The Murder Of J.D. Tippit
David Von Pein
"HOLIDAY RE-POST SPECIAL" #5 (From October 2006):
==================================================
Let's Talk About The Killing Of Dallas Police Officer J.D. Tippit (Lee
Harvey Oswald's Second Murder Victim On November 22nd, 1963)......
-----------------------------------------------------
A double-murderer by the name of Lee Harvey Oswald (alias Alek James
Hidell) shot and killed President John Kennedy and Dallas policeman
J.D. Tippit in the year 1963. The evidence of Oswald's guilt in these
crimes is wide and far-reaching.
But many people refuse to buy into the official version of these
killings as declared by the Warren Commission in late 1964. The
naysayers think that the evidence against Mr. Oswald has been
manipulated to falsely implicate only LHO in these heinous acts of
violence.
With respect to the murder of Officer Tippit specifically, many
conspiracy theorists feel that the 39-year-old Dallas patrolman was
killed by a gunman (not Oswald, naturally) who was using an
"automatic"
weapon, instead of a "revolver". (Oswald was arrested a short distance
from the Tippit crime scene with a .38 revolver on him as he attempted
to use it on officers in the theater itself.)
But the "automatic" vs. "revolver" controversy has been thoroughly
explained many times since 1963, including by one of the Dallas
policemen who was directly involved in this controversy on the day of
the Tippit murder (11/22/63), Gerald L. Hill.
Sergeant Hill had originally put out a broadcast over the DPD police
radio stating that the killer was probably carrying an "automatic"
type
of weapon. But in 1986, Hill tried to clear up the confusion about the
gun with these comments:
"I assumed that it was an automatic simply because we had found all
the
hulls in one little general area. .... If you find a cluster of
shells,
you have to assume that they were fired from an automatic." -- Gerald
Hill quote (Via Dale K. Myers' book, "With Malice: Lee Harvey Oswald
And The Murder Of Officer J.D. Tippit"; Pp. 260-261)
Also -- As pointed out in Mr. Myers' first-rate book which probes
every
last nook and cranny of the Tippit murder (and thoroughly verifies
Oswald's guilt in the crime from every angle), the very first
indication that Tippit's killer might have had an automatic weapon
actually came not from a policeman, but from used-car salesman (and
eyewitness) Ted Callaway.
Page 258 of "With Malice":
"All things considered, it appears the initial reference to an
'automatic' weapon stemmed from Callaway's mistaken impression that
the
gunman was pushing a fresh magazine into the handle of an automatic
weapon. The Davis women {witnesses Barbara Davis and Virginia Davis}
had a close-up view of the reality of the situation; the gunman had
both arms up, his right hand shaking shells from an open revolver into
his left {hand}."
Another thing that makes no sense whatsoever (if a person wants to
believe that an automatic gun was used to kill Tippit) is the fact
that
the 3rd and 4th bullet shells that were recovered that day (the ones
found by the two Davis ladies) were found in the Davis' SIDE YARD on
Patton Avenue; i.e., in a location where a gunman firing an automatic
at J.D. Tippit couldn't possibly have even SEEN Officer Tippit (who
was
located around the corner and many yards up 10th Street). The Davis
apartment building was blocking the view of any such gunman who would
have dropped shells from a gun WHILE FIRING from that location.*
* = See Page 266 of "With Malice" for a good photographic example of
how silly the "Automatic" theory is when looking at where these two
shells were found. Do CTers think the gunman kicked the automatic
shells into the Davis' side yard?
Or, in a "They Were Planted/Switched By The Police" theory -- why
would
the police plant the two shells in the Davis' yard and just leave them
for the Davis women to find? Why wouldn't the crooked cops pick up the
shells themselves after conveniently planting them?
Or, the crooked shell-switching cops could merely SAY they found two
more Oswald shells in the Davis' yard, instead of allowing one or more
non-conspirators (like the two Davis women) to pick them up and do
anything they wanted to with them...even keep them, as is purported in
Myers' book with regard to a possible fifth bullet shell.
It's rumored that the Davis' father-in-law might have, indeed, picked
up a 5th shell in the Davis yard and kept it for a souvenir. That
sounds kind of crazy, I guess. But it would explain some loose ends
quite nicely, including the mis-match of the bullets and shells at the
Tippit scene, and the "5 pistol shots" that Ted Callaway always
adamantly maintained he heard on 11/22/63 from his nearby car lot.
It burns me up greatly when conspiracy kooks have the nerve to imply
that Oswald wasn't even at the Tippit murder scene, when virtually
every single piece of physical and circumstantial evidence surrounding
this particular murder indicates just the opposite.
The "All The Evidence Is Worthless" dodge is nothing but a big cop-
out,
plain and simple. If the evidence is really tainted, CTers need to
provide some semblance of solid proof of that sinister allegation.
Tell
the world WHO exactly it was who faked the evidence (with a dose of
verifiable proof too, which would be a refreshing change-of-pace). And
tell the world if there was even one person on the planet who
witnessed
any "switching" of bullet shells at the murder scene (or elsewhere).
Alas, nobody can do that, because nothing shady like that occurred at
all, except in a CTer's theory-laden mind. We're about as likely to
get
some verifiable proof of a police "cover-up" with respect to the JFK
and J.D. Tippit murders as we are to witness the sun crashing into the
Earth a week from Thursday.
Just having Lee Oswald in the general area of the crime, with a gun,
and acting "funny" and obviously avoiding the police is a good hunk of
circumstantial evidence leading to his guilt right there.
Where does the road of common sense take a reasonable person when JUST
the above after-the-shooting activity of Lee Harvey Oswald is examined
objectively? It sure doesn't lead to total innocence, I'll tell ya
that
right now. (Especially when the stuff that went on inside the movie
theater is factored in as well.)
---------------------------------------------
MORE ON THE TIPPIT MURDER (AND A REVIEW OF DALE MYERS' BOOK)......
----------------------------------------------
In a nutshell, this murder boils to down the following concrete fact
(based on the overall weight of the evidence that surrounds the
crime)......
If Lee Harvey Oswald didn't kill J.D. Tippit -- then J.D. Tippit
wasn't
killed at all. Maybe it was all some kind of "Bobby Was In The Shower"
type of dream or something instead.
David Von Pein
October 2006
aeffects
> "HOLIDAY RE-POST SPECIAL" #5 (From October 2006):
>
> ==================================================
>
> Let's Talk About The Killing Of Dallas Police Officer J.D. Tippit (Lee
> Harvey Oswald's Second Murder Victim On November 22nd, 1963)......
>
~~~ come out, come out wherever you are ~~~
aeffects
> none of your posts ever make any sense...
then what is so special about "tonight", you moron
Walt
> "HOLIDAY RE-POST SPECIAL" #5 (From October 2006):
>
> ==================================================
>
> Let's Talk About The Killing Of Dallas Police Officer J.D. Tippit (Lee
> Harvey Oswald's Second Murder Victim On November 22nd, 1963)......
Talk?? TALK??!!...the time is over for talking ....It's time to take
action ..... Perhaps cutting yer lyin tongue off would work.
Walt
> http://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/discussions/start-thread.ht...
robcap...@netscape.com
> "HOLIDAY RE-POST SPECIAL" #5 (From October 2006):
>
> ==================================================
>
> Let's Talk About The Killing Of Dallas Police Officer J.D. Tippit (Lee
> Harvey Oswald's Second Murder Victim On November 22nd, 1963)......
>
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
"A double-murderer by the name of Lee Harvey Oswald (alias Alek James
Hidell) shot and killed President John Kennedy and Dallas policeman
J.D. Tippit in the year 1963. The evidence of Oswald's guilt in these
crimes is wide and far-reaching."
I wish LHO or his mom was here to sue you for this slanderous term,
double-murderer, as he was NOT convicted of either one. You need to
learn to use the term "alleged" as is the custom for all people not
yet convicted in a court of law. You also need to provide proof of an
alias being used by LHO beyond a silly card found the next day
(11/23/63) in his wallet. Funny it was not there at the time of his
arrest. Lay some real proof on us just for fun, okay?
"But many people refuse to buy into the official version of these
killings as declared by the Warren Commission in late 1964."
Uh, maybe because there is NO real proof? See, that is how the system
works, you have to provide real proof and evidence to convict someone
of any crime, especially murder.
"The naysayers think that the evidence against Mr. Oswald has been
manipulated to falsely implicate only LHO in these heinous acts of
violence."
For arguments sake we can even say it wasn't (but of course it was)
and you still don't enough proof to show LHO did either of the
shootings. Basically a purse snatcher couldn't be convicted with the
"evidence" the WC put forth.
"With respect to the murder of Officer Tippit specifically, many
conspiracy theorists feel that the 39-year-old Dallas patrolman was
killed by a gunman (not Oswald, naturally) who was using an
"automatic" weapon, instead of a "revolver". (Oswald was arrested a
short distance from the Tippit crime scene with a .38 revolver on him
as he attempted to use it on officers in the theater itself.)"
So? I wonder how many other Dallas citizens had guns on them or in
their car that day? This was the south you know. Here in Charleston
they still post signs saying you can't carry a conceled weapon at
certain locations, but others you can. This whole statement proves
only one thing, the killer used an "automatic" pistol as two officers
broadcasted this fact immediately after the shooting (one said a .32
and one said a .38).
"But the "automatic" vs. "revolver" controversy has been thoroughly
explained many times since 1963, including by one of the Dallas
policemen who was directly involved in this controversy on the day of
the Tippit murder (11/22/63),
Gerald L. Hill.
Sergeant Hill had originally put out a broadcast over the DPD police
radio stating that the killer was probably carrying an "automatic"
type of weapon. But in 1986, Hill tried to clear up the confusion
about the gun with these comments:
'I assumed that it was an automatic simply because we had found all
the hulls in one little general area. .... If you find a cluster of
shells, you have to assume that they were fired from an automatic.' --
Gerald Hill quote (Via Dale K. Myers' book, "With Malice: Lee Harvey
Oswald And The Murder Of Officer J.D. Tippit"; Pp. 260-261)"
Boy this statement is a win for your side, huh? Because you find a
"cluster of shells you HAVE TO assume" they were from an automatic
pistol? He was backpeddling, he had military experience and many
years on the police force, the man knew an automatic shell from a
revolver shell, period. Your theory is even crazier as it requires
LHO to open his revolver and EMPTY the shells - evidence - on to the
ground so the police could find them and match these to his revolver.
Now how may killers do this? And just to make sure the police made no
mistakes he left his wallet too.
"Also -- As pointed out in Mr. Myers' first-rate book which probes
every last nook and cranny of the Tippit murder (and thoroughly
verifies Oswald's guilt in the crime from every angle), the very first
indication that Tippit's killer might have had an automatic weapon
actually came not from a policeman, but from used-car salesman (and
eyewitness) Ted Callaway."
You are so funny. Mr. Myers cannot show LHO's guilt in the crime, all
he can do is show the evidence points to LHO. The court is the only
place "guilt" can be assigned for a crime. Nowhere else. Just like
CTers can't show a particular person is "guilty" or a group is
"guilty" you can't show LHO to be "guilty." We have to use terms like
"most likely involved" when we make our statments. A carsalesman?
Please. It came from two officers who broadcasted the fact that
automatic shells were found.
"Page 258 of "With Malice":
'All things considered, it appears the initial reference to an
'automatic' weapon stemmed from Callaway's mistaken impression that
the gunman was pushing a fresh magazine into the handle of an
automatic weapon. The Davis women {witnesses Barbara Davis and
Virginia Davis} had a close-up view of the reality of the situation;
the gunman had both arms up, his right hand shaking shells from an
open revolver into his left {hand}.'
Yeah, sure, the police can't determine what type of ammo was used in a
killing of a cop, they always rely on a "car salesman" to make this ID
for them. I guess he dropped them after shaking them into his left
hand, huh? How many bullets did LHO have on him before the shooting?
"Another thing that makes no sense whatsoever (if a person wants to
believe that an automatic gun was used to kill Tippit) is the fact
that the 3rd and 4th bullet shells that were recovered that day (the
ones found by the two Davis ladies) were found in the Davis' SIDE YARD
on Patton Avenue; i.e., in a location where a gunman firing an
automatic at J.D. Tippit couldn't possibly have even SEEN Officer
Tippit (who was located around the corner and many yards up 10th
Street). The Davis apartment building was blocking the view of any
such gunman who would
have dropped shells from a gun WHILE FIRING from that location.*"
Neither woman could ID the shells when shown them by the WC (XXIV,
414) so what does this prove? We know the two given to the officer
Poe did not bear his mark when shown to him in 6/64, nor could crime
scene officer Sgt. Barnes find his "B" on the two shells he ID. How
come?
"* = See Page 266 of "With Malice" for a good photographic example of
how silly the "Automatic" theory is when looking at where these two
shells were found. Do CTers think the gunman kicked the automatic
shells into the Davis' side yard?
Or, in a "They Were Planted/Switched By The Police" theory -- why
would the police plant the two shells in the Davis' yard and just
leave them for the Davis women to find? Why wouldn't the crooked cops
pick up the shells themselves after conveniently planting them?"
Who said anything about kick? Quite a few of the witnesses saw him
throw them into the bushes and hedges when he ran off and this is
where Benavides found two of the shells. I assume the Davis women
found them in a hedge or bush also. By the way they were found much
later and the Commission themselves asked many questions about this
and how reliable they can be for evidence since there was NO chain of
custody.
"Or, the crooked shell-switching cops could merely SAY they found two
more Oswald shells in the Davis' yard, instead of allowing one or more
non-conspirators (like the two Davis women) to pick them up and do
anything they wanted to with them...even keep them, as is purported in
Myers' book with regard to a possible fifth bullet shell."
Why would the conspirators have to do all that? All they had to do is
switch out any "evidence" turned in that did not match the LHO
scenario. You are making it too complicated.
"It's rumored that the Davis' father-in-law might have, indeed, picked
up a 5th shell in the Davis yard and kept it for a souvenir. That
sounds kind of crazy, I guess. But it would explain some loose ends
quite nicely, including the mis-match of the bullets and shells at the
Tippit scene, and the "5 pistol shots" that Ted Callaway always
adamantly maintained he heard on 11/22/63 from his nearby car lot."
This is all speculation, all that matters is the bullets in JDT did
NOT match LHO's revolver, therefore, he could NOT be the shooter.
"It burns me up greatly when conspiracy kooks have the nerve to imply
that
Oswald wasn't even at the Tippit murder scene, when virtually every
single
piece of physical and circumstantial evidence surrounding this
particular murder indicates just the opposite."
Like what? Fingerprints? No. Murder weapon ammo matching slugs in JDT?
No. Eyewitnesses see them talking to each other? No. Clothing
description matched LHO's? No. Jacket found in the bushes matched to
LHO's wardrobe? No. A motive for LHO? No. You have nothing. One thing
to consider is the fact that Roscoe White wore a hairpiece, a dark,
bushy one, and he was short and squat. Sound familar? It should since
your star witness, Helen Markham, gave this description to Mark Lane
in an interview.
"The "All The Evidence Is Worthless" dodge is nothing but a big cop-
out, plain and simple. If the evidence is really tainted, CTers need
to provide some semblance of solid proof of that sinister allegation.
Tell the world WHO exactly it was who faked the evidence (with a dose
of verifiable proof too, which would be a refreshing change-of-pace).
And tell the world if there was even one person on the planet who
witnessed any "switching" of bullet shells at the murder scene (or
elsewhere)."
What is a "cop-out" is tagging someone with a murder when you have NO
proof. Sure, we, the CTers, have to provide untainted evidence when
the WC didn't. Why do you belive them when they gave you faulty
evidence? He wants proof for everything when they provide none in
return. Sure, the people who had access to the evidence room called
the media and said, "We will be switching out the shells found at the
JDT scene since they don't match the accused's gun, and put in ones
that do. We are thinking we'll do this around lunchtime and we will
have pizza and sodas also."
"Alas, nobody can do that, because nothing shady like that occurred at
all, except in a CTer's theory-laden mind. We're about as likely to
get some verifiable proof of a police "cover-up" with respect to the
JFK and J.D. Tippit murders as we are to witness the sun crashing into
the Earth a week from Thursday."
You already have it if you would read the affadavits and statements of
the police officers (D.A.s too) from the weekend, before they were
forced to change much of what they said early on.
"Just having Lee Oswald in the general area of the crime, with a gun,
and acting "funny" and obviously avoiding the police is a good hunk of
circumstantial evidence leading to his guilt right there."
You aren't letting the readers know about LHO's penchant for defective
firing pins in his weapons, just to make it more of a challenge I
guess. The Carcano had a rusty, eroding pin ready to go at any time
and the pisol had a bent pin according to the FBI when they examined
it. Who would give LHO a gun with a bent firing pin? He just ordered
it in January and received it in March according to the WC, would they
mail a revolver with a bent firing pin?
"Where does the road of common sense take a reasonable person when
JUST the above after-the-shooting activity of Lee Harvey Oswald is
examined objectively? It sure doesn't lead to total innocence, I'll
tell ya that right now. (Especially when the stuff that went on inside
the movie theater is factored in as well.)"
What stuff in the movie theater? He didn't pay a 75 cent ticket? He
was accused of "Killing the President, will you" when he wasn't even
charged with JDT's murder yet. What are you talking about?
"In a nutshell, this murder boils to down the following concrete fact
(based on the overall weight of the evidence that surrounds the
crime)......
If Lee Harvey Oswald didn't kill J.D. Tippit -- then J.D. Tippit
wasn't killed at all. Maybe it was all some kind of "Bobby Was In The
Shower" type of dream or something instead."
Please, and you know this because the police and WC did an exhaustive
search on anyone who might have a MOTIVE to shoot officer Tippit? Oh,
that's right, they looked at no one else, did they? How easy police
work would be if all cases were this easy, huh?
David Von Pein
October 2006
He even has the guts to put his name to this junk too.
David Von Pein
To hell with your stinking "alleged" rule. There's no "alleged" about
it in LHO's case. He killed two men in Dallas in 1963. The evidence
proves it. And so do Oswald's own actions, which scream out "I'm
Guilty".
For some reason, CTers pretty much want to totally ignore Oswald's own
November 22nd post-12:30 ACTIONS and WORDS, which are actions and
words (i.e., lies) that are not indicative of an innocent patsy who
never fired a shot at anyone on 11/22.
And I guess Mama Marguerite would be very busy filing the lawsuits
too, because I'm certainly not alone here. The Warren Commission and
the HSCA would need to be sued too (they don't use the word "alleged"
either).....
"On the basis of these findings the Commission has concluded
that Lee Harvey Oswald was the assassin of President Kennedy." -- WCR;
Page 195
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0110a.htm
"Lee Harvey Oswald fired three shots at President John F.
Kennedy. The second and third shots fired struck the President. The
third shot he fired killed the President." -- HSCA Report; Page 3
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/report/html/HSCA_Report_0005a.htm
>>> "You also need to provide proof of an alias being used by LHO beyond a silly card found the next day (11/23/63) in his wallet." <<<
It wasn't found "the next day", Mister Kook. It was found in his
wallet by the DPD within minutes of LHO's arrest on 11/22/63.
As usual, a kook is mangling the evidence. Surprise!
>>> "It {the Hidell I.D. card} was not there at the time of his arrest. Lay some real proof on us just for fun, okay?" <<<
Okay....
Via Gerald Hill's WC testimony:
GERALD L. HILL -- "I asked Paul Bentley, 'Why don't you see if he has
any identification.' Paul was sitting sort of sideways in the seat,
and with his right hand he reached down and felt of the suspect's left
hip pocket and said, 'Yes, he has a billfold,' and took it out. I
never did have the billfold in my possession, but the name Lee Oswald
was called out by Bentley from the back seat, and said this
identification, I believe, was on the library card. And he also made
the statement that there was some more identification in this other
name which I don't remember, but it was the same name that later came
in the paper that he bought the gun under."
DAVID BELIN -- "Would the name Hidell mean anything? Alek Hidell?"
HILL -- "That would be similar. I couldn't say specifically that is
what it was, because this was a conversation and I never did see it
written down, but that sounds like the name that I heard."
~~~~~~~
Via C.T. Walker's WC testimony:
C.T. WALKER -- "We took him up the homicide and robbery bureau...and I
went inside, and Oswald sat down, and he was handcuffed with his hands
behind him. I sat down there, and I had his pistol, and he had a card
in there with a picture of him and the name A.J. Hidell on it."
~~~~~~~~
Via Will Fritz' WC testimony:
JOSEPH BALL -- "That day, at sometime during the 22nd when you
questioned Oswald, didn't you ask him about this card he had in his
pocket with the name Alek Hidell?"
CAPTAIN J. WILL FRITZ -- "I did; yes, sir."
BALL -- "What did you ask him about that?"
FRITZ -- "I believe he had three of those cards if I remember
correctly, and he told me that was the name that he picked up in New
Orleans that he had used sometimes. One of the cards looked like it
might have been altered a little bit and one of them I believe was the
Fair Play for Cuba and one looked like a social security card or
something."
~~~~~~~~
All of the above testimony indicates that the "Hidell" I.D. card was
found on Oswald on the day of the assassination (November 22). Only an
evidence-skewing maniac could possibly believe otherwise. Do you
qualify, Robert?
>>> "For arguments sake, we can even say it {the LHO-did-it evidence} wasn't {manipulated to implicate only Oswald}, but of course it was..." <<<
But you, of course, can't provide a stitch of PROOF to back up your
all-encompassing "All The Evidence Against Oswald Is Fake" claim. But
just SAYING it's all "fake" or "planted" is good enough for conspiracy
theorists like you, right? Right.
>>> "And you still don't {have} enough proof to show LHO did either of the shootings. Basically a purse snatcher couldn't be convicted with the "evidence" the WC put forth." <<<
The WC didn't gather up the physical evidence, Mister Idiot. The DPD,
FBI, and SS collected the evidence. And it all leads to Oswald, like
it or not. The WC (and the HSCA) merely evaluated that evidence.
And what did BOTH the WC and the HSCA conclude? -- Both the WC and
HSCA said that Oswald was the only gunman who hit any limo victims.
And what are the chances that both of those U.S. Government panels
(dealing with the same assassination, 15 years apart) would be filled
with nothing but either rotten liars or utter incompetents?
(Have you got your "Kook Kalculator" on you to figure those odds?)
>>> "Your theory is even crazier, as it requires LHO to open his revolver and EMPTY the shells--evidence--onto the ground so the police could find them and match these to his revolver. Now how many killers do this?" <<<
I don't really care how many other murderers have shaken empty bullet
cartridges out of their guns. But one particular police killer in Oak
Cliff did that for sure on 11/22/63 -- and that killer was positively
Lee H. Oswald.
Or are you willing to call multiple witnesses who observed the shell-
ejecting incident all liars (Barbara Davis, Virginia Davis, Helen
Markham, and Domingo Benavides)?
It looks like Rob favors the "Jim Garrison tactic" with respect to the
"Dumping The Bullet Shells On 10th Street" issue. King-Kook Garrison
enjoyed totally ignoring the ironclad "shell-ejecting" evidence too.
Looks like his lunacy has rubbed off on future generations of you
kooks.
>>> "And just to make sure the police made no mistakes, he {LHO} left his wallet {on 10th St.} too." <<<
No, he didn't. Oswald's wallet was found in one of his pockets just
minutes after he was arrested at the Texas Theater (as can be verified
via the WC testimony displayed earlier).
How many people carry two wallets on them? Not many that I've ever
encountered. I carry zero.
>>> "Mr. Myers cannot show LHO's guilt in the crime; all he can do is show the evidence points to LHO." <<<
LOL. And "Duh!" time.
>>> "The court is the only place "guilt" can be assigned for a crime. Nowhere else." <<<
LOL.
>>> "You can't show LHO to be "guilty". We have to use terms like "most likely involved" when we make our statements." <<<
Fuck your kook rules. I'll call LHO a guilty double-murdering bastard
anytime I please. Because it's true.
>>> "How many bullets did LHO have on him before the {Tippit} shooting?" <<<
Either 15 or 16. And that's a decent-sized number of bullets for an
"innocent patsy" to be carrying around if this "patsy" of yours was
merely strolling to the movies to watch a couple of war flicks. Don't
you think?
The number of bullets would be 15 if Oswald fired a total of four
shots at Officer Tippit. And it'd be 16 if LHO got off five total
shots (including one shot that missed Tippit completely).
The five-shot scenario is entirely possible, given the "I heard five
pistol shots" testimony of Ted Callaway, plus the mis-match of the
Remington & Western type bullets and shells found at the scene of the
crime.
I think it's quite likely that Oswald fired five shots, instead of
just four. Of course, that can never be proven beyond all doubt, since
a fifth bullet was never recovered.
>>> "Neither {Davis} woman could ID the shells when shown them." <<<
Who cares? Means nothing whether they could officially "identify" the
shells or not. Not even most CT-Kooks think the "chain of possession"
for the two bullet shells found in the yard of Barb & Virginia Davis
is weak or broken. There's a clear chain of custody for both of those
shells....from the Davis property to the DPD.
Naturally, Rob, being a nut, has to make something shady out of the
two Davis bullet cartridges too.
~shrug~
>>> "The bullets in JDT did NOT match LHO's revolver, therefore, he could NOT be the shooter." <<<
You're an idiot. The bullets were consistent with bullets from
Oswald's revolver. Plus, they were the identical TYPE/BRAND of bullets
that Oswald had inside his gun when captured (Remington-Peters and
Winchester-Western).
Plus, there's Joe Nicol's testimony. (You know what that is, right,
Mr. Idiot?)
>>> "The Carcano had a rusty, eroding pin ready to go at any time." <<<
Cite please.
Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano was fired many, many times after November
22, 1963, and AFAIK it never misfired and it never jammed during the
FBI's tests. The firing pin, therefore, must have been in "okay"
condition for those many post-11/22 tests.
But keep working on your "Anybody But Oswald And His Weapons"
theories. Pretty soon you'll probably be claiming that Rifle #C2766
never really existed in the first place.
>>> "Who would give LHO a gun with a bent firing pin? He just ordered it in January and received it in March, according to the WC. Would they mail a revolver with a bent firing pin?" <<<
The pin could have sustained damage after the revolver was shipped to
Oswald by Seaport-Traders in March 1963 (probably during the wild
theater scuffle on November 22nd).
But, being the idiot you so obviously are pretending to be, you seem
to think that any damage to the gun MUST have occurred prior to Oswald
having received it in the mail.
~another shrug~
>>> "What {LHO-is-guilty} stuff in the movie theater? .... What are you talking about?" <<<
Oh, I don't know....let me think....
Oh yeah! That little small-potatoes "stuff" when Oswald tried to kill
some people within the theater (after having NOTHING else said to him
by the police except "get on your feet").
And then there's Ozzie's "It's all over now" statement made in the
theater too. And, per some witnesses, possibly another comment made by
LHO as well, "This is it".
I guess those comments are the words of a totally-innocent "patsy",
huh?
>>> "And you know this because the police and WC did an exhaustive search on anyone who might have a MOTIVE to shoot officer Tippit?" <<<
Lee Harvey Oswald had the best motive imaginable for the murder of a
policeman on Tenth Street -- LHO had just shot the President of the
United States forty-five minutes earlier.
(Looks like it's "Duh!" time once more.)
>>> "Oh, that's right, they {the DPD} looked at no one else {re. Tippit's murder}, did they?" <<<
You're a (super) idiot.
Why on Earth would the police need to keep looking for J.D. Tippit's
killer after they knew they had captured the right man in the movie
theater?
I guess, per you CTers, the cops should have PRETENDED that all of the
evidence against Oswald was tainted in some way; and they should have
also PRETENDED that all of the dozen or so witnesses who identified
Oswald as the ONLY KILLER at (or near) the scene of Tippit's murder
were all wrong.
Right, kook?
This puts me in mind of the joke about a guy who loses his car keys.
He eventually finds the keys stuffed behind the sofa cushions in his
living room....but he continues to search for them even after he finds
them in the sofa.
I guess Rob would have preferred that all members of the Dallas Police
Department in 1963 had done the same thing as that man looking for his
keys -- just keep on looking for the damn things even after you've got
them in your hands.
robcap...@netscape.com
> >>> "I wish LHO or his mom was here to sue you for this slanderous term, double-murderer, as he was NOT convicted of either one. You need to learn to use the term "alleged", as is the custom for all people not yet convicted in a court of law." <<<
"To hell with your stinking "alleged" rule. There's no "alleged" about
it in LHO's case. He killed two men in Dallas in 1963. The evidence
proves it. And so do Oswald's own actions, which scream out "I'm
Guilty"."
Come on, there is no evidence, that is your problem. It doesn't make
any sense or more to the point, it doesn't show LHO to be guilty in
the least. Which actions "scream out" he's guilty. Humor me.
"For some reason, CTers pretty much want to totally ignore Oswald's
own November 22nd post-12:30 ACTIONS and WORDS, which are actions and
words (i.e., lies) that are not indicative of an innocent patsy who
never fired a shot at anyone on 11/22."
Which actions are these? Beyond the JDT shooting which you CANNOT
prove.
"And I guess Mama Marguerite would be very busy filing the lawsuits
too, because I'm certainly not alone here. The Warren Commission and
the HSCA would need to be sued too (they don't use the word "alleged"
either).....
She should have sued them, but I'm sure they told her something bad
would happen if she did.
"On the basis of these findings the Commission has concluded that Lee
Harvey Oswald was the assassin of President Kennedy." -- WCR; Page 195
It is easy to assert something without proof, just look at the LNers
on this board. It doesn't make someone guilty though.
> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0110a.htm
"Lee Harvey Oswald fired three shots at President John F. Kennedy. The
second and third shots fired struck the President. The third shot he
fired killed the President." -- HSCA Report; Page 3
This is one of their best claims as they could prove it at all, but
that small detail didn't stop them from saying and writing it though.
> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/report/html/HSCA_Report_0...
> >>> "You also need to provide proof of an alias being used by LHO beyond a silly card found the next day (11/23/63) in his wallet." <<<
"It wasn't found "the next day", Mister Kook. It was found in his
wallet by the DPD within minutes of LHO's arrest on 11/22/63."
No it wasn't, and by the way, which wallet are we talking about?
There are three of them you know.
"As usual, a kook is mangling the evidence. Surprise!"
As usual Mr. Nutjob (Mr. Peanut's cousin) is naive about the
information. IF the DPD knew of this card and alias right away, why
did they say his known alias was O.H. Lee instead? It seems to me
since the guns were tied to the Hidell alias they would have mentioned
it if they discovered the card right away.
> >>> "It {the Hidell I.D. card} was not there at the time of his arrest. Lay some real proof on us just for fun, okay?" <<<
"Okay....
Via Gerald Hill's WC testimony:
GERALD L. HILL -- "I asked Paul Bentley, 'Why don't you see if he has
any identification.' Paul was sitting sort of sideways in the seat,
and with his
right hand he reached down and felt of the suspect's left hip pocket
and said,
'Yes, he has a billfold,' and took it out. I never did have the
billfold in my possession, but the name Lee Oswald was called out by
Bentley from the
back seat, and said this identification, I believe, was on the library
card. And
he also made the statement that there was some more identification in
this other
name which I don't remember, but it was the same name that later came
in the paper that he bought the gun under."
Why did Hill say LHO refused to talk and they only knew his name by
looking at is wallet and see he was Lee H. Oswald. If as the FBI
claimed, that the ID was a picture of LHO with the name A.K. Hidell,
why did Hill get the name right? In other words, why did he not think
his name was HIDELL if LHO wouldn't say and the only ID said Hidell?
DAVID BELIN -- "Would the name Hidell mean anything? Alek Hidell?"
HILL -- "That would be similar. I couldn't say specifically that is
what it was, because this was a conversation and I never did see it
written down, but that sounds like the name that I heard."
Like I said, why did they not mention the alias Hidell on 11/22/63
then? Why only the O.H. Lee one he used to get his room? Not until
the FBI mentioned that the rifle found was mail-ordered by an A.
Hidell did the DPD mention they "found" this card on LHO on
11/22/63.
> ~~~~~~~
Via C.T. Walker's WC testimony:
C.T. WALKER -- "We took him up the homicide and robbery bureau...and I
went inside, and Oswald sat down, and he was handcuffed with his hands
behind him. I sat down there, and I had his pistol, and he had a card
in there with a picture of him and the name A.J. Hidell on it."
See above under Hill.
> ~~~~~~~~
Via Will Fritz' WC testimony:
JOSEPH BALL -- "That day, at sometime during the 22nd when you
questioned Oswald, didn't you ask him about this card he had in his
pocket with the name Alek Hidell?"
CAPTAIN J. WILL FRITZ -- "I did; yes, sir."
BALL -- "What did you ask him about that?"
FRITZ -- "I believe he had three of those cards if I remember
correctly, and he told me that was the name that he picked up in New
Orleans that he had used sometimes. One of the cards looked like it
might have been altered a little bit and one of them I believe was the
Fair Play for Cuba and one looked like a social security card or
something."
This is NOT what officer Hill said, he said LHO had ONE ID and it said
Lee H. Oswald on 11/22/63. It was planted later after they had Marina
fill it out.
> ~~~~~~~~
"All of the above testimony indicates that the "Hidell" I.D. card was
found on Oswald on the day of the assassination (November 22). Only an
evidence-skewing maniac could possibly believe otherwise. Do you
qualify, Robert?"
No it doesn't, it simply proves these people told stories to the WC.
IF the card was found on 11/22/63 in LHO's wallet, why did they say he
had ONE alias only, O.H. Lee?
> >>> "For arguments sake, we can even say it {the LHO-did-it evidence} wasn't {manipulated to implicate only Oswald}, but of course it was..." <<<
"But you, of course, can't provide a stitch of PROOF to back up your
all-encompassing "All The Evidence Against Oswald Is Fake" claim. But
just SAYING it's all "fake" or "planted" is good enough for conspiracy
theorists like you, right? Right."
I don't have to say it was all faked or planted, becasue when you take
the balance of the "evidence" against LHO it is clear to any rational
person that LHO would have gotten off. The "evidence" is extremely
weak as is, if the faked and planted could be proved there would have
been no case at all.
> >>> "And you still don't {have} enough proof to show LHO did either of the shootings. Basically a purse snatcher couldn't be convicted with the "evidence" the WC put forth." <<<
"The WC didn't gather up the physical evidence, Mister Idiot. The DPD,
FBI, and SS collected the evidence. And it all leads to Oswald, like
it or not. The WC (and the HSCA) merely evaluated that evidence."
No, really? Of course I know that and it just proves the fact that
the WC was worthless as they did NO investigation themselves. They
relied on groups who were suspicious themselves due to their
leadership.
"And what did BOTH the WC and the HSCA conclude? -- Both the WC and
HSCA said that Oswald was the only gunman who hit any limo victims."
So what? Garbage-in-Garbarge-out. Same as software, you enter faulty
data you get faulty reports. They both entered faulty data so we got
faulty and inaccurate reports.
"And what are the chances that both of those U.S. Government panels
(dealing with the same assassination, 15 years apart) would be filled
with nothing but either rotten liars or utter incompetents?"
Nobody said incompetents, just people doing what they are told to do
after being threatened. Like George H. Bush said a few years back,
"If the poeple knew what we were really doing they would lynch all of
us from the trees." The men who are benefitting from JFK's death and
the many since are in a position to make sure the truth doesn't come
out. They like the complacency the American people have, they don't
want to do what Yammamoto said after Pearl Harbor, "Wake a sleeping
Giant", so the truth can't come out as we might just rise up and make
a change. Keep them plied with Ipods, big-screen t.v.s, fancy homes,
fancy cars, etc...
"(Have you got your "Kook Kalculator" on you to figure those odds?)"
It is 100% certain they both lied to us to keep the truth covered, no
calculator needed.
> >>> "Your theory is even crazier, as it requires LHO to open his revolver and EMPTY the shells--evidence--onto the ground so the police could find them and match these to his revolver. Now how many killers do this?" <<<
" don't really care how many other murderers have shaken empty bullet
cartridges out of their guns. But one particular police killer in Oak
Cliff did that for sure on 11/22/63 -- and that killer was positively
Lee H. Oswald."
Of course you don't. That is why when you start in on CS&L I laugh
because your whole theory requires no common sense at all. None of it
makes a lick of sense. Sure he did. Prove it.
"Are you willing to call multiple witnesses who observed the shell-
ejecting incident all liars (Barbara Davis, Virginia Davis, Helen
Markham, and Domingo Benavides)?"
No, they were talking about an automatic pistol ejecting shells I'm
sure. Then they may have seen the real killer empty a stage revolver
to throw the shell into the bushes, but he got it wrong and that is
why they all disappeared later as no one could say the shells the WC
presented were the ones they found and saw. No one.
"t looks like Rob favors the 'Jim Garrison tactic' with respect to the
'Dumping The Bullet Shells On 10th Street' issue. King-Kook Garrison
enjoyed totally ignoring the ironclad "shell-ejecting" evidence too.
Looks like his lunacy has rubbed off on future generations of you
kooks."
Again, you don't know guns. "Shell ejecting" refers to an automatic
pistol NOT a revolver. You have to manually empty a revolver. Your
ignorance is showing.
> >>> "And just to make sure the police made no mistakes, he {LHO} left his wallet {on 10th St.} too." <<<
"No, he didn't. Oswald's wallet was found in one of his pockets just
minutes after he was arrested at the Texas Theater (as can be verified
via the WC testimony displayed earlier)."
Well you need to read my message board pal, because a wallet was found
at the scene of JDT as well. When you add the one at his house that
he supposedly left you have THREE wallets to account for. The wallet
at the JDT scene had a Texas DL and we all know LHO couldn't drive.
"How many people carry two wallets on them? Not many that I've ever
encountered. I carry zero."
Exactly my point. How many people leave their wallet at a murder scene
as well?
> >>> "Mr. Myers cannot show LHO's guilt in the crime; all he can do is show the evidence points to LHO." <<<
"LOL. And "Duh!" time."
Duh time? This is not what you said earlier, you said Myers showed
LHO to be GUILTY. Big difference.
> >>> "The court is the only place "guilt" can be assigned for a crime. Nowhere else." <<<
LOL.
> >>> "You can't show LHO to be "guilty". We have to use terms like "most likely involved" when we make our statements." <<<
"Fuck your kook rules. I'll call LHO a guilty double-murdering bastard
anytime I please. Because it's true."
Of course you can, that is the beauty of our country, but it shows
your ignorance of our Bill of Rights. Carry on clown.
> >>> "How many bullets did LHO have on him before the {Tippit} shooting?" <<<
"Either 15 or 16. And that's a decent-sized number of bullets for an
"innocent patsy" to be carrying around if this "patsy" of yours was
merely strolling to the movies to watch a couple of war flicks. Don't
you think?"
Wrong. He had no more than 10 if he had that. He is said to have
shot JDT four times, and when he was arrested the revolver had 6. He
had none on him at all. So at most he set out with only 10 bullets to
face who knows what. Doesn't sound like he was planning on shooting
too many people. You should learn the facts of the case, his revolver
had a bent firing pin.
"The number of bullets would be 15 if Oswald fired a total of four
shots at Officer Tippit. And it'd be 16 if LHO got off five total
shots (including one shot that missed Tippit completely)."
How are you getting these numbers? He had a 6 shot gun.
"The five-shot scenario is entirely possible, given the "I heard five
pistol shots" testimony of Ted Callaway, plus the mis-match of the
Remington & Western type bullets and shells found at the scene of the
crime."
It has nothing to do with the total of 10. Probably more like 6 as
LHO fired ZERO shots that day.
"I think it's quite likely that Oswald fired five shots, instead of
just four. Of course, that can never be proven beyond all doubt, since
a fifth bullet was never recovered."
You are still dwelling on this?
> >>> "Neither {Davis} woman could ID the shells when shown them." <<<
"Who cares? Means nothing whether they could officially "identify" the
shells or not. Not even most CT-Kooks think the "chain of possession"
for the two bullet shells found in the yard of Barb & Virginia Davis
is weak or broken. There's a clear chain of custody for both of those
shells....from the Davis property to the DPD."
The WC cared for once as they asked a million questions about this in
terms of how it affected the chain of custody issue. It means they
might NOT be the shells the Davis ladies turned in, that of course
doesn't bother Dave in the least I guess.
"Naturally, Rob, being a nut, has to make something shady out of the
two Davis bullet cartridges too."
Shady? How funny. LOL! They can't say the shells are the ones they
gave to the officer yet I'm making something out of this. LOL! I'm
sure the defense and the judge wouldn't have had any issue with this
one, huh?
~shrug~
~Head Scratch~
> >>> "The bullets in JDT did NOT match LHO's revolver, therefore, he could NOT be the shooter." <<<
"You're an idiot. The bullets were consistent with bullets from
Oswald's revolver. Plus, they were the identical TYPE/BRAND of bullets
that Oswald had inside his gun when captured (Remingon-Peters and
Winchester-Westerns)."
I can always tell when I say something Dave can't refute, because the
"I" word always comes out. Right, but they weren't in the right combo
with the shells found at the scene, and they could be matched in terms
of ballistics to LHO .38 revolver. They WERE NOT from LHO revolver
with the bent firing pin.
"Plus, there's Joe Nicol's testimony. (You know what that is, right,
Mr. Idiot?)"
Who cares? His testimony is wrong.
> >>> "The Carcano had a rusty, eroding pin ready to go at any time." <<<
"Cite please.
The C2766 Mannlicher-Carcano of Oswald's was fired many, many times
after November 22, 1963, and AFAIK it never misfired and it never
jammed during the FBI's tests. The firing pin, therefore, must have
been in "okay" condition for these many post-11/22 tests."
CE 544 and 545 have no firing pin indentations on them, so how where
they fired? True, CE544 had a similar mark of a Carcano firing pin on
it, but it was not exact. Both are suspected to been shot from
another rifle. They fixed it? They added shims to fix the scope so
why couldn't they replace a rusty firing pin?
"But keep working on your "Anybody But Oswald And His Weapons"
theories. Pretty soon you'll probably be claiming that Rifle #C2766
never really existed in the first place."
It existed, it just didn't kill or wound anyone on 11/22/63.
> >>> "Who would give LHO a gun with a bent firing pin? He just ordered it in January and received it in March, according to the WC. Would they mail a revolver with a bent firing pin?" <<<
"The pin could have sustained damage after the revolver was shipped to
Oswald by Seaport-Traders in March 1963 (probably during the wild
theater scuffle on November 22nd)."
It could have, but how did it get bent again after he allegedly shot
JDT?
"But, being the idiot you so obviously are pretending to be, you seem
to think that any damage to the gun MUST have occurred prior to Oswald
having received it in the mail."
No, I'm saying he ever gave him the gun knew it was bent and that was
the point as it would make him an easier target. Several witnesses
saw a man who looked like Ruby (and Willis photographed him) give LHO
a pistol out in front of the TSBD after the shooting. I am surmising
it was Ruby's job to shoot him then, but he chickened out. LHO was now
"armed and dangerous" and Ruby could have gotten off with self-defense
as LHO was armed (of course the gun was useless, but Ruby could argue
he didn't know this). He had a much better scenario than the DPD
garage, but he was a chicken.
~another shrug~
~another head scratch~
> >>> "What {LHO-is-guilty} stuff in the movie theater? .... What are you talking about?" <<<
>
> Oh, I don't ...
>
> read more »
David Von Pein
respond to Rob's lame, non-stop, unsupportable pro-CT idiocy.
He gets more hilarious and further from the actual facts in evidence
every day. How in this world he manages to post his junk without
cracking up into fits of laughter is beyond me.
The only point worth responding to in his last wholly-ridiculous batch
of shit (which I've destroyed in whole or in part via past posts from
October through December 2007) is the part about how ignorant Rob-Kook
is about the number of bullets Oswald had on him before killing Tippit
on Tenth Street.....
When he was arrested on 11/22, Oswald had six bullets in his S&W
revolver....plus five bullets in his pants pocket. He, of course, had
just fired 4 or 5 shots at Tippit 35 minutes earlier...making a total
of 15 or 16 total unfired bullets on hand for Oswald's use when he
left his roominghouse at about 1 PM on Nov. 22.
aeffects
> I can certainly see why virtually nobody else in this place bothers to
> respond to Rob's lame, non-stop, unsupportable pro-CT idiocy.
>
just pathetic Lone Nut dolts such as yourself, respond! You and
daBugliosi have F-A-I-L-E-D, Dave, all the copying and pasting the
last 10 months are for naught.
Get a life son, a few silly commission points aren't worth it. Got to
be more money in, say, I Love Lucy reruns on DVD
Walt
> >>> "I wish LHO or his mom was here to sue you for this slanderous term, double-murderer, as he was NOT convicted of either one. You need to learn to use the term "alleged", as is the custom for all people not yet convicted in a court of law." <<<
>
> To hell with your stinking "alleged" rule. There's no "alleged" about
> it in LHO's case. He killed two men in Dallas in 1963. The evidence
> proves it. And so do Oswald's own actions, which scream out "I'm
> Guilty".
Wrong!..wrong!....and wrong!.....
The preponderance of the evidence when viewed HONESTLY does NOT
support the conviction.
You can IMAGINE that Oswald killed two men but you can NOT prove it.
And the reason you can't prove it is because it didn't happen,
therefore there isn't any solid undisputable proof to present against
him. On the other hand there are witnesses to both murders that gave
descriptions of the gunmen involved in the two shootings that did NOT
fit Lee Oswald.
Walt
>
> For some reason, CTers pretty much want to totally ignore Oswald's own
> November 22nd post-12:30 ACTIONS and WORDS, which are actions and
> words (i.e., lies) that are not indicative of an innocent patsy who
> never fired a shot at anyone on 11/22.
>
> And I guess Mama Marguerite would be very busy filing the lawsuits
> too, because I'm certainly not alone here. The Warren Commission and
> the HSCA would need to be sued too (they don't use the word "alleged"
> either).....
>
> "On the basis of these findings the Commission has concluded
> that Lee Harvey Oswald was the assassin of President Kennedy." -- WCR;
> Page 195
>
> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0110a.htm
>
> "Lee Harvey Oswald fired three shots at President John F.
> Kennedy. The second and third shots fired struck the President. The
> third shot he fired killed the President." -- HSCA Report; Page 3
>
> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/report/html/HSCA_Report_0...
> Oh, I don't know....let me ...
>
> read more »
robcap...@netscape.com
"I can certainly see why virtually nobody else in this place bothers
to respond to Rob's lame, non-stop, unsupportable pro-CT idiocy."
You have it backwards, I'm not naming someone as a murderer, a double-
murderer to quote you, therefore, I don't have to show a person is
guilty, but you do. So you are the one who can't support YOUR
claims. It can say it until kingdom come, but you have no proof and
in the US you are supposed to be INNOCENT until PROVEN guilty. LHO was
never proven to be guilty.
"He gets more hilarious and further from the actual facts in evidence
every day. How in this world he manages to post his junk without
cracking up into fits of laughter is beyond me."
I am in the evidence, your crazy evidence, all the time. You are
making this about me because you can't show your theory is correct, so
you are the one getting away from the topic and talking about me
instead. I say the same about you as anyone with any reasoning skills
can see the WC's story is a joke.
"The only point worth responding to in his last wholly-ridiculous
batch of shit (which I've destroyed in whole or in part via past posts
from October through December 2007) is the part about how ignorant Rob-
Kook is about the number of bullets Oswald had on him before killing
Tippit on Tenth Street....."
Hey, you must have not read about LHO which wouldn't surprise me in
the least since you are so ready to hang the man with no proof. You
would have fit in well with the vigilantees of the 1800s who wanted to
hang men before the trial. Readers, Dave is making this about me
because HE CAN'T REFUTE what I am saying which should make you all
suspicious. We all repeat things here and on other boards a million
times, but when someone turns to attacking the person rather than the
message you know they have no rebuttal. DVP has been shown to be
wrong about LHO killing JD Tippit, period.
"When he was arrested on 11/22, Oswald had six bullets in his S&W
revolver....plus five bullets in his pants pocket. He, of course, had
just fired 4 or 5 shots at Tippit 35 minutes earlier...making a total
of 15 or 16 total unfired bullets on hand for Oswald's use when he
left his roominghouse at about 1 PM on Nov. 22."
Show me where they found 5 bullets in his pants pocket, as everything
I have ever read said he just had the 6 bullets in the revolver. They
also never found any ammo in his possessios or the Paine's garage so
all he supposedly had was 10 rounds of .38 bullets for the revolver
and 4 rounds of 6.5mm ammo for the Carcano, period.
robcap...@netscape.com
wrote:
I want to clarify my own post. LHO had 10 rounds of .38 IF you
believe he shot JDT, which I do not, so he really only had 6 founds.
Does a man carrying 6 rounds of pistol ammo and 4 rounds of rifle ammo
sound like he is taking the job seriously to you? It allows for no
misses really if you want to succeed. All professionals carry back-up
clips or ammo just in case.
