Are There Any Honest Lone-Gunman Theorists Here?
Michael T. Griffith
and deceptive of Dale Myers' to fail to mention anywhere in the text of
his book WITH MALICE that T. F. Bowley checked his watch when he came on
the scene and that the watch read 1:10? That it was wrong and deceptive
of him to bury these important contrary facts in an endnote?
That Myers surely knew that most of his readers would come away from his
book never knowing that the one and only witness who checked his watch
when he came on the scene said it was 1:10 when he arrived?
That Myers surely should have included and addressed these facts in his
section on when the Tippit shooting occurred, instead of burying them in
an endnote?
That rather than lashing out at those who call attention to his deception,
Myers should just concede that, yes, he should have mentioned and
discussed Bowley's watch-checking and the watch time in his section on the
time of the Tippit shooting?
Is there a single lone-gunman theorist who has the objectivity and candor
to admit this?
MICHAEL T. GRIFFITH
Visit my Real Issues Home Page
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/MGriffith_2/
"No other success can compensate for failure in the home."
-- David O. McKay
R2JUDGE
>From: mtgri...@cs.com (Michael T. Griffith)
>Date: Fri, 17 December 1999 09:47 AM EST
>Message-id: <19991217094744...@nso-bg.news.cs.com>
***Do you have the objectivity and candor to admit that the watch may have
been set at the incorrect time?
The call to the police came in at about 1:16. This would have been
immediately after the shooting. Nobody would have waited about 6 minutes
to call the police about a shot police officer.
***Ron Judge
Viking8350
>***Do you have the objectivity and candor to admit that the watch may have
>been set at the incorrect time?
>
>The call to the police came in at about 1:16. This would have been
>immediately after the shooting. Nobody would have waited about 6 minutes
>to call the police about a shot police officer.
>
>***Ron Judge
I'm not so sure about that Ron. Six minutes is not really that long of a
wait after a shooting. The witnesses were bound to be in shock and then
I'm pretty sure they would first have looked out for their own safety and
stayed back Their next reaction after assuring themselves that their
safety was OK would to have been to tended to the victim. So in my opinion
it could well have taken up to six minutes or longer to report the
shotting.
viking8350
jo...@my-deja.com
r2j...@aol.com (R2JUDGE) wrote:
> ><HTML><PRE>Subject: Are There Any Honest Lone-Gunman Theorists Here?
>
> ***Do you have the objectivity and candor to admit that the watch may have
> been set at the incorrect time?
>
> The call to the police came in at about 1:16. This would have been
> immediately after the shooting. Nobody would have waited about 6 minutes
> to call the police about a shot police officer.
>
> ***Ron Judge
>
Hi Ron, I seem to recall reading somewhere that the man who called in the
shooting on Tippet's car radio (Benavides?) said he waited a few minutes
before making the call. Can anyone confirm that?
joisa
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
tomnln
has left the scene...
I personally would wait long enough to make SURE that the gunman was NOT
going to Return to the scene.
"R2JUDGE" <r2j...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:19991217120921...@ng-bd1.aol.com...
Michael T. Griffith
I do not know him, however and it would be rather presumptuous to say that
was his motive when I have no possible way of knowing that. It would also
be rather presumptuous to say that T. F. Bowley looking at a watch can
establish the exact time and prove problems with the lone gunman theory.
I have within view of me at this time 4 clocks, not a single one of them
keeps perfect time with each other and they vary in some cases by up to 11
minutes.
Watches are notoriously unreliable over time, and it is possible his was
off by 4 to 5 minutes and he would not necessarily even notice that if it
was in good keeping with clocks at his place of work or at his home. How
many of us reset a watch if it is within a minute or two of the clocks at
the places we frequent?
I don't think that we can necessarily dismiss Oswald from the Tippet
killing based on one witnesses watch.
I do not exactly qualify as a Lone Gunman theorist, but I thought perhaps
this answer may be of some benefit. I could be wrong, it has happened
before.
Dr. Ford >>
Thank you for a reasonable, credible answer to my questions. Yes,
"perhaps it was" wrong for Myers to omit Bowley's watch-checking and the
watch's time from his discussion of the timing of the shooting.
I note your comments about the implications of the watch's time. One can
make these arguments. This is what Myers should have done, instead of
burying the watch-time evidence in an endnote.
Of course, it should be kept in mind that when Bowley arrived, Benavides
had already gotten in the patrol car and was already trying to work the
radio, and Benavides said he waited "a few minutes" before he got into the
car following the shooting. We should also keep in mind that by the time
Bowley arrived, people had already started to gather around the scene.
Yes, some watches are off, but others aren't. If anything, don't many if
not most people set their watches a few minutes fast, so as not to be
late? Also, Bowley never even hinted that his watch was markedly off, or
that it was off at all, for that matter.
Even assuming Bowley's watch was, say, as much as 5 minutes SLOW and that
it was actually 1:15 when Bowley arrived, this would still put the time of
the shooting at well before 1:15. As mentioned, when Bowley came on the
scene, Benavides was already in the squad car trying to work the radio and
some people had already begun to gather at the scene. Furthermore, Bowley
reportedly didn't check his watch right at the moment he arrived, but a
little bit afterward.
In order for Bowley's watch time of 1:10 to harmonize with Myers' time of
1:14:30 for the shooting, Bowley's watch would have had to be 7-10 minutes
SLOW. I don't think that's a reasonable scenario.
Again, Bowley never even hinted that his watch was markedly off, and I
think it's fair to say that many if not most people have their watches set
a few minutes fast so as to give themselves a little leeway.
Michael T. Griffith
>> ***Do you have the objectivity and candor to admit that the watch may have
>> been set at the incorrect time?
Certainly, and that's an argument that Myers could and should have made,
instead of saying nothing at all about Bowley's watch-checking and watch
time in his section on the time of the shooting.
Of course, there's a problem with that: In order to harmonize Bowley's
watch time with Myers' time of 1:14:30, we'd have to assume Bowley's watch
was some 7-10 minutes SLOW. Also, Bowley never even hinted that his watch
was markedly off, or that it was off at all. Don't most people set their
watches a few minutes fast so as to give themselves a little leeway?
>> The call to the police came in at about 1:16. This would have been
>> immediately after the shooting. Nobody would have waited about 6 minutes
>> to call the police about a shot police officer.
You're relying on the DPD transcripts? Which "version"? Have you read
Hurt's comments on the DPD transcripts in REASONABLE DOUBT?
What if the DPD clock was off?
Which is easier to believe: That there's something wrong with the DPD time
or that Bowley's watch was 7-10 minutes slow, that Benavides only
"thought" he waited a "few minutes" before he approached the patrol car
even though he was scared for his life, and that Mrs. Markham was at 10th
and Patton at 1:14:30 on her way to catch her 1:12 bus that was coming to
a bus stop that was still a block away?
>>
>> ***Ron Judge
>
>Hi Ron, I seem to recall reading somewhere that the man who called in the
>shooting on Tippet's car radio (Benavides?) said he waited a few minutes
>before making the call. Can anyone confirm that?
Yes, Benavides himself said he waited "a few minutes" before he came out
of hiding and approached the patrol car. This is completely logical,
credible, and understandable. He was scared for his life. He had just
seen a cop get gunned down. Naturally, he would not have rushed over the
patrol car just seconds after the shots were fired. He said he hid out of
the gunman's view and waited "a few minutes" before he went to the car.
Any sane person would have done the same thing. Benavides wanted to make
sure the killer had left the area before he came out from hiding and
approached the patrol car.
Russ and Carrie Burr
"Michael T. Griffith" wrote:
> a few minutes fast so as to give themselves a little leeway.
Well, we need to consider Scoggins estimation of when this murder occured.
QUOTE:
Mr. BELIN. What were you doing, eating your lunch?
Mr. SCOGGINS. I was in the process of eating it.
Mr. BELIN. You were in the process?
Mr. SCOGGINS. I had taken one or two bites of my sandwich and drank a
couple of swallows out of my coke.
Mr. BELIN. All right.
Mr. DULLES. What time was this, approximately, as far as you can recall?
Mr. SCOGGINS. Around 1:20 in the afternoon.
Mr. BELIN. All right. Will you please state then what happened, what you
saw, what you did, what you heard?
Mr. SCOGGINS. Well, I first seen the police car cruising east.
Mr. BELlN. About how fast was it cruising?
Mr. SCOGGINS. Not more than 10 or 12 miles a hour, I would say.
Mr. BELIN. It was going east on what street?
Mr. SCOGGINS. On Tenth.
Mr. BELIN. All right. Did you see the police car go across right in front
of yours?
324
Page 325
Mr. SCOGGINS. Yes; he went right down the street. He come from the west,
going east On east Tenth.
Mr. BELIN. Then what did you see?
Mr. SCOGGINS. I noticed he stopped down there, and I wasn't paying too
much attention to the man, you see, just used to see him every day, but
then I kind of looked down the street, saw this, someone, that looked to
me like he was going west, now, I couldn't exactly say whether he was
going west or was in the process of turning around, but he was facing west
when I saw him.
Mr. BELIN. All right.
Mr. SCOGGINS. And he was--he stopped there.
Mr. BELIN. Let me ask you this now. When you first saw this man, had the
police car stopped or not?
Mr. SCOGGINS. Yes; he stopped. When I saw he stopped, then I looked to
see why he was stopping, you see, and I saw this man with a light-colored
jacket on.
Mr. BELIN. Now, you saw a man with a light-colored jacket. With relation
to the police car, was the man east of the police car, west of the police
car, or kind of
Mr. SCOGGINS. Just a little east is the best I can remember.
Mr. BELIN. He was a little bit east of the police car?
Mr. SCOGGINS. Yes; he was just a little bit forward. The police car
headed east and he was a little bit, maybe not more than the front end of
the car.
Mr. BELIN. You thought the man was at the front end of the car?
Mr. SCOGGINS. Yes; approximately.
QUOTE OFF
The bottom line is that hand wound watches are not accurate. I'd put my
bets on the DPD time.....it was probably electric, but I'll need to check
with Gary Mack on that.....
Russ
jo...@my-deja.com
> >> The call to the police came in at about 1:16. This would have been
> >> immediately after the shooting. Nobody would have waited about 6
> >> minutes to call the police about a shot police officer.
> >I seem to recall reading somewhere that the man who called in the
> >minutes before making the call. Can anyone confirm that?
>
> Yes, Benavides himself said he waited "a few minutes" before he came
> out of hiding and approached the patrol car. This is completely
> logical, credible, and understandable. He was scared for his life.
> He had just seen a cop get gunned down. Naturally, he would not have
> rushed over the patrol car just seconds after the shots were fired.
> before he went to the car.
> Any sane person would have done the same thing. Benavides wanted to
> make sure the killer had left the area before he came out from hiding
> and approached the patrol car.
Which means that, according to Benavides' statement, the shooting took
place "a few minutes" before he made the call to DPD on Tippet's radio.
Since "the call to the police came in at about 1:16", the shooting would
have been at about 1:14. This would give Oswald even less time to arrive
at the scene.
Todd W. Vaughan
Russ,
They were analog clocks which were calibrated once a month.
--
Todd W. Vaughan
Russ Burr
mtgri...@cs.com says...
>
>Scoggins is the same guy who came up with the curious, belated testimony
>to the effect that the assailant suddenly changed direction before he shot
>Tippit.
Mike, I wouldn't call Scoggins statements belated nor did Scoggins say he
definatively changed directions.
From his testimony to the WC:
Mr. BELIN. All right. Did you see the police car go across right in front of
yours?
324
Page 325
Mr. SCOGGINS. Yes; he went right down the street. He come from the
west, going east On east Tenth.
Mr. BELIN. Then what did you see? Mr. SCOGGINS. I noticed he
stopped down there, and I wasn't paying too much attention to the man, you
see, just used to see him every day, but then I kind of looked down the
street, saw this, someone, that looked to me like he was going west, now,
I couldn't exactly say whether he was going west or was in the process of
turning around, but he was facing west when I saw him.
Mr. BELIN. All right.
Mr. SCOGGINS. And he was--he stopped there.
I suspect this was designed to lend credence to the claim that
>the assailant was walking away from Tippit, whereas all of the initial
>police reports, based on eyewitness accounts, said he was walking TOWARD
>Tippit's car.
So you agree with the DPD homicide report that Oswald was walking west
(and than turned around, going east), prior to the shooting? I don't see
how Scoggin's testimony is at variance with him walking west or
east......have you read "With Malice"? If so, then you're the first CT to
agree with the the DPD. I think, as is pointed out in Myer's work, that
Oswald was walking west and upon seeing Tippit's squad he turned around
and went in a easterly direction. That could be the reason Tippit pulled
Oswald over to his car... He most likely turned around when Tippit pulled
to the curb...so he'd be facing west...as Scoggin's said....
And some of the witnesses said Oswald was walking east...Tatum and Markham
(depending on who interviewed her;-).
If he was walking west from the direction of Marsalis, do you think he had
enough time to get that far, walking in a eastward direction, in respect
to his roominghouse?
>
>So I don't put much stock in Scoggins' time estimate of 1:20.
Than why would you put much stock in Bowley's 1:08 statement? Do you think
he had an Accutron??? The bottomline is not the time....it's the physical
evidence that tied Oswald and his pistol to the crime. You can also add
the witnesses that picked Oswald out of the showup.
I wonder if you put much stock in Markham's testimony? She changed her
statements 3 times to the SS, the FBI and the WC.....
Russ
Russ Burr
mtgri...@cs.com says...
>
>Another problem I have with the lone-gunman view of the Tippit shooting is
>that it assumes Tippit stopped Oswald on the basis of the very general
>description that went out over police radio. I don't buy this story.
>
>Tippit was hardly a go-getter; he hadn't been promoted in ten years. Also,
>the description in question was quite general and would have fit thousands
>of other males in the Dallas-Ft. Worth area.
>
>So why would Tippit have stopped "Oswald"? Because he was WALKING in a
>quiet, middle-class neighborhood? Because he, like thousands of other
>males in the area, "matched" the rather general description that went out
>over police radio?
>
>For that matter, what was Tippit doing in quiet, middle-class central Oak
>Cliff, which wasn't even his area?
>
>Who was in the police car that stopped in front of Oswald's boarding house
>and tapped its horn a couple times just after Oswald entered the house?
>Why was it there? The car surely wasn't there for Mrs. Roberts, the
>landlady.
>
>Sadly, most WC supporters, unable to produce an innocent explanation for a
>police car stopping in front of Oswald's boarding house and tapping its
>horn just after he entered the house, resort to saying or implying that
>Mrs. Roberts simply fabricated this story.
>
>If there is a witness in this case who comes across as wholly credible,
>disinterested, and sincere, it is Mrs. Roberts. Go listen to the radio
>interview that Mrs. Roberts gave shortly after the assassination--the
>woman didn't have a dishonest bone in her body. She was a simple,
>down-to-earth, sincere woman who had no possible motive for inventing such
>a story.
>
>I don't know what the number of the police car was, and Mrs. Roberts
>frankly said she wasn't sure and gave several possible numbers. But she
>was certain it was a police car, and she was certain it stopped in front
>of her house and tapped its horn a couple times--she saw the car in front
>of her house.
You obviously haven't read with "With Malice"....
Roberts story is like swiss cheese....did you know she changed her mind 3
times about the squad car's number...let's see, was it 207 or 106 or
107??? And gee whiz, she didn't even tell the story about the squad car
until five days "after" the assassination. And she had plenty of
opportunity to do so since she was questioned on the 22nd. I wouldn't call
her credible in the least.
Russ
Russ Burr
mtgri...@cs.com says...
>
>In article <83k67i$47p$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, jo...@my-deja.com writes:
>
>>Which means that, according to Benavides' statement, the shooting took
>>place "a few minutes" before he made the call to DPD on Tippet's radio.
>>Since "the call to the police came in at about 1:16", the shooting would
>>have been at about 1:14. This would give Oswald even less time to arrive
>>at the scene.
>
>a mile, part of which was somewhat uphill. A man walking at a good pace
>will do well to cover that distance in 11-12 minutes--that would be
>walking at a very fast clip.
Mike, I walked the distance with Greg Jaynes and Cecil Jones, with a
camcorder in under 12 minutes. I never jogged, ran, or took shortcuts. I
was also 20 plus years older than Oswald, I had a bum knee (at the
time..it's been replaced since) and was a heavy smoker...plus I was
carrying Greg's camcorder with me, which meant I had to check the
viewfinder a bunch of times to make sure I was filming properly.
All those variables slowed me down... and that hill you mention isn't that
much of a steep grade.
>
>According to his landlady, Oswald was STANDING at a bus stop across the
>street from the boarding house at around 1:02-1:04. Even assuming Oswald
>immediately took off toward 10th and Patton as soon as his landlady looked
>away from her window, he would have barely gotten to 10th and Patton at no
>earlier than 1:13.
And how do you know Roberts time estimate is exact???
>
> But Mrs. Markham said the assailant was walking along (apparently at a
>casual rate, not speed walking) when she first saw him, and that Tippit
>then pulled up to him, that the two had what seemed to be a friendly chat
>through the window, apparently for at least a minute or so, that Tippit
>then got out of the car, and that then and only then did the man shoot
>Tippit.
>
>Of course, all this is assuming Oswald speed walked to 10th and Patton,
>though he was last seen STANDING at a bus stop across the street from his
>boarding house at a few minutes after 1:00.
Prove to me that it was exactly a few minutes after 1PM.
>
>It's more likely that it would have taken Oswald about 15-18 minutes to
>walk to 10th and Patton.
Try walking it yourself.....if I didn't have the camcorder and even
slightly jogged I could have made it in 11 minutes easy. I have it on tape
to prove my point.....
Russ
Michael T. Griffith
to the effect that the assailant suddenly changed direction before he shot
the assailant was walking away from Tippit, whereas all of the initial
police reports, based on eyewitness accounts, said he was walking TOWARD
Tippit's car.
So I don't put much stock in Scoggins' time estimate of 1:20.
Mike Griffith
Michael T. Griffith
>Which means that, according to Benavides' statement, the shooting took
>place "a few minutes" before he made the call to DPD on Tippet's radio.
>Since "the call to the police came in at about 1:16", the shooting would
>have been at about 1:14. This would give Oswald even less time to arrive
>at the scene.
Indeed, from his boarding house, Oswald would have had to walk 9/10ths of
a mile, part of which was somewhat uphill. A man walking at a good pace
will do well to cover that distance in 11-12 minutes--that would be
walking at a very fast clip.
According to his landlady, Oswald was STANDING at a bus stop across the
street from the boarding house at around 1:02-1:04. Even assuming Oswald
immediately took off toward 10th and Patton as soon as his landlady looked
away from her window, he would have barely gotten to 10th and Patton at no
earlier than 1:13.
But Mrs. Markham said the assailant was walking along (apparently at a
casual rate, not speed walking) when she first saw him, and that Tippit
then pulled up to him, that the two had what seemed to be a friendly chat
through the window, apparently for at least a minute or so, that Tippit
then got out of the car, and that then and only then did the man shoot
Tippit.
Of course, all this is assuming Oswald speed walked to 10th and Patton,
though he was last seen STANDING at a bus stop across the street from his
boarding house at a few minutes after 1:00.
It's more likely that it would have taken Oswald about 15-18 minutes to
walk to 10th and Patton.
Mike Griffith
Michael T. Griffith
Mike Griffith
Viking8350
>In article <19991221202508...@nso-fq.news.cs.com>,
>mtgri...@cs.com says
>>Another problem I have with the lone-gunman view of the Tippit shooting is
>You obviously haven't read with "With Malice"....
>
>Roberts story is like swiss cheese....did you know she changed her mind 3
>times about the squad car's number...let's see, was it 207 or 106 or
>107??? And gee whiz, she didn't even tell the story about the squad car
>until five days "after" the assassination. And she had plenty of
>opportunity to do so since she was questioned on the 22nd. I wouldn't call
>her credible in the least.
>
>Russ
>
is it because her testomony doesn't fit your theory?
Happy Holidays
viking8350
CM2
<Russ_...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> I think, as is pointed out in Myer's work, that Oswald was walking west
> and upon seeing Tippit's squad he turned around and went in a easterly
> direction. That could be the reason Tippit pulled Oswald over to his
> car.
This is the one thing that doesn't seem to fit. Nerves of steel when Baker
points a gun at him 90 seconds after the assassination, but now so jumpy
that he makes himself obvious to a passing police car.
joez...@my-deja.com
When Oswald was arrested, there was no jacket in sight.
What happened to that jacket, Mike?
And why would Oswald just throw away a perfectly good jacket?
In article <19991221202508...@nso-fq.news.cs.com>,
mtgri...@cs.com (Michael T. Griffith) wrote:
<snip>
> If there is a witness in this case who comes across as wholly credible,
> disinterested, and sincere, it is Mrs. Roberts. Go listen to the radio
> interview that Mrs. Roberts gave shortly after the assassination--the
> woman didn't have a dishonest bone in her body. She was a simple,
> down-to-earth, sincere woman who had no possible motive for inventing such
> a story.
>
<snip>
>
> Mike Griffith
> MICHAEL T. GRIFFITH
> Visit my Real Issues Home Page
> http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/MGriffith_2/
>
> "No other success can compensate for failure in the home."
> -- David O. McKay
>
>
--
"We're really in nut country now, Toto."
Russ and Carrie Burr
Viking8350 wrote:
> >From: Russ Burr
>
> >In article <19991221202508...@nso-fq.news.cs.com>,
> >mtgri...@cs.com says
>
> >>Another problem I have with the lone-gunman view of the Tippit shooting is
> >>that it assumes Tippit stopped Oswald on the basis of the very general
> >>description that went out over police radio. I don't buy this story.
> >>
> >>Tippit was hardly a go-getter; he hadn't been promoted in ten years. Also,
> >>the description in question was quite general and would have fit thousands
> >>of other males in the Dallas-Ft. Worth area.
> >>
> >>So why would Tippit have stopped "Oswald"? Because he was WALKING in a
> >>quiet, middle-class neighborhood? Because he, like thousands of other
> >>males in the area, "matched" the rather general description that went out
> >>over police radio?
> >>
> >>For that matter, what was Tippit doing in quiet, middle-class central Oak
> >>Cliff, which wasn't even his area?
> >>
> >>Who was in the police car that stopped in front of Oswald's boarding house
> >>and tapped its horn a couple times just after Oswald entered the house?
> >>Why was it there? The car surely wasn't there for Mrs. Roberts, the
> >>landlady.
> >>
> >>Sadly, most WC supporters, unable to produce an innocent explanation for a
> >>police car stopping in front of Oswald's boarding house and tapping its
> >>horn just after he entered the house, resort to saying or implying that
> >>Mrs. Roberts simply fabricated this story.
> >>
> >>If there is a witness in this case who comes across as wholly credible,
> >>disinterested, and sincere, it is Mrs. Roberts. Go listen to the radio
> >>interview that Mrs. Roberts gave shortly after the assassination--the
> >>woman didn't have a dishonest bone in her body. She was a simple,
> >>down-to-earth, sincere woman who had no possible motive for inventing such
> >>a story.
> >>
> >>I don't know what the number of the police car was, and Mrs. Roberts
> >>frankly said she wasn't sure and gave several possible numbers. But she
> >>was certain it was a police car, and she was certain it stopped in front
> >>of her house and tapped its horn a couple times--she saw the car in front
> >>of her house.
> >
> >You obviously haven't read with "With Malice"....
> >
> >Roberts story is like swiss cheese....did you know she changed her mind 3
> >times about the squad car's number...let's see, was it 207 or 106 or
> >107??? And gee whiz, she didn't even tell the story about the squad car
> >until five days "after" the assassination. And she had plenty of
> >opportunity to do so since she was questioned on the 22nd. I wouldn't call
> >her credible in the least.
> >
> >Russ
> >
>
> is it because her testomony doesn't fit your theory?
Happy Holidays to you to!
It has nothing to do with my theory......it has to do with her statements.
I'm open minded enough not to 'stick' to a theory.
When a witness changes her story 2 or more times it doesn't lend
to much credence to her credibility.
If Roberts had insisted on the squad car number and it's occupants
from the very begining I'd give her the benefit of the doubt.....
But that isn't the case in this situation.
Russ
Russ and Carrie Burr
CM2 wrote:
Who said he had nerves of steel when he encountered Baker?? How long was
this encounter?? I'd guess less than 30 seconds.....what do you expect
Oswald do have done? Fall to his knees and confess?
And when he shot Tippit he didn't immediately flee....he stopped and
returned and shot him in the right temple.
Russ
Tom Pinkston
><Russ_...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>> I think, as is pointed out in Myer's work, that Oswald was walking west
>> and upon seeing Tippit's squad he turned around and went in a easterly
>> direction. That could be the reason Tippit pulled Oswald over to his
>> car.
>
>This is the one thing that doesn't seem to fit. Nerves of steel when Baker
>points a gun at him 90 seconds after the assassination, but now so jumpy
>that he makes himself obvious to a passing police car.
>
>
I have thought about this a fair amount and read what there is about this
point. Here is my 2 cents worth.
One of the techniques taught to spies (when they think they are being
tailed) is to suddenly turn and walk the other direction as this may cause
the person who might be trailing behind as a tail to show themselves by
accident.
Now, before anyone goes ballistic and freaks out about this let me state
that I don't mean to imply from this that Oswald received intelligence
training, my guess is he could have picked this technique up from reading
"I Led Three Lives" just a little too closely, or from the street kids in
NYC.
Oswald's movements from the time he left the TSBD, through downtown
Dallas, and then on to Oak Cliff sort of remind me of this kind of
"tradecraft" as well.
So.....I think Oswald was walking towards the on-coming police car and
turned suddenly to walk away from it. This behavior may have caught
Tippit's attention and he decided to investigate. Clearly, Tippit must
have been spurred to action by something or some action.
Why Oswald decided to kill Tippit can never be known, but I think he was
scared and felt he had no choice. His loss of nerve is not easily
explained relative to his confrontation with Baker only a 45 minutes
before. His specific reaction to Tippit needs a good deal of consideration
by all. The thing is though, if Myers's version is correct, Oswald
executed Tippit with a fair amount of calmness. So his actions could be
viewed as being somewhat consistent.
Tom
CM2
<l...@foxvalley.net> wrote:
> > In article <83palr$1o...@drn.newsguy.com>, Russ Burr
> > <Russ_...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> > > I think, as is pointed out in Myer's work, that Oswald was walking
> > > west and upon seeing Tippit's squad he turned around and went in a
> > > easterly direction. That could be the reason Tippit pulled Oswald
> > > over to his car.
> >
> > This is the one thing that doesn't seem to fit. Nerves of steel when
> > Baker points a gun at him 90 seconds after the assassination, but now
> > so jumpy that he makes himself obvious to a passing police car.
> Who said he had nerves of steel when he encountered Baker?? How long was
> this encounter?? I'd guess less than 30 seconds.....what do you expect
> Oswald do have done? Fall to his knees and confess?
Well, judging by what Marina said about him after Walker, yes . . . ;-)
Russ and Carrie Burr
Tom Pinkston wrote:
> >In article <83palr$1o...@drn.newsguy.com>, Russ Burr
> ><Russ_...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> >> I think, as is pointed out in Myer's work, that Oswald was walking west
> >> and upon seeing Tippit's squad he turned around and went in a easterly
> >> direction. That could be the reason Tippit pulled Oswald over to his
> >> car.
> >
> >This is the one thing that doesn't seem to fit. Nerves of steel when Baker
> >points a gun at him 90 seconds after the assassination, but now so jumpy
> >that he makes himself obvious to a passing police car.
> >
> >
>
> I have thought about this a fair amount and read what there is about this
> point. Here is my 2 cents worth.
>
> One of the techniques taught to spies (when they think they are being
> tailed) is to suddenly turn and walk the other direction as this may cause
> the person who might be trailing behind as a tail to show themselves by
> accident.
I work with conduct disordered adloescents and they would do this! But I
agree with Myer's thesis that this movement caused Tippit to notice him.
Plus, it dovetails with the different directions cited by the witnesses.
>
>
> Now, before anyone goes ballistic and freaks out about this let me state
> that I don't mean to imply from this that Oswald received intelligence
> training, my guess is he could have picked this technique up from reading
> "I Led Three Lives" just a little too closely, or from the street kids in
> NYC.
Common sense could dictate that kind of behavior if you're involved in a
crime......personally, I think that a seasoned criminal would just keep
walking in the same direction. But Oswald wan't a seasoned criminal.
>
>
> Oswald's movements from the time he left the TSBD, through downtown
> Dallas, and then on to Oak Cliff sort of remind me of this kind of
> "tradecraft" as well.
>
> So.....I think Oswald was walking towards the on-coming police car and
> turned suddenly to walk away from it. This behavior may have caught
> Tippit's attention and he decided to investigate. Clearly, Tippit must
> have been spurred to action by something or some action.
That's what I think! And that is what Myers's "With Malice" suggests.
>
>
> Why Oswald decided to kill Tippit can never be known, but I think he was
> scared and felt he had no choice. His loss of nerve is not easily
> explained relative to his confrontation with Baker only a 45 minutes
> before. His specific reaction to Tippit needs a good deal of consideration
> by all. The thing is though, if Myers's version is correct, Oswald
> executed Tippit with a fair amount of calmness. So his actions could be
> viewed as being somewhat consistent.
I think he killed Tippit because he feared Tippit would check his ID(s).
With ID's for Hidell and Oswald would have created enough doubt in
Tippit's mind to pull him in for questioning, imo.
Russ
Viking8350
>>In article <83palr$1o...@drn.newsguy.com>, Russ Burr
>><Russ_...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>>> I think, as is pointed out in Myer's work, that Oswald was walking west
>>> and upon seeing Tippit's squad he turned around and went in a easterly
>>> direction. That could be the reason Tippit pulled Oswald over to his
>>> car.
>>
>>This is the one thing that doesn't seem to fit. Nerves of steel when Baker
>>points a gun at him 90 seconds after the assassination, but now so jumpy
>>that he makes himself obvious to a passing police car.
>>
>>
>
>I have thought about this a fair amount and read what there is about this
>point. Here is my 2 cents worth.
>
>One of the techniques taught to spies (when they think they are being
>tailed) is to suddenly turn and walk the other direction as this may cause
>the person who might be trailing behind as a tail to show themselves by
>accident.
>
he wouldn't have wanted to do that with a police oficer as it would have
made him look suspicious.
>Now, before anyone goes ballistic and freaks out about this let me state
>that I don't mean to imply from this that Oswald received intelligence
>training, my guess is he could have picked this technique up from reading
>"I Led Three Lives" just a little too closely, or from the street kids in
>NYC.
>
>Oswald's movements from the time he left the TSBD, through downtown
>Dallas, and then on to Oak Cliff sort of remind me of this kind of
>"tradecraft" as well.
>
>So.....I think Oswald was walking towards the on-coming police car and
>turned suddenly to walk away from it. This behavior may have caught
>Tippit's attention and he decided to investigate. Clearly, Tippit must
>have been spurred to action by something or some action.
>
>Why Oswald decided to kill Tippit can never be known, but I think he was
>scared and felt he had no choice. His loss of nerve is not easily
>explained relative to his confrontation with Baker only a 45 minutes
>before. His specific reaction to Tippit needs a good deal of consideration
>by all. The thing is though, if Myers's version is correct, Oswald
>executed Tippit with a fair amount of calmness. So his actions could be
>viewed as being somewhat consistent.
>
>Tom
>
Happy Holidays
viking8350
Viking8350
thank you Russ, I respect your opinion and I thank you for your input.
May peace come to those that seek it.
viking8350
JudyandJFK
>From: Russ and Carrie Burr l...@foxvalley.net
>Date: Wed, 22 December 1999 05:18 PM EST
>Message-id: <38614E42...@foxvalley.net>
Happy Holidays to Viking and Russ,
Let me see, we are suppose to take Roberts later statements and her
changes, but refuse to accept Brennan's later statements. I tell you what,
let us just accept their first statements only. Thus, Brennan did see a
shooter taking the final shot from the 6th floor window. Roberts did see
LHO come in and leave quickly. Sounds okay to me.
Judy
Todd W. Vaughan
> MICHAEL T. GRIFFITH
> Visit my Real Issues Home Page
> http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/MGriffith_2/
>
> "No other success can compensate for failure in the home."
> -- David O. McKay
>
>
Mikey,
Have you read With Malice?
Yes or No?
Do you even have the book?
Or are you waiting for Santa to place it under your tree, all wrapped
up, nice and tight?
If you awoke on Christmas AM and tore open a brightly wrapped copy of
Dales book, do you think you could find time over the remaining course
of your life to read it?
--
Todd W. Vaughan
joez...@my-deja.com
mtgri...@cs.com (Michael T. Griffith) wrote:
> Another problem I have with the lone-gunman view of the Tippit shooting is
> that it assumes Tippit stopped Oswald on the basis of the very general
> description that went out over police radio. I don't buy this story.
>
> Tippit was hardly a go-getter; he hadn't been promoted in ten years. Also,
> the description in question was quite general and would have fit thousands
> of other males in the Dallas-Ft. Worth area.
>
> So why would Tippit have stopped "Oswald"? Because he was WALKING in a
> quiet, middle-class neighborhood? Because he, like thousands of other
> males in the area, "matched" the rather general description that went out
> over police radio?
Harris & Shaw uncovered information that Tippit was having an affair with
a waitress, a waitress who, it turns out, lived on that block. Tippit may
have been stopping by for a lunchtime visit. This explains why he alone,
among all the squad cars in the surrounding area, failed to advance to the
TSBD. Unfortunately for Tippit, he may have simply happened to pull over
to the same curb that Oswald was either walking along, or was advancing
toward. And Oswald, fresh off shooting the president, mis-interpreted
Tippit's actions as Tippit intending to stop him (Oswald). Tippit did not,
remember, call Oswald to the car. Oswald approached the car and spoke to
the officer through the side vent. Tippit did not unholster his weapon, or
draw it when getting out of the car. Tippit did not call in that he was
stopping a suspect. Instead, Tippit got out of the car, calmly, and walked
toward the front. Where he was gunned down by Oswald. All of Tippit's
actions point toward him not stopping Oswald at all. His actions point to
him merely being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
--
"We're really in nut country now, Toto."
joez...@my-deja.com
>
> >Which means that, according to Benavides' statement, the shooting took
> >place "a few minutes" before he made the call to DPD on Tippet's radio.
> >Since "the call to the police came in at about 1:16", the shooting would
> >have been at about 1:14. This would give Oswald even less time to arrive
> >at the scene.
>
> Indeed, from his boarding house, Oswald would have had to walk 9/10ths of
No. Actually it's .85 of a mile, or 85/100ths. You rounded it up an
additional .05 miles (about 6% greater than the actual distance), or
roughly 87 yards - almost the distance of a football field. Why? To
make it seem longer?
> a mile, part of which was somewhat uphill.
The only part uphill, as I recall from my own walk 6 years ago, was the
first 20 feet or so, when heading south from directly outside the
roominghouse. There's a slight rise, then that's it. The remainder was
over pretty level ground, as I recall. Is that accurate, or do you
dispute that?
> A man walking at a good pace
> will do well to cover that distance in 11-12 minutes--that would be
> walking at a very fast clip.
>
> According to his landlady, Oswald was STANDING at a bus stop across the
> street from the boarding house at around 1:02-1:04. Even assuming
No, she mentioned no time specifically. She said Oswald arrived around
1 pm, and left a few minutes later, which would still qualify
as 'around 1 pm'. You get to 1:02 - 1:04 by falsely assuming that when
she said Oswald arrived at 'around 1 pm' she meant at exactly 1 pm.
Quite simply, that is false precision.
>Oswald
> immediately took off toward 10th and Patton as soon as his landlady looked
> away from her window, he would have barely gotten to 10th and Patton at no
> earlier than 1:13.
>
Assuming, as you do, that he was seen outside at 1:02. But that is
false precision. And your later time of 1:13 is thus equally falsely
precise.
> But Mrs. Markham said the assailant was walking along (apparently at a
> casual rate, not speed walking) when she first saw him, and that Tippit
> then pulled up to him, that the two had what seemed to be a friendly chat
> through the window, apparently for at least a minute or so, that Tippit
A minute or so? Don't think so. She said the two men interacted for
seconds in the affadavit she gave (the same one that she ESTIMATED the
time as 1:06, BTW). Why does seconds = at least a minute or so to you?
And by the way, do you give as much credence to Markham's estimate that
she interacted with Tippit for nearly 20 minutes, as you do to her 1:06
time?
Clearly, you discount her claiming the men interacted for seconds, and
up it by a factor of 15 to 20 times greater, at a minimum. Why? Is she
a poor estimator of time, in your view? If not, why did you change her
claim of 'seconds' to 'at least a minute or so?'
> then got out of the car, and that then and only then did the man shoot
> Tippit.
>
> Of course, all this is assuming Oswald speed walked to 10th and Patton,
> though he was last seen STANDING at a bus stop across the street from his
> boarding house at a few minutes after 1:00.
A fast walk can accomplish the walk in 11:30. I know, I did it. And it
could have just as easily been a few minutes before one, or 1:00, that
Bledsoe saw Oswald outside the roominghouse. The time is nowhere able
to be determined as 1:02 - 1:04 as you stated.
>
> It's more likely that it would have taken Oswald about 15-18 minutes to
> walk to 10th and Patton.
>
It took me 11:30 back in 1993, when I was 42 and 250 lbs(18 years older
and 100 pounds heavier than Oswald). Any reasonably fit person in a
hurry could cover that distance in 11 or 12 minutes.
And Joachim Joesten, a long time critic, said he made the longer walk
(straight down N.Beckley to 10th, then northeast on 10th) in 9 to 11
minutes. Was this noted early WC critic lying about his times, or are
his times accurate, in your view?
joez...@my-deja.com
> >
> >In article <83k67i$47p$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, jo...@my-deja.com writes:
> >
> >>Which means that, according to Benavides' statement, the shooting
took
> >>place "a few minutes" before he made the call to DPD on Tippet's
radio.
> >>Since "the call to the police came in at about 1:16", the shooting
would
> >>have been at about 1:14. This would give Oswald even less time to
arrive
> >>at the scene.
> >
> >Indeed, from his boarding house, Oswald would have had to walk 9/10ths of
> >will do well to cover that distance in 11-12 minutes--that would be
> >walking at a very fast clip.
>
> camcorder in under 12 minutes. I never jogged, ran, or took shortcuts. I
> was also 20 plus years older than Oswald, I had a bum knee (at the
> time..it's been replaced since) and was a heavy smoker...plus I was
> carrying Greg's camcorder with me, which meant I had to check the
> viewfinder a bunch of times to make sure I was filming properly.
>
> All those variables slowed me down... and that hill you mention isn't that
> much of a steep grade.
>
> >
> >immediately took off toward 10th and Patton as soon as his landlady looked
> >away from her window, he would have barely gotten to 10th and Patton at no
> >earlier than 1:13.
>
>
> >
> >casual rate, not speed walking) when she first saw him, and that Tippit
> >then pulled up to him, that the two had what seemed to be a friendly chat
> >through the window, apparently for at least a minute or so, that Tippit
> >Tippit.
> >
> >Of course, all this is assuming Oswald speed walked to 10th and Patton,
> >though he was last seen STANDING at a bus stop across the street from his
> >boarding house at a few minutes after 1:00.
>
>
> >
> >walk to 10th and Patton.
>
> slightly jogged I could have made it in 11 minutes easy. I have it on tape
> to prove my point.....
>
> Russ
You're in better shape than I was when I did it. Not carry a camcorder or
anything else, I did it in 11:30 back in 1993 at age 42, when I was 100
lbs heavier than Oswald. Anyone who says it would have taken Oswald 15-18
minutes is kidding themselves.