Why was Tippit Killed?
RICLAND
and wherefore of the Tippit murder.
Any links...?
ricland
Walt
Instead of barging in here and asking questions that most of us have
answered many years ago, why don't you google back a few years and
read the posts from years ago.....then if you still have questions
post a question that others may be seeking the anser to also.
Thanks
Walt
cdddraftsman
LHO
Jumped Sky High ! Turned 180 degrees when he saw Tippit , that was
enough to cause suspicion and get himself killed in the process .
That's
a rap , iron clad and fully supports and undergirds the WCR , which is
a
beaconof truth in these matters ! ...............tl
RICLAND
I still have questions.
ricland
cdddraftsman
JFK and he " did nothing that he should be ashamed of " .
In his world , you could be what ever you imagined you
could be . His only stumbling block was reality , which
sadly kept interfering with his plans . You do a good job
trying to exonerate him but your a little late . Trial was
held in the DPD basement and the execution was swiftly
carried out in accordance with another mans warped
perception of reality . Have doubts there's all sorts of
weird and crazy people out there ? Open up todays
paper , they haven't gone away , they stare at you in
headlines that spell indictment , people vs , ect , ect
There's a bad moon arising , around every corner , there
lurks a demented killer ...................tl
> ricland- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
David Von Pein
RICLAND
Sorry, David, you explain nothing.
All you do is embellish a self-fulling prophecy.
ricland
RICLAND
> Case Closed . he murdered Tippit because he murdered
> JFK and he " did nothing that he should be ashamed of " .
> In his world , you could be what ever you imagined you
> could be . His only stumbling block was reality , which
> sadly kept interfering with his plans . You do a good job
> trying to exonerate him but your a little late . Trial was
> held in the DPD basement and the execution was swiftly
> carried out in accordance with another mans warped
> perception of reality . Have doubts there's all sorts of
> weird and crazy people out there ? Open up todays
> paper , they haven't gone away , they stare at you in
> headlines that spell indictment , people vs , ect , ect
> There's a bad moon arising , around every corner , there
> lurks a demented killer ...................tl
>
"there lurks a demented killer..."
-- CD
Too bad they no longer publish "Police Gazette," CD.
You'd fit right in with all the rest of the hacks.
ricland
David Von Pein
~shakes head in utter bewilderment~
Almost time to give up on the Ric-ster (already), it would appear.
Yesterday, the LNers are quite "impressive" to the Ric-man. ....
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/1e9c63c68dcc7a1d
Today....I "explain nothing" to him, even via detailed links provided,
clearly showing Oswald's obvious guilt in J.D. Tippit's death.
Go figure that about-face.
~shrugs~
RICLAND
"Obvious guilt," David, is postive ID.
"Obvious guilt," David, is conclusive ballistics matching.
"Obvious guilt" David, is motive.
"Obvious guilt" David, is opportunity.
"Obvious guilt" David, is obvious.
Witness Simmons obviously saw two men -- not of whom fit Oswald's
description.
Oswald obviously didn't have enough time to get to where Tippit was killed.
Oswald obviously had no reason to be where Tippit was killed.
Tippit obviously had no reason to stop Oswald.
The description of Oswald's capture was obviously a lie -- he's quick
enough to shoot Tippit, but not quick enough to shoot an officer walking
towards him from the stage of a movie theatre? He didn't pull a gun on
the cop. The cop obviously lied.
To sum up, the Tippit murder was obviously not done by Oswald. In fact,
the case for Oswald shooting JFK is far stronger.
Which is to say, the Tippit murder by itself, does not provide enough
evidence to convict Oswald, perhaps not enough to even charge him.
Obviously ...
ricland
David Von Pein
>>> "The Tippit murder was obviously not done by Oswald." <<<
=========================
Congrats, Ric....you just made the SUPER-KOOK CLUB. Anybody who
doesn't believe that LHO killed Tippit automatically gains entry to
that clique.*
* = Although I'm still not sure whether or not you're one of those
"I'll Just Pretend To Be Totally Ignorant Of The Evidence Against
Oswald" type of kooks. Care to fess up now, and save me some shoe
(mouse) leather?
But, just for amusement, I'll rip all of your "obviouslys" to shreds
anyway.......
>>> " "Obvious guilt," David, is positive ID." <<<
Which the LNers have here...several times over -- Markham, Scoggins,
Callaway, Tatum, and others.
Next?.....
>>> " "Obvious guilt," David, is conclusive ballistics matching." <<<
Which we have, via ALL FOUR bullet shells....plus Mr. Nicol's
"conclusive" analysis re. one of the 4 Tippit bullets itself (although
the FBI disagreed with that, but the bullets were certainly consistent
with LHO's gun).
>>> " "Obvious guilt" David, is motive." <<<
<chuckle time>
Oswald just killed the Chief Executive....and didn't want to burn for
murder. 'Nuff said re. "motive".
>>> " "Obvious guilt" David, is opportunity." <<<
Which, of course, Oswald had. Why you would think otherwise is a
bigger mystery.
>>> "Witness Simmons obviously saw two men -- not of whom fit Oswald's description." <<<
Try to at least PRETEND you know the players' names. Simmons=Clemons.
And it's interesting you'll "obviously" believe Mrs. Clemons, while
totally disregarding witnesses who actually SAW THE MURDER. Nice kook
approach there.
>>> "Oswald obviously didn't have enough time to get to where Tippit was killed." <<<
Obviously...you're wrong. He had ample time, proven by WC re-
enactments of LHO's probable 11/22 movements. And since nobody had a
stopwatch on Lee (and nobody knew how many MPH he was walking or
running), your point is reduced to a moot one even further.
Read these WR pages, and then spit on them for no good reason.
Okay?.....
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0100b.htm
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0110a.htm
>>> "Oswald obviously had no reason to be where Tippit was killed." <<<
And when did you get together with Lee Harvey in order to know this
information? I'm sure Groden and Fetzer, et al, would LOVE to hear
your story.
>>> "Tippit obviously had no reason to stop Oswald." <<<
<yawn>
Tippit hears the 12:43 APB broadcast on the DPD radio, describing a
"5-10; 165-lb. slender white man" (which is also repeated a little
later as well). Tippit sees Oswald walking on Tenth Street (and Oz
possibly did an "about-face" on Tenth St., perhaps making Tippit even
more suspicious of this guy). So Tippit stops Oswald.
Rocket science? Hardly.
>>> "The description of Oswald's capture was obviously a lie..." <<<
I doubt you even know what happened or who the officer was who was hit
by Oswald. But give it a shot.
>>> "He's quick enough to shoot Tippit, but not quick enough to shoot an officer walking towards him from the stage of a movie theatre?" <<<
As if Oswald would want to start firing away at cops BEFORE he was
even singled out as the suspect.
Next hunk of kookshit please....
>>> "He didn't pull a gun on the cop. The cop obviously lied." <<<
Yep. Kookshit alright.
Everybody lies who implicates Patsy Oswald...right, kook? Why...of
course they did.
Did Brewer and Postal lie too, when they testified to things that
incriminate your lovely Patsy?
(Who wants to bet that this goof doesn't have any idea who those
people even are?)
>>> "To sum up, the Tippit murder was obviously not done by Oswald. In fact, the case for Oswald shooting JFK is far stronger." <<<
To sum up -- You're fucking nuts!
tomnln
"RICLAND" <black...@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:DqadnQgUBcNolGLY...@comcast.com...
David Von Pein
webpage that Tom provided there. You'll see that his research seems to
begin and end with the "timeline" problem and "the jacket" (as if
there's NOTHING else to consider re. the whole matter other than those
two items that he has declared "shady" in some way).
You'll come away with nothing other than a huge belly-laugh after
reading that hunk of subjective "OSWALD CAN'T POSSIBLY BE GUILTY"
"analysis" provided by Mr. Tom-Kook. (Or at least that laugh is all
you SHOULD come away with, at any rate.)
RICLAND
> Congrats, Ric....you just made the SUPER-KOOK CLUB. Anybody who
> doesn't believe that LHO killed Tippit automatically gains entry to
> that clique.*
>
> To Be Totally Ignorant Of The Evidence Against Oswald" type of kooks.
> Care to fess up now, and save me some shoe (mouse) leather?
>
> But, just for amusement, I'll rip all of your "obviouslys" to shreds
> anyway.......
>
>>>> " "Obvious guilt," David, is positive ID." <<<
>
> Which the LNers have here...several times over -- Markham, Scoggins,
> Callaway, Tatum, and others.
>
> Next?.....
None of these people made a postive ID in the approved police line-up
way. Markham, for example, IDed Oswald in a line-up only after seeing
his photo on television. Moreover, she first described the killer as,
"being short and somewhat on the heavy side, with slightly bushy hair" a
description that perfectly fits the one Mrs. Clemons gave.
Also, you leave out Frank Wright, who like Mrs. Clemons said there were
two men.
But even more disconcerting, David, is the way you omit other vital
information. Warren Reynolds was also a witness. You know this. You know
he testified that the man he saw running from Tippit's body was not
Oswald, yet you exclude him from your list of witnesses too.
Why, David?
>
>
>>>> " "Obvious guilt," David, is conclusive ballistics matching." <<<
>
> Which we have, via ALL FOUR bullet shells....plus Mr. Nicol's
> "conclusive" analysis re. one of the 4 Tippit bulets itself (although
> the FBI disagreed with that, but the bullets were certainly consistent
> with LHO's gun).
Please learn the difference between bullets and cartridge cases. The
bullets found in Tippit were too damaged to determine whether they
actually came from LHO's .38.
As to the cartridge cases, they were removed from the pistol and thrown
to the ground as if the killer deliberately wanted them to be found.
Why do you think he did that, David?
>
>
>
>>>> " "Obvious guilt" David, is motive." <<<
>
> <chuckle time>
>
> Oswald just killed the Chief Executive....and didn't want to burn for
> murder. 'Nuff said re. "motive".
And he thought killing Tippit's would prevent him from burning for murder?
C'mon, David, you can do better than that.
>
>
>>>> " "Obvious guilt" David, is opportunity." <<<
>
> Which, of course, Oswald had. Why you would think otherwise is a
> bigger mystery.
1. Oswald didn't have time to get to the Tippit crime scene.
2. No reason yet presented why Oswald would be walking in that part of town.
>
>
>>>> "Witness Simmons obviously saw two men -- not of whom fit Oswald's description." <<<
>
> Try to at least PRETEND you know the players' names. Simmons=Clemons.
> And it's interesting you'll "obviously" believe Mrs. Clemons, while
> totally disregarding witnesses who actually SAW THE MURDER. Nice kook
> approach there.
Wrong again.
Heres's the link: http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKStippet.htm
>
>
>>>> "Oswald obviously didn't have enough time to get to where Tippit was killed." <<<
>
> Obviously...you're wrong. He had ample time, proven by WC re-
> enactments of LHO's probable 11/22 movements. And since nobody had a
> stopwatch on Lee (and nobody knew how many MPH he was walking or
> running), your point is reduced to a moot one even further.
Oswald left his house at 1:00. Tippit was killed at 1:15. Oswald did not
have enough time to walk to the crime scene.
Don't have the exact distance. But someone will supply it shortly.
Also, Oswald had no business in the area of the crime scene. No reason
for being there.
>
> Read these WR pages, and then spit on them for no good reason.
> Okay?.....
>
> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0100b.htm
>
> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0110a.htm
>
>
>>>> "Oswald obviously had no reason to be where Tippit was killed." <<<
>
> And when did you get together with Lee Harvey to know this
> information, Mr. Ric? I'm sure Groden and Fetzer, et al, would LOVE to
> hear your story.
What reason did they give?
>
>
>>>> "Tippit obviously had no reason to stop Oswald." <<<
>
> <yawn>
>
> Tippit hears the 12:43 APB broadcast on the DPD radio, describing a
> "5-10; 165-lb. slender white man" (which is also repeated a little
> later as well). Tippit sees Oswald walking on Tenth Street (and Oz
> possibly did an "about-face" on Tenth St., possibly making Tippit even
> more suspicious of this guy). So Tippit stops Oswald.
>
> Rocket science? Hardly.
You miss the point. The description would match half the male population
of Dallas. It by itself would not compel Tippit to stop Oswald.
In addition, how was this description broadcast so quickly?
>
>
>>>> "The description of Oswald's capture was obviously a lie..." <<<
>
> I doubt you even know what happened or who the officer was who was hit
> by Oswald. But give it a shot.
see below...
>
>
>>>> "He's quick enough to shoot Tippit, but not quick enough to shoot an officer walking towards him from the stage of a movie theatre?" <<<
>
> As if Oswald would want to start firing away at cops BEFORE he was
> even singled out as the suspect.
Or even after, which is why I say he did not pull his gun in the threatre.
The rest of your name-calling and sputtering deleted.
Get a grip, David.
ricland
David Von Pein
way. Markham, for example, IDed Oswald in a line-up only after seeing
his photo on television. Moreover, she first described the killer as,
"being short and somewhat on the heavy side, with slightly bushy hair"
a description that perfectly fits the one Mrs. Clemons gave. Also, you
leave out Frank Wright, who like Mrs. Clemons said there were two
men." <<<
Cite Wright saying that please.
There are bound to be witness discrepancies when describing people/
(suspects). And Markham's "bushy hair" reference has been overblown
(pardon the pun)...she was really referring to the windblown,
dishevelled look to Oswald's appearance/(hair).
The overwhelming preponderance tells us Oswald was the LONE killer of
Tippit...Davis, Davis, Scoggins, and Callaway are rock-solid witnesses
who saw Oswald with a gun running down the street, with Davis and
Davis getting an up-close look at LHO as he DUMPED SHELLS ON THEIR
LAWN. And those shells match Oz's gun. The same gun that he tries to
use on another officer in the theater. That alone hangs Oswald.
>>> "Warren Reynolds was also a witness. He testified that the man he saw running from Tippit's body was not Oswald." <<<
I have no idea why you're telling this falsehood. Let's look at
Reynolds WC testimony (did you bother to ever look at it?).....
Mr. LIEBELER. Did you see this man's face that had the gun in his
hand?
Mr.REYNOLDS. Very good.
Mr. LIEBELER. Subsequent to that time, you were questioned by the
Dallas Police Department, were you not?
Mr.REYNOLDS. No.
Mr. LIEBELER. The Dallas Police Department never talked to you about
the man that you saw going down the street?
Mr.REYNOLDS. Now, they talked to me much later, you mean?
Mr. LIEBELER. OK; let me put it this way: When is the first time that
anybody from any law-enforcement agency, and I mean by that, the FBI,
Secret Service, Dallas Police Department, Dallas County sheriff's
office; you pick it. When is the first time that they ever talked to
you?
Mr.REYNOLDS. January 21.
Mr. LIEBELER. That is the first time they ever talked to you about
what you saw on that day?
Mr.REYNOLDS. That's right.
Mr. LIEBELER. So you never in any way identified this man in the
police department or any other authority, either in November or in
December of 1963; is that correct?
Mr.REYNOLDS. No; I sure didn't.
Mr. LIEBELER. So it can be in no way said that you "fingered" the man
who was running down the street, and identified him as the man who was
going around and putting the gun in his pocket?
Mr.REYNOLDS. It can be said I didn't talk to the authorities.
Mr. LIEBELER. Did you say anything about it to anybody else?
Mr.REYNOLDS. I did.
Mr. LIEBELER. Were you able to identify this man in your own mind?
Mr.REYNOLDS. Yes.
Mr. LIEBELER. You did identify him as Lee Harvey Oswald in your own
mind?
Mr.REYNOLDS. Yes.
Mr. LIEBELER. You had no question about it?
Mr.REYNOLDS. No.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/reynolds.htm
>>> "Please learn the difference between bullets and cartridge cases. The bullets found in Tippit were too damaged to determine whether they actually came from LHO's .38." <<<
You stupid twit....I already mentioned the DIFFERENCES between
"shells" and "bullets" (can't you read now?). I already told you that
Nicol said 1 bullet was a positive match; but the FBI disagreed.
But ALL FOUR shells are ballistic matches to Oz's gun....and given the
FACT we know Oz dumped those shells HIMSELF out of his gun at the
scene of the crime...that is just as good as having ballistic matches
on the bullets.*
* = Unless you want to think that somebody ELSE shot Tippit, but Oz
just happened to be there too (with his gun), and then Oswald just
happened to have four spent shells in his gun that he had a burning
desire to dump out of his gun at just the same time somebody else was
killing Tippit with some OTHER gun. How far down Absurd Lane are you
willing to go here, dumbsack?
>>> "As to the cartridge cases, they were removed from the pistol and thrown to the ground as if the killer deliberately wanted them to be found. Why do you think he did that, David?" <<<
Go ask Oswald; he's the one who did it. Without a shred of a doubt.
>>> "And he thought killing Tippit's would prevent him from burning for murder? C'mon, David, you can do better than that." <<<
Why? That's obviously why he shot Tippit....to keep from being caught,
thrown in the slammer, and eventually fried.
It's rocket science to you evidently; but it's obvious to anyone else.
Do you think he shot Tippit because Oswald feared getting a ticket for
jaywalking perhaps?
>>> "Oswald left his house at 1:00. Tippit was killed at 1:15. Oswald did not have enough time to walk to the crime scene. Don't have the exact distance. But someone will supply it shortly. Also, Oswald had no business in the area of the crime scene. No reason for being there." <<<
<laugh> You admit you have no idea what the distance was, but you
somehow KNOW (from kooksites no doubt) that Oswald couldn't have made
it. You're pathetic.
The distance, btw, was 0.85 mile. Re-creations by the WC showed it to
be easily doable (esp. if Oz walked/ran faster than the re-creators
did, which is likely).
No reason for being there? How do you know what Ozzie's plans were?
You don't. That bus transfer might be the key. He might have been
headed for a bus stop where he could have used the transfer.
>>> "You miss the point. The description would match half the male population of Dallas. It by itself would not compel Tippit to stop Oswald." <<<
That possible "about-face" by Oswald, coupled with the description,
was probably enough to stop him. Plus, per Markham, Oswald looked kind
of dishelvelled...possibly Tippit noticed this as well.
Oh, yeah....I forgot....Oz had a sign on his back too --- "I JUST SHOT
THE PRESIDENT; HAVE GUN, WILL TRAVEL". (Not many people know that; but
I do. The same way you know that Oswald had "no business" being on
10th St. at 1:15.)
You're slipping, pal. Your efforts to exonerate Oz are miserable (and
reprehensible given his blatant guilt). Why do you want him innocent
so badly, btw?
My dead grandmother could convict the bastard of both 11/22 murders
(esp. Tippit's, which oozes "It Was Oswald" info).
Try again...maybe that lovely Tomnln site will help you.
And you'd better change your timeline for Tippit's murder too....no
good kook has him killed after 1:06 or 1:10. Get with the kook program
if you want to be one of 'em.
RICLAND
>>>> "None of these people made a positive ID in the approved police line-up
> way. Markham, for example, IDed Oswald in a line-up only after seeing
> his photo on television. Moreover, she first described the killer as,
> "being short and somewhat on the heavy side, with slightly bushy hair"
> a description that perfectly fits the one Mrs. Clemons gave. Also, you
> leave out Frank Wright, who like Mrs. Clemons said there were two
> men." <<<
>
>
> Cite Wright saying that please.
Someone will supply it soon enough. Point being, like Clemons, there are
some witnesses who never appeared before the WC.
>
> There are bound to be witness discrepancies when describing people/
> (suspects). And Markham's "bushy hair" reference has been overblown
> (pardon the pun)...she was really referring to the windblown,
> dishevelled look to Oswald's appearance/(hair).
Here again we see how you sweep key evidence under the rug. First, you
present Markham as a witness who ID-ed Oswald, then when your assertion
is shown to be false, you equivocate. Worse still, you leave out key
testimony when it doesn't support your self-fulling prophecy -- e.g.,
Markham also said the shooter was shot and heavy.
>
> The overwhelming preponderance tells us Oswald was the LONE killer of
> Tippit...Davis, Davis, Scoggins, and Callaway are rock-solid witnesses
> who saw Oswald with a gun running down the street, with Davis and
> Davis getting an up-close look at LHO as he DUMPED SHELLS ON THEIR
> LAWN. And those shells match Oz's gun. The same gun that he tries to
> use on another officer in the theater. That alone hangs Oswald.
But doesn't have enough time to use because the officer is on the stage
and Oswald is sitting in back of the threater.
Eh, yeah, right.
And try to curb your ethusiam, will you. No reason to put "overwhelming"
in front of "preponderance."
Also, Davis, Scoggins, and Callaway are not rock-sold witnesses. The
rock solid witnesses are the ones who gave testimony that doesn't fit
your agenda -- Mrs. Clemons, Markham, Reynolds.
Have you no shame, David?
Apparently not. But for those who want the truth about Reynolds, follow
this link: http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKreynolds.htm
>
>
>>>> "Please learn the difference between bullets and cartridge cases. The bullets found in Tippit were too damaged to determine whether they actually came from LHO's .38." <<<
>
> You stupid twit....I already mentioned the DIFFERENCES between
> "shells" and "bullets" (can't you read now?). I already told you that
> Nicol said 1 bullet was a positive match; but the FBI disagreed.
Learn to read (and write) for content, David. You wrote --
"but the bullets were certainly consistent
with LHO's gun."
"Bullets" is used incorrectly. You meant "shells" or cartridge cases.
Now be a man and admit you made a mistake, David.
Also, stop the name-calling, it marks you as a immature bully.
>
> But ALL FOUR shells are ballistic matches to Oz's gun....and given the
> FACT we know Oz dumped those shells HIMSELF out of his gun at the
> scene of the crime...that is just as good as having ballistic matches
> on the bullets.*
If Markham, Clemons', Reynold's positively ID-ed him, yes. But since
neither these people nor anyone else postively ID-ed him, no.
How many times do I have to explain this to you, David?
>
> * = Unless you want to think that somebody ELSE shot Tippit, but Oz
> just happened to be there too (with his gun), and then Oswald just
> happened to have four spent shells in his gun that he had a burning
> desire to dump out of his gun at just the same time somebody else was
> killing Tippit with some OTHER gun. How far down Absurd Lane are you
> willing to go here, dumbsack?
Why speculate when we have eyewitnesses who say it was a short fat man?
Again, you're trying to fit a suspect into a circumstance all available
evidence tells he doesn't fit. To do this you ignore all contrary
evidence (testimony.)
This produces conclusions riddled with fallacious logic.
Or to put it in language you'd better understand, David, you're trying
to frame the guy.
>
>
>>>> "As to the cartridge cases, they were removed from the pistol and thrown to the ground as if the killer deliberately wanted them to be found. Why do you think he did that, David?" <<<
>
> Go ask Oswald; he's the one who did it. Without a shred of a doubt.
Now you're just being dense.
>
>
>>>> "And he thought killing Tippit's would prevent him from burning for murder? C'mon, David, you can do better than that." <<<
>
> Why? That's obviously why he shot Tippit....to keep from being caught,
> thrown in the slammer, and eventually fried.
Shooting Tippit would do all that?
Wow!
>
> It's rocket science to you evidently; but it's obvious to anyone else.
Everyone else as pudding head as you maybe.
>
> Do you think he shot Tippit because Oswald feared getting a ticket for
> jaywalking perhaps?
He who?
Learn how to construct a proper sentence. "He" is your main subject;
therefore, you must continue to call him "he" when you mention him (not
"he" then Oswald).
>
>
>>>> "Oswald left his house at 1:00. Tippit was killed at 1:15. Oswald did not have enough time to walk to the crime scene. Don't have the exact distance. But someone will supply it shortly. Also, Oswald had no business in the area of the crime scene. No reason for being there." <<<
>
> <laugh> You admit you have no idea what the distance was, but you
> somehow KNOW (from kooksites no doubt) that Oswald couldn't have made
> it. You're pathetic.
I don't know the exact distance I'd have to walk to punch you in the
nose, but I know it would take longer than 15 minutes.
>
> The distance, btw, was 0.85 mile. Re-creations by the WC showed it to
> be easily doable (esp. if Oz walked/ran faster than the re-creators
> did, which is likely).
I'm sure Gil or one of the other Assassination experts will chime in
shortly to explain to you why Oswald would have had to have been a
veritable Jesse Owens to get to the scene at the appointed time, but
until they do, I'd be interested in hearing your theory on what Tippit
was doing a full four minutes drive time away from his patrol route.
Have you Magic Bullet Boys yet pondered that?
My theory is he was waiting to meet someone.
>
> No reason for being there? How do you know what Ozzie's plans were?
> You don't. That bus transfer might be the key. He might have been
> headed for a bus stop where he could have used the transfer.
To go where?
>
>>>> "You miss the point. The description would match half the male population of Dallas. It by itself would not compel Tippit to stop Oswald." <<<
>
> That possible "about-face" by Oswald, coupled with the description,
> was probably enough to stop him. Plus, per Markham, Oswald looked kind
> of dishelvelled...possibly Tippit noticed this as well.
"Disheveled"?
How does Oswald get disheveled?
>
> Oh, yeah....I forgot....Oz had a sign on his back too --- "I JUST SHOT
> THE PRESIDENT; HAVE GUN, WILL TRAVEL". (Not many people know that; but
> I do. The same way you know that Oswald had "no business" being on
> 10th St. at 1:15.)
Failing at logic, he tries humor.
And fails again.
>
>
> You're slipping, pal. Your efforts to exonerate Oz are miserable (and
> reprehensible given his blatant guilt). Why do you want him innocent
> so badly, btw?
Because you Magic Bullet Boys don't play fair. You play games with
evidence. You hide it, twist and bend it, overstate it.
>
> My dead grandmother could convict the bastard of both 11/22 murders
> (esp. Tippit's, which oozes "It Was Oswald" info).
Your dead grandmother must be privy to evidence you haven't presented here.
>
> Try again...maybe that lovely Tomnln site will help you.
>
> And you'd better change your timeline for Tippit's murder too....no
> good kook has him killed after 1:06 or 1:10. Get with the kook program
> if you want to be one of 'em.
>
Well, gad, man, how does Oswald cover .85 of a mile in 6 minutes?
ricland
RICLAND
Not what I came away with at all, David.
For example, Tom notes that the jacket found had a cleaner's tag on it,
while Marina said she always washed OZ's jacket.
What's you take on that?
Also, you'll recall, Oz's landlady said Oz's jacket was gray, not
light-colored.
Finally, if it had a cleaner's tag on it, why didn't the police simply
find out which cleaners it was and get a name?
ricland
David Von Pein
I'll admit no such thing...because I made no mistake. The bullets
(plural) removed from Tippit were "consistent" with having come from
Oswald's S&W .38. None were said to positively NOT have come from Oz's
gun. Therefore, they all could have been fired from Lee's .38. (And,
of course, given the OTHER evidence, all four of those bullets HAD to
have, indeed, come out of Oswald's revolver. It's THE only reasonable
conclusion. Are you "reasonable"? I'm certainly doubting it at this
point.)
Now, you said something about being a man...? Wanna try it now?
>>> "Also, stop the name-calling, it marks you as a immature bully." <<<
Fuck you.
That better??
<grin>
>>> "If Markham, Clemons, {and} Reynolds positively ID-ed him, yes. But since {none of} these people nor anyone else postively ID-ed him, no. How many times do I have to explain this to you, David?" <<<
Maybe until you get it right. You haven't yet. Wanna try again?
Markham positively IDed Oswald.
And Reynolds IDed Oswald. (Read that WC testimony I provided earlier.
He's a liar too, right?)
Davis and Davis positively IDed Oswald too. And so did Scoggins. And
another witness surfaced later (Jack Tatum) who IDed Oswald, including
seeing Oz fire at point-blank range into Tippit's head. Grain of salt
needed with Tatum, granted, since he cropped up later on.
>>> "How does Oswald get disheveled?" <<<
Oh, I don't know. He shoots JFK...rushes out of his workplace...rushes
home (per E. Roberts) and grabs his gun and a jacket...rushes out
again and high-tails it to 10th & Patton (and, yes, he doesn't have
all day to get there...but he got there...he was probably hurrying a
tad).
Hence, "dishelvement" can likely accompany his hurried, probably-a-bit-
agitated state.
I'm also wondering if it was windy that day in Oak Cliff? I've never
heard anybody talk about that aspect of how Oz's hair could had gained
a "bushy" type look to it. Get on that, Ric...what was the wind
velocity in Dallas/Oak Cliff, Texas, from 1:03 PM to 1:14 PM on
11/22/63. I want that verified weather report (via NOAA) on my desk by
noon tomorrow...or you're THROUGH with this company! THROUGH!!
>>> "I don't know the exact distance {from 1026 Beckley to 10th & Patton}; but I know it would take longer than 15 minutes." <<<
It's nice being a crazy person with no facts to base your conclusions
on, ain't it?
You admit you have no idea how far the distance is, but somehow you
KNOW you couldn't walk it (or run it even??!) in "15 minutes". Wild!
(And kooky too. Par for the Rabid CTer course, I will admit.)
<remainder of senseless CT (or CT Faker) kookshit snipped, undeserving
of any response>
David Von Pein
mouth even if I verified it WAS true.
RICLAND
> I wouldn't believe anything that came out of Tom-Sack's (Tomnln's)
> mouth even if I verified it WAS true.
>
You need to slide it down a notch, David.
You're starting to come across as a Usenet bully.
ricland
RICLAND
>>>> ""Bullets" is used incorrectly. You meant "shells" or cartridge cases. Now be a man and admit you made a mistake, David." <<<
>
> I'll admit no such thing...because I made no mistake. The bullets
> (plural) removed from Tippit were "consistent" with having come from
> Oswald's S&W .38. None were said to positively NOT have come from Oz's
> gun. Therefore, they all could have been fired from Lee's .38. (And,
> of course, given the OTHER evidence, all four of those bullets HAD to
> have, indeed, come out of Oswald's revolver. It's THE only reasonable
> conclusion. Are you "reasonable"? I'm certainly doubting it at this
> point.)
Not the way ballistics works, David.
In ballistics, either something is a positive ID or it isn't.
>
> Now, you said something about being a man...? Wanna try it now?
>
>>>> "Also, stop the name-calling, it marks you as a immature bully." <<<
>
> Fuck you.
>
> That better??
>
> <grin>
Get a grip, dude.
>
>
>>>> "If Markham, Clemons, {and} Reynolds positively ID-ed him, yes. But since {none of} these people nor anyone else postively ID-ed him, no. How many times do I have to explain this to you, David?" <<<
>
> Maybe until you get it right. You haven't yet. Wanna try again?
>
> Markham positively IDed Oswald.
No. Read below:
"On 22nd November, 1963, Markham was in the Oak Cliff area when she saw
Officer J. D. Tippit killed. She later described the killer as being
short and somewhat on the heavy side, with slightly bushy hair." Later,
Markham identified Lee Harvey Oswald in a police lineup, but this was
after she had seen his photograph on television."
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKmarkhamH.htm
Honestly, David, your slight of hand with evidence shows you're as
ethically challenged as a common Three Card Monte man.
>
> And Reynolds IDed Oswald. (Read that WC testimony I provided earlier.
> He's a liar too, right?)
The word is "context," David. As you know, Reynolds positively ID-ed
Oswald AFTER he was shot in the head by Jack Ruby associate Darrell
Garner. http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKreynolds.htm
>
> Davis and Davis positively IDed Oswald too. And so did Scoggins. And
> another witness surfaced later (Jack Tatum) who IDed Oswald, including
> seeing Oz fire at point-blank range into Tippit's head. Grain of salt
> needed with Tatum, granted, since he cropped up later on.
Let me explain to you how posting to a forum works, David.
It's really simple.
When you make a claim that's in dispute, you provide a link.
Note how I do this above.
>
>>>> "How does Oswald get disheveled?" <<<
>
> Oh, I don't know. He shoots JFK...rushes out of his workplace...rushes
> home (per E. Roberts) and grabs his gun and a jacket...rushes out
> again and high-tails it to 10th & Patton (and, yes, he doesn't have
> all day to get there...but he got there...he was probably hurrying a
> tad).
You mean he was running to get there, David?
Why ...?
>
> Hence, "dishelvement" can likely accompany his hurried, probably-a-bit-
> agitated state.
Let's see, if I follow you, David.
When Truly last sees him, Oswald is sitting down having a Coke.
But neither Truly nor the cop said he looked disheveled.
Oswald leaves and eventually gets into a taxi.
But the taxi driver doesn't say he looked disheveled.
Oswald goes into his rooming house.
But his landlady doesn't say he looked disheveled.
So is your point, David, that some time between when he leaves the
boarding house and arrives at the crime scene he becomes disheveled?
>
> I'm also wondering if it was windy that day in Oak Cliff? I've never
> heard anybody talk about that aspect of how Oz's hair could had gained
> a "bushy" type look to it. Get on that, Ric...what was the wind
> velocity in Dallas/Oak Cliff, Texas, from 1:03 PM to 1:14 PM on
> 11/22/63. I want that verified weather report (via NOAA) on my desk by
> noon tomorrow...or you're THROUGH with this company! THROUGH!!
There you go again, David, with your self-fulfilling prophecies.
Do you know what a self-fulfilling prophecy is, David?
Here's a definition:
"The self-fulfilling prophecy is, in the beginning, a false definition
of the situation evoking a new behaviour which makes the original false
conception come true."
ricland
Walt
Hey!!! Who says an old dog can't learn new tricks?.... Just look at
Von Pea brain. He knows that Mrs roberts saw Lee outside the rooming
house at about 1:04, and he's well aware that Helen Markham saw Tippit
shot at about 1:06. He just can't do simple arithmetic and subtract
1:04 from 1:06.... and realize that there is only TWO minutes between
those numbers. He's probably not aware that there isn't a man alive
that could cover that mile in TWO minutes. His hatred for the villian
in this story has him blinded to reality. Then to compound matters he
thinks that Oswald would have had to have covered .85 mile in two
minutes....but in reality the man who shot Tippit had been walking
east when Tippit stopped to talk to him.... The site of Tippit's
murder was WEST of the rooming house, so if the killer had been Oswald
he'd have had to have sprinted past the intersection in front of
Scroggins cab and then spun around and reversed his direction to be
seen WALKING EAST on the street before Tippit who was also travel ing
EAST stopped him. Which means If the killer had been Oswald he'd have
had to have covered about a mile in TWO minutes.
Walt
tomnln
"RICLAND" <black...@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:CqCdnZfet6dua2LY...@comcast.com...
tomnln
It's from the Official Records>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/Rifle.htm
So, it's the WCR that David Rejects.
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1174402141.2...@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
tomnln
BADA-BING
ย (WR 172) States that one bullet taken from officer Tippit match Oswald's 38 "TO THE EXCLUSION OF ALL OTHER WEAPONS"
ย
ย
ย ย ย ย ย ย BADA-BOOM
ย (WR 559) "The .38 had been RECHAMBERED for a .38 Special cartridge, it had not been REBARRELED for a .38 Special bullet. The barrel was therefore slightly oversized for a .38 Special bullet, which has a smaller diameter than a .38 S&W bullet. This would cause the passage of a .38 Special bullet through the barrel to be eratic, resulting in inconsistent microscopic markings."ย ย
ย
tomnln
Marina said she Always washed his jackets.
"RICLAND" <black...@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:aImdnZxaaa22cWLY...@comcast.com...
Neil Coburn
Walt
Let's examine DVP's statement.....
Tippit hears the 12:43 APB broadcast on the DPD radio, describing a
"5-10; 165-lb. slender white man" (which is also repeated a little
later as well).
How many men in Dallas were about 5 ' 10" tall, weighing about 165
pounds??? ..........120,000 ??--- 130,000 ??
Was Oswald 5' 10 " tall?......... Nope....He was 5' 9"
Tippit sees Oswald walking on Tenth Street (and Oz
possibly did an "about-face" on Tenth St., perhaps making Tippit even
more suspicious of this guy).
If Oswald had been traveling along tenth he would have been traveling
away from the Texas theater which was his intended destination, and he
would have been more than two blocks off the most direct route to the
theater. Which makes no sense.
If the man had been Oswald and he was headed WEST toward to the
theater, but then did an about face when he saw Tippit as DVP suggests
he could NOT have been "WALKING". He would have had to have been
sprinting just as fast as he could run because Mrs Roberts said he was
at the boarding house at 1:04 and Tippit had to have been shot before
1:10, ( TF Bowley looked at the dead Tippit on the street and then
looked at his watch, time 1:10 ) Probably not later than 1:08. So if
Oswald had been the killer he would have had to have been running as
fast as he could go, NOT walking, and he would have been very very
winded and gasping for air, when Markham and Scroggins saw him,. and
when Tippit was trying to talk to him through the wing window. None of
the witnesses described Tippits killer as bent over and gasping for
air prior to the shooting. Furthermore DVP's idea that Oswald spun
around and reversed himself when he saw Tippit's squad car is just
dumb thinking. If Oswald had been running WEST toward the theater
and he saw Tippit's police car approaching from WEST his best bet to
elude Tippit was to just keep running West, so that Tippit would have
had to make a "U" turn or circle around the block. Since he was
already running he could have ducked down the alley and disappeared in
the back yard of the houses there, before Tippit could have turned
around.
So Tippit stops Oswald.
Tippit did NOT stop Oswald..... You're displaying that you have very
poor, problem solving skills.
Walt
RICLAND
> Tippit was killed by his girl freind's husband. Neil Coburn
>
That's what I was starting to think.
Witnesses at the crime scene said he was a regular in the neighborhood
-- a neighborhood that was four minutes drive time off his patrol
route. Indeed, one witness said he was "parked in front of the house he
lived in," which to me means he was there so much, she thought he lived
there.
So he goes to the Tip Top Record Shop calls her and she's not there.
Then he goes to the Glaco Gas Station and waits. A few minutes later he
sees her or her husband drive by and tears after her.
If it's the husband, he catches up to him and pistol whips him -- that
would have been the fight someone reported.
The husband goes home gets his pistol and waits. Tippit drives up and
the guy gives it to him, runs, tosses his jacket and pistol near the
other gas station.
The police find it, know at once what happened, and decide to make
Tippit a hero instead of a loser by piggy-backing his murder on Oswald.
This would explain why Mrs. Clemons gets a visit from the police telling
her to keep her mouth shut about 2 men.
And incidentally, the Magic Bullet Boys simply sweep Mrs. Clemons'
testimony under the rug. It doesn't fit their theory of the case, so
they dismiss it.
ricland
RICLAND
Thanks, Walt.
I never said I was an expert, so I don't have all the data at my
finger-tips like some of you fellows do.
But what gets me about David is he knows there are people here who know
the data and still he bends and twists it.
ricland
RICLAND
One thing, Walt -- it's not David's poor problem solving skills, because
David is not trying to solve the problem.
He's like the little Dutch boy plugging each hole in the dyke with his
fingers until he runs out of fingers.
ricland
Walt
Ric....He has no choice... He's John Mc Adams cabin boy. John mc
Adams is a government paid disinformationist. He's paid as a
perfesser but his primary job is to keep the truth hidden. He and
Arlen Specter, Dan Rather, Gerald Ford, and a host of others have made
a hansome living ( Taxpayers Dollars) of their perfidity. Sir Robert
David Von Pien is just another one of the bastards. You'll notice that
he always links to Mc Adams website to be sure he gets his masters
words correct.
Sir Robert David Von Pein isn't really very good at twisting and
bending but he can always post a link to his masters website. He's
not obtuse....he just likes his job.
Walt
curtjester1
> Hi, fellow, truth seekers. I've been unable to find anything on the why
> and wherefore of the Tippit murder.
>
> Any links...?
>
> ricland
Tippit was killed because he was just another link in the chain of the
conspiracy, and it allowed for the conspiracy to be stonewalled with
the capture of the patsy.
Tippit, Ruby, and Bernard Weissman met at the Carousel Club eight days
before the assassination. People like Dorothy Kilgalen, Thayer Waldo,
and Mark Lane discovered that, and well when you blab that kind of
stuff to your friends like Dorothy did, you pay for it with your life.
Tippit had to be a conspirator just on the fact that he honked while
parked in front of Oswald's roominghouse after the assassination. He
probably took Oswald to the Texas Theater, and maybe he was going to
be the one to give him a ride later, possibly to the Red Bird
airport. The conspirators wanted the Oswald in the theater dead or
captured, so they had to have a trail to get the police a bona fide
way to get there. The conspirator that was setting Oswald up a month
prior to the assassination around Dallas probably knew Tippit, and had
Oswald's ID and wallet, so when he killed Tippit, and and emptied the
shells, and walked like a suspect and walked into the balcony of the
Texas Theater without paying, it just sealed the fate of the patsy.
CJ
Walt
Ric ....The cops did put a tracer on that Jacket's laundry tag. It
was a common practice to trace an article of clothing by a laundry
tag. They knew that the laundries and dy cleaners in Dallas used a
standard identication system that used the first initial of the
customer's Last name and then a four digit number....in this case B
9738 ..... Which indicates that Mr. Boswald left his jacket for
cleaning at The Acme Laundry in September of 63. They didn't
actually track that down, but if they had I'm quite sure they would
have found that Oswald left his jacket under the alias of Boswald.
Oswald knew that he would be tossing down his jacket after he shot
officer Tippit and used the alias "Boswald" to throw them off the
track. I'm telli ya Ric...Ol Lee was better than Houdini,at
performing magic.......
Walt
>
> ricland
Bud
Thats probably what Tippit intended to do when he stopped Oswald,
measure his height. Oz should have waited, once Tippit determined he
was 5'-9", I`m sure he would have left him on his way.
> Tippit sees Oswald walking on Tenth Street (and Oz
> possibly did an "about-face" on Tenth St., perhaps making Tippit even
> more suspicious of this guy).
>
> If Oswald had been traveling along tenth he would have been traveling
> away from the Texas theater which was his intended destination,
Oz came to Walt in a dream, and told him his intentions.
> and he
> would have been more than two blocks off the most direct route to the
> theater. Which makes no sense.
I suggest you replace it with some of your speculation, then.
> If the man had been Oswald and he was headed WEST toward to the
> theater, but then did an about face when he saw Tippit as DVP suggests
> he could NOT have been "WALKING". He would have had to have been
> sprinting just as fast as he could run because Mrs Roberts said he was
> at the boarding house at 1:04
Walt believes if he keeps telling these lies long enough, they
will become the truth.
> and Tippit had to have been shot before
> 1:10, ( TF Bowley looked at the dead Tippit on the street and then
> looked at his watch, time 1:10 )
Jean Hill looked right in the limo, and saw a dog.
> Probably not later than 1:08.
Probably not, since Tippit talked to the dispatcher at 1:08. That
was a busy minute, hangs up, stops Oz, gets out, gets shot.
> So if
> Oswald had been the killer he would have had to have been running as
> fast as he could go,
Unless the times you are working with are not accurate. Impossible,
cry the kooks!
> NOT walking, and he would have been very very
> winded and gasping for air, when Markham and Scroggins saw him,. and
> when Tippit was trying to talk to him through the wing window. None of
> the witnesses described Tippits killer as bent over and gasping for
> air prior to the shooting.
They did say the killer was wearing Oswald`s face.
> Furthermore DVP's idea that Oswald spun
> around and reversed himself when he saw Tippit's squad car is just
> dumb thinking. If Oswald had been running WEST toward the theater
Which Walt can`t substantiate, yet regards as a fact.
> and he saw Tippit's police car approaching from WEST his best bet to
> elude Tippit was to just keep running West, so that Tippit would have
> had to make a "U" turn or circle around the block.
Oz opted to try to talk his way out (playing it cool got him past
Baker). When that turned sour, he used his handgun to kill him. Or so
the people who were there say.
> Since he was
> already running he could have ducked down the alley and disappeared in
> the back yard of the houses there, before Tippit could have turned
> around.
>
>
> So Tippit stops Oswald.
>
> Tippit did NOT stop Oswald..... You're displaying that you have very
> poor, problem solving skills.
No problem. Tippit stopped Oswald.
RICLAND
But Tippit was a straight guy. He was a paratrooper during WWII who when
offered a Purple Heart for a wound received during a non-combat
accident, refused it.
And he was brave. He and a partner charged a guy with an ice pick and
disarmed him but not before the guy managed to stick him with it a
couple of times.
No. I just can't see a straight-shooter like Tippit getting involved in
anything as sordid as setting up a patsy, assassination, or cold-blooded
murder. Tippit was your basic farm boy, dumb but honest to the bone.
ricland
Walt
Dud....I didn't make up that the time of 1:04 that Mrs Roberts saw
Oswald at the bus stop in front of the rooming house.Your venerated
Warren Commission determined that Oswald left the rooming house about
1:04, so if you want to call someone a liar perhaps you should aim
that at Gerald Ford or Earl warren, or Arlen Specter. Nor did I make
up the times of 1:06 or 1:10. Helen Markham said she saw Tippit shot
at about 1:06, and TF Bowley saw the dead officer lying in the street
at 1:10.
I know it's tough to accept the fact that the author of your bible
( Warren Report) is I M Satan. You've placed so much faith in that
bible, and your pride and ego, just won't allow you to see the
truth.
>
> > and Tippit had to have been shot before
> > 1:10, ( TF Bowley looked at the dead Tippit on the street and then
> > looked at his watch, time 1:10 )
>
> Jean Hill looked right in the limo, and saw a dog.
>
> > Probably not later than 1:08.
>
> Probably not, since Tippit talked to the dispatcher at 1:08. That
> was a busy minute, hangs up, stops Oz, gets out, gets shot.
Tippit talked to the dispatcher at 1:08??..... Really?? What did he
say??
>
> > So if
> > Oswald had been the killer he would have had to have been running as
> > fast as he could go,
>
> Unless the times you are working with are not accurate. Impossible,
> cry the kooks!
Even if the times are not precise as set by the atomic clock in
Greenich England, it is clear to a REASONABLE person that Oswald could
not have covered the distance on foot in time to kill Tippit.He was at
the boarding house at 1:04 Tippit was shot at about 1:06. Oswald would
have had to have traveled from the rooming house PAST the site, then
reversed his course and then talked to Tippit for about a minute
before the murder. It just flat don't work.....sorry Dud. You'll
either have to accept that or look like the village idiot.
Walt
> > > To sum up -- You're fucking nuts!- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Walt
That's not what the people who had contact with him thought of him....
Jean Hill knew him and referred to him as a "scuzz" who liked to flash
his badge. Many of the teenagers who hung around the Austin BBQ
thought he was an asshole.
He was involved in the plot..... But his role has been carefully
covered up.
In fact some researchers believe that J.D. Tippit is the Rosetta Stone
of the Kennedy Assassination.
Walt
>
> ricland- Hide quoted text -
Bud
Neil Coburn wrote:
> Tippit was killed by his girl freind's husband. Neil Coburn
You`re saying Tippit was seeing Marina?
Bud
You said "Mrs Roberts said he was at the boardinghouse at 1:04."
Thats a lie, Walt. You know it is, I can show Joe Zircon pointing it
out to you in 1997. Yet you still repeat it, knowing it to be a lie.
Why is that, Walt?
> so if you want to call someone a liar perhaps you should aim
> that at Gerald Ford or Earl warren, or Arlen Specter.
If they say Mrs Roberts said Oswald was at the boardinghouse at
1:04, I will.
> Nor did I make
> up the times of 1:06 or 1:10. Helen Markham said she saw Tippit shot
> at about 1:06,
She also said Oz is the man she saw shoot Tippit.
> and TF Bowley saw the dead officer lying in the street
> at 1:10.
Other information conflicts with this.
> I know it's tough to accept the fact that the author of your bible
> ( Warren Report) is I M Satan. You've placed so much faith in that
> bible, and your pride and ego, just won't allow you to see the
> truth.
I know the truth. You are a crackpot.
> > > and Tippit had to have been shot before
> > > 1:10, ( TF Bowley looked at the dead Tippit on the street and then
> > > looked at his watch, time 1:10 )
> >
> > Jean Hill looked right in the limo, and saw a dog.
> >
> > > Probably not later than 1:08.
> >
> > Probably not, since Tippit talked to the dispatcher at 1:08. That
> > was a busy minute, hangs up, stops Oz, gets out, gets shot.
>
> Tippit talked to the dispatcher at 1:08??..... Really?? What did he
> say??
Not sure. Dispatcher didn`t respond.
> > > So if
> > > Oswald had been the killer he would have had to have been running as
> > > fast as he could go,
> >
> > Unless the times you are working with are not accurate. Impossible,
> > cry the kooks!
>
> Even if the times are not precise as set by the atomic clock in
> Greenich England, it is clear to a REASONABLE person that Oswald could
> not have covered the distance on foot in time to kill Tippit.He was at
> the boarding house at 1:04 Tippit was shot at about 1:06.
You admit the times aren`t accurate, yet still insist on using
them as if they are.
> Oswald would
> have had to have traveled from the rooming house PAST the site, then
> reversed his course and then talked to Tippit for about a minute
> before the murder. It just flat don't work.....sorry Dud. You'll
> either have to accept that or look like the village idiot.
<snicker> Yah, thats too far fetched, better to imagine look-
alikes, and meetings in theaters where they pawn off the murder weapon
on Oz, and other such silliness.
David Von Pein
NOVEMBER 22, 1963.......
=============================================
Let's examine the horrid reasoned-thinking skills (or lack thereof) of
Mr. Ric. Plus his lack of knowledge re. some aspects of the case:
>>> "When Truly last sees him, Oswald is sitting down having a Coke." <<<
Wrong right off the bat. Oswald wasn't "sitting down"; and Truly
didn't see a "Coke".
>>> "But neither Truly nor the cop said he looked disheveled." <<<
So? When he encountered Truly and Baker in the TSBD, Oswald hadn't
dashed home yet and he hadn't yet walked or run the 0.85 of a mile to
Tenth Street either.
>>> "Oswald leaves and eventually gets into a taxi. But the taxi driver doesn't say he looked disheveled." <<<
Why did you skip the "on the bus" episode? Mary Bledsoe saw Oswald on
a bus, prior to Oz getting off and then taking a taxi to Oak Cliff.
Here's what Bledsoe said:
"Oswald got on. He looks like a maniac. His sleeve was out. His shirt
was undone. ... He looked so bad in his face, and his face was so
distorted." -- Mary E. Bledsoe; To WC; April 2, 1964
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/bledsoe.htm
Now, it's true that Bledsoe said she didn't pay much attention to
Oswald at all after he got on the bus. She was deliberately trying to
ignore him, in fact, because she didn't like him (she had, in effect,
kicked him out of her roominghouse just one month earlier), and she
didn't want him to see her. But she saw enough of him on the bus to
note the above-mentioned things about his appearance.
>>> "Oswald goes into his rooming house. But his landlady doesn't say he looked disheveled." <<<
It wasn't his landlady (the landlady was Mrs. Johnson), but that's a
minor mistake. It was the roominghouse housekeeper (Earlene Roberts)
who saw Oswald on 11/22/63.
And she didn't use the word "disheveled", true. But she did mention
his unusual hasty entry and exit from the house. ....
"He {LHO} came home that Friday in an unusual hurry. ... He wasn't
running, but he was walking pretty fast---he was all but running." --
Earlene Roberts; To WC; April 8, 1964
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/robertse.htm
As for Helen Markham on 10th Street, the "bushy hair" thing was almost
ALL of Mark Lane's making, as Mrs. Markham told the Warren
Commission. .....
Mr. BALL. Did you ever tell anyone that the man who shot Tippit was
short, a little on the heavy side, and his hair was somewhat bushy?
Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir.
Mr. BALL. Was the man, is it your memory now that the man who shot
Tippit was short, a little on the heavy side?
Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir. He wasn't too heavy.
Mr. BALL. Is it your memory that his hair was bushy?
Mrs. MARKHAM. It wasn't so bushy. It was, say, windblown or something.
What I mean, he didn't have a lot of hair.
Interesting, huh? Markham (per Mark Lane) has the killer with bushy
hair; but Markham tells the WC that the killer "didn't have a lot of
hair".
Ever see a "bushy-haired" semi-bald guy? That'd be unique.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/markham1.htm
>>> "So is your point, David, that some time between when he leaves the boarding house and arrives at the crime scene he becomes disheveled?" <<<
It seems likely that Oswald became more and more "disheveled" as time
went on --- From the Sniper's Nest...to the lunchroom (he was
"calm")...to the bus ("He looks like a maniac")...to the cab...to the
roominghouse ("He was all but running")...to Tenth Street where he
guns down Officer Tippit ("Windblown or something").
But LHO's "disheveled" state isn't overly important anyway; since we
know beyond any and all doubt that Lee Harvey Oswald murdered J.D.
Tippit BASED ON THE PHYSICAL EVIDENCE (and the witness accounts, which
corroborate the physical evidence).
David Von Pein
Pathetic.
THE TIPPIT MURDER AND THE HILARIOUS DEFENSE OF LEE HARVEY OSWALD:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/4d1790303e6fcc19
Walt
If you were a truthful man you'd admit that Tippit would have had no
reason to stop Oswald, If the man had been Oswald. Tippit probably
did have a reason to stop the guy that shot him..... I've heard that
he would stop people and harass them just because he was an asshole
with a badge. Perhaps Tippit had hassled this guy on previous
occasions and the guy just lost it......
>
> > > > Tippit sees Oswald walking on Tenth Street (and Oz
> > > > possibly did an "about-face" on Tenth St., perhaps making Tippit even
> > > > more suspicious of this guy).
>
> > > > If Oswald had been traveling along tenth he would have been traveling
> > > > away from the Texas theater which was his intended destination,
>
> > > Oz came to Walt in a dream, and told him his intentions.
That's ridiculous......Lee told Capt Fritz that he decided to go to
the movies when Shelly told him there wou;dn't be anymore work in the
TSBD that day.
>
> > > > and he
> > > > would have been more than two blocks off the most direct route to the
> > > > theater. Which makes no sense.
>
> > > I suggest you replace it with some of your speculation, then.
Since he wasn't there....I can't imagine why I should .......
> > > > If the man had been Oswald and he was headed WEST toward to the
> > > > theater, but then did an about face when he saw Tippit as DVP suggests
> > > > he could NOT have been "WALKING". He would have had to have been
> > > > sprinting just as fast as he could run because Mrs Roberts said he was
> > > > at the boarding house at 1:04
>
> > > Walt believes if he keeps telling these lies long enough, they
> > > will become the truth.
>
> > Dud....I didn't make up that the time of 1:04 that Mrs Roberts saw
> > Oswald at the bus stop in front of the rooming house.Your venerated
> > Warren Commission determined that Oswald left the rooming house about
> > 1:04,
>
> You said "Mrs Roberts said he was at the boardinghouse at 1:04."
> Thats a lie, Walt. You know it is, I can show Joe Zircon pointing it
> out to you in 1997. Yet you still repeat it, knowing it to be a lie.
> Why is that, Walt?
You tell me......why you believe it is a lie.
> > so if you want to call someone a liar perhaps you should aim
> > that at Gerald Ford or Earl warren, or Arlen Specter.
>
> If they say Mrs Roberts said Oswald was at the boardinghouse at
> 1:04, I will.
Are you trying to split hairs again, Dud?? Are you trying to say
that a few minutes after 1:00 can't be 1:04??
>
> > Nor did I make
> > up the times of 1:06 or 1:10. Helen Markham said she saw Tippit shot
> > at about 1:06,
>
> She also said Oz is the man she saw shoot Tippit.
But the description that she gave immediately after the shooting did
NOT fit Oswald. She was hysterical when she was taken to view the
lineup .....If they had put Jesus Christ in that line up she would
have fingered him because he looked different then the others in the
line up.
>
> > and TF Bowley saw the dead officer lying in the street
> > at 1:10.
>
> Other information conflicts with this.
Oh really??.....WHAT other information.
As I recall ALL of the other information FITS with TF Bowley's time
line. I believe he took the radio mike from Dom Benavides after he
thought Benavides couldn't seem to make contact with the police
dispatcher, although Benavides had in fact already contacted the
dispatcher a couple of minutes earlier. When TF Bowley made contact
the dispatcher told him they already had the information and stay off
the radio.
>
> > I know it's tough to accept the fact that the author of your bible
> > ( Warren Report) is I M Satan. You've placed so much faith in that
> > bible, and your pride and ego, just won't allow you to see the
> > truth.
>
> I know the truth. You are a crackpot.
I may be a crack pot in your eyes.... But you certainly don't know
the truth.
>
> > > > and Tippit had to have been shot before
> > > > 1:10, ( TF Bowley looked at the dead Tippit on the street and then
> > > > looked at his watch, time 1:10 )
>
> > > Jean Hill looked right in the limo, and saw a dog.
Huh?? Jean Hill is involved in the Tippit shooting.....what's the
connection?
>
> > > > Probably not later than 1:08.
>
> > > Probably not, since Tippit talked to the dispatcher at 1:08. That
> > > was a busy minute, hangs up, stops Oz, gets out, gets shot.
>
> > Tippit talked to the dispatcher at 1:08??..... Really?? What did he
> > say??
>
> Not sure. Dispatcher didn`t respond.
Well now that's one hell of a conversation...... Tippit talking to
himself. I was sure that you wrote:" Probably not, since Tippit
talked to the dispatcher at 1:08." Talking generally is something
that takes place between two or more people. Why would you lie and
say, Tippit talked to the dispatcher??
>
> > > > So if
> > > > Oswald had been the killer he would have had to have been running as
> > > > fast as he could go,
>
> > > Unless the times you are working with are not accurate. Impossible,
> > > cry the kooks!
>
> > Even if the times are not precise as set by the atomic clock in
> > Greenich England, it is clear to a REASONABLE person that Oswald could
> > not have covered the distance on foot in time to kill Tippit.He was at
> > the boarding house at 1:04 Tippit was shot at about 1:06.
>
> You admit the times aren`t accurate, yet still insist on using
> them as if they are.
>
> > Oswald would
> > have had to have traveled from the rooming house PAST the site, then
> > reversed his course and then talked to Tippit for about a minute
> > before the murder. It just flat don't work.....sorry Dud. You'll
> > either have to accept that or look like the village idiot.
>
> <snicker> Yah, thats too far fetched, better to imagine look-
> alikes, and meetings in theaters where they pawn off the murder weapon
> on Oz, and other such silliness.
Hey....Facts are facts..... It is a FACT that Oswald could not have
been at the site of Tippit's murder in time to have committed that
murder.
>
>
>
> > Walt
>
> > > > NOT walking, and he would have been very very
> > > > winded and gasping for air, when Markham and Scroggins saw him,. and
> > > > when Tippit was trying to talk to him through the wing window. None of
> > > > the witnesses described Tippits killer as bent over and gasping for
> > > > air prior to the shooting.
>
> > > They did say the killer was wearing Oswald`s face. ( or a face similar to his)
>
> > > > Furthermore DVP's idea that Oswald spun
> > > > around and reversed himself when he saw Tippit's squad car is just
> > > > dumb thinking. If Oswald had been running WEST toward the theater
>
> > > Which Walt can`t substantiate, yet regards as a fact.
Hey Dud.....even your venerated Warren Commission painted the picture
of Oswald traveling WEST and the doing an about face just before
Tippit was shot. Ask them to substantiate the allegation.
>
> > > > and he saw Tippit's police car approaching from WEST his best bet to
> > > > elude Tippit was to just keep running West, so that Tippit would have
> > > > had to make a "U" turn or circle around the block.
>
> > > Oz opted to try to talk his way out (playing it cool got him past
> > > Baker). When that turned sour, he used his handgun to kill him. Or so
> > > the people who were there say.
Have you been communicating with him???
Walt
> ...
>
> read more ยป- Hide quoted text -
David Von Pein
Another wet dream, Walt?
You're sickening. Smear the victim, and paint HIM as the bad guy. Nice
kook tactic there.
>>> "Perhaps Tippit had hassled this guy on previous occasions and the guy just lost it." <<<
And "the guy" just happened to kill Tippit within .85 mile of a place
that Oswald just left minutes earlier while in a hurry....and "the
guy" just happened to look like Oz and just happened to have Oswald's
gun on him (which was then later planted on Oswald in the theater I
guess, where Oswald attempts to use the PLANTED GUN on another cop,
even though he's innocent of killing the first).
JFK Conspiracy Kooks = A rare, rare breed indeed. (Hopefully they
won't breed further.)
>>> "That's ridiculous. Lee told Capt. Fritz that he decided to go to the movies when Shelly [sic] told him there wouldn't be anymore work in the TSBD that day." <<<
Yeah, let's start believing what the accused assassin has to say as if
it were The Gospel. Nice kook tactic.
Bill Shelley never saw or talked to Oswald after the shooting......
Mr. BALL. On November 22, 1963, the day the President was shot, when
is the last time you saw Oswald?
Mr. SHELLEY. It was 10 or 15 minutes before 12.
Mr. BALL. Where?
Mr. SHELLEY. On the first floor over near the telephone.
Mr. BALL. Did you ever see him again?
Mr. SHELLEY. At the police station when they brought him in.
Mr. BALL. Did you see him in the building at any time after 12?
Mr. SHELLEY. No.
Mr. BALL. Did you at anytime after the President was shot see Oswald
in the building?
Mr. SHELLEY. No, sir.
Mr. BALL. Did you at anytime after the President was shot tell Oswald
to go home?
Mr. SHELLEY. No, sir.
Mr. BALL. Did you tell anybody to go home?
Mr. SHELLEY. No.
Mr. BALL. You didn't tell anybody to leave the building at all?
Mr. SHELLEY. No, sir.
http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/shelley2.htm
Walt ignores the above testimony (naturally), and believes Oswald had
a burning desire to go to a Van Heflin double-feature in Oak Cliff
(and sneak into the films WITHOUT PAYING A DIME!) just minutes after
the biggest event in the history of Dallas' Dealey Plaza has just
occurred within yards of Oswald's own workplace.
Oz must REALLY have loved Van Heflin!
Bud
Other than the description of Oz going over the air.
> Tippit probably
> did have a reason to stop the guy that shot him..... I've heard that
> he would stop people and harass them just because he was an asshole
> with a badge. Perhaps Tippit had hassled this guy on previous
> occasions and the guy just lost it......
Anybody but Oz, right? Just because Oz was in the area with a gun,
people saw him shoot Tippit, you can "connect the dots" with people
who said they saw Oz from the shooting to where Oz was arrested, you
still maintain it was someone else, anybody else, but your precious
patsy.
> > > > > Tippit sees Oswald walking on Tenth Street (and Oz
> > > > > possibly did an "about-face" on Tenth St., perhaps making Tippit even
> > > > > more suspicious of this guy).
> >
> > > > > If Oswald had been traveling along tenth he would have been traveling
> > > > > away from the Texas theater which was his intended destination,
> >
> > > > Oz came to Walt in a dream, and told him his intentions.
>
> That's ridiculous......Lee told Capt Fritz that he decided to go to
> the movies when Shelly told him there wou;dn't be anymore work in the
> TSBD that day.
Let see, how many problems are there with that? Shelley said he
never spoke with Oz after the assassination. You kooks don`t believe
the information generated from the interrogations. Oz did nothing but
lie to the authorities while in custody. Other than those little
things, it`s good solid stuff.
> > > > > and he
> > > > > would have been more than two blocks off the most direct route to the
> > > > > theater. Which makes no sense.
> >
> > > > I suggest you replace it with some of your speculation, then.
>
> Since he wasn't there....I can't imagine why I should .......
Never stopped you before.
> > > > > If the man had been Oswald and he was headed WEST toward to the
> > > > > theater, but then did an about face when he saw Tippit as DVP suggests
> > > > > he could NOT have been "WALKING". He would have had to have been
> > > > > sprinting just as fast as he could run because Mrs Roberts said he was
> > > > > at the boarding house at 1:04
> >
> > > > Walt believes if he keeps telling these lies long enough, they
> > > > will become the truth.
> >
> > > Dud....I didn't make up that the time of 1:04 that Mrs Roberts saw
> > > Oswald at the bus stop in front of the rooming house.Your venerated
> > > Warren Commission determined that Oswald left the rooming house about
> > > 1:04,
> >
> > You said "Mrs Roberts said he was at the boardinghouse at 1:04."
> > Thats a lie, Walt. You know it is, I can show Joe Zircon pointing it
> > out to you in 1997. Yet you still repeat it, knowing it to be a lie.
> > Why is that, Walt?
>
> You tell me......why you believe it is a lie.
Because it is something Mrs Roberts never said. Idiot.
> > > so if you want to call someone a liar perhaps you should aim
> > > that at Gerald Ford or Earl warren, or Arlen Specter.
> >
> > If they say Mrs Roberts said Oswald was at the boardinghouse at
> > 1:04, I will.
>
> Are you trying to split hairs again, Dud?? Are you trying to say
> that a few minutes after 1:00 can't be 1:04??
No, I`m saying that when you say that Mrs Roberts said Oz was at
the boardinhouse at 1:04, you are telling a lie. You`ve been telling
these lies for years. You won`t stop, maybe you can`t stop.
> > > Nor did I make
> > > up the times of 1:06 or 1:10. Helen Markham said she saw Tippit shot
> > > at about 1:06,
> >
> > She also said Oz is the man she saw shoot Tippit.
>
> But the description that she gave immediately after the shooting did
> NOT fit Oswald.
Perhaps you can explain how such a good description of Oswald was
put on the air after the Tippit slaying, if none of the witnesses saw
Oz.
>She was hysterical when she was taken to view the
> lineup .....If they had put Jesus Christ in that line up she would
> have fingered him because he looked different then the others in the
> line up.
She said she looked long and hard before selecting Oz as the man
she saw. Would you select someone for a murder if you weren`t sure?
> > > and TF Bowley saw the dead officer lying in the street
> > > at 1:10.
> >
> > Other information conflicts with this.
>
> Oh really??.....WHAT other information.
A half dozen people saying Oswald was in the vicintity, for one.
The dispatcher log. The fact thatTippit`s murder wasn`t being
broadcast until around 1:18, which is a long time if the Davis sisters
called it in as they said.
> As I recall ALL of the other information FITS with TF Bowley's time
> line.
Like what? What time Markham thought it was?
> I believe he took the radio mike from Dom Benavides after he
> thought Benavides couldn't seem to make contact with the police
> dispatcher, although Benavides had in fact already contacted the
> dispatcher a couple of minutes earlier. When TF Bowley made contact
> the dispatcher told him they already had the information and stay off
> the radio.
How does this help confirm Bowley`s time of 1:10?
> > > I know it's tough to accept the fact that the author of your bible
> > > ( Warren Report) is I M Satan. You've placed so much faith in that
> > > bible, and your pride and ego, just won't allow you to see the
> > > truth.
> >
> > I know the truth. You are a crackpot.
>
> I may be a crack pot in your eyes.... But you certainly don't know
> the truth.
I told you the truth. You`re a crackpot.
> > > > > and Tippit had to have been shot before
> > > > > 1:10, ( TF Bowley looked at the dead Tippit on the street and then
> > > > > looked at his watch, time 1:10 )
> >
> > > > Jean Hill looked right in the limo, and saw a dog.
>
> Huh?? Jean Hill is involved in the Tippit shooting.....what's the
> connection?
A witness saying something doesn`t make it a fact.
> > > > > Probably not later than 1:08.
> >
> > > > Probably not, since Tippit talked to the dispatcher at 1:08. That
> > > > was a busy minute, hangs up, stops Oz, gets out, gets shot.
> >
> > > Tippit talked to the dispatcher at 1:08??..... Really?? What did he
> > > say??
> >
> > Not sure. Dispatcher didn`t respond.
>
> Well now that's one hell of a conversation...... Tippit talking to
> himself. I was sure that you wrote:" Probably not, since Tippit
> talked to the dispatcher at 1:08." Talking generally is something
> that takes place between two or more people. Why would you lie and
> say, Tippit talked to the dispatcher??
Did I say Tippit talked *with* the dispatcher, numbnut? I said
*to*. Tippit`s voice went over the airwaves at 1:08, making it likely
he was alive at that time, is the point.
> > > > > So if
> > > > > Oswald had been the killer he would have had to have been running as
> > > > > fast as he could go,
> >
> > > > Unless the times you are working with are not accurate. Impossible,
> > > > cry the kooks!
> >
> > > Even if the times are not precise as set by the atomic clock in
> > > Greenich England, it is clear to a REASONABLE person that Oswald could
> > > not have covered the distance on foot in time to kill Tippit.He was at
> > > the boarding house at 1:04 Tippit was shot at about 1:06.
> >
> > You admit the times aren`t accurate, yet still insist on using
> > them as if they are.
> >
> > > Oswald would
> > > have had to have traveled from the rooming house PAST the site, then
> > > reversed his course and then talked to Tippit for about a minute
> > > before the murder. It just flat don't work.....sorry Dud. You'll
> > > either have to accept that or look like the village idiot.
> >
> > <snicker> Yah, thats too far fetched, better to imagine look-
> > alikes, and meetings in theaters where they pawn off the murder weapon
> > on Oz, and other such silliness.
>
> Hey....Facts are facts..... It is a FACT that Oswald could not have
> been at the site of Tippit's murder in time to have committed that
> murder.
You have no fixed and established times with which to make such an
assertion.
>
> >
> >
> >
> > > Walt
> >
> > > > > NOT walking, and he would have been very very
> > > > > winded and gasping for air, when Markham and Scroggins saw him,. and
> > > > > when Tippit was trying to talk to him through the wing window. None of
> > > > > the witnesses described Tippits killer as bent over and gasping for
> > > > > air prior to the shooting.
> >
> > > > They did say the killer was wearing Oswald`s face. ( or a face similar to his)
>
> >
> > > > > Furthermore DVP's idea that Oswald spun
> > > > > around and reversed himself when he saw Tippit's squad car is just
> > > > > dumb thinking. If Oswald had been running WEST toward the theater
> >
> > > > Which Walt can`t substantiate, yet regards as a fact.
>
> Hey Dud.....even your venerated Warren Commission painted the picture
> of Oswald traveling WEST and the doing an about face just before
> Tippit was shot. Ask them to substantiate the allegation.
You`d have to ask Oz why he was walking west. Next seance.
> > > > > and he saw Tippit's police car approaching from WEST his best bet to
> > > > > elude Tippit was to just keep running West, so that Tippit would have
> > > > > had to make a "U" turn or circle around the block.
> >
> > > > Oz opted to try to talk his way out (playing it cool got him past
> > > > Baker). When that turned sour, he used his handgun to kill him. Or so
> > > > the people who were there say.
>
> Have you been communicating with him???
Well, I know he stopped Oz. I know Oz acted like he was going to
comply. I know he suddenly shot Tippit.
cdddraftsman
felons have to offer ! ........Nice try though .......tl
On Mar 20, 10:32 am, "tomnln" <e...@cox.net> wrote:
> It's from the Official Records>>>http://whodidn'tkilljfk.net/Rifle.htm
Walt
> >>> "I've heard that he {J.D. Tippit, a good cop whom Walt is smearing without a shred of a good-enough reason to do so} would stop people and harass them just because he was an asshole with a badge." <<<
>
> Another wet dream, Walt?
>
> You're sickening. Smear the victim, and paint HIM as the bad guy. Nice
> kook tactic there.
>
> >>> "Perhaps Tippit had hassled this guy on previous occasions and the guy just lost it." <<<
And "the guy" just happened to kill Tippit within .85 mile of a place
that Oswald just left minutes earlier while in a hurry....and "the
guy" just happened to look like Oz and just happened to have Oswald's
gun on him (which was then later planted on Oswald in the theater I
guess, where Oswald attempts to use the PLANTED GUN on another cop,
even though he's innocent of killing the first).
And "the guy" just happened to kill Tippit within .85 mile of a place
pssssst Pea Brain....almost anyplace in Oakcliff was in a .85 mile
radius of the tippit murder scene.
"Oswald just left minutes earlier while in a hurry"
He was in a hurry when Mrs Roberts saw him STANDING ( as in
stationary, like a statue ) at the bus stop at about 1:04??
How can you tell a stationary person is hurrying Pea Brain??
""the guy" just happened to look like Oz "
Are you referring to Helen Markham's description of Oswald as " short,
kinda heavy, with dark bushy hair"??
Or are you referring to Dom Benavides testimony in which he says "I
remember the killer had his hair cut in an unusual style. His hair was
long in back and cut square across the bottom at the collar line. The
way he had his hair cut made the back of his head look flat"
Do you really think their DESCRIPTIONS fit Lee Oswald??
"just happened to have Oswald's gun on him"
Would it be too much trouble for you to prove that the killer had
Oswald's gun?? Or to put it another way can you prove that Oswald's
gun was in FACT the murder weapon??
Walt
Walt
I believe that Lee had a good reason to go to the theater, and it
wasn't because he "had a burning desire to go to a Van Heflin double-
feature"...... The theater was a prearranged meeting spot where Lee
was supposed to be picked up and taken to Red Bird airport so he
could be flown to Houston where he thought he would be on his way to
Cuba to become "Our Man in Havana"
(and sneak into the films WITHOUT PAYING A DIME!)
Odd.... that Capt Fritz never once asked Lee why he had snuck into the
theater. Lee had talked to Fritz during several interrogation sessions
before Ruby shut him up for good on Sunday morning, and not ONCE did
the subject of sneaking into the theater come up. Fritz did ask him
why he decided to go to the movies and Oswald said he figured that
there wouldn't be anymore work in the TSBD that day so he decided to
go to the movies. Lee was probably lying about merely going to the
movies but he definitely was going to the theater, and it's highly
unlikely that he snuck in.
just minutes after
the biggest event in the history of Dallas' Dealey Plaza has just
occurred within yards of Oswald's own workplace.
Oswald had been duped into believing that the event outside the front
door of the TSBD was going to be a STAGED ATTEMPT to shoot JFK.
Afterward he was supposed to flee to avoid arrest, for trying to shoot
the President of the U.S.and then he would have asked for assylum in
Cuba.
Walt
Walt
She didn't?....... Here's her affidavit.....Let's look......
I, Earlene Roberts, after being duly sworn, do depose and state:
I live at 1026 Beckley, Dallas, Texas, where I serve as housekeeper
for a rooming house owned by Mr. & Mrs. A. C. Johnson.
On Friday, November 22, 1963, at approximately 1:00 pm I was sitting
in the living room watching television about the President's
assassination when a man I knew as O. H. Lee, but who has since been
identified as Lee Harvey Oswald, came into the front door and went to
his room. Oswald did not have a jacket when he came in the house and I
don't recall what type of clothing he was wearing.
Oswald went to his room and was only there a very few minutes before
coming out. I noticed he had a jacket he was putting on. I recall the
jacket was a dark color and it was the type that zips up the front. He
was zipping the jacket up as he left.
Oswald went out the front door. A moment later I looked out the
window. I saw Lee Oswald standing on the curb at the bus stop just to
the right, and on the same side of the street as our house. I just
glanced out the window that once. I don't know how long Lee Oswald
stood at the curb nor did I see which direction he went when he left
there.
Notice where she said that Lee arrived at approximately 1:00 PM.... Do
ya see that Dud?
Then she says....."Oswald went to his room and was only there a very
few minutes before coming out."
A few minutes..... perhap's three or four.....
Then she says..... A moment later I looked out the window. I saw Lee
Oswald standing on the curb at the bus
So Mrs Roberts did in FACT see Lee in front of the boarding house at
about 1:04
I believe that Mrs Roberts has just shown that one of us is a
liar........
Walt
Walt
> Walt wrote:
> > On 20 Mar, 18:55, "Bud" <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> > > Walt wrote:
> > > > On 20 Mar, 16:34, "Bud" <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> > > > > Walt wrote:
> > > > > > On 19 Mar, 21:32, "David Von Pein" <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > A KOOK SAID:
>
> > > > > > > >>> "The Tippit murder was obviously not done by Oswald." <<<
Oswald would have had to have traveled from the rooming house PAST
the site, then reversed his course and then talked to Tippit for about
a minute before the murder. It just flat don't work.....sorry Dud.
You'll either have to accept that or look like the village idiot.
<snicker> Yah, thats too far fetched, better to imagine look-
alikes, and meetings in theaters where they pawn off the murder weapon
on Oz, and other such silliness.
That's it.... when you refuse to accept mathmatically provable facts,
and show that you continue to believe in nonsense, you get the
position of the Village Idiot. There's no doubt that the position was
created with you in mind.... It fits you to a "T".
Here after you are entitled to sign your posts...... "the Village
Idiot"
Walt
That's it.... when you refuse to accept mathmatically provable facts,
and show that you continue to believe in nonsense, you get the
position of the Village Idiot. There's no doubt that the position was
created with you in mind.... It fits you to a "T".
Here after you are entitled to sign your posts...... "the Village
Idiot"
Walt
Bud
<SNIP>
What I don`t see is her saying that Oswald left the boardinghouse at
1:04. That is what you said she had said. It was a lie.
> Then she says....."Oswald went to his room and was only there a very
> few minutes before coming out."
>
> A few minutes..... perhap's three or four.....
>
> Then she says..... A moment later I looked out the window. I saw Lee
> Oswald standing on the curb at the bus
>
> So Mrs Roberts did in FACT see Lee in front of the boarding house at
> about 1:04
No, it is a fact you are an idiot. I`m not interested in how your
mind interprets what she said. You said that she had stated 1:04 as
the time Oz left the boardinghouse. She never did, you knew she never
did, you lied when you said she did. You lie about a lot of the
evidence, and continue to tell these same lies even after they have
been pointed out to you numerous times. Why is that, Walt?
> I believe that Mrs Roberts has just shown that one of us is a
> liar........
Yes, she has, seeing as you could not produce her saying what you
said she did.
The fact is, you have no established time for when Oz got to the
boardinghouse, or when he left. You need to pretend you have these
things established to dispute an obvious occurance, Oz shooting
Tippit.
> Walt
<SNIP>
Bud
Walt wrote:
> On 20 Mar, 21:39, "Bud" <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> > Walt wrote:
> > > On 20 Mar, 18:55, "Bud" <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> > > > Walt wrote:
> > > > > On 20 Mar, 16:34, "Bud" <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> > > > > > Walt wrote:
> > > > > > > On 19 Mar, 21:32, "David Von Pein" <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > A KOOK SAID:
> >
> > > > > > > > >>> "The Tippit murder was obviously not done by Oswald." <<<
>
>
>
> Oswald would have had to have traveled from the rooming house PAST
> the site, then reversed his course and then talked to Tippit for about
> a minute before the murder. It just flat don't work.....sorry Dud.
> You'll either have to accept that or look like the village idiot.
>
> <snicker> Yah, thats too far fetched, better to imagine look-
> alikes, and meetings in theaters where they pawn off the murder weapon
> on Oz, and other such silliness.
>
> That's it.... when you refuse to accept mathmatically provable facts,
Here we see a kook who considers his speculation to be
"matmatically provable facts". Well, lets plug the numbers in, state
as fact when Oswald left the boardinghouse. No approximations or best
guesses, we need good hard data.
> and show that you continue to believe in nonsense, you get the
> position of the Village Idiot. There's no doubt that the position was
> created with you in mind.... It fits you to a "T".
> Here after you are entitled to sign your posts...... "the Village
> Idiot"
Those were you theories, Walt, not mine. You sign you name under
such retarded conjecture, not me.
Walt
No, it is a fact you are an idiot.I`m not interested in how your mind
interprets what she said.
C'mon Dud, you know that ad hominem attacks don't effect me, so don't
waste your time typing them.
You're not interested in how a rational, reasonable, mind would
intrepret the facts? Why do you want to continue to believe in
fantasy ??? Do you feel better by escaping reality?? I understand
that is the PRIME reason that the U.S. is flooded with druggies.....
they can't accept the governments "reality", so they escape with
narcotics
.
You said that she had stated 1:04 as the time Oz left the
boardinghouse.
She sure did Dud..... Maybe not in those exact words but she most
certainly did provide an estimate of the time between Lee's arrival
and the time she saw him standing at the bus stop. And in reading her
affidavit I believe I'm being generous, it could have been as late as
1:06 when she saw him standing like a statue at the bus stop.
She never did, you knew she never
did, you lied when you said she did. You lie about a lot of the
evidence, and continue to tell these same lies even after they have
been pointed out to you numerous times. Why is that, Walt?
Dud.....I don't lie about the evidence....Lying is for fools and
Lner's. Lying is selfdefeating for a person who is seriously seeking
the truth.
Walt
>
> > I believe that Mrs Roberts has just shown that one of us is a
> > liar........
>
> Yes, she has, seeing as you could not produce her saying what you
> said she did.
>
> The fact is, you have no established time for when Oz got to the
> boardinghouse, or when he left. You need to pretend you have these
> things established to dispute an obvious occurance, Oz shooting
> Tippit.
>
> > Walt
>
> <SNIP>- Hide quoted text -
Bud
Nothing I write here is for you benefit, Walt. You are beyond
reach. You prefer to believe stupid shit.
> You're not interested in how a rational, reasonable, mind would
> intrepret the facts?
Yah, believing prearranged clandestine meetings in theaters you
have no support for over a concept with a whole lot of support, that
Oz killed Tippit, fled the scene, and ducked into the theater to aviod
the search.
> Why do you want to continue to believe in
> fantasy ??? Do you feel better by escaping reality?? I understand
> that is the PRIME reason that the U.S. is flooded with druggies.....
> they can't accept the governments "reality", so they escape with
> narcotics
Let the people reading decide who is presenting a rational
viewpoint. If they can`t tell you are a kook, that can only mean they
are one themselves.
> You said that she had stated 1:04 as the time Oz left the
> boardinghouse.
>
> She sure did Dud.....
Quote her, liar.
> Maybe not in those exact words but she most
> certainly did provide an estimate of the time between Lee's arrival
> and the time she saw him standing at the bus stop.
Why not just say "Mrs Roberts said Oswald came in at approxomately
one o`clock"? Why is it so hard for you to tell the truth regarding
what these witnesses actually said?
> And in reading her
> affidavit I believe I'm being generous, it could have been as late as
> 1:06 when she saw him standing like a statue at the bus stop.
Did she say "standing like a statue", or is this just more of your
embellishment? She said she glanced out the window, how would she know
if she saw him pausing before crossing the street (even a person in a
hurry might nor walk out into traffic without stopping to look for
oncoming cars).
> She never did, you knew she never
> did, you lied when you said she did. You lie about a lot of the
> evidence, and continue to tell these same lies even after they have
> been pointed out to you numerous times. Why is that, Walt?
>
> Dud.....I don't lie about the evidence....
You lie often about the evidence. You did so when you put words in
Mrs Roberts mouth she never said. You do so to make the defense of
your precious patsy sem stronger than it actually is. If you told the
truth, it would be apparent your assertions are not as strong as you
represent them to be.
>Lying is for fools and
> Lner's. Lying is selfdefeating for a person who is seriously seeking
> the truth.
You aren`t seeking the truth, you`re playing games with a man`s
murder.
Walt
> On 20 Mar, 21:39, "Bud" <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Walt wrote:
> > > On 20 Mar, 18:55, "Bud" <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> > > > Walt wrote:
> > > > > On 20 Mar, 16:34, "Bud" <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> > > > > > Walt wrote:
> > > > > > > On 19 Mar, 21:32, "David Von Pein" <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Let's examine DVP's statement.....
>
> > > > > > > Tippit hears the 12:43 APB broadcast on the DPD radio, describing a
> > > > > > > "5-10; 165-lb. slender white man" (which is also repeated a little
> > > > > > > later as well).
>
> > > > > > > How many men in Dallas were about 5 ' 10" tall, weighing about 165
> > > > > > > pounds??? ..........120,000 ??--- 130,000 ??
>
> > > > > > > Was Oswald 5' 10 " tall?......... Nope....He was 5' 9"
>
> > > > > > Thats probably what Tippit intended to do when he stopped Oswald,
> > > > > > measure his height. Oz should have waited, once Tippit determined he
> > > > > > was 5'-9", I`m sure he would have left him on his way.
>
> > > If you were a truthful man you'd admit that Tippit would have had no
> > > reason to stop Oswald, If the man had been Oswald.
>
> > Other than the description of Oz going over the air.
Did he stop any other man before he was shot?? Surely with such a
vague description he would have seen several men who fit the
description of "5-10; 165-lb. slender white man".......
It's very doubtful that Tippit stopped his killer because he matched
that APB description.......but there is no doubt he suspected the guy
of something......If he thought the guy was the suspect in the murder
of JFK, It's doubtful that he would have got out of his car before
telling the dipatcher that he was going to get out of the car to talk
to a man who fit the description of the assassin..... and if the guy
had matched the description, and that's the reason Tippit stopped him,
he most certainly would have been very alert and pulled his side arm,
and would have had it cocked and ready. He certainly was aware that
the guy who had shot at President Kennedy (JFK's death had not yet
been announced) was a bad dude who had tried to kill the President.
And if the guy was crazy enough to shoot at the President then it
should have been obvious that the guy wouldn't hesitate to shoot a
copd if necessary.
>
> > > Tippit probably
> > > did have a reason to stop the guy that shot him..... I've heard that
> > > he would stop people and harass them just because he was an asshole
> > > with a badge. Perhaps Tippit had hassled this guy on previous
> > > occasions and the guy just lost it......
>
Hey Dud....Did ya notice the color of the jacket that Mrs Roberts saw
Oswald putting on as he left at about 1:03??
I recall the jacket was a dark color and it was the type that zips up
the front.
What color Jacket was the killer wearing?
>
> Notice where she said that Lee arrived at approximately 1:00 PM.... Do
> ya see that Dud?
>
> Then she says....."Oswald went to his room and was only there a very
> few minutes before coming out."
>
> A few minutes..... perhap's three or four.....
>
> Then she says..... A moment later I looked out the window. I saw Lee
> Oswald standing on the curb at the bus
>
> So Mrs Roberts did in FACT see Lee in front of the boarding house at
> about 1:04
>
> I believe that Mrs Roberts has just shown that one of us is a
> liar........
>
> Walt
Hey dud look on page 158 of yer bible and notice that the Warren
Commission printed a map which gives the times that Oswald was at
various points..... Out of Cab 12:54----- At roominghouse 1:00PM,
leave 1:03---- Tippit killing site 1:16 ---Texas theater 1:40,
apprended 1:50.
So the W.C. found that Lee left the Rooming house at 1:03 Mrs Roberts
saw him STANDING at the bus stop AFTER he left the house so the time
of 1:04 is probably accurate. Then they have him at the Tippit
murder site at 1:16 but that's utterly ridiculous.....at 1:16 TF
Bowley had already been at that site for SIX minutes, at 1:16, and
Tippit was lying on the street dead when he arrived at 1:10.
Walt
>
>
> > > > > so if you want to call someone a liar perhaps you should aim
> > > > > that at Gerald Ford or Earl warren, or Arlen Specter.
>
> > > > If they say Mrs Roberts said Oswald was at the boardinghouse at
> > > > 1:04, I will.
>
> > > Are you trying to split hairs again, Dud?? Are you trying to say
> > > that a few minutes after 1:00 can't be 1:04??
>
> > No, I`m saying that when you say that Mrs Roberts said Oz was at
> > the boardinhouse at 1:04, you are telling a lie. You`ve been telling
> > these lies for years. You won`t stop, maybe you can`t stop.
>
> > > > > Nor did I make
> > > > > up the times of 1:06 or 1:10. Helen Markham said she saw Tippit shot
> > > > > at about 1:06,
>
> > > > She also said Oz is the man she saw shoot Tippit.
>
> > > But the description that she gave immediately after the shooting did
> > > NOT fit Oswald.
>
> > Perhaps you can explain how such a good description of Oswald was
> > put on the air after the Tippit slaying, if none of the witnesses saw
> > Oz.
>
> > >She was hysterical when she was taken to view the
>
Bud
Maybe not so many in the middle of a work day walking around. But,
it may not have been the description alone.
> It's very doubtful that Tippit stopped his killer because he matched
> that APB description.......but there is no doubt he suspected the guy
> of something......If he thought the guy was the suspect in the murder
> of JFK, It's doubtful that he would have got out of his car before
> telling the dipatcher that he was going to get out of the car to talk
> to a man who fit the description of the assassin..... and if the guy
> had matched the description, and that's the reason Tippit stopped him,
> he most certainly would have been very alert and pulled his side arm,
> and would have had it cocked and ready. He certainly was aware that
> the guy who had shot at President Kennedy (JFK's death had not yet
> been announced) was a bad dude who had tried to kill the President.
> And if the guy was crazy enough to shoot at the President then it
> should have been obvious that the guy wouldn't hesitate to shoot a
> copd if necessary.
Yah, it seems Tippit didn`t think it was likely that Oz was
Kennedy`s shooter, a mistake he paid for with his life.
Of course, you ignore the context of her observations. She said she
was busy trying to get receprtion to her television to get news about
the President being shot.
> What color Jacket was the killer wearing?
What color jacket was Oz wearing when he was arrested? What
happened to it?
> > Notice where she said that Lee arrived at approximately 1:00 PM.... Do
> > ya see that Dud?
> >
> > Then she says....."Oswald went to his room and was only there a very
> > few minutes before coming out."
> >
> > A few minutes..... perhap's three or four.....
> >
> > Then she says..... A moment later I looked out the window. I saw Lee
> > Oswald standing on the curb at the bus
> >
> > So Mrs Roberts did in FACT see Lee in front of the boarding house at
> > about 1:04
> >
> > I believe that Mrs Roberts has just shown that one of us is a
> > liar........
> >
> > Walt
>
>
> Hey dud look on page 158 of yer bible and notice that the Warren
> Commission printed a map which gives the times that Oswald was at
> various points..... Out of Cab 12:54----- At roominghouse 1:00PM,
> leave 1:03---- Tippit killing site 1:16 ---Texas theater 1:40,
> apprended 1:50.
Does the WC claim these are established times?
> So the W.C. found that Lee left the Rooming house at 1:03 Mrs Roberts
> saw him STANDING at the bus stop AFTER he left the house so the time
> of 1:04 is probably accurate.
Why keep piling one lie on top of another? The WC did not "find"
any of those times, they are estimates. Why are you representing
estimates as established times?
> Then they have him at the Tippit
> murder site at 1:16 but that's utterly ridiculous.....at 1:16 TF
> Bowley had already been at that site for SIX minutes, at 1:16, and
> Tippit was lying on the street dead when he arrived at 1:10.
There is no confirmation to Bowley`s 1:10 time, with a lot of
reasons to believe it is inaccurate. Bowley`s call using the police
radio came in at around 1:18. Unlikely he waited 8 minutes to make
that call. Much more likely he got to the scene 1:16ish, and made that
call. For one thing, Bowley says a crowd had formed. Tippit is known
to be alive at 1:08, which leaves only two minutes for Tippit to
confront this person (who many said was Oswald), get out, get shot,
crowd to form, Bowley arives, looks at watch, which reads 1:10. I
don`t see this crime taking 8 minutes to get on the air. Two or three
seems a lot more likely under the circumstances.
tomnln
WHO is tom lowery?>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/tom_lowery.htm
"cdddraftsman" <cdddra...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1174471477.3...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
Walt
Actually there is quite a bit that confirms that TF Bowley arrived on
the scene at 1:10
When he drove up to the intersection Hellen Markham was standing over
Tippit's body and screaming hysterically. Her screaming caught his
attention, and that's when he noticed Tippit's body lying in the
street. He had just minutes before picked up his daughter at school
( He knew what time his daughter got out of school and he knew what
time he picked her up) He was on his way to pick up his wife at her
placed of employment and he damned sure knew when he had to be there.
( this may be the reason he looked at his watch)...ie to be sure he
wouldn't be late to pick up his wife. He looked at his watch and
noted the time...1:10.
Furthermore his 1:10 time is also confirmed by Helen Markham's
affidavit. Markham wrote that she saw Tippit shot at about 1:06,
which would mean that Tippit had been shot about 4 minutes before
Bowley arrived. After checking on Tippit's condition he noticed Dom
Benavides using Tippits radio, he didn't know that Benavides had
already made contact with the police dispatcher, so he took the mike
from Benavides and reported that an officer had been shot and he
appeared to be dead. The dispatcher responded with the
remark...."Citizen using the police radio.... we already have that
information, please stay off the radio. The time for that transmission
was 1:16. Obviously Tippit had been shot several minutes before the
dispatcher told TF Bowley to stay off the radio at 1:16.
I'm going to save this post so I can repost it everytime you make the
dumb statement that there isn't confirmation that Bowley arrived at
1:10.
Walt
Bud
<SNIP>
> > There is no confirmation to Bowley`s 1:10 time,
>
> Actually there is quite a bit that confirms that TF Bowley arrived on
> the scene at 1:10
>
> When he drove up to the intersection Hellen Markham was standing over
> Tippit's body and screaming hysterically.
Yah, another indication that Bowley`s 1:10 time is wrong. Markham
saw the murder from across the street. So, we know Tippit was alive at
1:08. For Bowley`s time of 1:10 to be correct, Tippit had to hang up,
immediately stop the shooter (Oz), get out of the car, got shot, a
crowd formed, Markham crossed the street, Bowley pulled up, Bowley
checked time.
> Her screaming caught his
> attention, and that's when he noticed Tippit's body lying in the
> street. He had just minutes before picked up his daughter at school
> ( He knew what time his daughter got out of school and he knew what
> time he picked her up)
What time was that?
> He was on his way to pick up his wife at her
> placed of employment and he damned sure knew when he had to be there.
What time did his wife get out of work? How do times you don`t have
to substantiate Bowley`s account?
> ( this may be the reason he looked at his watch)
Didn`t you say previously that he looked at his watch to note the
time he came across Tippit? Neither makes sense, by the way.
>...ie to be sure he
> wouldn't be late to pick up his wife. He looked at his watch and
> noted the time...1:10.
So he said, but that is unconfirmed information. And there is a
lot more information indicating the event occurred later.
> Furthermore his 1:10 time is also confirmed by Helen Markham's
> affidavit.
> Markham wrote that she saw Tippit shot at about 1:06,
> which would mean that Tippit had been shot about 4 minutes before
> Bowley arrived.
Did she look at her watch at the time also?
> After checking on Tippit's condition he noticed Dom
> Benavides using Tippits radio, he didn't know that Benavides had
> already made contact with the police dispatcher, so he took the mike
> from Benavides and reported that an officer had been shot and he
> appeared to be dead.
This call was around 1:18. Unlikely it was eight minutes before
Bowley tried to call in this murder.
>The dispatcher responded with the
> remark...."Citizen using the police radio.... we already have that
> information, please stay off the radio. The time for that transmission
> was 1:16. Obviously Tippit had been shot several minutes before the
> dispatcher told TF Bowley to stay off the radio at 1:16.
No, the time of Bowley`s call was around 1:18.
> I'm going to save this post so I can repost it everytime you make the
> dumb statement that there isn't confirmation that Bowley arrived at
> 1:10.
Save my responses also, so people can see why Bowley`s time is
unconfirmed. Markham`s times are also. You can`t use unconfirmed times
to establish other information.
<SNIP>
Walt
You may be right that TF Bowley made tha call at 1:18....
This call was around 1:18. Unlikely it was eight minutes before
Bowley tried to call in this murder.
Dud....I think you;re wrong about TF Bowley using the radio at 1:18
He made contact with the dispatcher at 1:16....but Dom Benavides had
made contact a couple of minures earlier probably about 1:14
Here's an exceprt from Benavides testimony.
Mr. Belin.
Then what did you do?
Mr. BENAVIDES. Then I don't know if I opened the car door back further
than what it was or not, but anyway, I went in and pulled the radio
and I mashed the button and told them that an officer had been shot,
and I didn't get an answer, so I said it again, and this guy asked me
whereabouts all of a sudden, and I said, on 10th Street. I couldn't
remember where it was at at the time. So I looked up and I seen this
number and I said 410 East 10th Street.
Mr. Belin.
You saw a number on the house then?
Mr. Benavides.
Yes.
Mr. Belin.
All right.
Mr. BENAVIDES. Then he started to--then I don't know what he said; but
I put the radio back. I mean, the microphone back up, and this other
guy was standing there, so I got up out of the car, and I don't know,
I wasn't sure if he heard me, and the other guy sat down in the car.
There's some interesting information in Dom's testimony.
Notice that Benavides gave the address as "410 E 10th", and he got
that number by looking at the numerals on the front of a house there.
When TF Bowley took the mike a couple of minutes after Benavides had
made contact Bowley gave the dispatcher the address as "404 E. 10th"
Here's a copy of the 1:16 radio transmission
Citizen--- Hello police operator
Dispatcher----Go ahead ...Go ahead citizen using the police radio
( citizen cut in)
Citizen----We've had a shooting out here.
Dispatcher----Where's it at? The citizen using the police radio
(citizen cut in)
Citizen ---- On tenth street.
Dispatcher----What location on tenth street?
Citizen---- Between Marsalis and Beckley. It's a police
officer...somebody shot him -- what's this?-- 404 Tenth street
So we know that the radio transmission occurred at 1:16 and it was TF
Bowley on the radio at 1:16 because he gave the address as "404 E.10th
street."
The dispatcher responded with the remark...."Citizen using the police
radio.... we already have that information, please stay off the radio.
The time for that transmission was 1:16. Obviously Tippit had been
shot several minutes before the dispatcher told TF Bowley to stay off
the radio at 1:16.
Walt
Walt
Von Pea Brain wrote:
As for Helen Markham on 10th Street, the "bushy hair" thing was almost
ALL of Mark Lane's making,
You should learn to check the records before you smear egg all over
yer face....
Mark Lane had nothing to do with creating the bushy haired gunman who
shot Tippit. Helen Markham DESCRIBED Tippit's killer as short, a
little on the heavy side, with dark bushy hair. But apparently she
wasn't the only witness who said the killer had bushy hair. Here's
an exerpt from DPD officer Hill's testimony.... Let's read it....
the reporter, Jim Ewell, came up, and I said an officer had been shot
in Oak Cliff, and he wanted to go with us also.
In the process of getting the location straight, and I think it was at
this point I was probably using 19 call number, because I was riding
with him, we got the information correctly that the shooting had
actually been on East 10th, and we were en route there.
We crossed the Commerce Street viaduct and turned, made a right turn
to go under the viaduct on North Beckley to go up to 10th Street. As
we passed, just before we got to Colorado on Beckley, an ambulance
with a police car behind it passed us en route to Methodist Hospital.
We went on to the scene of the shooting where we found a squad car
parked against the right or the south curb on 10th Street, with a pool
of blood on the left-hand side of it near the side of the car.
Tippit had already been removed. The first man that came up to me, he
said, "The man that shot him was a white male about 5'10", weighing
160 to 170 pounds, had on a Jacket and a pair of dark trousers, and
brown bushy hair."
The first man that came up to me, he said, "The man that shot him was
a white male about 5'10", weighing 160 to 170 pounds, had on a Jacket
and a pair of dark trousers, and brown bushy hair."
At this point the first squad rolled up, and that would have been
squad 105, which had been dispatched from downtown. An officer named
Joe Poe, and I believe his partner was a boy named Jez.
I told him to stay at the scene and guard the car and talk to as many
witnesses as they could find to the incident, and that we were going
to start checking the area.
Do ya see that description Von Pea Brain?? Notice that a MAN came up
to him as soon as he stepped out of the car at the scene, and gave him
a description of Tippit's killer. There's not one iota of evidence
that Mark Lane was at the scene of the shooting, so contrary to your
assnine assertion that "the "bushy hair" thing was almost ALL of Mark
Lane's making", he can't be the man who gave Hill the description.
Walt
P.S. Do you think that description fit Lee Oswald?? How could he
have bushy hair and thinning hair at the same time?
Bud
http://www.wilsonsalmanac.com/images2/oswald_lee3.jpg
Are you saying it is impossible for Oz, as seen in this picture, to
be described as having "busy hair", or that it`s impossible for Oz to
look like this, or worse, when he shot Tippit?
Walt
>
> - Show quoted text -
Oh that's cute Dud....... How long did it take you to paint the messed
up hair on Oswald's picture?
I wouldn't described the hair in that pic as "bushy".....and I'd bet
very few people would describe it as "bushy"
Most folks would describe the hair as "messed up" or "disheveled" as
if he just got out of bed.
Walt
Walt
David Von Pein
>>> "Do ya see that description Von Pea Brain?? Notice that a MAN came up to him {Gerald Hill} as soon as he stepped out of the car at the scene, and gave him a description of Tippit's killer. There's not one iota of evidence that Mark Lane was at the scene of the shooting; so contrary to your assnine [sic] assertion that "the bushy-hair thing was almost ALL of Mark Lane's making", he can't be the man who gave Hill the description." <<<
<strong laugh>
Oh, for Pete sake! I wasn't asserting that Lane HIMSELF gave a
description of Tippit's killer to the cops! (That's a howl that you'd
actually think that's what I meant.)
Plus, what the hell does all of the above have to do with MARKHAM
making her supposed "bushy hair" statement? (Unless Gerald Hill
couldn't tell a "man" from a woman.)
Answer: Nothing.
In fact, when thinking about that Hill testimony further, it's quite
possible that Mark Lane got the LONE "bushy hair" reference from THE
MAN who said it (or from Gerald Hill directly)....and not from Markham
(who flatly denied she ever said "bushy" in her WC account).
Here's a possible scenario (not verified, but it's possible):
Mark Lane somehow gets wind of the bushy-hair account of the killer
(i.e., Gerald Hill's account saying it was a "man" who gave him a
description of the killer).
Lane then wants to put THE SAME WORDS into the mouth of another Tippit
witness -- Helen Markham. But Helen won't have any of it...because she
knows she didn't actually say those things....as the Lane tape
recording indicates (plus Markham's WC testimony).
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/lane1.txt
It was a nice, underhanded CT tactic by Lane (if it's true). And I'll
admit, I'm just guessing here.
But it's a guess that seems logical -- especially given Lane's burning
desire to have a conspiracy exist in the JFK case, and given the fact
that Lane was serving as Marguerite Oswald's attorney, and Marguerite
at some point probably convinced Lane that her wonderful son "has done
more for his country than any other living human being".
<belly-laugh break!>
So, Lane gets word somehow (possibly by talking to Gerald Hill
directly about this) that one "man" has used the words "bushy hair" to
describe Tippit's murderer. Lane now wants OTHER witnesses to back
that up too....so he uses a little arm-twisting on Markham. But, as I
said, Markham wasn't biting. Just read the transcript above to see for
yourself.
And, btw, the tape recording fully BACKS UP Markham's later WC
testimony as well. Helen was obviously trying to distance herself from
this kook named Mark Lane, so she denies that she ever even talked to
him at any point in time.
Now, that was probably a white lie told by Helen to the WC, yes; for
it's quite likely she would have remembered that weird "bushy-hair"
conversation with a kook on the phone who was trying his damndest to
put words in her mouth; who would simply FORGET something like that,
for Pete sake?
But the key re. that "white lie" is that it DOESN'T MATTER. Why?
Because the tape recording (made BEFORE Helen's WC testimony was
taken) verifies Markham's WC "I never said bushy" account of events.
Therefore, there's really no need at all for Helen to want to distance
herself from that tape recording....because she denies the "bushy
hair" junk RIGHT ON THE TAPE RECORDING ITSELF -- the very same thing
she also does in her WC account of the event.
So there's really nothing to "hide" there. Which is why I'm a little
curious as to why Helen was afraid (or ashamed, or whatever) to simply
admit to the Warren Commission that she had had that phone
conversation with Mark Lane in early March of 1964.
Walt
> RE. J.D. TIPPIT'S KILLER, HELEN MARKHAM, AND MARK LANE:
>
> >>> "Do ya see that description Von Pea Brain?? Notice that a MAN came up to him {Gerald Hill} as soon as he stepped out of the car at the scene, and gave him a description of Tippit's killer. There's not one iota of evidence that Mark Lane was at the scene of the shooting; so contrary to your assnine [sic] assertion that "the bushy-hair thing was almost ALL of Mark Lane's making", he can't be the man who gave Hill the description." <<<
>
> <strong laugh>
>
> Oh, for Pete sake! I wasn't asserting that Lane HIMSELF gave a
> description of Tippit's killer to the cops! (That's a howl that you'd
> actually think that's what I meant.)
If that's not what you intended to say then perhap's you need to parse
your own words..."the bushy-hair thing was almost ALL of Mark Lane's
making",
You were the one who put the word "ALL" in caps.... I thought you
intended to blame Mark Lane for creating (making) the bushy hair .
>
> Plus, what the hell does all of the above have to do with MARKHAM
> making her supposed "bushy hair" statement? (Unless Gerald Hill
> couldn't tell a "man" from a woman.)
>
> Answer: Nothing.
Oh no, the answer is:.... At least TWO people gave the description of
Tippit's killer, Helen markham and this man who gave
the description to sgt. Hill
>
> In fact, when thinking about that Hill testimony further, it's quite
> possible that Mark Lane got the LONE "bushy hair" reference from THE
> MAN who said it (or from Gerald Hill directly)....and not from Markham
> (who flatly denied she ever said "bushy" in her WC account).
Markham lied that she had told Mark Lane that Tippit's killer had
bushy hair. She was scared to death that she would go to jail, because
she had told a couple of newsreporters that Tippit's killer was
"short, kind of heavy, and had dark bushy hair". Captain Fritz had
called her and told her to keep her mouth shut or she could get
herself in trouble. Mark Lane learned that she had told reporters
that Tippit's killer was "short, kind of heavy, and had dark bushy
hair". He called her and recorded their conversation, in which she did
say the killer was "short, kind of heavy, and had dark bushy hair".
When she heard that tape recording she remembered Captain Fritz's
threat and was scared that she would become a resident of the Cross
Bar Hotel.
Walt
David Von Pein
CONSPIRACY KOOK" (Part 189).
>>> ""The bushy-hair thing was almost ALL of Mark Lane's making" {DVP quote}. You were the one who put the word "ALL" in caps. I thought you intended to blame Mark Lane for creating (making) the bushy hair." <<<
And to Walt, my above quote meant that Lane had to have been on Tenth
Street on 11/22. Weird.
>>> "She {Markham} was scared to death that she would go to jail, because she had told a couple of reporters that Tippit's killer was "short, kind of heavy, and had dark bushy hair"." <<<
Which must be why we have this exchange on a tape recording made by
Lane BEFORE MARKHAM EVER GAVE HER WARREN COMMISSION TESTIMONY,
huh?.....
LANE -- "I read that you told some of the reporters that he was short,
stocky, and had bushy hair."
MARKHAM -- "No, no. I did not say this."
LANE -- "You did not say that?"
MARKHAM -- "No, sir."
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/lane1.txt
>>> "Captain Fritz had called her {Markham} and told her to keep her mouth shut or she could get herself in trouble." <<<
Cite this please. Or can you?
>>> "He {Lane} called her and recorded their conversation, in which she did say the killer was "short, kind of heavy, and had dark bushy hair"." <<<
Where are those comments on this tape?.....
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/lane1.txt
I'll admit, that after trying to shove "bushy" down Helen's throat for
a while, Helen relented (probably out of deference, or to just get
this fucking kook named Mark Lane off her back) and said:
"Yeah, just a little bit bushy, uh huh."
But as she told the WC, the killer's hair wasn't so much "bushy" as it
was "windblown"...just like we see Oswald's hair in post-arrest
pictures.
Also -- Markham, later in the same conversation with Lane, makes this
statement, explaining why the word "bushy" (which Lane insists upon
using) equates to "uncombed" to Markham's way of thinking.....
LANE -- "Did you tell the officers that the man who shot Tippit had
bushy hair?"
MARKHAM -- "Uh, no, I did not."
LANE -- "But, but he did have bushy hair you said, just a little
bushy?"
MARKHAM -- "Well, you wouldn't say it hadn't been combed you know or
anything."
~~~~
Simple translation: "Bushy" = The same thing as "Uncombed" in
Markham's eyes.
>>> "When she heard that tape recording she remembered Captain Fritz's threat and was scared that she would become a resident of the Cross Bar Hotel." <<<
You, OTOH, are definitely ready for The Ratched Hotel (aka: The
Cuckoo's Nest, with a seat awaiting you right next to R.P. McMurphy).
http://www.manics.nl/images/prs_mcmurphythumb.jpg
(BTW, is R.P.'s hair "bushy" in the above photo...or merely kinda
windblown and disheveled?)
Bud
<SNIP>
> > > P.S. Do you think that description fit Lee Oswald?? How could he
> > > have bushy hair and thinning hair at the same time?
> >
> > http://www.wilsonsalmanac.com/images2/oswald_lee3.jpg
> >
> > Are you saying it is impossible for Oz, as seen in this picture, to
> > be described as having "busy hair", or that it`s impossible for Oz to
> > look like this, or worse, when he shot Tippit?- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Oh that's cute Dud....... How long did it take you to paint the messed
> up hair on Oswald's picture?
If I painted it on my screen, how would it appear on yours? But,
you`re right, I created this image, and stuck it on a half dozen sites
around the internet, like the BBC`s site. Here is that photo appearing
elsewhere...
http://news.bbc.co.uk./.../1244907_oswald_ap150.jpg
On the bottom row of this site...
http://www.sparticus.schoolnet.co.uk.LHO.jpg
And, my favorite photo of Oz, clearly showing his bushy hair...
http://adipocere.homestead.com/files/lhoskull2.jpg
> I wouldn't described the hair in that pic as "bushy"....
And I wouldn`t call you retarded or insane, although I wouldn`t
argue very vehemently on your behalf with those that would.
>.and I'd bet
> very few people would describe it as "bushy"
Your contention is that the word "bushy" makes it impossible for Oz
to be the person the witnesses described, that "bushy" rules out that
it was Oz, right? Is it impossible for someone to use the word "bushy"
to describe Oz`s hair in that photo?
> Most folks would describe the hair as "messed up" or "disheveled" as
> if he just got out of bed.
This photo shows without a doubt that "bushy" could very well be
an inclusive descriptive term for Oswald`s hair when he shot Tippit.
> Walt
Bud
Bud wrote:
> <SNIP>
>
> > > > P.S. Do you think that description fit Lee Oswald?? How could he
> > > > have bushy hair and thinning hair at the same time?
> > >
> > > http://www.wilsonsalmanac.com/images2/oswald_lee3.jpg
> > >
> > > Are you saying it is impossible for Oz, as seen in this picture, to
> > > be described as having "busy hair", or that it`s impossible for Oz to
> > > look like this, or worse, when he shot Tippit?- Hide quoted text -
> > >
> > > - Show quoted text -
> >
> > Oh that's cute Dud....... How long did it take you to paint the messed
> > up hair on Oswald's picture?
>
> If I painted it on my screen, how would it appear on yours? But,
> you`re right, I created this image, and stuck it on a half dozen sites
> around the internet, like the BBC`s site. Here is that photo appearing
> elsewhere...
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk./.../1244907_oswald_ap150.jpg
>
> On the bottom row of this site...
Tried a fix on the one below, might work now...
http://www.sparticus.schoolnet.co.uk.LHOM.htm
Bud
Bud wrote:
> Bud wrote:
> > <SNIP>
> >
> > > > > P.S. Do you think that description fit Lee Oswald?? How could he
> > > > > have bushy hair and thinning hair at the same time?
> > > >
> > > > http://www.wilsonsalmanac.com/images2/oswald_lee3.jpg
> > > >
> > > > Are you saying it is impossible for Oz, as seen in this picture, to
> > > > be described as having "busy hair", or that it`s impossible for Oz to
> > > > look like this, or worse, when he shot Tippit?- Hide quoted text -
> > > >
> > > > - Show quoted text -
> > >
> > > Oh that's cute Dud....... How long did it take you to paint the messed
> > > up hair on Oswald's picture?
> >
> > If I painted it on my screen, how would it appear on yours? But,
> > you`re right, I created this image, and stuck it on a half dozen sites
> > around the internet, like the BBC`s site. Here is that photo appearing
> > elsewhere...
> >
> > http://news.bbc.co.uk./.../1244907_oswald_ap150.jpg
> >
> > On the bottom row of this site...
>
> Tried a fix on the one below, might work now...
Or now...
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk.LHOM.htm
http://www.spatacus.schoolnet.co.uk/LHO.jpg
Bud
Bud wrote:
> Bud wrote:
> > Bud wrote:
> > > <SNIP>
> > >
> > > > > > P.S. Do you think that description fit Lee Oswald?? How could he
> > > > > > have bushy hair and thinning hair at the same time?
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.wilsonsalmanac.com/images2/oswald_lee3.jpg
> > > > >
> > > > > Are you saying it is impossible for Oz, as seen in this picture, to
> > > > > be described as having "busy hair", or that it`s impossible for Oz to
> > > > > look like this, or worse, when he shot Tippit?- Hide quoted text -
> > > > >
> > > > > - Show quoted text -
> > > >
> > > > Oh that's cute Dud....... How long did it take you to paint the messed
> > > > up hair on Oswald's picture?
> > >
> > > If I painted it on my screen, how would it appear on yours? But,
> > > you`re right, I created this image, and stuck it on a half dozen sites
> > > around the internet, like the BBC`s site. Here is that photo appearing
> > > elsewhere...
> > >
> > > http://news.bbc.co.uk./.../1244907_oswald_ap150.jpg
> > >
> > > On the bottom row of this site...
> >
> > Tried a fix on the one below, might work now...
>
> Or now...
>
> http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk.LHOM.htm
>
Walt
> Walt's last post = "WHAT IT'S LIKE TO BE AN 'ANYBODY-BUT-OSWALD'
> CONSPIRACY KOOK" (Part 189).
>
> >>> ""The bushy-hair thing was almost ALL of Mark Lane's making" {DVP quote}. You were the one who put the word "ALL" in caps. I thought you intended to blame Mark Lane for creating (making) the bushy hair." <<<
>
> And to Walt, my above quote meant that Lane had to have been on Tenth
> Street on 11/22. Weird.
Weird... Yes you are.... You are the one who attempted to credit Mark
Lane with the problem that Markham created by saying Tippit's killer
had bushy hair. The only way that "The bushy-hair thing (could have
been) almost ALL of Mark Lane's making" is if Mark Lane was the person
responsible for making that statement. Since you obviously think Mark
Lane is responsible, you must think that he wasat the scene.
> >>> "She {Markham} was scared to death that she would go to jail, because she had told a couple of reporters that Tippit's killer was "short, kind of heavy, and had dark bushy hair"." <<<
>
> Which must be why we have this exchange on a tape recording made by
> Lane BEFORE MARKHAM EVER GAVE HER WARREN COMMISSION TESTIMONY,
> huh?.....
>
> LANE -- "I read that you told some of the reporters that he was short,
> stocky, and had bushy hair."
> MARKHAM -- "No, no. I did not say this."
> LANE -- "You did not say that?"
> MARKHAM -- "No, sir."
>
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/lane1.txt
>
> >>> "Captain Fritz had called her {Markham} and told her to keep her mouth shut or she could get herself in trouble." <<<
>
> Cite this please. Or can you?
Mrs. Markham.
I am going to tell you this, now, there was someone--let me tell you
this--there was someone one day-- this was all to me--I was scared,
and I was, you know, frightened, and one day--now, this brings me
back--the memories [referring to the transcript heretofore mentions].
One day on my job there was someone that called, but he told me he was
from the city.
Mr. Liebeler.
>From here in Dallas?
Mrs. Markham.
That's right; the city hall down here, and this man told me he was---
now, I can tell you what he told me he was--he said he was Captain
Fritz--over this telephone--Capt. Will Fritz and I know you are
familiar with him, maybe. Now, he said he was Captain Fritz with the
police department of the city of Dallas.
>
> >>> "He {Lane} called her and recorded their conversation, in which she did say the killer was "short, kind of heavy, and had dark bushy hair"." <<<
>
> Where are those comments on this tape?.....
See Rush to Judgement....
>
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/lane1.txt
>
> I'll admit, that after trying to shove "bushy" down Helen's throat for
> a while, Helen relented (probably out of deference, or to just get
> this fucking kook named Mark Lane off her back) and said:
She relented because she was caught by her own words on the tape.
She was so worried that at the end of her testimony she asked the W.C.
lawyer if she was going to be in trouble for what she had told Mark
Lane.
>
> "Yeah, just a little bit bushy, uh huh."
>
> But as she told the WC, the killer's hair wasn't so much "bushy" as it
> was "windblown"...just like we see Oswald's hair in post-arrest
> pictures.
>
> Also -- Markham, later in the same conversation with Lane, makes this
> statement, explaining why the word "bushy" (which Lane insists upon
> using) equates to "uncombed" to Markham's way of thinking.....
>
That was the W.C. Lawyer putting words in her mouth. They focused on
the "bushy hair" characteristic because they knew they could change
her bushy hair statement into disheveled hair. They conviently
pushed the other two physical characteristics aside .... Markham also
said Tippit's killer was SHORT, and A LITTLE BIT HEAVY.
Walt
Walt
> Walt's last post = "WHAT IT'S LIKE TO BE AN 'ANYBODY-BUT-OSWALD'
> CONSPIRACY KOOK" (Part 189).
>
> >>> ""The bushy-hair thing was almost ALL of Mark Lane's making" {DVP quote}. You were the one who put the word "ALL" in caps. I thought you intended to blame Mark Lane for creating (making) the bushy hair." <<<
>
> And to Walt, my above quote meant that Lane had to have been on Tenth
> Street on 11/22. Weird.
>
>
> Which must be why we have this exchange on a tape recording made by
> Lane BEFORE MARKHAM EVER GAVE HER WARREN COMMISSION TESTIMONY,
> huh?.....
>
> LANE -- "I read that you told some of the reporters that he was short,
> stocky, and had bushy hair."
> MARKHAM -- "No, no. I did not say this."
> LANE -- "You did not say that?"
> MARKHAM -- "No, sir."
>
Here's the real story Mr. Liar Von Pea Brain
Mr. Liebeler.
"Mr. LANE. Would you say that he was stocky?
"Mrs. MARKHAM. He was short.
"Mr. LANE. He was short?
"Mrs. MARKHAM. Yes.
"Mr. LANE. And was he a little on the heavy side?
"Mrs. MARKHAM. Not too heavy.
"Mr. LANE. Not too heavy, but slightly heavy?
"Mrs. MARKHAM. Well, he was--no--he didn't look too heavy.
"Mr. LANE. He wasn't too heavy and would you say that he had a rather
bushy kind of hair?
Mrs. Markham.
Yes; that's my voice.
"Mrs. MARKHAM. Yes; just a little bit bushy.
"Mr. LANE. It was a little bit bushy?
"Mrs. MARKHAM. Yes.
"Mr. LANE. Yes. Was there anybody else around when you saw this
happen?
"Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir; I didn't see anyone.
Walt
> On 22 Mar, 17:59, "David Von Pein" <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > Walt's last post = "WHAT IT'S LIKE TO BE AN 'ANYBODY-BUT-OSWALD'
> > CONSPIRACY KOOK" (Part 189).
>
> > >>> ""The bushy-hair thing was almost ALL of Mark Lane's making" {DVP quote}. You were the one who put the word "ALL" in caps. I thought you intended to blame Mark Lane for creating (making) the bushy hair." <<<
>
> > And to Walt, my above quote meant that Lane had to have been on Tenth
> > Street on 11/22. Weird.
>
> Weird... Yes you are.... You are the one who attempted to credit Mark
> Lane with the problem that Markham created by sayingTippit'skiller
> had bushy hair. The only way that "The bushy-hair thing (could have
> been) almost ALL of Mark Lane's making" is if Mark Lane was the person
> responsible for making that statement. Since you obviously think Mark
> Lane is responsible, you must think that he wasat the scene.
>
>
>
>
>
Mr. Liebeler.
"Mr. LANE. Would you say that he was stocky?
"Mrs. MARKHAM. He was short.
"Mr. LANE. He was short?
"Mrs. MARKHAM. Yes.
"Mr. LANE. And was he a little on the heavy side?
"Mrs. MARKHAM. Not too heavy.
"Mr. LANE. Not too heavy, but slightly heavy?
"Mrs. MARKHAM. Well, he was--no--he didn't look too heavy.
"Mr. LANE. He wasn't too heavy and would you say that he had a rather
bushy kind of hair?
Mrs. Markham.
Yes; that's my voice.
"Mrs. MARKHAM. Yes; just a little bit bushy.
"Mr. LANE. It was a little bit bushy?
"Mrs. MARKHAM. Yes.
"Mr. LANE. Yes. Was there anybody else around when you saw this
happen?
"Mrs. MARKHAM. No, sir; I didn't see anyone.
"Mr. LANE. There was no one else there. Did you ever have a chance to
see Mr. Oswald when he was alive, I mean after he was arrested, did
they bring you down to look at him?
"Mrs. MARKHAM. I saw him on the lineup.
"Mr. LANE. Yes. Did he look anything like the man who shot Oswald?
"Mrs. MARKHAM. I identified him.
"Mr. LANE. You identified him as the man who did shoot him. Did anyone
point him out to you at that time as the man?
"Mrs. MARKHAM. In the lineup?
"Mr. LANE. Yes.
"Mrs. MARKHAM. No; they did not.
"Mr. LANE. Did they tell you who it might be?
"Mrs. MARKHAM. They didn't tell me one thing.
"Mr. LANE. No. Do you recall what the gentleman was wearing who shot
Officer Tippit?
"Mrs. MARKHAM. Yes, sir.
"Mr. LANE. How was he dressed?
"Mrs. MARKHAM. He had on a light gray looking jacket.
"Mr. LANE. Yes.
"Mrs. MARKHAM. Kind of dark trousers.
"Mr. LANE. Dark trousers?
"Mrs. MARKHAM. Uh-huh.
"Mr. LANE. And did you see what color shirt?
"Mrs. MARKHAM. No; I could not.
"Mr. LANE. The jacket was open or closed?
"Mrs. MARKHAM. Yes, sir; it was zipped up a little bit--the neck was
closed--pretty close too.
"Mr. LANE. Well, as I said, I have read your affidavit and it
indicates the police car stopped and then this man walked over to it
and leaned on it and placed his arms up against the car.
"Mrs. MARKHAM. Up in the window.
"Mr. LANE. In the window?
"Mrs. MARKHAM. Yes.
"Mr. LANE. You didn't see the police officer call him over, did you?
>
> See Rush to Judgement....
>
>
>
> >http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/lane1.txt
>
> > I'll admit, that after trying to shove "bushy" down Helen's throat for
> > a while, Helen relented (probably out of deference, or to just get
> > this fucking kook named Mark Lane off her back) and said:
>
> She relented because she was caught by her own words on the tape.
>
> She was so worried that at the end of her testimony she asked the W.C.
> lawyer if she was going to be in trouble for what she had told Mark
> Lane.
>
>
>
> > "Yeah, just a little bit bushy, uh huh."
>
> > But as she told the WC, the killer's hair wasn't so much "bushy" as it
> > was "windblown"...just like we see Oswald's hair in post-arrest
> > pictures.
>
> > Also -- Markham, later in the same conversation with Lane, makes this
> > statement, explaining why the word "bushy" (which Lane insists upon
> > using) equates to "uncombed" to Markham's way of thinking.....
>
> That was the W.C. Lawyer putting words in her mouth. They focused on
> the "bushy hair" characteristic because they knew they could change
> her bushy hair statement into disheveled hair. They conviently
> pushed the other two physical characteristics aside .... Markham also
> saidTippit'skiller was SHORT, and A LITTLE BIT HEAVY.
>
> Walt
>
>
>
> > LANE -- "Did you tell the officers that the man who shotTippithad
> > bushy hair?"
> > MARKHAM -- "Uh, no, I did not."
> > LANE -- "But, but he did have bushy hair you said, just a little
> > bushy?"
> > MARKHAM -- "Well, you wouldn't say it hadn't been combed you know or
> > anything."
>
> > ~~~~
>
> > Simple translation: "Bushy" = The same thing as "Uncombed" in
> > Markham's eyes.
>
> > >>> "When she heard that tape recording she remembered Captain Fritz's threat and was scared that she would become a resident of the Cross Bar Hotel." <<<
>
> > You, OTOH, are definitely ready for The Ratched Hotel (aka: The
> > Cuckoo's Nest, with a seat awaiting you right next to R.P. McMurphy).
>
> >http://www.manics.nl/images/prs_mcmurphythumb.jpg
>
> > (BTW, is R.P.'s hair "bushy" in the above photo...or merely kinda
> > windblown and disheveled?)- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
David Von Pein
Any jury listening to that tape would be rolling their eyes in
unison....as all 12 jurors (and their uncles) would know instantly
that Lane was trying to get Markham to say something she really didn't
want to say.
>>> "That was the W.C. lawyer putting words in her mouth. They focused on the "bushy hair" characteristic because they knew they could change her bushy hair statement into disheveled hair." <<<
<laugh>
Even though the word "disheveled" never appears once in Markham's WC
transcript, huh? (You're probably thinking about MY frequent use of
that word in the last few days to describe what Markham actually
meant. Next thing you know Walt will be accusing ME of putting words
in Markham's mouth BACK IN 1964.)
So, you think "they" (Joe Ball in the instance below) put the word
"windblown" into Markham's mouth, huh? Even though that one word --
"Windblown" -- appears just ONE time in Markham's WC transcript; with
no lawyer ever saying it prior to Mrs. Markham uttering it ON HER OWN.
Did Ball tell her to be sure to say "windblown" instead of "bushy"
before they went "on the record"? Do you really want to go down that
silly road?.....
Mr. BALL -- "Did you ever tell anyone that the man who shot Tippit was
short, a little on the heavy side, and his hair was somewhat bushy?"
Mrs. MARKHAM -- "No, sir."
Mr. BALL -- "Is it your memory now that the man who shot Tippit was
short, a little on the heavy side?"
Mrs. MARKHAM -- "No, sir. He wasn't too heavy."
Mr. BALL -- "Is it your memory that his hair was bushy?"
Mrs. MARKHAM -- "It wasn't so bushy. It was, say, windblown or
something. What I mean, he didn't have a lot of hair."
>>> "Markham also said Tippit's killer was SHORT, and A LITTLE BIT HEAVY." <<<
Even though Markham specifically says this on the Lane tape (in
addition to the WC "HE WASN'T TOO HEAVY" account posted above):
"And he was, uh, uh, well not too heavy. Uh, say around 160, maybe
150." -- H. MARKHAM
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/lane1.txt
So, as we can see there, Markham guessed Oswald's weight PERFECTLY
(150 lbs., per LHO's autopsy report). How does that "150 pounds"
statistic uttered by Markham herself turn Helen into a lousy witness
when it comes to fingering Oswald for the Tippit murder (whether she
ever said "a little bit heavy" or not...at ANY time)?
Bud
Walt wrote:
> On 22 Mar, 17:59, "David Von Pein" <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> > Walt's last post = "WHAT IT'S LIKE TO BE AN 'ANYBODY-BUT-OSWALD'
> > CONSPIRACY KOOK" (Part 189).
> >
> > >>> ""The bushy-hair thing was almost ALL of Mark Lane's making" {DVP quote}. You were the one who put the word "ALL" in caps. I thought you intended to blame Mark Lane for creating (making) the bushy hair." <<<
> >
> > And to Walt, my above quote meant that Lane had to have been on Tenth
> > Street on 11/22. Weird.
>
> Weird... Yes you are.... You are the one who attempted to credit Mark
> Lane with the problem that Markham created by saying Tippit's killer
> had bushy hair.
It`s not a problem. It`s an invention by kooks so they can pretend
their precious patsy didn`t commit this crime. I`ve produced a photo
in which a perfectly good description of his hair would be
"bushy" (and no, it doesn`t matter if that is the word *you* would
choose to describe it), indicating it was an accurate description, and
it that was Oz that Markham saw.
> The only way that "The bushy-hair thing (could have
> been) almost ALL of Mark Lane's making" is if Mark Lane was the person
> responsible for making that statement. Since you obviously think Mark
> Lane is responsible, you must think that he wasat the scene.
It was a perfectly good description of Oz, one that would rule out
many a bald or close cropped individual. But not Oz.
Oz certainly wasn`t tall, so "short" doesn`t rule him out. And
since Markham gave a weight estimation also, we can see that this also
is inclusive of Oz. "Markham: And he was uh, uh, well, not too heavy,
uh, say 160, maybe 150." None of this nitpicking rules out your
beloved Oz as the man she saw, leaving her carefully considered
selection of Oz at the police station unharmed.
curtjester1
> curtjester1 wrote:
> > On 19 Mar, 18:10, RICLAND <blackwr...@lycos.com> wrote:
> >> Hi, fellow, truth seekers. I've been unable to find anything on the why
> >> and wherefore of the Tippit murder.
>
> >> Any links...?
>
> >> ricland
>
> > Tippit was killed because he was just another link in the chain of the
> > conspiracy, and it allowed for the conspiracy to be stonewalled with
> > the capture of the patsy.
>
> > Tippit, Ruby, and Bernard Weissman met at the Carousel Club eight days
> > before the assassination. People like Dorothy Kilgalen, Thayer Waldo,
> > and Mark Lane discovered that, and well when you blab that kind of
> > stuff to your friends like Dorothy did, you pay for it with your life.
>
> > Tippit had to be a conspirator just on the fact that he honked while
> > parked in front of Oswald's roominghouse after the assassination. He
> > probably took Oswald to the Texas Theater, and maybe he was going to
> > be the one to give him a ride later, possibly to the Red Bird
> > airport. The conspirators wanted the Oswald in the theater dead or
> > captured, so they had to have a trail to get the police a bona fide
> > way to get there. The conspirator that was setting Oswald up a month
> > prior to the assassination around Dallas probably knew Tippit, and had
> > Oswald's ID and wallet, so when he killed Tippit, and and emptied the
> > shells, and walked like a suspect and walked into the balcony of the
> > Texas Theater without paying, it just sealed the fate of the patsy.
>
> > CJ
>
> But Tippit was a straight guy. He was a paratrooper during WWII who when
> offered a Purple Heart for a wound received during a non-combat
> accident, refused it.
>
> And he was brave. He and a partner charged a guy with an ice pick and
> disarmed him but not before the guy managed to stick him with it a
> couple of times.
>
> No. I just can't see a straight-shooter like Tippit getting involved in
> anything as sordid as setting up a patsy, assassination, or cold-blooded
> murder. Tippit was your basic farm boy, dumb but honest to the bone.
>
> ricland- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
All I can say is there are many people in shady backgrounds who have
served in the military or been involved in life threatening
situations. The fact is that he hung around the clubs and was known
to be a womanizer. The fact is that some police car honked in front
of the Oswald roominghouse, an irony of all ironies, and noone could
be found other than Tippit to represent the police in that situation.
The fact is that he was acting very strange before his death, driving
erratically, and pushing people aside to get to a phone in a record
store. I don't think an honest person could say that Jefferson Davis
Tippit should be excluded from being a suspect in the JFK murder.
CJ
Bud
It`s a certififed fact when a witness says something? Does that
mean there was a dig in the limo?
> an irony of all ironies, and noone could
> be found other than Tippit to represent the police in that situation.
Roberts recalled the number on the car, and it wasn`t Tippit`s.
Unless you want to say Roberts is unreliable.
> The fact is that he was acting very strange before his death, driving
> erratically, and pushing people aside to get to a phone in a record
> store. I don't think an honest person could say that Jefferson Davis
> Tippit should be excluded from being a suspect in the JFK murder.
Typical kook-think. "I don`t have enough information to make
intelligent conclusions, so let me disparage this man`s memory with
some crackpot assumptions I can`t begin to support."
To recap, you can`t establish who beeped, why they beeped, or if
the beeping actually occurred. You have some actions by Tippit that
you claim are suspicious, but you can`t establish, or even loosely
connect any of them to the assassination. Of course Tippit`s actions
are inexplicable, the man who performed them didn`t explain them. Do
two people always agree on a particular event, would Tippit say he
barrelled through the guy to use the phone?
> CJ
tomnln
"Bud" <sirs...@fast.net> wrote in message
news:1174664787....@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
Walt
> curtjester1 wrote:
> > On 20 Mar, 19:16, RICLAND <blackwr...@lycos.com> wrote:
> > > curtjester1 wrote:
> > > > On 19 Mar, 18:10, RICLAND <blackwr...@lycos.com> wrote:
> > > >> Hi, fellow, truth seekers. I've been unable to find anything on the why
> > > >> and wherefore of theTippitmurder.
>
> > > >> Any links...?
>
> > > >> ricland
>
> > > > conspiracy, and it allowed for the conspiracy to be stonewalled with
> > > > the capture of the patsy.
>
> > > >Tippit, Ruby, and Bernard Weissman met at the Carousel Club eight days
> > > > before the assassination. People like Dorothy Kilgalen, Thayer Waldo,
> > > > and Mark Lane discovered that, and well when you blab that kind of
> > > > stuff to your friends like Dorothy did, you pay for it with your life.
>
> > > > parked in front of Oswald's roominghouse after the assassination. He
> > > > probably took Oswald to the Texas Theater, and maybe he was going to
> > > > be the one to give him a ride later, possibly to the Red Bird
> > > > airport. The conspirators wanted the Oswald in the theater dead or
> > > > captured, so they had to have a trail to get the police a bona fide
> > > > way to get there. The conspirator that was setting Oswald up a month
> > > > Oswald's ID and wallet, so when he killedTippit, and and emptied the
> > > > shells, and walked like a suspect and walked into the balcony of the
> > > > Texas Theater without paying, it just sealed the fate of the patsy.
>
> > > > CJ
>
> > > offered a Purple Heart for a wound received during a non-combat
> > > accident, refused it.
>
> > > And he was brave. He and a partner charged a guy with an ice pick and
> > > disarmed him but not before the guy managed to stick him with it a
> > > couple of times.
>
> > > anything as sordid as setting up a patsy, assassination, or cold-blooded
>
> > > ricland- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > All I can say is there are many people in shady backgrounds who have
> > served in the military or been involved in life threatening
> > situations. The fact is that he hung around the clubs and was known
> > to be a womanizer. The fact is that some police car honked in front
> > of the Oswald roominghouse,
>
> It`s a certififed fact when a witness says something? Does that
> mean there was a dig in the limo?
>
> > an irony of all ironies, and noone could
>
> Roberts recalled the number on the car, and it wasn`tTippit`s.
> Unless you want to say Roberts is unreliable.
Roberts DID NOT "recall the number" So the car probably was
Tippit....since he was driving the the only DPD police car
in that district at that time. Tippit's Car Number was #10. Mrs
Roberts said the car she saw was #107 and it should be evident to you
that since the first two numerals of 107 is 1- 0, so she could easily
have imagined that there was a third numeral, because she was
accustomed to seeing car #170 that a friend of hers drove.
Mr. Ball.
On the 29th of November, Special Agents Will Griffin and James Kennedy
of the Federal Bureau of Investigation interviewed you and you told
them that "after Oswald had entered his room about 1 p.m. on November
22, 1963, you looked out the front window and saw police car No. 207?
Mrs. Roberts.
No. 107.
Mr. Ball.
Is that the number?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes--I remembered it. I don't know where I got that
106---207. Anyway, I knew it wasn't 170.
Mr. Ball.
And you say that there were two uniformed policemen in the car?
Mrs. Roberts.
Yes, and it was in a black car. It wasn't an accident squad car at
all.
Mr. Ball.
Were there two uniformed policemen in the car?
Mrs. Roberts.
Oh, yes.
Mr. Ball.
And one of the officers sounded the born ?
Mrs. Roberts.
Just kind of a "tit-tit"--twice.
Mr. BALL. And then drove on to Beckley toward Zangs Boulevard, is that
right?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes. I thought there was a number, but I couldn't
remember it but I did know the number of their car--I could tell that.
I want you to understand that I have been put through the third degree
and it's hard to remember.
>
> > The fact is that he was acting very strange before his death, driving
> > erratically, and pushing people aside to get to a phone in a record
> > store. I don't think an honest person could say that Jefferson Davis
> >Tippitshould be excluded from being a suspect in the JFK murder.
>
> Typical kook-think. "I don`t have enough information to make
> intelligent conclusions, so let me disparage this man`s memory with
> some crackpot assumptions I can`t begin to support."
>
> To recap, you can`t establish who beeped, why they beeped, or if
> the beeping actually occurred. You have some actions byTippitthat
> you claim are suspicious, but you can`t establish, or even loosely
> connect any of them to the assassination. Of courseTippit`s actions
> are inexplicable, the man who performed them didn`t explain them. Do
> two people always agree on a particular event, wouldTippitsay he
> barrelled through the guy to use the phone?
>
>
>
> > CJ- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Bud
She says "Yes-- I remembered it" in the testimony you yourself
produced.
> So the car probably was
> Tippit....since he was driving the the only DPD police car
> in that district at that time. Tippit's Car Number was #10. Mrs
> Roberts said the car she saw was #107 and it should be evident to you
> that since the first two numerals of 107 is 1- 0,
What should be evident to you is that 10 is not 107.
> so she could easily
> have imagined that there was a third numeral,
So, your argument is that what she says is unreliable.
> because she was
> accustomed to seeing car #170 that a friend of hers drove.
Yah, apparently it was popular spot for cops to stop and toot
their horns.
lazu...@webtv.net
extra police jacket hanging inside. Could this be where Mrs. Roberts got
the idea that there were two officers in the car which stopped in front
of her house?
David Von Pein
===============================================
>>> "Mark Lane learned that she {Helen Markham} had told reporters that Tippit's killer was "short, kind of heavy, and had dark bushy hair"." <<<
Go to Page 219 of Dale Myers' 1998 book "WITH MALICE", and check out
the direct quote from Dallas Morning News reporter Hugh Aynesworth
regarding the "bushy hair" matter.
Quoting from Myers' book:
"Dallas Morning News staff writer Hugh Aynesworth, one of three
contributors to the article, stated that the word "bushy-haired" was
HIS interpretation of what she {Helen Markham} had said.
{Myers quotes Aynesworth} "She might have said something like, 'His
hair was messed up', or 'He was running and his hair was blown
about'," Aynesworth recalled. "But, I know that the word 'bushy-
haired' was not her's exactly. I talked with her after that two or
three times and that's where I got the idea that I manufactured the
EXACT word, but it wasn't far off"." -- Page 219 of "With Malice: Lee
Harvey Oswald And The Murder Of Officer J.D. Tippit"*
~~~~~~
So, it was reporter HUGH AYNESWORTH, not Helen Markham, who very
likely originated the specific "BUSHY HAIRED" reference in the
newspaper article that Mark Lane likely saw on 11/23/63.
* = The source note connected with the above-mentioned Aynesworth
quotes reveals that Hugh's quotes were derived from a Myers/Aynesworth
conversation that took place on May 14, 1997.
The same source note (#627, on Page 636 of "WM") also has Myers
forthrightly admitting that Mrs. Markham possibly could have used the
word "bushy" when she described Tippit's killer to Officer J.M. Poe on
11/22/63.
However, that Poe reference to Markham's saying "bushy" is not really
directly relevant to the Aynesworth quote above, because Page 219 of
Mr. Myers' book is referring to Mark Lane's obvious badgering of Mrs.
Markham during the phone interview, where Lane specifies that he
thinks Markham used the word "bushy" when she talked to
"reporters" (i.e., Aynesworth, et al)....not a police officer (Poe).
Also -- Myers' footnote re. Officer Poe on Page 636 is also
interesting in that it reveals that Poe said in a report dated
11/22/63 that Markham said the killer of J.D. Tippit was "25 years
old, slender, and 5'10" tall" -- all of which very closely align with
Oswald being the gunman. (The "slender" reference being a key one, in
that it destroys Mark Lane's notion that Markham had originally
thought Tippit's killer was "heavy-set" or "stocky".)
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/1bdb7e56f0427853
Bud
So, for Roberts to have seen Tippit`s car, she`d have to be wrong
about the only two verifiable details she provided, the car number,
and the number of officers in the car.
Walt
> RE.: MARKHAM, AYNESWORTH, AND "BUSHY HAIR".......
>
> ===============================================
>
> >>> "Mark Lane learned that she {Helen Markham} had told reporters that Tippit's killer was "short, kind of heavy, and had dark bushy hair"." <<<
>
> Go to Page 219 of Dale Myers' 1998 book "WITH MALICE", and check out
> the direct quote from Dallas Morning News reporter Hugh Aynesworth
> regarding the "bushy hair" matter.
Go to Myer's book!.....Is that an original source??
Mrs Markham told a couple of reporters, an man and a woman, who said
that they were with LIFE magazine, that the man she saw shoot officer
Tippit was:.... "short, a little bit heavy, and had dark bushy hair."
Perhaps you could check an ORIGINAL source like LIFE, to see if the
reporters used her description of Tippit's killer in their article.
Walt
curtjester1
> > an irony of all ironies, and noone could
> > be found other than Tippit to represent the police in that situation.
>
> Roberts recalled the number on the car, and it wasn`t Tippit`s.
> Unless you want to say Roberts is unreliable.
>
It was very very close. I don't believe it was even close to another
patrol car's number either. Bud will assume it was the pizza guy.
> > The fact is that he was acting very strange before his death, driving
> > erratically, and pushing people aside to get to a phone in a record
> > store. I don't think an honest person could say that Jefferson Davis
> > Tippit should be excluded from being a suspect in the JFK murder.
>
> Typical kook-think. "I don`t have enough information to make
> intelligent conclusions, so let me disparage this man`s memory with
> some crackpot assumptions I can`t begin to support."
>
Or let's not investigate Tippit's life or actions at all. Why would
people say from Oak Cliff that he moonlighted as a bouncer in clubs?
Why does Dorothy Kilgallen, syndicated columnist say she knows of
Tippit, Ruby, and the guy who did the Treason posters all confering 8
days before the assassination at Ruby's Club after spending time alone
with Ruby in jail? Why did the WC ask that of Ruby, and Ruby give a
mocking answer, not denying it at all, but saying "what oilman?" when
an oil person was supposed to be in their company?
> To recap, you can`t establish who beeped, why they beeped, or if
> the beeping actually occurred. You have some actions by Tippit that
> you claim are suspicious, but you can`t establish, or even loosely
> connect any of them to the assassination. Of course Tippit`s actions
> are inexplicable, the man who performed them didn`t explain them. Do
> two people always agree on a particular event, would Tippit say he
> barrelled through the guy to use the phone?
With that thinking, you can't establish that JFK was killed because
nobody was able to document by sight any bullets penetrating his
body.
That fact is Tippit was not performing even close what a police
officer would be normally doing.
CJ
>
>
>
> > CJ- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
curtjester1
And that police jacket was found in Tippit's car. The only other
possible conclusion would be that another officer that was Carousel-
friendly, Harry Olson was house sitting in Oak Cliff during that time.
CJ
Bud
> >
> Limo? Where are you? Not in the vicinity of earth.
>
> > > an irony of all ironies, and noone could
> > > be found other than Tippit to represent the police in that situation.
> >
> > Roberts recalled the number on the car, and it wasn`t Tippit`s.
> > Unless you want to say Roberts is unreliable.
> >
> It was very very close.
Only off by 97.
> I don't believe it was even close to another
> patrol car's number either.
Do you mean you don`t believe the other Dallas police cars use the
numbers "1", "0" or "7"?
> Bud will assume it was the pizza guy.
I wouldn`t assume anything from this information. For her to have
seen Tippit, she would need to be wrong about the only verifiable
information she offered, the number of the police car she said she
saw, and the number of officers in that car. Personally, I haven`t
seen it established she saw any police car.
> > > The fact is that he was acting very strange before his death, driving
> > > erratically, and pushing people aside to get to a phone in a record
> > > store. I don't think an honest person could say that Jefferson Davis
> > > Tippit should be excluded from being a suspect in the JFK murder.
> >
> > Typical kook-think. "I don`t have enough information to make
> > intelligent conclusions, so let me disparage this man`s memory with
> > some crackpot assumptions I can`t begin to support."
> >
> Or let's not investigate Tippit's life or actions at all.
When is this "investigating" going to produce anything substantial?
All I see you doing is throwing up weak innuendo.
> Why would
> people say from Oak Cliff that he moonlighted as a bouncer in clubs?
Maybe because he was a hit man for the Mafia. Maybe.
> Why does Dorothy Kilgallen, syndicated columnist say she knows of
> Tippit, Ruby, and the guy who did the Treason posters all confering 8
> days before the assassination at Ruby's Club after spending time alone
> with Ruby in jail?
"she knows of"? Did she observe this meeting?
> Why did the WC ask that of Ruby, and Ruby give a
> mocking answer, not denying it at all, but saying "what oilman?" when
> an oil person was supposed to be in their company?
What oilman?
> > To recap, you can`t establish who beeped, why they beeped, or if
> > the beeping actually occurred. You have some actions by Tippit that
> > you claim are suspicious, but you can`t establish, or even loosely
> > connect any of them to the assassination. Of course Tippit`s actions
> > are inexplicable, the man who performed them didn`t explain them. Do
> > two people always agree on a particular event, would Tippit say he
> > barrelled through the guy to use the phone?
>
> With that thinking, you can't establish that JFK was killed because
> nobody was able to document by sight any bullets penetrating his
> body.
Yah, the two events are so alike, it`s almost uncanny.
> That fact is Tippit was not performing even close what a police
> officer would be normally doing.
He shouldn`t have been stopping the President`s murderer?
Bud
<snicker> "the only other possible conclusion"?
> CJ
curtjester1
themselves.
> > I don't believe it was even close to another
> > patrol car's number either.
>
> Do you mean you don`t believe the other Dallas police cars use the
> numbers "1", "0" or "7"?
>
No, they would have numbers like 8 and 4, that would be more
identifiable to them.
> > Bud will assume it was the pizza guy.
>
> I wouldn`t assume anything from this information. For her to have
> seen Tippit, she would need to be wrong about the only verifiable
> information she offered, the number of the police car she said she
> saw, and the number of officers in that car. Personally, I haven`t
> seen it established she saw any police car.
>
You expect her to have her binoculars waiting for Tippit to arrive.
He was honking and creeping around the corner. There was nobody else
assigned to the area, and he had a uniform hanging up in his car. You
just can't admit that it's the only viable solution since there can be
noone else to possibly take the place of Tippit.
> > > > The fact is that he was acting very strange before his death, driving
> > > > erratically, and pushing people aside to get to a phone in a record
> > > > store. I don't think an honest person could say that Jefferson Davis
> > > > Tippit should be excluded from being a suspect in the JFK murder.
>
> > > Typical kook-think. "I don`t have enough information to make
> > > intelligent conclusions, so let me disparage this man`s memory with
> > > some crackpot assumptions I can`t begin to support."
>
> > Or let's not investigate Tippit's life or actions at all.
>
> When is this "investigating" going to produce anything substantial?
> All I see you doing is throwing up weak innuendo.
>
LN methodology, weak when it doesn't suit them, and strong when it
does. The evidence it was him. He got murdered just after his
honking.
> > Why would
> > people say from Oak Cliff that he moonlighted as a bouncer in clubs?
>
> Maybe because he was a hit man for the Mafia. Maybe.
>
> > Why does Dorothy Kilgallen, syndicated columnist say she knows of
> > Tippit, Ruby, and the guy who did the Treason posters all confering 8
> > days before the assassination at Ruby's Club after spending time alone
> > with Ruby in jail?
>
> "she knows of"? Did she observe this meeting?
>
> > Why did the WC ask that of Ruby, and Ruby give a
> > mocking answer, not denying it at all, but saying "what oilman?" when
> > an oil person was supposed to be in their company?
>
> What oilman?
>
Ask Ruby, he only had H.L Hunt's phone number on him and visited the
son the day before the assassination, who gave money to the other guy
at the meeting for the posters.
> > > To recap, you can`t establish who beeped, why they beeped, or if
> > > the beeping actually occurred. You have some actions by Tippit that
> > > you claim are suspicious, but you can`t establish, or even loosely
> > > connect any of them to the assassination. Of course Tippit`s actions
> > > are inexplicable, the man who performed them didn`t explain them. Do
> > > two people always agree on a particular event, would Tippit say he
> > > barrelled through the guy to use the phone?
>
> > With that thinking, you can't establish that JFK was killed because
> > nobody was able to document by sight any bullets penetrating his
> > body.
>
> Yah, the two events are so alike, it`s almost uncanny.
>
> > That fact is Tippit was not performing even close what a police
> > officer would be normally doing.
>
> He shouldn`t have been stopping the President`s murderer?
>
How would he guess even remotely that he was? If he thought that
Oswald was at the roominghouse, he could have just walked up and
knocked at the door, or waited for him to come out and arrest him
right there, huh?
CJ
curtjester1
worked at Ruby's place, but Tippit by 99.99999999% because he wasn't
working on the force at the time.
CJ
Bud
Oh, they retired the "1" and the "0" after they used them on
Tippit`s car.
> > > Bud will assume it was the pizza guy.
> >
> > I wouldn`t assume anything from this information. For her to have
> > seen Tippit, she would need to be wrong about the only verifiable
> > information she offered, the number of the police car she said she
> > saw, and the number of officers in that car. Personally, I haven`t
> > seen it established she saw any police car.
> >
> You expect her to have her binoculars waiting for Tippit to arrive.
I do? I think she was trying to get reception on her TV.
> He was honking and creeping around the corner. There was nobody else
> assigned to the area, and he had a uniform hanging up in his car. You
> just can't admit that it's the only viable solution since there can be
> noone else to possibly take the place of Tippit.
So, for her to have seen Tippit, she must be wrong about the only
things she said that can be checked against Tippit. And since you
believe she was wrong about those two things, how does that warrant
confidence of the accuracy of the rest of her account?
> > > > > The fact is that he was acting very strange before his death, driving
> > > > > erratically, and pushing people aside to get to a phone in a record
> > > > > store. I don't think an honest person could say that Jefferson Davis
> > > > > Tippit should be excluded from being a suspect in the JFK murder.
> >
> > > > Typical kook-think. "I don`t have enough information to make
> > > > intelligent conclusions, so let me disparage this man`s memory with
> > > > some crackpot assumptions I can`t begin to support."
> >
> > > Or let's not investigate Tippit's life or actions at all.
> >
> > When is this "investigating" going to produce anything substantial?
> > All I see you doing is throwing up weak innuendo.
> >
> LN methodology, weak when it doesn't suit them, and strong when it
> does. The evidence it was him.
There is no evidence it was him. You have not one single witness who
puts Tippit at the boardinghouse beeping his horn. You only have one
unconfirmed witness that the event took place at all.
> He got murdered just after his
> honking.
He was killed by Oswald shortly after leaving the boardinghouse,
no doubt about that. At least there are people who say they saw Oz and
Tippit together where Tippit was killed..
> > > Why would
> > > people say from Oak Cliff that he moonlighted as a bouncer in clubs?
> >
> > Maybe because he was a hit man for the Mafia. Maybe.
> >
> > > Why does Dorothy Kilgallen, syndicated columnist say she knows of
> > > Tippit, Ruby, and the guy who did the Treason posters all confering 8
> > > days before the assassination at Ruby's Club after spending time alone
> > > with Ruby in jail?
> >
> > "she knows of"? Did she observe this meeting?
> >
> > > Why did the WC ask that of Ruby, and Ruby give a
> > > mocking answer, not denying it at all, but saying "what oilman?" when
> > > an oil person was supposed to be in their company?
> >
> > What oilman?
> >
> Ask Ruby, he only had H.L Hunt's phone number on him and visited the
> son the day before the assassination, who gave money to the other guy
> at the meeting for the posters.
In other words, you only have weak innuendo.
> > > > To recap, you can`t establish who beeped, why they beeped, or if
> > > > the beeping actually occurred. You have some actions by Tippit that
> > > > you claim are suspicious, but you can`t establish, or even loosely
> > > > connect any of them to the assassination. Of course Tippit`s actions
> > > > are inexplicable, the man who performed them didn`t explain them. Do
> > > > two people always agree on a particular event, would Tippit say he
> > > > barrelled through the guy to use the phone?
> >
> > > With that thinking, you can't establish that JFK was killed because
> > > nobody was able to document by sight any bullets penetrating his
> > > body.
> >
> > Yah, the two events are so alike, it`s almost uncanny.
> >
> > > That fact is Tippit was not performing even close what a police
> > > officer would be normally doing.
> >
> > He shouldn`t have been stopping the President`s murderer?
> >
> How would he guess even remotely that he was?
The description of Oz going out over the police radio, maybe?
> If he thought that
> Oswald was at the roominghouse, he could have just walked up and
> knocked at the door, or waited for him to come out and arrest him
> right there, huh?
If Tippit was on the 6th floor of the TSBD at 12:31, he could have
arrested Oz there. But Tippit wasn`t there, either.
aeffects
If he came on duty 5 hours later, perhaps he'd be dealing with great-
grandchildren these days. Alas, he didn't!
So wind up that tin-foil beannie, Dudster.... thanks for the input,
though!
curtjester1
that time that had a one, seven....but first you would have to find a
cop numeration that had that. I don't think all the WC apologists
that would have jumped on that type of artifact would have if they
could have, but alas they did not, did they? Of course all that would
have to be done is do a sort of roll call of officers and find who
could even have possibly been there. I do believe that was done, and
nobody else could have been there. Also you have to find cops that
were working as double partners, and I believe there was no training
going on at the time.
> > > > Bud will assume it was the pizza guy.
>
> > > I wouldn`t assume anything from this information. For her to have
> > > seen Tippit, she would need to be wrong about the only verifiable
> > > information she offered, the number of the police car she said she
> > > saw, and the number of officers in that car. Personally, I haven`t
> > > seen it established she saw any police car.
>
> > You expect her to have her binoculars waiting for Tippit to arrive.
>
> I do? I think she was trying to get reception on her TV.
>
Yes, and wasn't that right after a phone conversation with a friend
that let her know there was something on the TV concerning the
assassination? Why didn't they go for the phone records to verify the
time? Ordinary police work would have, but again this jurisdiction
seemed so unordinary in so many circumstances.
> > He was honking and creeping around the corner. There was nobody else
> > assigned to the area, and he had a uniform hanging up in his car. You
> > just can't admit that it's the only viable solution since there can be
> > noone else to possibly take the place of Tippit.
>
> So, for her to have seen Tippit, she must be wrong about the only
> things she said that can be checked against Tippit. And since you
> believe she was wrong about those two things, how does that warrant
> confidence of the accuracy of the rest of her account?
I believe she saw what she saw, and heard what she heard. The only
way you can argue anything against it being Tippit is to argue that is
really wasn't a patrol car.
>
>
>
>
>
> > > > > > The fact is that he was acting very strange before his death, driving
> > > > > > erratically, and pushing people aside to get to a phone in a record
> > > > > > store. I don't think an honest person could say that Jefferson Davis
> > > > > > Tippit should be excluded from being a suspect in the JFK murder.
>
> > > > > Typical kook-think. "I don`t have enough information to make
> > > > > intelligent conclusions, so let me disparage this man`s memory with
> > > > > some crackpot assumptions I can`t begin to support."
>
> > > > Or let's not investigate Tippit's life or actions at all.
>
> > > When is this "investigating" going to produce anything substantial?
> > > All I see you doing is throwing up weak innuendo.
>
> > LN methodology, weak when it doesn't suit them, and strong when it
> > does. The evidence it was him.
>
> There is no evidence it was him. You have not one single witness who
> puts Tippit at the boardinghouse beeping his horn. You only have one
> unconfirmed witness that the event took place at all.
>
The evidence is overwhelming, since he was broadcasting from a few
blocks away at 8th and Lancaster to home base. Don't forget the
sightings of Tippit, Ruby, and the Wanted For Treason poster person
sitting in the Carousel 8 days prior to the JFK murder.
> > He got murdered just after his
> > honking.
>
> He was killed by Oswald shortly after leaving the boardinghouse,
> no doubt about that. At least there are people who say they saw Oz and
> Tippit together where Tippit was killed..
>
But none of those have Oz coming from the roominghouse or it's
direction when they were 'in the way' to be there. The real ones that
sighted Oswald had him coming from the opposite direction on E. Tenth
as far as four long blocks down from the crime scene. And of those
they differentiated on hair cut, hair color, and clothing from the one
that left the boardinghouse and the TSBD.
>
>
>
>
> > > > Why would
> > > > people say from Oak Cliff that he moonlighted as a bouncer in clubs?
>
> > > Maybe because he was a hit man for the Mafia. Maybe.
>
> > > > Why does Dorothy Kilgallen, syndicated columnist say she knows of
> > > > Tippit, Ruby, and the guy who did the Treason posters all confering 8
> > > > days before the assassination at Ruby's Club after spending time alone
> > > > with Ruby in jail?
>
> > > "she knows of"? Did she observe this meeting?
>
> > > > Why did the WC ask that of Ruby, and Ruby give a
> > > > mocking answer, not denying it at all, but saying "what oilman?" when
> > > > an oil person was supposed to be in their company?
>
> > > What oilman?
>
> > Ask Ruby, he only had H.L Hunt's phone number on him and visited the
> > son the day before the assassination, who gave money to the other guy
> > at the meeting for the posters.
>
> In other words, you only have weak innuendo.
>
There are numerous other sightings at the Carousel from ones
overhearing talk of the assasination from employees, associates of
employees, and just customers verified similar type of talk between
very highly suspected people. Oswald was seen in that club by
numerous people.
>
>
>
>
> > > > > To recap, you can`t establish who beeped, why they beeped, or if
> > > > > the beeping actually occurred. You have some actions by Tippit that
> > > > > you claim are suspicious, but you can`t establish, or even loosely
> > > > > connect any of them to the assassination. Of course Tippit`s actions
> > > > > are inexplicable, the man who performed them didn`t explain them. Do
> > > > > two people always agree on a particular event, would Tippit say he
> > > > > barrelled through the guy to use the phone?
>
> > > > With that thinking, you can't establish that JFK was killed because
> > > > nobody was able to document by sight any bullets penetrating his
> > > > body.
>
> > > Yah, the two events are so alike, it`s almost uncanny.
>
> > > > That fact is Tippit was not performing even close what a police
> > > > officer would be normally doing.
>
> > > He shouldn`t have been stopping the President`s murderer?
>
> > How would he guess even remotely that he was?
>
> The description of Oz going out over the police radio, maybe?
>
A half hour after the assassination? Why don't you attempt to
enlighten us on some kind of possibility?
> > If he thought that
> > Oswald was at the roominghouse, he could have just walked up and
> > knocked at the door, or waited for him to come out and arrest him
> > right there, huh?
>
> If Tippit was on the 6th floor of the TSBD at 12:31, he could have
> arrested Oz there. But Tippit wasn`t there, either.
But he was never there, he was in Oak Cliff since 12:45 verified by
the folks at the GLOCO station. If he was in Dealey, he could just
have well been the 'Badgeman' couldn't he of?
CJ
Bud
Why? I have no theories about cops around the boardinghouse.
> I don't think all the WC apologists
> that would have jumped on that type of artifact would have if they
> could have, but alas they did not, did they? Of course all that would
> have to be done is do a sort of roll call of officers and find who
> could even have possibly been there. I do believe that was done, and
> nobody else could have been there. Also you have to find cops that
> were working as double partners, and I believe there was no training
> going on at the time.
>
> > > > > Bud will assume it was the pizza guy.
> >
> > > > I wouldn`t assume anything from this information. For her to have
> > > > seen Tippit, she would need to be wrong about the only verifiable
> > > > information she offered, the number of the police car she said she
> > > > saw, and the number of officers in that car. Personally, I haven`t
> > > > seen it established she saw any police car.
> >
> > > You expect her to have her binoculars waiting for Tippit to arrive.
> >
> > I do? I think she was trying to get reception on her TV.
> >
> Yes, and wasn't that right after a phone conversation with a friend
> that let her know there was something on the TV concerning the
> assassination? Why didn't they go for the phone records to verify the
> time? Ordinary police work would have, but again this jurisdiction
> seemed so unordinary in so many circumstances.
Why would you think this would be part of normal police
investigation. When Roberts talked to a friend on the phone? What use
is this information? Was Roberts a suspect?
> > > He was honking and creeping around the corner. There was nobody else
> > > assigned to the area, and he had a uniform hanging up in his car. You
> > > just can't admit that it's the only viable solution since there can be
> > > noone else to possibly take the place of Tippit.
> >
> > So, for her to have seen Tippit, she must be wrong about the only
> > things she said that can be checked against Tippit. And since you
> > believe she was wrong about those two things, how does that warrant
> > confidence of the accuracy of the rest of her account?
>
> I believe she saw what she saw, and heard what she heard.
Then you need to produce a police car with two cops, that had the
number "107".
> The only
> way you can argue anything against it being Tippit is to argue that is
> really wasn't a patrol car.
<snicker> You don`t have anyone who said Tippit was there. I don`t
need to argue anything.
> > > > > > > The fact is that he was acting very strange before his death, driving
> > > > > > > erratically, and pushing people aside to get to a phone in a record
> > > > > > > store. I don't think an honest person could say that Jefferson Davis
> > > > > > > Tippit should be excluded from being a suspect in the JFK murder.
> >
> > > > > > Typical kook-think. "I don`t have enough information to make
> > > > > > intelligent conclusions, so let me disparage this man`s memory with
> > > > > > some crackpot assumptions I can`t begin to support."
> >
> > > > > Or let's not investigate Tippit's life or actions at all.
> >
> > > > When is this "investigating" going to produce anything substantial?
> > > > All I see you doing is throwing up weak innuendo.
> >
> > > LN methodology, weak when it doesn't suit them, and strong when it
> > > does. The evidence it was him.
> >
> > There is no evidence it was him. You have not one single witness who
> > puts Tippit at the boardinghouse beeping his horn. You only have one
> > unconfirmed witness that the event took place at all.
> >
>
> The evidence is overwhelming,
In a nonexistant sort of way.
> since he was broadcasting from a few
> blocks away at 8th and Lancaster to home base.
Says who?
> Don't forget the
> sightings of Tippit, Ruby, and the Wanted For Treason poster person
> sitting in the Carousel 8 days prior to the JFK murder.
Yah, what was that source again? A newspaper woman who wasn`t
there?
> > > He got murdered just after his
> > > honking.
> >
> > He was killed by Oswald shortly after leaving the boardinghouse,
> > no doubt about that. At least there are people who say they saw Oz and
> > Tippit together where Tippit was killed..
> >
> But none of those have Oz coming from the roominghouse or it's
> direction when they were 'in the way' to be there.
No, they only said they saw Oz shootong Tippit. And then there were
the people who had Oz fleeing the scene with a gun in his hand.
Generally in the direction he was caught, with a gun.
Your inability to go anywhere with all these leads is apparent.
Curt. Rumor and innuendo. Get some crackpot conpsiracy writed to track
down those shadowy "suspected people", and establish ties to someone,
and acts by someone. Or keep them in the shadows, and just claim to
"know" they were up to something.
> > > > > > To recap, you can`t establish who beeped, why they beeped, or if
> > > > > > the beeping actually occurred. You have some actions by Tippit that
> > > > > > you claim are suspicious, but you can`t establish, or even loosely
> > > > > > connect any of them to the assassination. Of course Tippit`s actions
> > > > > > are inexplicable, the man who performed them didn`t explain them. Do
> > > > > > two people always agree on a particular event, would Tippit say he
> > > > > > barrelled through the guy to use the phone?
> >
> > > > > With that thinking, you can't establish that JFK was killed because
> > > > > nobody was able to document by sight any bullets penetrating his
> > > > > body.
> >
> > > > Yah, the two events are so alike, it`s almost uncanny.
> >
> > > > > That fact is Tippit was not performing even close what a police
> > > > > officer would be normally doing.
> >
> > > > He shouldn`t have been stopping the President`s murderer?
> >
> > > How would he guess even remotely that he was?
> >
> > The description of Oz going out over the police radio, maybe?
> >
> A half hour after the assassination? Why don't you attempt to
> enlighten us on some kind of possibility?
The ID went out around 12:45. Around a half hour before Tippit
confronted Oz.
> > > If he thought that
> > > Oswald was at the roominghouse, he could have just walked up and
> > > knocked at the door, or waited for him to come out and arrest him
> > > right there, huh?
> >
> > If Tippit was on the 6th floor of the TSBD at 12:31, he could have
> > arrested Oz there. But Tippit wasn`t there, either.
>
> But he was never there, he was in Oak Cliff since 12:45 verified by
> the folks at the GLOCO station. If he was in Dealey, he could just
> have well been the 'Badgeman' couldn't he of?
Hell, he could have been the dog Jean Hill saw in the limo.
tomnln
anyway.
Exactly which of these official records do you reject?
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/officer_m.htm
You ARE familiar with the official records aren't you???
(or, Aren't you)
"chuck schuyler" <chu...@am-mtg.com> wrote in message
news:1175141233....@y66g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> On Mar 23, 11:27 am, "tomnln" <e...@cox.net> wrote:
>> http://www.whokilledjfk.net/tippit.htm
>>
>> "Bud" <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote in message
>>
>
> Shorten up those posts, Rossley.
>
curtjester1
>
>
>
>
> > I don't think all the WC apologists
> > that would have jumped on that type of artifact would have if they
> > could have, but alas they did not, did they? Of course all that would
> > have to be done is do a sort of roll call of officers and find who
> > could even have possibly been there. I do believe that was done, and
> > nobody else could have been there. Also you have to find cops that
> > were working as double partners, and I believe there was no training
> > going on at the time.
>
> > > > > > Bud will assume it was the pizza guy.
>
> > > > > I wouldn`t assume anything from this information. For her to have
> > > > > seen Tippit, she would need to be wrong about the only verifiable
> > > > > information she offered, the number of the police car she said she
> > > > > saw, and the number of officers in that car. Personally, I haven`t
> > > > > seen it established she saw any police car.
>
> > > > You expect her to have her binoculars waiting for Tippit to arrive.
>
> > > I do? I think she was trying to get reception on her TV.
>
> > Yes, and wasn't that right after a phone conversation with a friend
> > that let her know there was something on the TV concerning the
> > assassination? Why didn't they go for the phone records to verify the
> > time? Ordinary police work would have, but again this jurisdiction
> > seemed so unordinary in so many circumstances.
>
> Why would you think this would be part of normal police
> investigation. When Roberts talked to a friend on the phone? What use
> is this information? Was Roberts a suspect?
>
It would be an obvious narrowing of Oswald's and Tippit's timelines.
Are you on drugs...."Roberts"...LMAO?
> > > > He was honking and creeping around the corner. There was nobody else
> > > > assigned to the area, and he had a uniform hanging up in his car. You
> > > > just can't admit that it's the only viable solution since there can be
> > > > noone else to possibly take the place of Tippit.
>
> > > So, for her to have seen Tippit, she must be wrong about the only
> > > things she said that can be checked against Tippit. And since you
> > > believe she was wrong about those two things, how does that warrant
> > > confidence of the accuracy of the rest of her account?
>
> > I believe she saw what she saw, and heard what she heard.
>
> Then you need to produce a police car with two cops, that had the
> number "107".
>
What are you trying to do, prove a complex mathmatical theory on
molecular structure? Assigned patrolman should be enough. Numbers of
patrolmen assigned at the time, and number configurations not
necessary, just supportive.
> > The only
> > way you can argue anything against it being Tippit is to argue that is
> > really wasn't a patrol car.
>
> <snicker> You don`t have anyone who said Tippit was there. I don`t
> need to argue anything.
>
You don't have anyone seeing Tippit at Lancaster and Eighth, but you
would accept that, wouldn't ya?
>
>
>
>
> > > > > > > > The fact is that he was acting very strange before his death, driving
> > > > > > > > erratically, and pushing people aside to get to a phone in a record
> > > > > > > > store. I don't think an honest person could say that Jefferson Davis
> > > > > > > > Tippit should be excluded from being a suspect in the JFK murder.
>
> > > > > > > Typical kook-think. "I don`t have enough information to make
> > > > > > > intelligent conclusions, so let me disparage this man`s memory with
> > > > > > > some crackpot assumptions I can`t begin to support."
>
> > > > > > Or let's not investigate Tippit's life or actions at all.
>
> > > > > When is this "investigating" going to produce anything substantial?
> > > > > All I see you doing is throwing up weak innuendo.
>
> > > > LN methodology, weak when it doesn't suit them, and strong when it
> > > > does. The evidence it was him.
>
> > > There is no evidence it was him. You have not one single witness who
> > > puts Tippit at the boardinghouse beeping his horn. You only have one
> > > unconfirmed witness that the event took place at all.
>
> > The evidence is overwhelming,
>
> In a nonexistant sort of way.
>
Of course, music on the radio doesn't exist because you can't see
radio waves.
> > since he was broadcasting from a few
> > blocks away at 8th and Lancaster to home base.
>
> Says who?
>
DPD police records.
> > Don't forget the
> > sightings of Tippit, Ruby, and the Wanted For Treason poster person
> > sitting in the Carousel 8 days prior to the JFK murder.
>
> Yah, what was that source again? A newspaper woman who wasn`t
> there?
>
There just a bunch of hookers and drunks there at the Carousel. Their
testimonies should have been tossed.
> > > > He got murdered just after his
> > > > honking.
>
> > > He was killed by Oswald shortly after leaving the boardinghouse,
> > > no doubt about that. At least there are people who say they saw Oz and
> > > Tippit together where Tippit was killed..
>
> > But none of those have Oz coming from the roominghouse or it's
> > direction when they were 'in the way' to be there.
>
> No, they only said they saw Oz shootong Tippit. And then there were
> the people who had Oz fleeing the scene with a gun in his hand.
> Generally in the direction he was caught, with a gun.
>
But they should have seen him around Tenth and Patton prior. They
didn't.
>
>
> > The real ones that
> > sighted Oswald had him coming from the opposite direction on E. Tenth
> > as far as four long blocks down from the crime scene. And of those
> > they differentiated on hair cut, hair color, and clothing from the one
> > that left the boardinghouse and the TSBD.
>
> > > > > > Why would
> > > > > > people say from Oak Cliff that he moonlighted as a bouncer in clubs?
>
> > > > > Maybe because he was a hit man for the Mafia. Maybe.
>
> > > > > > Why does Dorothy Kilgallen, syndicated columnist say she knows of
> > > > > > Tippit, Ruby, and the guy who did the Treason posters all confering 8
> > > > > > days before the assassination at Ruby's Club after spending time alone
> > > > > > with Ruby in jail?
>
> > > > > "she knows of"? Did she observe this meeting?
>
> > > > > > Why did
>
> ...
>
> read more ยป- Hide quoted text -