time of JFK's Assn and Tippit's killing. But he was by this time, back and staying at his mons place. On one of their attempts to speak to Helen, William went to the door and told them that he would meet wih them, down the street, which he did. He did feel that Marguerete had a right to find out all she could.

__________

Dixie

[James Richards]

Thank you, Dixie and Duke, for your thoughts and information. Most intersting indeed.

James

[J. Raymond Carroll]

She certainly did lie in her testimony. Although, a lot of the final testimony had to do with her denials of ever taking to Mark Lane. Even with the conversation recorded, she still tried to deny it was her voice. I believe she did finally admit it though.

Helen denied that it was her voice on the tape. I believe it was the first time in her life that she ever heard her own voice on tape, and she re-acted in exactly the same way that I did -- many many years ago-- when I first heard my own voice on tape. I said "I've never heard that person before in my life." I submit that, if you check with friends and acquaintances, you will find that many people have had that same reaction.

Are there any other instances where Markham is thought to have lied? In your last post she sounds like a paragon of civic virtue, even sacrificing her maternal instincts for the greater good.

Mark Lane also took Marguerete Oswald to Helen's house to speak to her. But, Helen refused to talk with them.

_________

Dixie

Did lane ever write about this visit?

And thank you Dixie for posting your information. Ms. Markham is an intriguing witness.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Now that is something that is seemingly do-able, and should probably be a part of the same project to replicate the Unsolved History walk from 1026 to 10&P, wouldn't you think?

Sounds like the makings of a plan.

[Jack White]

Now that is something that is seemingly do-able, and should probably be a part of the same project to replicate the Unsolved History walk from 1026 to 10&P, wouldn't you think?

Sounds like the makings of a plan.

There are NUMEROUS routes from the Beckley bus stop to Tenth and Patton. (from west and

east on Tenth, and from various approach streets). There are possibly a half dozen different

routes. The route for LHO to walk WEST on Tenth is completely different than an eastward

route. Anyone trying a walking test should:

Drive all the routes first, including both east and west on Tenth, and Beckley and other approaches.

Walk each route with helper following in car with camera, stopwatch and note pad or tape recorder.

Walk at a normal speed (not a speedwalk or trot) and without predetermined objectives.

The walker, if possible, should be same age and build as LHO.

Ideally each route should be videotaped with narrator giving times and locations on audio.

Tapes should start with "walker" leaving 1026 Beckley and bus stop and ending at Tenth and Patton.

Audio should mention all landmarks, streets and street crossings. There is at least one wide busy

street with stoplights, as I recall. If so, it must be assumed that the walker might have to wait

for the light to change.

The unedited videotapes with audio would give accurate real time accuracy of each route.

Such a taping would be definitive enough to be admitted as evidence if properly done.

Jack

[Duke Lane]

There are NUMEROUS routes from the Beckley bus stop to Tenth and Patton. (from west and east on Tenth, and from various approach streets). There are possibly a half dozen different routes. The route for LHO to walk WEST on Tenth is completely different than an eastward route. Anyone trying a walking test should:

Drive all the routes first, including both east and west on Tenth, and Beckley and other approaches. Walk each route with helper following in car with camera, stopwatch and note pad or tape recorder. Walk at a normal speed (not a speedwalk or trot) and without predetermined objectives. The walker, if possible, should be same age and build as LHO.

Ideally each route should be videotaped with narrator giving times and locations on audio. Tapes should start with "walker" leaving 1026 Beckley and bus stop and ending at Tenth and Patton. Audio should mention all landmarks, streets and street crossings. There is at least one wide busy street with stoplights, as I recall. If so, it must be assumed that the walker might have to wait for the light to change.

The unedited videotapes with audio would give accurate real time accuracy of each route. Such a taping would be definitive enough to be admitted as evidence if properly done.

Jack

Good suggestions, all, Jack. I've got the equipment to make a VHS of all of that; do you have the capability of turning it into something viewable online? The audio dubs of the timings might prove a bit difficult without a second person in the vehicle so the driver doesn't have to do it and distract his attention from driving, but a reliable subject could make note of them. Unfortunately, I don't have the wherewithal to do it on a golf cart, or get traffic to accomodate such an excursion even if I did!

A truly (no pun intended!) ideal re-enactment would include several takes of the walk at various speeds, since there's no way to know how fast anyone walking from and to those points might have been walking since there were no witnesses to anyone having done so. Should one assume that it was LHO on the lam, skirting from shadow to shadow, or someone else walking at a more leisurely ("normal") pace?

The only conclusions this exercise can reach is whether it was possible for someone to walk from 1026 to 10&P, and in what possible periods of time. While it might rule out certain scenarios, it cannot prove any of them (e.g., it was possible for someone to get from point A to point B in ten minutes at a "normal" walk, but not that LHO did do it ... or that the only way to do it was at a trot, but NOT that LHO - to the exclusion of all other people - was therefore running).

I think it was (and is) possible; I'd just like someone other than a freakin' fitness trainer to do it, since there's NO evidence LHO was that "in shape."

(An interesting question that I've never heard posed - and which I know can be answered - is how "in shape" LHO actually was. Sure, we can see his general physique while wearing a tee-shirt, but was he skinny, or wiry? Could he have walked briskly from 1026 to 10&P? For that matter, could he have - and did he? - walk up three of four flights of stairs in TSBD without getting winded or stopping for a quick rest? Some people reading this will know exactly what I'm suggesting here ...!)

Gotta run, it's late!

[Jim Feemster]

OK. Let's forget Helen for a minute.

If Scoggins is setting in his cab facing North at the intersection of 10th&P, then why did he not testify that he saw a man walking in front of his cab crossing Patton as the man walked from West to East on 10th?

To my knowledge this question has never been raised by WC or anyone else.

This was my reason for beginning this post.

Scoggins would have had the best vantage point had this event occured. Markham never mentions the cab. She could have said she saw a man walk infront of the cab that was parked on the South East side of the intersection and there was a man sitting in the cab-- ask him--he'll tell you about the killer passing right in front of his cab walking from the West to the East.

Helen didn't see a man before or rather right before the actual shooting.

So if she didn't see the killer of Tippit cross her path and Scoggins didn't the killer cross his path , then the killer didn't come from the West and with the timeline in play Ozwald wasn't there--so he didn't and couldn't have killed Tippit== Case Closed. IMO

jim

[Duke Lane]

OK. Let's forget Helen for a minute. If Scoggins is setting in his cab facing North at the intersection of 10th&P, then why did he not testify that he saw a man walking in front of his cab crossing Patton as the man walked from West to East on 10th? To my knowledge this question has never been raised by WC or anyone else.

Not to be flippant, but you may well have answered your own question: because Scoggins was not asked!

Most testimony is a series of questions and answers, and witnesses are often counseled to answer only what's asked of them, and not to editorialize beyond the scope of the question. Some do and are able to finish their thought, and some are cut off before they're able to.

Scoggins did get some editorial into his testimony, such as the fact that he didn't pay much attention to the passing police cruiser that Tippit was driving because he "just saw him every day," but not much of it was unrelated to the direct questions. He was directly asked about the police car; he was not asked about seeing a man cross the street in front of him.

The most obvious answer to why that was, is that Scoggins didn't see anyone pass in front of his cab. Had he, and especially had that person been Oswald, that fact would have been known to WC counsel and the question would have been asked, the answer entered into the record. Scoggins didn't see anyone. QED.

Just because a question isn't asked on the record, doesn't mean that it hasn't been asked and answered off the record. Scoggins was an important witness, and I find it difficult if not impossible to believe that he was questioned without any preparation at all.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

If Scoggins is setting in his cab facing North at the intersection of 10th&P, then why did he not testify that he saw a man walking in front of his cab crossing Patton as the man walked from West to East on 10th?

The most obvious answer to why that was, is that Scoggins didn't see anyone pass in front of his cab.

Helen Markham did say that the man was walking east when she first saw him, but she did not pretend to know which direction he had come from prior to her seeing him. As Duke has pointed out, we can almost certainly eliminate the possibility that he had come down Patton from the north, which leaves coming from the west down Tenth St or coming from the South along the west side of Patton as the two most likely possibilities.

As I recall, Markham did not say, nor was she asked, how close to the intersection the man was when she saw him step on to the curb. It seems to me that from her testimony the man could have crossed the street BEHIND Scoggins cab, which would explain why Scoggins did not see him cross the intersection.

If the man did in fact cross behind Scoggins's cab, that would suggest that he had previously been walking north from the direction of Jefferson, walking on the western side of Patton, and then crossing over to the eastern side, behind Scoggins's cab, before he reached the corner.

In other words, he was jaywalking when Markham saw him.

Edited February 24, 2007 by J. Raymond Carroll

[Duke Lane]

... As Duke has pointed out, we can almost certainly eliminate the possibility that he had come down Patton from the north, which leaves coming from the west down Tenth St or coming from the South along the west side of Patton as the two most likely possibilities.

Careful! I only said that Scoggins did not see the shooter cross in front of his cab, not that the shooter didn't do so!

While Scoggins did see the police car go by, a vehicle is larger object and less likely to be missed by a casual observer on a quiet side street. That he saw the larger object (the police car) doesn't mean that he'd had to see the smaller one (the walking man).

From the WC's prosecutorial standpoint, it would have been ideal if Scoggins had said that, yes, he'd seen the man walk from west to east across Patton, and that without a doubt, the man was Oswald. Scoggins couldn't or wouldn't say that, and so it was best to simply not address the issue during testimony.

To call attention to the fact that Scoggins had been looking and didn't see anyone cross the street would have been potentially exculpatory to Oswald since, if he'd have come from any other direction, he'd have had to walk either past or ahead of Helen Markham, or have had to walk around more blocks than even they could provide him time to do ... or he'd have had to have some other way to have gotten past Scoggins' cab without being seen (i.e., an accomplice, probably driving him there).

One was highly improbable, and neither of the other two was a tenable alternative, so for it to have been Oswald, he'd have to have come from the west and crossed Patton, seen or unseen by Scoggins.

Since he wasn't asked, Scoggins also didn't say that he didn't see Oswald (or anyone else) cross the street in front of him. The implication is that he perhaps just didn't notice, but it still could've happened. Asked and responded to in the negative, it might be construed to mean that it didn't happen. That was also untenable, because the only other available option is that it wasn't Oswald who did the shooting!

So even while I don't think that the shooter was walking from west to east, crossing Patton, I don't believe it can be said that the possibility can "almost certainly" be eliminated simply because Scoggins didn't see (or notice?) him. He almost didn't even notice the police car!

[Jack White]

... As Duke has pointed out, we can almost certainly eliminate the possibility that he had come down Patton from the north, which leaves coming from the west down Tenth St or coming from the South along the west side of Patton as the two most likely possibilities.

Careful! I only said that Scoggins did not see the shooter cross in front of his cab, not that the shooter didn't do so!

While Scoggins did see the police car go by, a vehicle is larger object and less likely to be missed by a casual observer on a quiet side street. That he saw the larger object (the police car) doesn't mean that he'd had to see the smaller one (the walking man).

From the WC's prosecutorial standpoint, it would have been ideal if Scoggins had said that, yes, he'd seen the man walk from west to east across Patton, and that without a doubt, the man was Oswald. Scoggins couldn't or wouldn't say that, and so it was best to simply not address the issue during testimony.

To call attention to the fact that Scoggins had been looking and didn't see anyone cross the street would have been potentially exculpatory to Oswald since, if he'd have come from any other direction, he'd have had to walk either past or ahead of Helen Markham, or have had to walk around more blocks than even they could provide him time to do ... or he'd have had to have some other way to have gotten past Scoggins' cab without being seen (i.e., an accomplice, probably driving him there).

One was highly improbable, and neither of the other two was a tenable alternative, so for it to have been Oswald, he'd have to have come from the west and crossed Patton, seen or unseen by Scoggins.

Since he wasn't asked, Scoggins also didn't say that he didn't see Oswald (or anyone else) cross the street in front of him. The implication is that he perhaps just didn't notice, but it still could've happened. Asked and responded to in the negative, it might be construed to mean that it didn't happen. That was also untenable, because the only other available option is that it wasn't Oswald who did the shooting!

So even while I don't think that the shooter was walking from west to east, crossing Patton, I don't believe it can be said that the possibility can "almost certainly" be eliminated simply because Scoggins didn't see (or notice?) him. He almost didn't even notice the police car!

Duke...please share with us your theory of the Tippit shooter. You say you don't think he

was going west to east (the official theory), so what is your opinion? If he was going

east to west, wouldn't this eliminate the shooter having come from 1026 because of the

greater distance? It would also mean a change in direction of travel at some point. What

was the shooter's route in your opinion?

Jack

[Duke Lane]

Duke...please share with us your theory of the Tippit shooter. You say you don't think he was going west to east (the official theory), so what is your opinion? If he was going east to west, wouldn't this eliminate the shooter having come from 1026 because of the greater distance? It would also mean a change in direction of travel at some point. What was the shooter's route in your opinion?

Jack

I think I've expounded on this at length in another thread, but to synopsize, the shooter's route was from around Garland Road, across the Fort Worth Turnpike, to East Jefferson, to the 10th Street alley, to 10th Street; thence Patton, Jefferson Blvd, Ballew's Texaco, Crawford and back to Garland Road. Admittedly, the Garland Road part may be a little hazy, but the rest is probably fairly dead-on, and really the part of the question you were asking.

The shooter had probably never been to 1026 N Beckley in his life. It's possible he lives in Denton County today.

[Jack White]

Duke...please share with us your theory of the Tippit shooter. You say you don't think he was going west to east (the official theory), so what is your opinion? If he was going east to west, wouldn't this eliminate the shooter having come from 1026 because of the greater distance? It would also mean a change in direction of travel at some point. What was the shooter's route in your opinion?

Jack

I think I've expounded on this at length in another thread, but to synopsize, the shooter's route was from around Garland Road, across the Fort Worth Turnpike, to East Jefferson, to the 10th Street alley, to 10th Street; thence Patton, Jefferson Blvd, Ballew's Texaco, Crawford and back to Garland Road. Admittedly, the Garland Road part may be a little hazy, but the rest is probably fairly dead-on, and really the part of the question you were asking.

The shooter had probably never been to 1026 N Beckley in his life. It's possible he lives in Denton County today.

You obviously are not talking about LHO. Who are you talking about?

Jack

[Jim Feemster]

Duke,

A cab driver's function is to look for pedestrians. Even if Scoggins dropped his sandwhich on the floorboard and reached to pick it up he would have seen the killer coming from the West towards the intersection or seen the killer cross in front of his cab or seen the killer walking to the spot where the killer and Tippit met up.

To me the fact that Scoggins doesn't notice the killer until just before shots are fired is the same thing as saying he did not see the killer cross in front of his cab or at any time or location prior.

In this way it becomes a FACT to me and one a lawyer would prove out in court.

Also, I don't remember seeing curbs on Patton as it runs South to Jefferson in any photos so Helen M. couldn't have seen the killer cross Patton behind the cab, { Someone may prove me wrong if they have photos of the complete intersection} and step up on to the curb.

She never even acknowledges the cab being there.

I can believe almost nothing of what Helen Markum says about this event.

I don't think this is a minor point. IMO Ozwald wasn't the killer----Case Closed.

jim