POLICE OFFICER NICK McDONALD AND LEE HARVEY OSWALD
David Von Pein
POLICE OFFICER NICK McDONALD....LEE HARVEY OSWALD....AND LHO's
REVOLVER:
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/thread/f52f87a6e29b809f
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/thread/cf38368fb7511bb2
The top forum thread linked above is from April 2007, and it contains
the following remarks from the lips of a conspiracy kook named Walt:
"[DPD Officer M.N.] McDonald squeezed Oswald's balls and
Oswald's reflexes caused him to strike McDonald. In the ensuing
scuffle McDonald grabbed Oswald's hand while Jerry Hill pulled the
pistol from Oswald's belt."
"Oswald never pulled his pistol."
"You lying bastarrds [sic] always embroider Oswald's arrest, by
saying Oswald pulled his gun and yelled "this is it", but when the
testimonies of the cops who were there are examined it's clear that
nothing of the kind happened."
"We both know that a cop saying "a gun was pulled" is a evasive
way of saying "Oswald pulled a gun". He [DPD Officer Ray Hawkins] knew
damned well that Oswald never pulled a gun, so therefore he [Hawkins]
couldn't be on record as saying "Oswald pulled a gun"...so he IMPLIES
that Oswald pulled the gun by saying...."a gun was pulled". The fact
that you believe it proves that gullible idiots will believe
anything."
==================================
I then offered up this comment in that 2007 discussion:
"Walt evidently thinks that Oswald had his hand on his gun just
in order to push it further down inside his pants. Oz couldn't
possibly have had his hand on his gun for the purpose of pulling it
OUT of his pants and possibly shooting some cops with it, could he?
Oz, after all, wouldn't harm a fly." -- DVP; 04/22/2007
==================================
Now, with Walt's 2007 quotes from above fresh in our minds (wherein he
states his idiotic belief that Lee Oswald never pulled a revolver out
of the waistband of his pants at all on the afternoon of 11/22/63
while in the Texas Theater), I'd like to offer up the following video,
which consists of a segment from a CBS-TV special news program
entitled "The Warren Report" (which aired on the same day the WCR was
released to the public, 9/27/64).
This video features Dallas policeman M.N. (Nick) McDonald re-creating,
for the CBS-TV cameras, his struggle with Oswald inside the movie
theater. The part of Oswald is played by KRLD newsman Eddie Barker for
the purposes of this reconstruction.
And keep in mind that these remarks being made by Officer McDonald in
this video were spoken by McDonald prior to the September 1964 release
of the Warren Commission's Final Report.
So this re-creation being performed by McDonald is just about as close
as you're going to get to the original event itself (calendar-wise).
The date of the assassination was no more than ten months prior to the
filming of this CBS video (and it could have been as little as five
months, per comments made by CBS' Dan Rather regarding the dates when
witnesses were interviewed for the 2-hour "Warren Report" news program
that was aired by CBS on 9/27/64).
The segment with McDonald and Barker in the Texas Theater begins at
the 4:01 mark of this 7-minute video:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVypu6gHvNQ&fmt=18
After viewing the above video, the question to ask conspiracy
theorists is:
Do you think Nick McDonald was lying his ass off in that CBS news
program?
And do CTers like Walt still really continue to believe that Oswald
never had his gun pointed at McDonald in the theater?
It will be interesting to see just how far down "Everybody Was Lying"
Avenue certain CTers are willing to travel with respect to the gun-
wielding incident that took place inside the Texas Theater on November
22....especially after watching that video linked above.
A "HAIR" OF A FOOTNOTE:
At the very end of the above-linked video, we see Lee Oswald at the
police station shortly after being taken into custody on 11/22/63. And
we can see Oswald's hair pretty clearly in those black-and-white video
clips. And we can also see that Oswald's hair, just after his arrest,
was in a disheveled condition, to be sure.
There has been much talk about how Tippit murder witness Helen Markham
supposedly described Oswald's hair as being "bushy". It's debatable
whether Mrs. Markham ever used that word to describe LHO's hair, but
let's assume she actually did say "bushy" to a reporter shortly after
the Tippit murder.
Perhaps she saw Oswald's hair in much the same condition it was in
after his arrest (as seen in the above video). And while Oswald's hair
isn't exactly long, perhaps it could pass for "bushy" in the eyes of
some people who only saw his hair for a few fleeting moments on Tenth
Street on 11/22/63.
It's possible, of course (and even quite likely, in fact), that
Oswald's hair only achieved its mussed-up status after the wild brawl
with the police in the theater, but it's also interesting to note this
testimony of Helen Markham when she was questioned by WC counsel about
the condition of LHO's hair:
JOE 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."
http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/02_04/OswaldSP_468x447.jpg
Food for "bushy"-haired thought.