Message from discussion Where was Oswald going when he left his rooming house?
Received: by 10.68.230.68 with SMTP id sw4mr535067pbc.7.1333248785048;
Sat, 31 Mar 2012 19:53:05 -0700 (PDT)
From: Canuck <prwhit...@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Where was Oswald going when he left his rooming house?
Date: 31 Mar 2012 22:53:04 -0400
Injection-Info: pg6g2000pbb.googlegroups.com; posting-host=188.8.131.52; posting-account=SLeQMQoAAAD7pI-4ccuuW-GxToBgyxyy
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 5.1;
X-Trace: mcadams.posc.mu.edu 1333248784 184.108.40.206 (31 Mar 2012 21:53:04 -0500)
X-Original-Trace: 31 Mar 2012 21:53:04 -0500, 220.127.116.11
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Mar 28, 8:50=A0pm, "Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon)"
> On Mar 28, 11:54=A0am, Canuck <prwhit...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Has any researcher or writer ever come up with an explanation for why
> > Oswald, upon leaving his rooming house shortly after 1:00 pm, decided
> > to walk to the area in Oak Cliff where J.D. Tippit was murdered
> > (shortly before 1:12, when the next bus going downtown was scheduled
> > to reach 10th and Patton, which eyewitness Helen Markham was planning
> > to take to her job at the Eat Well restaurant - where Ruby and Craford
> > regularly ate, btw.)?
> > Perhaps he was planning to meet up with Cecil Lee Small (see my
> > article "The Allegations of Cecil Small" athttp://www.kenrahn.com/JFK/T=
> > - prwhitmey
> Hi Peter,
> Yes, I have.
> He was going to kill Walker. He had to catch a connecting bus at a
> nearby bus stop on W.Jefferson Blvd.
> If he wasn't planning on catching a bus, he would have had no need to
> request a transfer when he left the bus in Dallas shortly after the
> Any theory that doesn't account for the transfer is ignoring strong
> evidence that Oswald had plans to go somewhere by bus after leaving
> the rooming house.
> That's some connection you're building there - Markham worked at a
> restaurant where Jack Ruby ate.
> The conspiracy is starting to become much clearer now. ;D
> Seriously, though, of what pertinence is factoids like that? None that
> I can see.
> And in the article you wrote, I'm confused: Did Small's truck work on
> 11/22 or not? You say they were headed back to North Carolina when...
> **they became stranded in Dallas due to mechanical problems with their
> old truck**. Since they were very low on money at the time, it was
> decided that Mrs. Small would find work in Dallas while Mr. Small
> attempted to **repair the truck** sufficiently so that they could
> continue their trip home, hopefully in time for Christmas in 1963
> (they arrived in Dallas a few weeks prior to the assassination). They
> were allowed to park their truck, which had sleeping facilities in the
> back, on the property of a mechanic. =A0On November 22, 1963, Cecil set
> out **in his truck** for Western Auto on Main Street in downtown
> It sounds like he was driving the truck on 11/22 to get the parts
> necessary to repair the truck that he couldn't drive due to mechanical
> problems with the truck he was driving.
> Do I have that right?
> And then, there's this: "Small did describe his experience to other
> members of the family, and sometime in the late sixties, two FBI
> agents interviewed Small, suggesting that he should get a job and stop
> worrying about the matter. [in other words, they didn't find him
> credible - Hank] ... It is also plausible that Small feared for his
> life as reports quickly came in indicating that Oswald had taken a
> taxi driven by William Whaley (the most senior taxi driver in his
> company and a Teamsters Union member, who died on duty several years
> later in a car accident ). He might have felt it was safer to
> simple keep the information to himself until he got back to the
> security of his home in North Carolina."
> So he told family members and possibly the FBI about it, and yet he
> told no one because he might have feared for his life? Can you even
> establish that Small knew about Whaley's death? If not, the whole
> 'maybe he feared for his life' scenario has no leg to stand on (it's
> really just conjecture on your part with no evidence to support it in
> any case).
> I stopped after this bizarre scenario you paint: I highlighted the
> pertinent parts:
> "The most significant aspect of Small's account is the discussion he
> *ALLEGEDLY* had with Oswald related to *POSSIBLY* exchanging guns.
> *IF* this really occurred, it would provide an innocent explanation
> for Oswald having picked up his .38 revolver at the rooming house. *IT
> IS POSSIBLE* that Oswald was on his way to rendezvous with Small when
> he was questioned by Tippit, who *MIGHT HAVE* noticed the gun, causing
> Oswald to panic. It is also *POSSIBLE* that Oswald and Small had
> already met and were in the process of making a trade when Tippit
> showed up, especially if Small *HAPPENED TO BE* short, heavy-set with
> black, curly hair. Such a description was given by several witnesses
> to the Tippit murder, and Acquilla Clemons, who was ignored by the
> Warren Commission, told Mark Lane that this man had shot Tippit,
> gesturing to a man fitting Oswald's description to leave the scene.
>  *IF*, in fact, Cecil Small shot Tippit with his long-barreled .38,
> that would explain why he did not contact the Dallas Police about
> having picked up Oswald."
> So let me get this straight: Small didn't contact the police because
> maybe he shot Tippit? But Small did tell family members all about it
> and did talk to the FBI about the incident? And of course, Small had
> no motive for shooting Tippit. And there's no evidence Small shot
> Tippit, whereas the shells recovered at the scene matched Oswald's
> gun. And don't even think to suggest that Small gave the gun back to
> Oswald after the shooting; as why would Small shoot Tippit, and why
> would Oswald accept the gun back? You can conjecture all you want, but
> all you really have is a guy telling a story.
> If somebody gunned down a cop in your presence, would you take the gun
> and flee? If you were an innocent man, and stopped for questioning by
> an officer of the law, would you pull out a gun and shoot him dead, or
> just answer his questions?
> Sheez. The lengths you conspiracy people go to try to absolve Oswald
> of the crimes is truly over the top.
> Your scenario is unbelievable. For a believable scenario, consult the
> Warren Report.
You raise some good points. I probably should have filed the article I
received anonymously in my waste paper basket and not contacted Small's
niece. I have to admit I got carried away in my speculation. Btw, the
woman who interviewed Small (which is available from the JFK archives) was
a psychology instructor at a college in Raleigh and was working on a book
about the assassination. However, her house burned down and with it all
her work on the subject. I refuse to speculate that the fire was
intentionally set. - Peter R. Whitmey