Benavides' brother
yeuhd
about Tippit shooting witness Domingo Benavides.
I said then that Domingo Benavides' brother Lee Roy Benavides died a
homicide victim in 1964. But I have found no evidence that Lee Roy died
then, and some evidence that he was still living in Texas in 1996.
Anyone who would like to repeat the claim that Domingo Benavides' brother
was murdered to coerce Domingo to identify Oswald to the Warren Commission
as Tippit's killer is welcome to supply primary evidence (not from
conspiracy literature) of the brother's name, and of his place, date and
cause of death.
David Von Pein
"Lee Roy" isn't the person who died suddenly in 1964. It was Domingo's
brother Edward (Eddy) who died as a result of being shot in early 1964.
Here's a quote regarding Edward Benavides from Vincent Bugliosi's book:
"The [conspiracy] buffs are so silly that in addition to President
Kennedy and Officer J. D. Tippit, they even have people like Abraham
Zapruder (heart attack, 1970), J. Edgar Hoover (heart attack, 1972),
Lyndon Baines Johnson (heart attack, 1973), and Earl Warren (heart attack,
1974) on their mysterious-death lists. .... So silly that when Edward
Benavides, who the buffs say resembled his brother, Warren Commission
witness Domingo Benavides, was shot to death in a Dallas bar in February
1964, they allege that it was a case of mistaken identity, Domingo
probably being "the intended victim," and list Edward's homicide as
"mysterious" and, by implication, unsolved. Actually, he was shot by a
drinking companion, who confessed to the killing and served twenty months
for manslaughter. It should be recalled that Domingo Benavides, who saw
Officer Tippit being murdered, never identified Oswald as the killer. He
only said Oswald "resembled" the man and refused to make a positive
identification [DVP INTERJECTION: until 1967 on CB-TV, that is]." -- Page
1018 of "Reclaiming History"
Bugliosi has one source note for the above excerpt regarding Edward
Benavides' death. The source is this one:
"Roberts, Truth about the Assassination, p.96."
http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2009/12/reclaiming-history.html
yeuhd
> Benavides' death. The source is this one:
>
> "Roberts, Truth about the Assassination, p.96."
Thanks, but I had all the information, and even gave that reference to
Roberts, a secondary source, in my post last July. That is why I
specified that I was looking for any "primary" source (e.g, birth
certificate, death certificate, newspaper article, police report,
witness).
According to the Texas birth index, 1903–1997, Domingo Benavides (1937–
2005) had siblings
1. Lee Roy Benavides (b. 1 July 1933, Falls County, Texas)
2. T.J. Benavidez (sic) (male) (b. 5 March 1944, Dallas County, Texas)
3. Shelby Ann Benavides (b. 11 May 1945, Dallas County, Texas).
Their parents were Domingo Benavides (Sr.) and Elvis Clark (yes, her
first name was Elvis).
The following males surnamed Benavides died in Texas between 22
November 1963 and 2 April 1964, when Domingo Benavides gave his WC
testimony:
1. Jesse Abrego Benavides died in Nueces County, Texas on 27 November
1963.
2. Eracido Benavides died in Hidalgo County, Texas on 10 January 1964.
3. Raymond Benavides died in Tarrant County, Texas on 1 February 1964.
4. Isidro Benavides died in Medina County, Texas on 15 February 1964.
David Von Pein
So, Yeuhd, according to your information, Domingo had no brother named
Edward at all, eh?
Interesting.
I know conspiracy theorists are fond of inventing stories out of thin air,
but it's hard for me to believe that "Eddy" didn't exist at all.
Quoting David Welsh in the November 1966 edition of "Ramparts" magazine:
"Domingo Benevides, a dark, slim auto mechanic, was a witness to the
murder of Officer Tippit who testified that he "really got a good view" of
the slayer. He was not asked to see the police lineup in which Oswald
appeared. Although he later said the killer resembled newspaper pictures
of Oswald, he described the man differently: "I remember the back of his
head seemed like his hairline sort of went square instead of tapered
off...it kind of went down and squared off and made his head look flat in
back." Domingo reports that he has been repeatedly threatened by police,
and advised not to talk about what he saw.
"In mid-February 1964 his brother Eddy, who resembled him, was
fatally shot in the back of the head in a beer joint on Second Avenue in
Dallas. Police said it was a pistol shot, wrote up a cursory report and
marked the case "unsolved."
"Domingo's father-in-law, J.W. Jackson, was so unimpressed with the
police investigation of Eddy's death that he launched a little inquiry of
his own. Two weeks later Jackson was shot at in his home. The assailant
secreted himself in the carport, fired once into the house, and when
Jackson ran outside, fired one more time, just missing his head.
"As the gunman clambered into an automobile in a nearby driveway,
Jackson saw a police car coming down the block. The officer made no
attempt to follow the gunman's speeding car; instead, he stopped at
Jackson's home and spent a long time inquiring what had happened. Later a
police lieutenant advised Jackson, "You'd better lay off of this business.
Don't go around asking question; that's our job." Jackson and Domingo are
both convinced that Eddy's murder was a case of mistaken identity and that
Domingo, the Tippit witness, was the intended victim."
Source:
Bud
A couple sources you might be aware of, yuehd...
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,843014-2,00.html
yeuhd
> So, Yeuhd, according to your information, Domingo had no brother named
> Edward at all, eh?
>
> Interesting.
>
> I know conspiracy theorists are fond of inventing stories out of thin air,
> but it's hard for me to believe that "Eddy" didn't exist at all.
I will further add that there is nothing in the Dallas Morning News from
22 November 1963 through 1964 about anyone named Benavides (Benevides,
Benavidez, Benevidez) getting shot in a bar (or anywhere else). No
obituary for any of Domingo's siblings, either.
No birth certificate, no death certificate, no newspaper story, no
obituary.
yeuhd
> A couple sources you might be aware of, yuehd...
>
> http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,843014-2,00.html
>
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/crs.htm
Thanks. Per the Time magazine article, Eddy Benavides died in February
1965, not 1964. Ten months *after* Domingo Benavides gave his
testimony to the Warren Commission.
The Texas death index does have an Edward Benavidez (sic) who died in
Dallas County on 16 February 1965.
Bud
Well, keep digging yeuhd, because I don`t think it`s possible that
conspiracy mongers have been repeating a story for years and years
that has no real basis.
If you google "eddy benavides look-alike", you`ll find many. many
conspiracy sites repeating this story, so there has to be something to
it, right?
Jean Davison
"yeuhd" <needle...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:c91a4d92-b909-4b90...@r18g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
Here's a link to a Dallas Morning News article about his death,
February 17, 1965, p. 10:
http://docs.newsbank.com/s/HistArchive/ahnpdoc/EANX/0FF3DDFCA1CE8E86/0D1C2A34C3EF45E0
Benavides testified on April 2, 1964, as you say, well before
his brother was shot. I don't know who first moved Edward's death back to
February 1964 and put a sinister spin on it, but this myth turns up
repeatedly in conspiracy books.
For instance, Harry Livingstone wrote, "Three months after the
assassination, Benavides' brother Edward was murdered, and Domingo then
changed his story and gave the testimony the government wanted." (p. 42,
"The Radical Right and the Murder of John F. Kennedy") The same incorrect
date is given by Penn Jones, Jim Marrs, and many others.
One might think that a site named "Spartacus Educational" would
do a little fact checking. But no...
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKbenavides.htm
Jean
Sean Smiley
dcw interjection: John McAdams has made the same argument against the
importance of Benavides. But Benavides was one of the three key witnesses
to the ID of the suspect's *weapon*, along with Virginia & Barbara
Jeanette Davis. (A fourth witness, Sam Guinyard, is generally ignored,
probably because his version contradicts the Davises'.) Benavides'
testimony was used to validate the type of two of the hulls found; the
Davises' used to validate the other 2 hulls, as revolver. The importance
of these 3 witnesses cannot really be overestimated since they were used
to counter the two reports of an automatic weapon heard on the police
radio.
The problem with the Benavides version is apparent when his testimony is
compared with the testimony of DPD Sgt Gerald Hill. The latter testified
that a patrolman told him that a witness saw the suspect manually tossing
down hulls, confirming the weapon as a revolver, confirming Benavides'
testimony. But for this story to stand, Hill also had to deny that he
then radioed that the gun was an automatic. Thus his testimony that
Patrolman Poe told him a witness had seen the suspect discarding hulls
must also have been false, & Hill's supposed Commission confirmation of
the Benavides & Poe story is actually a contradiction of it.
dcw
Bud
> On Apr 2, 12:20 am, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> > A couple sources you might be aware of, yuehd...
>
> > http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,843014-2,00.html
>
> > http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/crs.htm
>
> Thanks.
And thanks for sparing me the crushing rebuke that it wasn`t what
you were asking for.
> Per the Time magazine article, Eddy Benavides died in February
> 1965, not 1964. Ten months *after* Domingo Benavides gave his
> testimony to the Warren Commission.
>
> The Texas death index does have an Edward Benavidez (sic) who died in
> Dallas County on 16 February 1965.
I spent about an hour surfing Benavides genealogy sites. Found one
person who seemed possible for one of Domingo`s kids (age and location
seemed right, and Domingo told the WC that he had 2 children, with one on
the way.) This might be your best bet for cracking the mystery, contact a
relative. Maybe facebook.
Sean Smiley
Like to see that "full police report" on Eddy's shooting, as per
Time....
dcw
Bud
wrote:
> "yeuhd" <needleswax...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:c91a4d92-b909-4b90...@r18g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 2, 12:20 am, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> >> A couple sources you might be aware of, yuehd...
>
> >>http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,843014-2,00.html
>
> >>http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/crs.htm
> >Thanks. Per the Time magazine article, Eddy Benavides died in February
> >1965, not 1964. Ten months *after* Domingo Benavides gave his
> >testimony to the Warren Commission.
> >The Texas death index does have an Edward Benavidez (sic) who died in
> >Dallas County on 16 February 1965.
>
> Here's a link to a Dallas Morning News article about his death,
> February 17, 1965, p. 10:
>
You are the best, Jean.
> Benavides testified on April 2, 1964, as you say, well before
> his brother was shot. I don't know who first moved Edward's death back to
> February 1964 and put a sinister spin on it, but this myth turns up
> repeatedly in conspiracy books.
>
> For instance, Harry Livingstone wrote, "Three months after the
> assassination, Benavides' brother Edward was murdered, and Domingo then
> changed his story and gave the testimony the government wanted." (p. 42,
> "The Radical Right and the Murder of John F. Kennedy") The same incorrect
> date is given by Penn Jones, Jim Marrs, and many others.
>
> One might think that a site named "Spartacus Educational" would
> do a little fact checking. But no...
>
> http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKbenavides.htm
Simkin isn`t interested in the facts, he is only interested in
recycling conspiracy myths and legends.
> Jean
John McAdams
<jjdavison...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>"yeuhd" <needle...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:c91a4d92-b909-4b90...@r18g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>On Apr 2, 12:20 am, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
>>> A couple sources you might be aware of, yuehd...
>>>
>>> http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,843014-2,00.html
>>>
>>> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/crs.htm
>
>>Thanks. Per the Time magazine article, Eddy Benavides died in February
>>1965, not 1964. Ten months *after* Domingo Benavides gave his
>>testimony to the Warren Commission.
>
>>The Texas death index does have an Edward Benavidez (sic) who died in
>>Dallas County on 16 February 1965.
>
> Here's a link to a Dallas Morning News article about his death,
>February 17, 1965, p. 10:
>
>http://docs.newsbank.com/s/HistArchive/ahnpdoc/EANX/0FF3DDFCA1CE8E86/0D1C2A34C3EF45E0
>
Damn you're good!
I've known about Newsbank for years, but I never thought to check it
since my students have scoured the February 1964 issues of the DALLAS
MORNING NEWS and the DALLAS TIMES HERALD.
I guess it's best not to accept *anything* that conspiracy books tell
you.
I also tell my students to search for variations of names, but I'm not
sure I would have come up with "Benavidez." Seems like one brother
anglicized the name, and the other didn't.
If would, I suppose, be too much to expect conspiracy authors to spell
Edward's name correctly.
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John McAdams
>> Bugliosi has one source note for the above excerpt regarding Edward
>> Benavides' death. The source is this one:
>>
>> "Roberts, Truth about the Assassination, p.96."
>
>
>Thanks, but I had all the information, and even gave that reference to
>Roberts, a secondary source, in my post last July. That is why I
>specified that I was looking for any "primary" source (e.g, birth
>certificate, death certificate, newspaper article, police report,
>witness).
>
Now that Jean has nailed down the date of the death, finding a good
primary source might be more likely.
I'm inclined to say that I would use Roberts as a source, since I
consider something written by a reputable journalist to be close to a
"primary source." If the same journalist wrote a story for a daily
paper, that story would be considered a primary source.
Still . . . I would love to see the police report on that incident.
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John McAdams
>news:c91a4d92-b909-4b90...@r18g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>On Apr 2, 12:20 am, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
>>> A couple sources you might be aware of, yuehd...
>>>
>>> http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,843014-2,00.html
>>>
>>> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/crs.htm
>
>>Thanks. Per the Time magazine article, Eddy Benavides died in February
>>1965, not 1964. Ten months *after* Domingo Benavides gave his
>>testimony to the Warren Commission.
>
>>The Texas death index does have an Edward Benavidez (sic) who died in
>>Dallas County on 16 February 1965.
>
> Here's a link to a Dallas Morning News article about his death,
>February 17, 1965, p. 10:
>
>http://docs.newsbank.com/s/HistArchive/ahnpdoc/EANX/0FF3DDFCA1CE8E86/0D1C2A34C3EF45E0
>
Here is the death notice, also from the DALLAS MORNING NEWS.
It gives a list of relatives, and apparently some anglicized their
last names, and some did not.
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
David Von Pein
Now all we need to do is prove that Edward Benavidez was really the
brother of Domingo Benavides. Has anyone ever confirmed that he was?
According to the "sibling" list provided by Yeuhd earlier in this thread,
Domingo did not have a brother named Edward (or a brother with an "E" as
an initial either, or a brother who would have been 29 years old in
February 1965, as Edward Benavidez was):
1. Lee Roy Benavides (b. 1 July 1933, Falls County, Texas)
2. T.J. Benavidez (sic) (male) (b. 5 March 1944, Dallas County, Texas)
3. Shelby Ann Benavides (b. 11 May 1945, Dallas County, Texas)
You don't suppose the conspiracy kooks like Jim Marrs (et al) have given
Domingo a brother that he never really had, do you? That wouldn't really
surprise me too much if the kooks had done that. But, as I said in an
earlier post, it would surprise me to hear that the conspiracy theorists
have literally CREATED a person out of thin air who never actually existed
at all, which we can now confirm they did not do in the case of Edward
Benavidez/Benavides, thanks to Jean Davison's fine research--yet again.
Of course, when thinking about this "Mystery Death" silliness a little
more, it becomes quite obvious that even if a conspiracy plot did exist to
kill JFK, the conspirators would have had no reason under the moon for
wanting to knock off Domingo Benavides.
Benavides was a pretty good "LN" type of witness, overall. He didn't
positively I.D. Oswald as Tippit's killer until 1967 on CBS-TV, that's
true; but AFAIK he never ever said that Tippit's killer was positively NOT
Lee Oswald. Domingo said that the killer "resembled the guy" (Oswald).
So there is no logical reason (or need) for any plotters to want to rub
out Mr. Benavides. It's just silly. The same way it's totally silly for
any conspirators to have wanted to rub out cab driver William Whaley. For
Pete sake, Whaley positively identified Oswald in a police lineup! And yet
Whaley is listed on Jim Marrs' "Mystery Death" list. It's ridiculous!
(Even for Jim Marrs.)
==========================================
MORE ON THE "MYSTERY DEATH" NONSENSE:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/d52845e6c744cccf
==========================================
yeuhd
> http://iw.newsbank.com/iw-search/we/HistArchive?p_theme=ahnpdoc&p_act...
>
> Now all we need to do is prove that Edward Benavidez was really the
> brother of Domingo Benavides. Has anyone ever confirmed that he was?
As .John said, the death notice of Edward Benavidez lists his survivors,
and confirms that he was the brother of Domingo Benavides, and the son of
Domingo (Sr.) and Elvis. Perhaps Edward was born outside Texas, hence he
is not in the Texas birth index. I also find Edward living with his
parents in a Dallas city directory from the 1950s.
Even Bugliosi has the wrong year (February 1964) for Edward's death in
"Reclaiming History". Just proves one more time: always look for *primary*
sources, not only secondary sources.
David Von Pein
>>> "Here is the death notice." <<<
Where? No link was included.
Is there a "Domingo" listed?
Bud
Don`t you think that it`s the date that is important, and not the
details? You`ve been claiming for years that Eddie Benavides was killed to
influence the testimony Domingo gave before the WC. Don`t you think that
idea suffers from the fact that he hadn`t been killed until long after
Domingo testified? Haven`t you been parroting weak information because you
liked the sound of it?
Bud
> On 2 Apr 2010 18:05:48 -0400, "Jean Davison"
>
>
>
>
> >"yeuhd" <needleswax...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:c91a4d92-b909-4b90...@r18g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
> >On Apr 2, 12:20 am, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> >>> A couple sources you might be aware of, yuehd...
>
> >>>http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,843014-2,00.html
>
> >>>http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/crs.htm
>
> >>Thanks. Per the Time magazine article, Eddy Benavides died in February
> >>1965, not 1964. Ten months *after* Domingo Benavides gave his
> >>testimony to the Warren Commission.
>
> >>The Texas death index does have an Edward Benavidez (sic) who died in
> >>Dallas County on 16 February 1965.
>
> > Here's a link to a Dallas Morning News article about his death,
> >February 17, 1965, p. 10:
>
>
> Here is the death notice, also from the DALLAS MORNING NEWS.
You forget the link, .John?
David Von Pein
>>> "Even Bugliosi has the wrong year (February 1964) for Edward's death
in "Reclaiming History"." <<<
I would suspect that Vince wasn't overly concerned about confirming the
precise date with more than just the one "Roberts" source he used, and
that's because it's connected to a theory about Edward's death that is
ridiculously silly and far-fetched to begin with. And Vince B. doesn't
waste too much time with such really silly things (although he did spend
15 pages in his book attacking one of the silliest theories of
all-time--John Armstrong's 'Two LHO's' garbage; but perhaps Vince spent
that much time on Armstrong just for the kicks of berating such an
obviously-idiotic theory).
Sean Smiley
Not necessarily convinced by these new claims. Any actual documents
supporting them?
dcw
John McAdams
wrote:
>
>>>> "Here is the death notice." <<<
>
>Where? No link was included.
>
You have to have a read newsreader, reading via NNTP.
You might try hitting this:
news://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/alt.assassination.jfk
I'm at home, but I'll put that on my server when I get in to work
tomorrow.
>Is there a "Domingo" listed?
No, but there is a "Donnie."
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John McAdams
>On Apr 2, 8:44 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
>> On 2 Apr 2010 18:05:48 -0400, "Jean Davison"
>>
>>
>>
>> <jjdavison2000NO...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >"yeuhd" <needleswax...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> >news:c91a4d92-b909-4b90...@r18g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>> >On Apr 2, 12:20 am, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>>
>> >>> A couple sources you might be aware of, yuehd...
>>
>> >>>http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,843014-2,00.html
>>
>> >>>http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/crs.htm
>>
>> >>Thanks. Per the Time magazine article, Eddy Benavides died in February
>> >>1965, not 1964. Ten months *after* Domingo Benavides gave his
>> >>testimony to the Warren Commission.
>>
>> >>The Texas death index does have an Edward Benavidez (sic) who died in
>> >>Dallas County on 16 February 1965.
>>
>> > Here's a link to a Dallas Morning News article about his death,
>> >February 17, 1965, p. 10:
>>
>> >http://docs.newsbank.com/s/HistArchive/ahnpdoc/EANX/0FF3DDFCA1CE8E86/...
>>
>> Here is the death notice, also from the DALLAS MORNING NEWS.
>
> You forget the link, .John?
>
No, link. It was an attachment.
I'll put up a link tomorrow.
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Jean Davison
"John McAdams" <john.m...@marquette.edu> wrote in message
news:fl3dr5prsh6sivlfe...@4ax.com...
I'm wondering if "Donnie" in the death notice could be our
Domingo? According to Bugliosi, a suspect "confessed and served twenty
months for manslaughter," but I can't find a primary source for that.
Jean
yeuhd
> Not necessarily convinced by these new claims. Any actual documents
> supporting them?
> dcw
Sources:
1. "Witness Dies of Wounds", Dallas Morning News, 17 February 1965, p.
10.
2. "Edward H. Benavidez", in "Deaths and Funerals", Dallas Morning
News, 18 February 1965.
3. Record of Edward Benavidez. Ancestry.com. Texas Death Index,
1903-2000 [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations
Inc, 2006.
Name: Edward Benavidez
Death Date: 16 February 1965
Death County: Dallas
4. Worley's Greater Dallas City Directory, 1950, p. 97.
Domingo (Elvis) Benavidez, home 2704 Coombs
Edward Benavidez, driver, Ray & Parma, residence 2704 Coombs
5. Record of Domingo Benavides. Ancestry.com. Texas Birth Index,
1903-1997 [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations
Inc, 2005.
Name: Domingo Benavides
Date of Birth: 9 April 1937
Gender: Male
Birth County: Dallas
Father's Name: Domingo Benavides
Mother's Name: Elvis Clark
Sean Smiley
> http://iw.newsbank.com/iw-search/we/HistArchive?p_theme=ahnpdoc&p_act...
>
importance as a witness to the ID of the killer's *gun*....
dcw
Sean Smiley
Good. Your next task: Find a primary source for anything Benavides
(Domingo) said on record in 1963. An FBI interview. A SS interview.
A newspaper interview. An affidavit. The closest thing I've seen to
a primary source is Det. Leavelle's 11/22/63 report stating that
Benavides made out an affidavit that same day. But I've never seen
the affidavit.
dcw
Bud
What actual documents did you see when you decided to believe the
claim that Domingo`s brother Eddy was killed because he was mistaken
for Domingo, or to influence Domingo`s testimony?
You were provided with a newspaper account of a man named Edward
Benavidez killed in a bar on Second Ave in Dallas in 1965. This you
are skeptical about, but for years you were buying the whole
"Benevides`s brother`s murder has something to do with the
assassination" nonsense without applying any critical appraisal of the
information whatsoever. You never saw a photo of "Eddie", to see if he
actually looked like Domingo, you never saw a police report or death
certificate (suddenly these are requirements), the idea just appealed
to you and you believed it. Just like the idea that Oswald was
railroaded appeals to you.
> dcw
Anthony Marsh
Bugliosi needs to waste a lot of time propping up his straw men so that
he can show how courageous he is in knocking them down.
That way he can avoid discussing the real evidence.
Anthony Marsh
That is not an official document. It is just a funeral home death notice.
They could have easily misspelled his name. The brother's name is also
spelled Benavidez. Did you crosscheck the names of the brothers, sisters
and parents? Do you have his birth certificate?
Anthony Marsh
> <jjdavison...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> "yeuhd"<needle...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:c91a4d92-b909-4b90...@r18g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>> On Apr 2, 12:20 am, Bud<sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> A couple sources you might be aware of, yuehd...
>>>>
>>>> http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,843014-2,00.html
>>>>
>>>> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/crs.htm
>>
>>> Thanks. Per the Time magazine article, Eddy Benavides died in February
>>> 1965, not 1964. Ten months *after* Domingo Benavides gave his
>>> testimony to the Warren Commission.
>>
>>> The Texas death index does have an Edward Benavidez (sic) who died in
>>> Dallas County on 16 February 1965.
>>
>> Here's a link to a Dallas Morning News article about his death,
>> February 17, 1965, p. 10:
>>
>> http://docs.newsbank.com/s/HistArchive/ahnpdoc/EANX/0FF3DDFCA1CE8E86/0D1C2A34C3EF45E0
>>
>
> Here is the death notice, also from the DALLAS MORNING NEWS.
>
Yes, but that is not reporting. That is a paid ad from the funeral home.
They could have easily misspelled his name.
> It gives a list of relatives, and apparently some anglicized their
> last names, and some did not.
>
Did you crosscheck the names of the relatives? Do you have his birth
certificate?
> .John
> --------------
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Bud
Thanks.
> .John
> --------------http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Sean Smiley
wrote:
> "John McAdams" <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote in message
>
> news:fl3dr5prsh6sivlfe...@4ax.com...
>
>
>
> > On 2 Apr 2010 18:05:48 -0400, "Jean Davison"
>
> >>"yeuhd" <needleswax...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>news:c91a4d92-b909-4b90...@r18g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
> >>On Apr 2, 12:20 am, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> >>>> A couple sources you might be aware of, yuehd...
>
> >>>>http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,843014-2,00.html
>
> >>>>http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/crs.htm
>
> >>>Thanks. Per the Time magazine article, Eddy Benavides died in February
> >>>1965, not 1964. Ten months *after* Domingo Benavides gave his
> >>>testimony to the Warren Commission.
>
> >>>The Texas death index does have an Edward Benavidez (sic) who died in
> >>>Dallas County on 16 February 1965.
>
> >> Here's a link to a Dallas Morning News article about his death,
> >>February 17, 1965, p. 10:
>
>
> > Here is the death notice, also from the DALLAS MORNING NEWS.
>
> > It gives a list of relatives, and apparently some anglicized their
> > last names, and some did not.
>
> I'm wondering if "Donnie" in the death notice could be our
> Domingo? According to Bugliosi, a suspect "confessed and served twenty
> months for manslaughter," but I can't find a primary source for that.
>
> Jean
All I get on the above link is "server error"
dcw
John McAdams
For those on Google, and those using news servers that don't "do"
binaries, here is the document.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/ngarchive/Benavidez.gif
.John
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John McAdams
wrote:
>
>>>> "Even Bugliosi has the wrong year (February 1964) for Edward's death
>in "Reclaiming History"." <<<
>
>
>I would suspect that Vince wasn't overly concerned about confirming the
>precise date with more than just the one "Roberts" source he used, and
>that's because it's connected to a theory about Edward's death that is
>ridiculously silly and far-fetched to begin with.
OK, but I'm willing to say that Jean is simply a better researcher
than Vince.
John McAdams
wrote:
>On Apr 2, 7:07=A0pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>> On Apr 2, 7:44 pm, Sean Smiley <seansmileyran...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> =A0 Don`t you think that it`s the date that is important, and not the
>> details? You`ve been claiming for years that Eddie Benavides was killed t=
>o
>> influence the testimony Domingo gave before the WC. Don`t you think that
>> idea suffers from the fact that he hadn`t been killed until long after
>> Domingo testified? Haven`t you been parroting weak information because yo=
>u
>> liked the sound of it?
>
>Not necessarily convinced by these new claims. Any actual documents
>supporting them?
>
Well you've got "actual documents" supporting that Eddie was shot in
1965, and *not* 1964.
John McAdams
wrote:
>On Apr 1, 1:56=A0pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>> >>> "I would like to correct something that I posted to this forum last
>>
>> July, about Tippit shooting witness Domingo Benavides. I said then that
>> Domingo Benavides' brother Lee Roy Benavides died a homicide victim in
>> 1964. But I have found no evidence that Lee Roy died then, and some
>> evidence that he was still living in Texas in 1996. Anyone who would like
>> to repeat the claim that Domingo Benavides' brother was murdered to coerc=
>e
>> Domingo to identify Oswald to the Warren Commission as Tippit's killer is
>> welcome to supply primary evidence (not from conspiracy literature) of the
>> brother's name, and of his place, date and cause of death." <<<
>>
>> "Lee Roy" isn't the person who died suddenly in 1964. It was Domingo's
>> brother Edward (Eddy) who died as a result of being shot in early 1964.
>>
>> Here's a quote regarding Edward Benavides from Vincent Bugliosi's book:
>>
>> "The [conspiracy] buffs are so silly that in addition to President
>> Kennedy and Officer J. D. Tippit, they even have people like Abraham
>> Zapruder (heart attack, 1970), J. Edgar Hoover (heart attack, 1972),
>> Lyndon Baines Johnson (heart attack, 1973), and Earl Warren (heart attack,
>> 1974) on their mysterious-death lists. .... So silly that when Edward
>> Benavides, who the buffs say resembled his brother, Warren Commission
>> witness Domingo Benavides, was shot to death in a Dallas bar in February
>> 1964, they allege that it was a case of mistaken identity, Domingo
>> probably being "the intended victim," and list Edward's homicide as
>> "mysterious" and, by implication, unsolved. Actually, he was shot by a
>> drinking companion, who confessed to the killing and served twenty months
>> for manslaughter. It should be recalled that Domingo Benavides, who saw
>> Officer Tippit being murdered, never identified Oswald as the killer. He
>> only said Oswald "resembled" the man and refused to make a positive
>> identification
>
>dcw interjection: John McAdams has made the same argument against the
>importance of Benavides. But Benavides was one of the three key witnesses
>to the ID of the suspect's *weapon*, along with Virginia & Barbara
>Jeanette Davis. (A fourth witness, Sam Guinyard, is generally ignored,
>probably because his version contradicts the Davises'.) Benavides'
>testimony was used to validate the type of two of the hulls found; the
>Davises' used to validate the other 2 hulls, as revolver. The importance
>of these 3 witnesses cannot really be overestimated since they were used
>to counter the two reports of an automatic weapon heard on the police
>radio.
>
>The problem with the Benavides version is apparent when his testimony is
>compared with the testimony of DPD Sgt Gerald Hill. The latter testified
>that a patrolman told him that a witness saw the suspect manually tossing
>down hulls, confirming the weapon as a revolver, confirming Benavides'
>testimony. But for this story to stand, Hill also had to deny that he
>then radioed that the gun was an automatic.
You can see Hill in the "Frontline" documentary admitting he made a
mistake.
You really assume that all reports are either the gospel truth or
sinister lies, don't you?
John McAdams
<anthon...@comcast.net> wrote:
I'm afraid Tony is very demanding when somebody debunks a favorite
conspiracy factoid.
I wish he were more demanding about evidence to *support* conspiracy
factoids. Especially Judyth's.
And Tony, the funeral home death notice is almost certainly reliable
information. The funeral home gets the information from relatives.
As for "Benevidez," is you just look at the death notice, you'll see
that some members of the family seem to have anglicized their names,
and others not.
John McAdams
wrote:
>On Apr 2, 8:57 pm, "Jean Davison" <jjdavison2000NO...@yahoo.com>
>wrote:
>>
>> >> Here's a link to a Dallas Morning News article about his death,
>> >>February 17, 1965, p. 10:
>>
>> >>http://docs.newsbank.com/s/HistArchive/ahnpdoc/EANX/0FF3DDFCA1CE8E86/..
>.
>>
>
>All I get on the above link is "server error"
>
Try this:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/ngarchive/Benevides_shooting.gif
Newsbank is a subscription service, and I'm guessing they don't let
anybody in who hasn't paid.
Or who isn't at a university that has paid. :-)
Sean Smiley
When I was good, I noted that McAdams' students had found nothing re
Eddy's death in 2/64. When I was bad, I didn't note that. Yes, sometimes
I was bad. We were all going on that '64 date--me, McAdams, Bugliosi.
Wonder how that started. I see that date in Meagher's book.... Gee, why
would I be slow accepting this new information, when for years I was
accepting what has proved to be bad old info? That Texas Death Index
looks like it might be reliable, but I haven't seen an actual copy of the
Eddy entry....
dcw
Sean Smiley
Looking good, but as I told Bud, once bitten, twice shy. You've been
bitten, too, as I recall--e.g., originally situating Warren Reynolds'
sighting of a suspect some blocks away from the Tippit murder site;
stating that Callaway & Guinyard described the same suspect route down
Patton.
dcw
David Von Pein
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/ngarchive/Benavidez.gif
Thank you, .John, for the Google-friendly version of the above
February 1965 death notice concerning Edward H. Benavidez.
FWIW, here are my thoughts on this (after looking at that death/
funeral notice):
Edward H. Benavidez of Garland, Texas, was certainly the brother of
Tippit murder witness Domingo Benavides, and the above-linked
newspaper clip pretty much confirms that fact. And the confirmation,
IMO, is the fact that the death notice lists Edward Benavidez' father
as "Mr. DOMINGO Benavidez".
And Yeuhd's research on this matter indicates this:
"Their parents were Domingo Benavides (Sr.) and Elvis Clark
(yes, her first name was Elvis)." -- "Yeuhd"; 04/01/2010
Plus, there's the fact that one of Edward's surviving sisters is named
"Shelby", which aligns perfectly with the information that Yeuhd
supplied earlier about Domingo's siblings.
The brothers of Edward don't align themselves perfectly with Yeuhd's
data, however, with the newspaper clipping saying that Edward had a
brother named "Thomas P. Benavidez"; whereas, Yeuhd's data shows a
"T.J. Benavidez". But, perhaps that is merely an error with the middle
initial only that was made in one of those two documents. The "T" and
"Thomas" would certainly line up, however.
And there's no third brother (Lee Roy) listed in the newspaper death
notice. And Yeuhd had earlier mentioned that Domingo definitely had a
brother named Lee Roy, and that Lee Roy was still alive as recently as
1996.
~shrug~
So, there's still some rough edges around this whole "Eddy/Domingo"
thing, but that death notice that appeared in a Dallas paper in
February 1965 has enough "Benavidez" information in it to convince me
that Edward and Domingo Jr. were indeed brothers. (Despite the
different spellings of their last names, which is undoubtedly quite
common for a name such as that.)
Jean Davison
"Sean Smiley" <seansmil...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4365ddcc-be16-4def...@r1g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
________________________________
Sorry, here's the article:
WITNESS DIES
OF WOUNDS
A Garland man who was shot
Monday afternoon as he witnessed
a fight in a South Dallas tavern
died Tuesday night at Parkland
Hospital.
Edward H. Benavidez, 29, of
2107 Dollye, died of head wounds
received while ducking for cover
during a fracas at the Wheel,
1417 Second Ave.
Witnesses said Benavidez was
not involved in the fight and
merely was seeking cover when
gunfire broke out.
Homicide detectives are seeking
a 41-year-old man who fired shots
in the tavern shortly after 5 p.m.
Monday. The gunman fled after
he saw that the bystander had
been hit, witnesses told police.
--Dallas Morning News, February 17, 1965
Anthony Marsh
> On 3 Apr 2010 10:35:07 -0400, Anthony Marsh
> <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> On 4/2/2010 8:44 PM, John McAdams wrote:
>>
>>
>> That is not an official document. It is just a funeral home death notice.
>> They could have easily misspelled his name. The brother's name is also
>> spelled Benavidez. Did you crosscheck the names of the brothers, sisters
>> and parents? Do you have his birth certificate?
>>
>>
>
>
> I'm afraid Tony is very demanding when somebody debunks a favorite
> conspiracy factoid.
>
> I wish he were more demanding about evidence to *support* conspiracy
> factoids. Especially Judyth's.
>
It would help if you'd actually read what I've said about Judyth instead
of inventing straw man arguments.
> And Tony, the funeral home death notice is almost certainly reliable
> information. The funeral home gets the information from relatives.
>
Fine, you can think that if you wish. But again it is not an official
document. It is ONLY a paid ad from the funeral home. So, your position
is that it is 100% accurate and every family member is named Benavidez
with a "z"? Which family member in that ad is spelled with an "s"? None
of them. Everyone is spelled with a "z" including Domingo. So this can't
be our guy.
So when Domingo Benavides testified before the Warren Commission he lied
about his name because it was really spelled Benavidez?
Testimony Of Domingo Benavides
The testimony of Domingo Benavides was taken at 2:30 p.m., on April 2,
1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building,
Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. David W. Belin, assistant
counsel of the President's Commission.
Mr. BELIN - You want to raise your hand and stand up and be sworn.
Do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. BENAVIDES - I do.
Mr. BELIN - Will you state your name for our reporter, please?
Mr. BENAVIDES - Domingo Benavides.
Mr. BELIN - How old are you, sir?
Mr. BENAVIDES - I am 27, April the 9th. I am now 26.
Mr. BELIN - Single or married?
Mr. BENAVIDES - Married.
Mr. BELIN - Family?
So, are you saying he committed perjury by giving a false name or that
the your beloved Warren Commission made a simple mistake? Someone is
wrong here, either you, the WC or the funeral home.
Again, do you have the birth certificates? There is nothing wrong with
changing your name, but usually that has to be done legally in a court
and court records need to exist to prove it.
I don't see anything wrong with his brother changing the spelling of his
last name as long as it is done legally, but don't claim that the entire
family always spelled their names with a Z unless you you have the
records to prove it.
Have you ever heard of a thing called genealogy and searched family names?
I don't mind if some of my relatives spelled their name March, but I am
not going to go into court and spell my name March. I consider that to
be perjury.
When I applied for Social Security my SSI card said W. Anthony Marsh and
the clerk called me Wanthony. She said that I would have to go to court
to legally change my name from William A. Marsh to W. Anthony Marsh and
I would lose all my credits to date in the process.
> As for "Benevidez," is you just look at the death notice, you'll see
> that some members of the family seem to have anglicized their names,
> and others not.
>
What death notice? What was uploaded is not a legal document. It is an
ad from the funeral home. You can't tell an ad from a primary document?
That explains a lot.
David Von Pein
>>> "As for "Benevidez," is you just look at the death notice, you'll see
that some members of the family seem to have anglicized their names, and
others not." <<<
That's not correct, .John. In the 02/18/65 death notice you posted (re-
linked below), the last name is spelled "Benavidez" (with a Z) every
single time.
But, IMO, that's not overly important, because that death notice is
obviously talking about the death of Domingo Benavides' brother, Edward.
And Domingo and Eddy both had a father named DOMINGO Benavidez Sr.
Anthony Marsh
>> Jeanette Davis. (A fourth witness, Sam Guinyard, is generally ignored,
>> probably because his version contradicts the Davises'.) Benavides'
>> testimony was used to validate the type of two of the hulls found; the
>> Davises' used to validate the other 2 hulls, as revolver. The importance
>> of these 3 witnesses cannot really be overestimated since they were used
>> to counter the two reports of an automatic weapon heard on the police
>> radio.
>>
>> The problem with the Benavides version is apparent when his testimony is
>> compared with the testimony of DPD Sgt Gerald Hill. The latter testified
>> that a patrolman told him that a witness saw the suspect manually tossing
>> down hulls, confirming the weapon as a revolver, confirming Benavides'
>> testimony. But for this story to stand, Hill also had to deny that he
>> then radioed that the gun was an automatic.
>
>
> You can see Hill in the "Frontline" documentary admitting he made a
> mistake.
>
I don't think he made a mistake. I think, and Mike Wallace also thought,
that Hill blamed himself unfairly. He reacted sooner and better than
everyone else. He tried to save the President. He was a true hero.
Reacting one second earlier would have made no difference. I don't expect
him to react BEFORE the shots.
> You really assume that all reports are either the gospel truth or
> sinister lies, don't you?
>
No, you do. And you confuse newspaper ads with primary documents.
Anthony Marsh
Thanks. It's an ad. So let me remind you again of why this newsgroup
SHOULD carry binaries.
David Von Pein
>>> "I'm willing to say that Jean [Davison] is simply a better researcher
than Vince [Bugliosi]." <<<
Jean Davison is the God (Goddess) of online researchers, IMO. No question
about it.
I think part of the problem a person has who is stuck in the "19th
century" (like Vince Bugliosi says he is with respect to computers and
computer technology) is the fact that he doesn't have the fabulous
"Information Super Highway" at his instant disposal the way all of us
Internet users do.
Vince, to this day (although I've tried to tell him otherwise via e- mails
to his secretary), doesn't seem to realize that every page of every volume
of the WC and HSCA (and most other JFK-related material) is available for
free online.
Vince gets some Internet stuff sent to him by his secretary, Rosemary
Newton, but that really cannot begin to compare with Vince having 24/7
Internet access himself and being able to utilize the extremely helpful
"Word Find" tools that can be found in any Internet browser. Without that
"Find" tool, it would be hell to try and find a particular quote that is
buried among hundreds of pages of testimony, etc.
So, Mr. Bugliosi was at a distinct disadvantage right from the get-go when
he wrote his book "Reclaiming History". He had to get copies of the actual
documents at either the National Archives or at various libraries.
Plus, if he needed to find a particular passage in the WC or HSCA
testimony, he had to actually read through every word of the text in the
physical volumes that he owns, which IMO would be torture in many
instances when searching for something small and/or SPECIFIC.
But, then too (to be fair), when Mark Lane wrote his first book which came
out in 1966 ("Rush To Judgment"), he certainly didn't have the Internet at
his side either. Lane had to research the "old fashioned" way, like Vince
did, without the aid of the great websites we have today, such as History
Matters and Mary Ferrell's site.
In fact, when Jean Davison wrote her excellent book ("Oswald's Game"),
which was first published in 1983, she didn't have the World Wide Web to
help her either. The Internet was still about a decade away from becoming
a reality when Jean researched and wrote her book.
Anyway, I admire BOTH Jean Davison's work and Vincent Bugliosi's "old
school" way of researching. And I owe a great debt of gratitude to Jean
for pointing out the very key significance of one particular Warren
Commission document -- CE903 -- which is an exhibit that almost all
conspiracy theorists hate with a passion (or the CTers try to dismiss the
exhibit as being "misleading" or a crock of Specter- authored bullshit,
etc.).
I've kind of grabbed the CE903 baton from Jean Davison and have run with
it many times in my own Internet articles, in order to illustrate the key
point that Jean was making when she said what she said about CE903 at John
Simkin's Education Forum in late December 2006 and early January 2007 ---
with that key point being:
The Warren Commission (and Arlen Specter) certainly DID NOT require
President Kennedy's upper-back wound to be "moved" up into the "neck" in
order to support the Single-Bullet Theory. And CE903 demonstrably proves
that fact for all time.
=================================================
THE SBT PERFECTION OF CE903:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/c65419db537d4abf
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/753b93209f19ba6e
=================================================
yeuhd
> Looking good, but as I told Bud, once bitten, twice shy. You've been
> bitten, too, as I recall--e.g., originally situating Warren Reynolds'
> sighting of a suspect some blocks away from the Tippit murder site
Actually, I said the same block as the Tippit shooting site (the block
surrounded by Denver, 10th Street, Jefferson, and Patton), not some
blocks away. Based on the WC testimony of Dallas police Sgt. Calvin
Budd Owens:
Mr. ELY. Can you tell us specifically what block you blocked off?
Mr. OWENS. I believe it was the 400 block of East Jefferson — the 400
or 500 block. It was this block bound by Jefferson, 10th, Patton, and
Denver — I believe that was the area. Then we started searching the
buildings and houses — there are some old two-story houses there used
as businesses.
John McAdams
wrote:
>
>
>
>
>>>> "As for "Benevidez," is you just look at the death notice, you'll see
>that some members of the family seem to have anglicized their names, and
>others not." <<<
>
>That's not correct, .John. In the 02/18/65 death notice you posted (re-
>linked below), the last name is spelled "Benavidez" (with a Z) every
>single time.
>
You are right. I had trouble distingushing the "s" and "z" at the
end.
>But, IMO, that's not overly important, because that death notice is
>obviously talking about the death of Domingo Benavides' brother, Edward.
>And Domingo and Eddy both had a father named DOMINGO Benavidez Sr.
>
>http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/ngarchive/Benavidez.gif
One possibility is that funderal home people simply misspelled
"Benavides." I suppose another is that JFK researchers have been
misspelling "Benavidez," but I do tend to go with the WC on these
things.
If the funeral home people misspelled "Benavides," then it's true that
the newspaper misspelled the name in the short article Jean posted.
This is plausible. Somebody hearing "Benavides" could easily think
it's "Benavidez."
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John McAdams
<anthon...@comcast.net> wrote:
>On 4/3/2010 1:14 PM, John McAdams wrote:
>> On 3 Apr 2010 10:35:07 -0400, Anthony Marsh
>> <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/2/2010 8:44 PM, John McAdams wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> That is not an official document. It is just a funeral home death notice.
>>> They could have easily misspelled his name. The brother's name is also
>>> spelled Benavidez. Did you crosscheck the names of the brothers, sisters
>>> and parents? Do you have his birth certificate?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> I'm afraid Tony is very demanding when somebody debunks a favorite
>> conspiracy factoid.
>>
>> I wish he were more demanding about evidence to *support* conspiracy
>> factoids. Especially Judyth's.
>>
>
>It would help if you'd actually read what I've said about Judyth instead
>of inventing straw man arguments.
>
>> And Tony, the funeral home death notice is almost certainly reliable
>> information. The funeral home gets the information from relatives.
>>
>
>Fine, you can think that if you wish. But again it is not an official
>document.
It's the reincarnation of Tom Rossley!
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John McAdams
<anthon...@comcast.net> wrote:
How could you know what it was if you didn't see the image?
And how could you see the image if there was no binary in the post?
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Bud
This whole idea that Benavides` brother was killed to influence or
silence him is something that conspiracy mongers propped up.
Bud
There is plenty enough establish when Eddy Benavidez was killed,
which dispels the CTer myth that he was killed because he looked like
Domingo.
yeuhd
Domingo Benavides said in his WC testimony that he was born in Dallas, and
that he would be turning 27 years old on 9 April 1964 (thus, he was born
on 9 April 1937). The Texas birth index, 1903-1997, says that Domingo
Benavides was born to Domingo Benavides and Elvis Clark in Dallas County
on 9 April 1937. That same index says that Shelby Ann Benavides was born
to Domingo Benavides and Elvis Clark Osuna in Dallas County in 1945.
The death notice of Edward Benavidez in the Dallas Morning News (18
February 1965) says that his parents were Mr. and Mrs. Domingo Benavidez,
one of his brothers was Donnie Benavidez, of Dallas, another brother was
Thomas Benavidez, and one of his sisters was Mrs. Shelby Harrison.
Domingo Benavides (Sr.) died on 19 March 1974, residing in Dallas. His
death notice in the Dallas Morning News (21 March 1974) says that he was
survived by his wife Elvis C. Benavides, his sons Donnie J. Benavides and
Thomas Benavides, and daughters Mrs. Kenneth … (and there my free view
of the death notice ends, and I'm not paying $10 to read the rest).
Elvis Clark Benavides died on 28 September 1974, residing in Dallas (death
notice 30 September 1974).
Perhaps those with free access to the archives of the Dallas Morning News
could look up those death notices and see the family members listed.
Sean Smiley
> On 2 Apr 2010 18:14:05 -0400, Sean Smiley <seansmileyran...@gmail.com>
You define the act when Sgt Hill denied to the WC that he sent the "auto
38" transmission. And when, complementarily, he said he heard from Poe
that the suspect manually threw down hulls.
dcw
Sean Smiley
> On 2 Apr 2010 23:52:20 -0400, Sean Smiley <seansmileyran...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Apr 2, 7:07=A0pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> >> On Apr 2, 7:44 pm, Sean Smiley <seansmileyran...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> =A0 Don`t you think that it`s the date that is important, and not the
> >> details? You`ve been claiming for years that Eddie Benavides was killed t=
> >o
> >> influence the testimony Domingo gave before the WC. Don`t you think that
> >> idea suffers from the fact that he hadn`t been killed until long after
> >> Domingo testified? Haven`t you been parroting weak information because yo=
> >u
> >> liked the sound of it?
>
> >Not necessarily convinced by these new claims. Any actual documents
> >supporting them?
>
> Well you've got "actual documents" supporting that Eddie was shot in
> 1965, and *not* 1964.
Getting close, but I saw where you too would like to see the police
report. Well, now we know why your students couldn't find any info re a
2/64 incident. Was Meagher the first to attach this date?
dcw
Sean Smiley
> On 3 Apr 2010 12:23:32 -0400, Sean Smiley <seansmileyran...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >On Apr 2, 8:57 pm, "Jean Davison" <jjdavison2000NO...@yahoo.com>
> >wrote:
>
> >> >> Here's a link to a Dallas Morning News article about his death,
> >> >>February 17, 1965, p. 10:
>
> >> >>http://docs.newsbank.com/s/HistArchive/ahnpdoc/EANX/0FF3DDFCA1CE8E86/..
> >.
>
> >All I get on the above link is "server error"
>
> Try this:
>
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/ngarchive/Benevides_shooting.gif
>
Thank you, John. But this isn't the "death notice" which mentions a
"Donnie"....
dcw
Sean Smiley
> On Fri, 02 Apr 2010 19:44:10 -0500, John McAdams
>
>
>
> <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
> >On 2 Apr 2010 18:05:48 -0400, "Jean Davison"
>
> >>"yeuhd" <needleswax...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>news:c91a4d92-b909-4b90...@r18g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
> >>On Apr 2, 12:20 am, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> >>>> A couple sources you might be aware of, yuehd...
>
> >>>>http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,843014-2,00.html
>
> >>>>http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/crs.htm
>
> >>>Thanks. Per the Time magazine article, Eddy Benavides died in February
> >>>1965, not 1964. Ten months *after* Domingo Benavides gave his
> >>>testimony to the Warren Commission.
>
> >>>The Texas death index does have an Edward Benavidez (sic) who died in
> >>>Dallas County on 16 February 1965.
>
> >> Here's a link to a Dallas Morning News article about his death,
> >>February 17, 1965, p. 10:
>
>
> >Here is the death notice, also from the DALLAS MORNING NEWS.
>
> >It gives a list of relatives, and apparently some anglicized their
> >last names, and some did not.
>
> For those on Google, and those using news servers that don't "do"
> binaries, here is the document.
>
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/ngarchive/Benavidez.gif
>
> .John
>
> --
> The Kennedy Assassination Home Pagehttp://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Thank you, John. That's what I was looking for.
dcw
Bud
Probably one person said it and a lot of people repeated it, never
bothering to check it out because it sounded good to them. And the reality
is that there is a lot greater effort by the conspiracy industry to create
these myths than there is in the LNer community to correct the record,
only a handful of people even bother. Luckily a few of them post here, so
I can benefit from their work by rubbing your nose in your mistakes.
There are a lot of these "soft" versions of information around, accepted
by conspiracy "folks" (you know what I want to call them), but never
really looked into by them because the information is good to them where
it stands, suspicious sounding. The supposed assassination set-ups in
Chicago and Tampa are like this, conspiracy "folks" don`t really
critically appraise the sources or the information, it is accepted as face
value because it confirms what they want to believe as it stands.
> I see that date in Meagher's book.... Gee, why
> would I be slow accepting this new information, when for years I was
> accepting what has proved to be bad old info?
Oh, I hope you don`t, it will only be further confirmation for what
I already know about conspiracy "folks".
> That Texas Death Index
> looks like it might be reliable, but I haven't seen an actual copy of the
> Eddy entry....
It`s obvious Eddy died in 1965.
> dcw
David Von Pein
>>> "...you confuse newspaper ads with primary documents." <<<
You think the Benavides/z family had to PAY for that death notice in the
DMN on 2/17/65, Tony?
Why in the world do you consider a newspaper death notice to be an "ad"?
That's crazy.
A death announcement like that one is definitely a PRIMARY source, without
doubt, in my view.
In fact, I'd consider an announcement like that one to contain about as
good and solidly FACTUAL information as anything I can think of.
It's certainly much better than anything you'd see second-hand in a
conspiracy book (or an LN book). It amounts to an OFFICIAL notice of a
person's death, with supplemental information contained therein regarding
the dead person's family, etc.
Other than the death certificate itself, I don't see how anything could be
considered more factual (or "primary") than a newspaper's death notice.
David Von Pein
>>> "It [the 2/18/65 death notice of Edward H. Benavidez in the DMN] is
your position is that it is 100% accurate and every family member is named
Benavidez with a "z"? Which family member in that ad is spelled with an
"s"? None of them. Everyone is spelled with a "z" including Domingo. So
this can't be our guy." <<<
Sure it can. The information supplied by the funeral home (which, of
course, obviously would have been information that came directly from the
dead man's family) shows that the dead man's last name was spelled
"Benavidez" (with a Z).
So, quite naturally, the other family members who have the same last name
are going to be spelled the EXACT SAME WAY in that 2/18/65 DMN death
notice (even though it's quite possible that some of those family members
spelled their last name with an S, instead of a Z).
I think it's logical to assume that neither the newspaper nor the funeral
home would have asked the family the following question --- Do all of the
Benavidez family members spell their last names the exact same way?
Why on Earth would the Dallas Morning News have asked such a question?
And, for that matter, why would the funeral home ask such a thing of the
family either?
But, Tony, when you say "this can't be our guy", you are totally ignoring
the fact that the death notice shows Edward's father to be named
"DOMINGO", and the fact that one of Edward's sisters was named "SHELBY" --
which perfectly match the names of Domingo Benavides' father and sister.
Just a coincidence I suppose, huh Tony?
>>> "So when Domingo Benavides testified before the Warren Commission he
lied about his name because it was really spelled Benavidez?" <<<
Domingo didn't SPELL OUT his last name, letter-by-letter, when he gave his
Warren Commission testimony. Perhaps everybody has been misspelling
Domingo's last name for 46 years. Maybe he really did spell it with a Z.
Who knows? Did anybody ever ask him? Or has anybody ever seen a signed
document in Domingo's handwriting to confirm how he spelled his last name?
I sure haven't.
>>> "What death notice? What was uploaded is not a legal document. It is
an ad from the funeral home. You can't tell an ad from a primary document?
That explains a lot." <<<
LOL.
Here we are treated to another example of Tony Marsh electing to argue
with someone about a subject which couldn't be any clearer -- i.e., Edward
H. Benavidez was the brother of Tippit murder witness Domingo Benavides,
and Edward was shot and killed in February 1965 (not 1964).
Let me predict what the "new wave" of Benavides arguments will be from the
Jim Marrs-like researchers in the future:
The conspiracy kooks who recognize the rock-solid FACT (thanks to the
Dallas Morning News clippings provided by Jean Davison and John McAdams
this week) that Eddy Benavidez died in 1965 and not 1964 will now start
claiming that Eddy's death is still to be considered "suspicious", and
that Eddy's death was the motivating factor that prompted Domingo to
POSITIVELY identify Lee Oswald as J.D. Tippit's killer two years later
during a 1967 CBS-TV documentary.
After all, Jim Marrs wouldn't want to have to scratch Eddy's name off of
his "Mystery Deaths" list, would he? (I doubt it.)
http://www.assassinationresearch.com/v1n2/deaths.html
Bud
> On 4/3/2010 1:14 PM, John McAdams wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 3 Apr 2010 10:35:07 -0400, Anthony Marsh
>
> >> On 4/2/2010 8:44 PM, John McAdams wrote:
>
> >> That is not an official document. It is just a funeral home death notice.
> >> They could have easily misspelled his name. The brother's name is also
> >> spelled Benavidez. Did you crosscheck the names of the brothers, sisters
> >> and parents? Do you have his birth certificate?
>
> > I'm afraid Tony is very demanding when somebody debunks a favorite
> > conspiracy factoid.
>
> > I wish he were more demanding about evidence to *support* conspiracy
> > factoids. Especially Judyth's.
>
> It would help if you'd actually read what I've said about Judyth instead
> of inventing straw man arguments.
>
> > And Tony, the funeral home death notice is almost certainly reliable
> > information. The funeral home gets the information from relatives.
>
> Fine, you can think that if you wish. But again it is not an official
> document. It is ONLY a paid ad from the funeral home. So, your position
> is that it is 100% accurate and every family member is named Benavidez
> with a "z"? Which family member in that ad is spelled with an "s"? None
> of them. Everyone is spelled with a "z" including Domingo. So this can't
> be our guy.
Stellar thinking, Tony. Why do you insist on making absolute
statements you can`t support?
> So when Domingo Benavides testified before the Warren Commission he lied
> about his name because it was really spelled Benavidez?
>
> Testimony Of Domingo Benavides
>
> The testimony of Domingo Benavides was taken at 2:30 p.m., on April 2,
> 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building,
> Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. David W. Belin, assistant
> counsel of the President's Commission.
>
> Mr. BELIN - You want to raise your hand and stand up and be sworn.
> Do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
> but the truth, so help you God?
> Mr. BENAVIDES - I do.
> Mr. BELIN - Will you state your name for our reporter, please?
> Mr. BENAVIDES - Domingo Benavides.
> Mr. BELIN - How old are you, sir?
> Mr. BENAVIDES - I am 27, April the 9th. I am now 26.
> Mr. BELIN - Single or married?
> Mr. BENAVIDES - Married.
> Mr. BELIN - Family?
>
> So, are you saying he committed perjury by giving a false name or that
> the your beloved Warren Commission made a simple mistake?
Let me help ,you here, Tony, whenever you ask "are you saying?", it
is never, ever, ever what the person was saying, so you can stop
asking.
And unless you have Benavides spelling his name on record you
haven`t produced Benavides`s spelling of his name.
> Someone is
> wrong here, either you, the WC or the funeral home.
And the Benavides family trees on the genealogy forums that have the
name both ways in the same family.
> Again, do you have the birth certificates? There is nothing wrong with
> changing your name, but usually that has to be done legally in a court
> and court records need to exist to prove it.
A lot of times these things happen when some clerk puts the name one
way or another on a form, and it becomes easier to keep that spelling
than trying to change it.
> I don't see anything wrong with his brother changing the spelling of his
> last name as long as it is done legally, but don't claim that the entire
> family always spelled their names with a Z unless you you have the
> records to prove it.
>
> Have you ever heard of a thing called genealogy and searched family names?
> I don't mind if some of my relatives spelled their name March, but I am
> not going to go into court and spell my name March. I consider that to
> be perjury.
>
> When I applied for Social Security my SSI card said W. Anthony Marsh and
> the clerk called me Wanthony. She said that I would have to go to court
> to legally change my name from William A. Marsh to W. Anthony Marsh and
> I would lose all my credits to date in the process.
>
> > As for "Benevidez," is you just look at the death notice, you'll see
> > that some members of the family seem to have anglicized their names,
> > and others not.
>
> What death notice? What was uploaded is not a legal document. It is an
> ad from the funeral home. You can't tell an ad from a primary document?
> That explains a lot.
The whole affair explains a lot. It shows that some CTers are not
interested in the truth. And when it comes down to it, it isn`t incumbent
on anyone to try to prove or disprove a claim, it`s up to the person
making the claim to support it. The rote LN answer to any CTers claims
like the one about Benavides` brother should be "I haven`t seen any
support for that claim, and it is meaningless without support". Of course
they will refer you to the half-dozen conspiracy books that parrot the
claim, as if that is support.
Bud
> On 4/3/2010 12:52 PM, John McAdams wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Fri, 02 Apr 2010 19:44:10 -0500, John McAdams
> > <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
>
> >> On 2 Apr 2010 18:05:48 -0400, "Jean Davison"
>
> >>> "yeuhd"<needleswax...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>>news:c91a4d92-b909-4b90...@r18g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
> >>> On Apr 2, 12:20 am, Bud<sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
> >>>>> A couple sources you might be aware of, yuehd...
>
> >>>>>http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,843014-2,00.html
>
> >>>>>http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/crs.htm
>
> >>>> Thanks. Per the Time magazine article, Eddy Benavides died in February
> >>>> 1965, not 1964. Ten months *after* Domingo Benavides gave his
> >>>> testimony to the Warren Commission.
>
> >>>> The Texas death index does have an Edward Benavidez (sic) who died in
> >>>> Dallas County on 16 February 1965.
>
> >>> Here's a link to a Dallas Morning News article about his death,
> >>> February 17, 1965, p. 10:
>
>
> >> Here is the death notice, also from the DALLAS MORNING NEWS.
>
> >> It gives a list of relatives, and apparently some anglicized their
> >> last names, and some did not.
>
> > For those on Google, and those using news servers that don't "do"
> > binaries, here is the document.
>
> >http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/ngarchive/Benavidez.gif
>
> Thanks. It's an ad.
<snicker> An ad? What are they selling, dead people?
It`s an announcement.
David Von Pein
NAME-SPELLING ADDENDUM:
I will say that it would surprise me if the Warren Commission misspelled
Domingo's last name. It's quite likely that somebody connected with the
Commission confirmed via Domingo the correct spelling of his name prior to
the printing of the 26 volumes of testimony and exhibits. As far as I have
been able to tell, the Commission did a very good job when it came to
spelling the names of people accurately.
Sean Smiley
> On 4/3/2010 1:09 PM, John McAdams wrote:
>
>
>
The Hills Have Lies? Actually, just confusions, I think. There's a Craig
Hill, right? And a Sgt. Hill? And, my personal favorite, Patrolman
Leonard Hill, who was made to do a vanishing act in late 1963....
dcw
yeuhd
> I don't see anything wrong with his brother changing the spelling of his
> last name as long as it is done legally, but don't claim that the entire
> family always spelled their names with a Z unless you you have the
> records to prove it.
Straw man argument. No one here has claimed that the entire family
always spelled their names with a "z".
> Have you ever heard of a thing called genealogy and searched family names?
> I don't mind if some of my relatives spelled their name March, but I am
> not going to go into court and spell my name March. I consider that to
> be perjury.
You're really getting desperate, aren't you?
From the Texas birth index, 1903-1997. Exact spellings as given:
1. Lee Roy Benavides (b. 1 July 1933, Falls County, Texas), parents
Domingo Benavides and Elvis Black. [My guess is that "Black" is a
clerical or OCR misreading of "Clark".]
2. Domingo Benavides (b. 9 April 1937, Dallas County, Texas), parents
Domingo Benavides and Elvis Clark.
3. T.J. Benavidez (sic) (male) (b. 5 March 1944, Dallas County,
Texas), parents Domingo Medrano Benavidez and Elvis Clark.
4. Shelby Ann Benavides (b. 11 May 1945, Dallas County, Texas),
parents Domingo Benavides and Elvis Clark Osuna.
> What death notice? What was uploaded is not a legal document. It is an
> ad from the funeral home. You can't tell an ad from a primary document?
The death notice may not be a legal document, but it is a primary
document. Its source was very likely someone with first-hand knowledge of
the facts therein.
Szucs and Luebking, "The Source: A Guidebook of American
Genealogy" (2nd ed., 1997), p. 1.
"A common distinction is that between primary and secondary sources. Many
definitions have been given for these two terms. We will say that a
primary record is one that was created in near chronological proximity to
an event by someone who had reasonably close knowledge of the event. A
secondary record, then, is one that was created at some remove from the
event in question; it represents editorial conclusions based on primary
records.
"'The Source' attempts to introduce the reader to the main varieties of
primary sources which the researcher will find useful. The presence of
such sources as newspapers in this book may cause some to question their
inclusion, for there is a widespread belief that newspapers are secondary
sources at best. But a single newspaper issue may contain material of all
levels of usability. One news story might be an excellent eyewitness
account of a fire, more accurate and closer to the event than any other
account (even court testimony), while another article may represent the
writer’s own opinion about an event he himself did not witness. The
lesson is that categorical distinctions such as primary versus secondary
should not be applied too rigidly; each record should be taken on its own
merits."
Sean Smiley
wrote:
> "Sean Smiley" <seansmileyran...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Thanks, Jean. I think I've gotten both the key news items now. I
will now have to reconsider my whole vision of the universe....
dcw
Sean Smiley
> On 3 Apr 2010 10:35:07 -0400, Anthony Marsh
>
> <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >On 4/2/2010 8:44 PM, John McAdams wrote:
>
> >That is not an official document. It is just a funeral home death notice.
> >They could have easily misspelled his name. The brother's name is also
> >spelled Benavidez. Did you crosscheck the names of the brothers, sisters
> >and parents? Do you have his birth certificate?
>
> I'm afraid Tony is very demanding when somebody debunks a favorite
> conspiracy factoid
Aren't there *two* considerations here? The date of Eddy's death is one
thing, with the appearance, way back, of the (apparently) wrong year, in
someone's story. But was this instantly seized upon as an element from a
conspiracy? Or did that happen later? And the original misinformation
somehow included the right *month*...!?!
dcw
Anthony Marsh
>
>>>> "...you confuse newspaper ads with primary documents."<<<
>
> You think the Benavides/z family had to PAY for that death notice in the
> DMN on 2/17/65, Tony?
>
Probably, but it may have been composed by the funeral home which has
more experience in such matters. That's part of what you pay for with
funeral expenses.
> Why in the world do you consider a newspaper death notice to be an "ad"?
> That's crazy.
>
It is an ad.
> A death announcement like that one is definitely a PRIMARY source, without
> doubt, in my view.
>
Nonsense.
It is just an ad.
> In fact, I'd consider an announcement like that one to contain about as
> good and solidly FACTUAL information as anything I can think of.
>
Nonsense.
> It's certainly much better than anything you'd see second-hand in a
> conspiracy book (or an LN book). It amounts to an OFFICIAL notice of a
> person's death, with supplemental information contained therein regarding
> the dead person's family, etc.
>
I never mentioned any conspiracy book, did I?
> Other than the death certificate itself, I don't see how anything could be
> considered more factual (or "primary") than a newspaper's death notice.
>
Police report?
Hospital report?
Death certificate?
Anthony Marsh
> On Apr 3, 10:35 am, Anthony Marsh<anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> On 4/2/2010 8:44 PM, John McAdams wrote:
>>
>> That is not an official document. It is just a funeral home death notice.
>> They could have easily misspelled his name. The brother's name is also
>> spelled Benavidez. Did you crosscheck the names of the brothers, sisters
>> and parents? Do you have his birth certificate?
>
> Domingo Benavides said in his WC testimony that he was born in Dallas, and
> that he would be turning 27 years old on 9 April 1964 (thus, he was born
> on 9 April 1937). The Texas birth index, 1903-1997, says that Domingo
> Benavides was born to Domingo Benavides and Elvis Clark in Dallas County
> on 9 April 1937. That same index says that Shelby Ann Benavides was born
> to Domingo Benavides and Elvis Clark Osuna in Dallas County in 1945.
>
Then why did the funeral home ad say the father was Benavidez? Because it
was just an ad, not an official document, not a primary document. Because
ads like that often get details wrong.
> The death notice of Edward Benavidez in the Dallas Morning News (18
> February 1965) says that his parents were Mr. and Mrs. Domingo Benavidez,
> one of his brothers was Donnie Benavidez, of Dallas, another brother was
> Thomas Benavidez, and one of his sisters was Mrs. Shelby Harrison.
>
> Domingo Benavides (Sr.) died on 19 March 1974, residing in Dallas. His
> death notice in the Dallas Morning News (21 March 1974) says that he was
> survived by his wife Elvis C. Benavides, his sons Donnie J. Benavides and
> Thomas Benavides, and daughters Mrs. Kenneth ? (and there my free view
John McAdams
wrote:
>
>>>> "I'm willing to say that Jean [Davison] is simply a better researcher
>than Vince [Bugliosi]." <<<
>
>Jean Davison is the God (Goddess) of online researchers, IMO. No question
>about it.
>
>I think part of the problem a person has who is stuck in the "19th
>century" (like Vince Bugliosi says he is with respect to computers and
>computer technology) is the fact that he doesn't have the fabulous
>"Information Super Highway" at his instant disposal the way all of us
>Internet users do.
>
>Vince, to this day (although I've tried to tell him otherwise via e- mails
>to his secretary), doesn't seem to realize that every page of every volume
>of the WC and HSCA (and most other JFK-related material) is available for
>free online.
>
>Vince gets some Internet stuff sent to him by his secretary, Rosemary
>Newton, but that really cannot begin to compare with Vince having 24/7
>Internet access himself and being able to utilize the extremely helpful
>"Word Find" tools that can be found in any Internet browser. Without that
>"Find" tool, it would be hell to try and find a particular quote that is
>buried among hundreds of pages of testimony, etc.
>
He cites various essays on my web site, but in a case or two the way
he did it gave something intereting away.
He would cite "[Whatever]" page 5."
But the actual essay on my site was just one long HTML page, with
scroll bars.
Somebody printed out and sent to him my essay, and he cited the page
number of the print-out that he got.
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Anthony Marsh
Maybe they were just confused.
Anthony Marsh
> On 3 Apr 2010 10:35:07 -0400, Anthony Marsh
> <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> On 4/2/2010 8:44 PM, John McAdams wrote:
>>
>>
>> That is not an official document. It is just a funeral home death notice.
>> They could have easily misspelled his name. The brother's name is also
>> spelled Benavidez. Did you crosscheck the names of the brothers, sisters
>> and parents? Do you have his birth certificate?
>>
>
> How could you know what it was if you didn't see the image?
>
I can view HTML files with my newsreader.
> And how could you see the image if there was no binary in the post?
>
You still don't get it. Intentionally.
Someone complained that he couldn't see it.
> .John
> --------------
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Anthony Marsh
They spelled it Domingo Benavidez. Do you think that is correct? Would
an official document make that simple mistake?
> .John
> --------------
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Anthony Marsh
> On 3 Apr 2010 17:56:17 -0400, David Von Pein<davev...@aol.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> "As for "Benevidez," is you just look at the death notice, you'll see
>> that some members of the family seem to have anglicized their names, and
>> others not."<<<
>>
>> linked below), the last name is spelled "Benavidez" (with a Z) every
>> single time.
>>
>
> You are right. I had trouble distingushing the "s" and "z" at the
> end.
>
>
>> But, IMO, that's not overly important, because that death notice is
>> obviously talking about the death of Domingo Benavides' brother, Edward.
>> And Domingo and Eddy both had a father named DOMINGO Benavidez Sr.
>>
>> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/ngarchive/Benavidez.gif
>
>
> One possibility is that funderal home people simply misspelled
> "Benavides." I suppose another is that JFK researchers have been
Duh! It only took you 5 years to figure that out. And yet you keep
calling the funeral home ad an official document and a primary source.
> misspelling "Benavidez," but I do tend to go with the WC on these
> things.
>
> If the funeral home people misspelled "Benavides," then it's true that
> the newspaper misspelled the name in the short article Jean posted.
>
> This is plausible. Somebody hearing "Benavides" could easily think
> it's "Benavidez."
>
>
> .John
> --------------
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Anthony Marsh
> On Apr 3, 5:55 pm, Anthony Marsh<anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> I don't see anything wrong with his brother changing the spelling of his
>> last name as long as it is done legally, but don't claim that the entire
>> family always spelled their names with a Z unless you you have the
>> records to prove it.
>
> Straw man argument. No one here has claimed that the entire family
> always spelled their names with a "z".
>
Not straw man. McAdams did.
>> Have you ever heard of a thing called genealogy and searched family names?
>> I don't mind if some of my relatives spelled their name March, but I am
>> not going to go into court and spell my name March. I consider that to
>> be perjury.
>
> You're really getting desperate, aren't you?
>
> From the Texas birth index, 1903-1997. Exact spellings as given:
>
> 1. Lee Roy Benavides (b. 1 July 1933, Falls County, Texas), parents
> Domingo Benavides and Elvis Black. [My guess is that "Black" is a
> clerical or OCR misreading of "Clark".]
>
> 2. Domingo Benavides (b. 9 April 1937, Dallas County, Texas), parents
> Domingo Benavides and Elvis Clark.
>
> 3. T.J. Benavidez (sic) (male) (b. 5 March 1944, Dallas County,
> Texas), parents Domingo Medrano Benavidez and Elvis Clark.
>
So even the Texas birth index which is supposed to be a primary source can
mispell the names? I'd like to see some documents about each person, like
Social Security, birth records, death certificate, payroll.
> 4. Shelby Ann Benavides (b. 11 May 1945, Dallas County, Texas),
> parents Domingo Benavides and Elvis Clark Osuna.
>
>
>> What death notice? What was uploaded is not a legal document. It is an
>> ad from the funeral home. You can't tell an ad from a primary document?
>
> The death notice may not be a legal document, but it is a primary
> document. Its source was very likely someone with first-hand knowledge of
> the facts therein.
>
It is not an official document. It is not a primacy document. It is a
newspaper ad.
> Szucs and Luebking, "The Source: A Guidebook of American
> Genealogy" (2nd ed., 1997), p. 1.
>
> "A common distinction is that between primary and secondary sources. Many
Source, not official document.
> definitions have been given for these two terms. We will say that a
> primary record is one that was created in near chronological proximity to
> an event by someone who had reasonably close knowledge of the event. A
> secondary record, then, is one that was created at some remove from the
> event in question; it represents editorial conclusions based on primary
> records.
>
> "'The Source' attempts to introduce the reader to the main varieties of
> primary sources which the researcher will find useful. The presence of
> such sources as newspapers in this book may cause some to question their
> inclusion, for there is a widespread belief that newspapers are secondary
> sources at best. But a single newspaper issue may contain material of all
> levels of usability. One news story might be an excellent eyewitness
> account of a fire, more accurate and closer to the event than any other
> account (even court testimony), while another article may represent the
> writer?s own opinion about an event he himself did not witness. The
> lesson is that categorical distinctions such as primary versus secondary
> should not be applied too rigidly; each record should be taken on its own
> merits."
>
MAY. But we've already seen that the newspaper ad got it wrong and the
Texas birth index got it wrong. Is this a contest to see who will get it
the MOST wrong?
Anthony Marsh
Maybe it's just me, but I am kinda amused at the idea that the Warren
Commission could possibly do one thing right. Like maybe someone asked to
see his identification or someone asked him to spell his name, anything.
And maybe, just maybe, even a lowly FBI agent could have gone to his
employer and looked at his work record and confirmed his name in the
process. You never know.
Anthony Marsh
They are advertising their services.
> It`s an announcement.
>
Is a wedding announcement an official document to prove a couple is
married? Would that hold up in court?
Anthony Marsh
Which statement. Even other WC defenders have pointed out to John that
every name is spelled with a "z" at the end. McAdams with his poor
eyesight thought that some were spelled with an "s."
Nothing wrong with that. I am sure that there some of my distant relatives
were named March. But it would be perjury for me to go into court and say
my name is March with a "c."
I see nothing wrong with latinos Anglecizing their names or changing them
back to the original Spanish spelling. Maybe some purists or racists would
complain, but I believe in personal choice.
>> Again, do you have the birth certificates? There is nothing wrong with
>> changing your name, but usually that has to be done legally in a court
>> and court records need to exist to prove it.
>
> A lot of times these things happen when some clerk puts the name one
> way or another on a form, and it becomes easier to keep that spelling
> than trying to change it.
>
Sure, then maybe you can show me what clerk did it when in what record.
But don't cite one newspaper ad as evidence that this is what happened in
this example. That doesn't explain the Texas birth record.
>> I don't see anything wrong with his brother changing the spelling of his
>> last name as long as it is done legally, but don't claim that the entire
>> family always spelled their names with a Z unless you you have the
>> records to prove it.
>>
>> Have you ever heard of a thing called genealogy and searched family names?
>> I don't mind if some of my relatives spelled their name March, but I am
>> not going to go into court and spell my name March. I consider that to
>> be perjury.
>>
>> When I applied for Social Security my SSI card said W. Anthony Marsh and
>> the clerk called me Wanthony. She said that I would have to go to court
>> to legally change my name from William A. Marsh to W. Anthony Marsh and
>> I would lose all my credits to date in the process.
>>
>>> As for "Benevidez," is you just look at the death notice, you'll see
>>> that some members of the family seem to have anglicized their names,
>>> and others not.
>>
>> What death notice? What was uploaded is not a legal document. It is an
>> ad from the funeral home. You can't tell an ad from a primary document?
>> That explains a lot.
>
> The whole affair explains a lot. It shows that some CTers are not
> interested in the truth. And when it comes down to it, it isn`t incumbent
It shows that McAdams is not a reliable source.
> on anyone to try to prove or disprove a claim, it`s up to the person
> making the claim to support it. The rote LN answer to any CTers claims
> like the one about Benavides` brother should be "I haven`t seen any
> support for that claim, and it is meaningless without support". Of course
> they will refer you to the half-dozen conspiracy books that parrot the
> claim, as if that is support.
>
This particular argument is not about the wacky conspiracy theory that his
brother was killed to intimidate him. This is only about the spelling and
misspelling of his name and the caveat that one should look for
misspellings when searching for a name, especially a latino name.
yeuhd
> MAY. But we've already seen that the newspaper ad got it wrong and the
> Texas birth index got it wrong. Is this a contest to see who will get it
> the MOST wrong?
Keep ignoring the forest for the trees, because it has now been shown
beyond any reasonable doubt that Tippit shooting witness Domingo
Benavides' brother was shot long *after* Domingo's WC testimony, not
before it. This is the point at which it is obvious you have nothing
better to do but hector for hectoring's sake on trivialities to show
everybody how smart you are.
Anthony Marsh
>
>>>> "It [the 2/18/65 death notice of Edward H. Benavidez in the DMN] is
> not an official document. It is ONLY a paid ad from the funeral home. So,
> your position is that it is 100% accurate and every family member is named
> Benavidez with a "z"? Which family member in that ad is spelled with an
> "s"? None of them. Everyone is spelled with a "z" including Domingo. So
> this can't be our guy."<<<
>
I guess you are trying to quote me, but some people would not know that
because you refuse to follow standard Usenet practice in quoting messages.
> Sure it can. The information supplied by the funeral home (which, of
> course, obviously would have been information that came directly from the
> dead man's family) shows that the dead man's last name was spelled
> "Benavidez" (with a Z).
>
That's ok. I said before that I didn't mind if his brother chose to
change the spelling of his name to get back to his Latin roots.
> So, quite naturally, the other family members who have the same last name
> are going to be spelled the EXACT SAME WAY in that 2/18/65 DMN death
> notice (even though it's quite possible that some of those family members
> spelled their last name with an S, instead of a Z).
>
Quite naturally the clerk at the funeral home is going to make that
mistake and not realize that the names are spelled differently. That's
why it is not an official record. It is only an ad.
> I think it's logical to assume that neither the newspaper nor the funeral
> home would have asked the family the following question --- Do all of the
> Benavidez family members spell their last names the exact same way?
>
Why should they? That would be like common courtesy. That would be like
actually doing some work.
> Why on Earth would the Dallas Morning News have asked such a question?
They don't ask questions. They print the ad EXACTLY has they got it.
If they get an ad listing the middle name as HORSESHIT they may decide
against including the middle name and change it to an initial.
> And, for that matter, why would the funeral home ask such a thing of the
> family either?
>
They wouldn't. That would be too much like common courtesy.
> But, Tony, when you say "this can't be our guy", you are totally ignoring
> the fact that the death notice shows Edward's father to be named
I wasn't serious. I was making fun of John's pretending to believe that
the funeral home notice was 100% accurate and qualifies as an official
document.
> "DOMINGO", and the fact that one of Edward's sisters was named "SHELBY" --
> which perfectly match the names of Domingo Benavides' father and sister.
>
> Just a coincidence I suppose, huh Tony?
>
It's a tipoff that the misspelled some of the names.
>
>
>>>> "So when Domingo Benavides testified before the Warren Commission he
> lied about his name because it was really spelled Benavidez?"<<<
>
>
> Domingo didn't SPELL OUT his last name, letter-by-letter, when he gave his
> Warren Commission testimony. Perhaps everybody has been misspelling
Some witnesses did. How did the WC or the court reporter know how to
spell his name otherwise?
> Domingo's last name for 46 years. Maybe he really did spell it with a Z.
I like that explanation. Show me his birth certificate spell with a "z."
Or his work record. Anything from his childhood with a "z." Record of
baptism?
> Who knows? Did anybody ever ask him? Or has anybody ever seen a signed
> document in Domingo's handwriting to confirm how he spelled his last name?
> I sure haven't.
>
Oh please. That would be like actual research. Something way beyond the
capabilities of any WC defender. How did Bugliosi spell it? Do you think
Bugliosi is a liar? Do you think he worried about the correct spelling?
LOL.
>
>>>> "What death notice? What was uploaded is not a legal document. It is
> an ad from the funeral home. You can't tell an ad from a primary document?
> That explains a lot."<<<
>
> LOL.
>
> Here we are treated to another example of Tony Marsh electing to argue
> with someone about a subject which couldn't be any clearer -- i.e., Edward
> H. Benavidez was the brother of Tippit murder witness Domingo Benavides,
> and Edward was shot and killed in February 1965 (not 1964).
>
I never argued that he wasn't. My only purpose was to make fun of McAdams
and his pompous and phony Argument by Authority when he couldn't even read
the damn ad correctly.
> Let me predict what the "new wave" of Benavides arguments will be from the
> Jim Marrs-like researchers in the future:
>
> The conspiracy kooks who recognize the rock-solid FACT (thanks to the
> Dallas Morning News clippings provided by Jean Davison and John McAdams
> this week) that Eddy Benavidez died in 1965 and not 1964 will now start
Why this week? Why did it take 45 years to straighten this out? And why
must we rely on a newspaper ad to prove a fact?
> claiming that Eddy's death is still to be considered "suspicious", and
> that Eddy's death was the motivating factor that prompted Domingo to
> POSITIVELY identify Lee Oswald as J.D. Tippit's killer two years later
> during a 1967 CBS-TV documentary.
>
I never said it was suspicious. I see it as a stray shot.
Tragic, but common in those regions.
yeuhd
> Again, do you have the birth certificates? There is nothing wrong with
> changing your name, but usually that has to be done legally in a court
> and court records need to exist to prove it.
Corpus Juris Secundum
IV. Change of Name
A. In General
§ 20. Generally; common-law right to change name
In the absence of statutory restriction, a person may lawfully change his
or her name without resort to any legal proceedings where it does not
interfere with the rights of others and is not done for a fraudulent
purpose.
Under common law, any adult or emancipated person has the right to change
his or her name without legal formality or permission of court to any name
he or she lawfully chooses. The common-law and statutory right to change
one's name belongs to the individual whose name is being changed, and in
the absence of statutory restriction, a person may lawfully change his or
her name without resort to any legal proceedings at any time as long as it
does not interfere with the rights of others and it is not done for a
fraudulent purpose but with an honest purpose.
Under the common law, a change of name is accomplished by usage or habit.
The name thus assumed will constitute the person's legal name for all
purposes just as much as though he or she had borne it from birth or as
though it had been provided for by a court order even though the name
taken is the name of another living person. An individual's decision to
use a name other than his or her birth name does not imply an intent to
set aside his or her birth name or the identity associated with that name.
§ 21. Right to name change under statutory provisions
The grant of an application for a change of name is a matter of judicial
discretion, but ordinarily, such an application should be granted unless
there exists some substantial reason for its denial. Statutes permitting a
change of name generally do not abrogate the common-law right of an
individual to change his or her name without resort to legal proceedings.
American Jurisprudence, Second Edition
II. Change of Name A. Basic Rules 1. In General
§ 16. Common-law rule
A person has a common-law right to assume any name he or she lawfully
chooses. In the absence of a statute to the contrary, at common law any
person may ordinarily change his or her name at will, without any legal
proceedings, merely by simple usage or habit, absent fraud,
misrepresentation or an interference with the rights of others. There is
nothing in the common law requiring a showing of a compelling need to
justify a change of name and any such requirement is inconsistent with the
common-law principle that names may be changed in the absence of a
fraudulent purpose.
§ 17. Statutory regulation
In most jurisdictions, a change of one's name is regulated by statutes
which prescribe the proceedings by which such change is to be
accomplished. Statutes which set forth procedures to be followed in
changing one's name merely provide a codified process to aid the
individual's common-law right to adopt another name at will. The statutory
method of changing one's name has distinct advantages, as it is speedy and
definite, provides a record by which the change of name is definitely and
specifically established, and is easily proved, even after the death of
all contemporaneous witnesses.
Practice Guide: Statutory procedures enabling a person to petition for a
court order changing his or her name are generally an alternative
procedure to the common-law procedure, and such procedures are neither a
substitute nor a replacement for the common law, and conversely, the
common-law right to change a name does not preclude the use of a statutory
method, as neither method is generally exclusive.
yeuhd
> On 4/3/2010 11:54 PM, yeuhd wrote:
> > From the Texas birth index, 1903-1997. Exact spellings as given:
>
> > 1. Lee Roy Benavides (b. 1 July 1933, Falls County, Texas), parents
> > Domingo Benavides and Elvis Black. [My guess is that "Black" is a
> > clerical or OCR misreading of "Clark".]
>
> > 2. Domingo Benavides (b. 9 April 1937, Dallas County, Texas), parents
> > Domingo Benavides and Elvis Clark.
>
> > 3. T.J. Benavidez (sic) (male) (b. 5 March 1944, Dallas County,
> > Texas), parents Domingo Medrano Benavidez and Elvis Clark.
>
> So even the Texas birth index which is supposed to be a primary source can
> mispell the names? I'd like to see some documents about each person, like
> Social Security, birth records, death certificate, payroll.
"Mispell"? Misspell.
The Texas birth index is *not* a primary document; it is a secondary
document because it is based on primary documents (the certificates
themselves), and the person(s) creating the index has no personal
knowledge of the births. However, the index simply repeats the spelling
used in the certificates. If the birth certificate says T.J. Benavidez is
the son of Domingo Medrano Benavidez, then that is what the index will
report too.
The "correct" way to spell a person's name is however the person chooses
to spell it. See my post above: there is a common-law right to change
one's name as one wishes, absent fraud.
> It is not an official document. It is not a primacy document.
When you start criticizing people for their misspelling, you might want to
check your own spelling.
David Von Pein
>>> "I guess you are trying to quote me, but some people would not know
that because you refuse to follow standard Usenet practice in quoting
messages." <<<
And I never will. I'll always do it my own preferred way, like above. If
you disapprove--tough toenails.
>>> "Show me his [Domingo Jr.'s] birth certificate spell with a "z." Or
his work record. Anything from his childhood with a "z." Record of
baptism?" <<<
I can't show you anything of his spelled with an "S" either.
So, it's a wash.
And a newspaper death notice is certainly a PRIMARY source to confirm a
person has DIED. To believe it isn't, you've got to be a fool.
John McAdams
<anthon...@comcast.net> wrote:
Haven't seen many official documents, have you?
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
David Von Pein
>>> "Is a wedding announcement an official document to prove a couple is
married? Would that hold up in court?" <<<
That's completely different. The bride or groom could back out and decide
not to go through with the wedding. But I kinda doubt a dead man is going
to suddenly start living again.
Bud
No, they already have their customer in a box.
> > It`s an announcement.
>
> Is a wedding announcement an official document to prove a couple is
> married? Would that hold up in court?
Has what to do with this death notice being an announcement?
John McAdams
>On Apr 2, 12:20=A0am, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
>
>> A couple sources you might be aware of, yuehd...
>>
>> http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,843014-2,00.html
>>
>> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/crs.htm
>
>Thanks. Per the Time magazine article, Eddy Benavides died in February
>1965, not 1964. Ten months *after* Domingo Benavides gave his
>testimony to the Warren Commission.
>
>The Texas death index does have an Edward Benavidez (sic) who died in
>Dallas County on 16 February 1965.
>
OK, this is the post that nailed it.
I had seen the TIME article, but never paid any attention to the
"1965" data -- indeed didn't really notice it.
John McAdams
>On Apr 3, 10:35=A0am, Anthony Marsh <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> On 4/2/2010 8:44 PM, John McAdams wrote:
>>
>> That is not an official document. It is just a funeral home death notice.
>> They could have easily misspelled his name. The brother's name is also
>> spelled Benavidez. Did you crosscheck the names of the brothers, sisters
>> and parents? Do you have his birth certificate?
>
>Domingo Benavides said in his WC testimony that he was born in Dallas, and
>that he would be turning 27 years old on 9 April 1964 (thus, he was born
>on 9 April 1937). The Texas birth index, 1903-1997, says that Domingo
>Benavides was born to Domingo Benavides and Elvis Clark in Dallas County
>on 9 April 1937. That same index says that Shelby Ann Benavides was born
>to Domingo Benavides and Elvis Clark Osuna in Dallas County in 1945.
>
>The death notice of Edward Benavidez in the Dallas Morning News (18
>February 1965) says that his parents were Mr. and Mrs. Domingo Benavidez,
>one of his brothers was Donnie Benavidez, of Dallas, another brother was
>Thomas Benavidez, and one of his sisters was Mrs. Shelby Harrison.
>
>Domingo Benavides (Sr.) died on 19 March 1974, residing in Dallas. His
>death notice in the Dallas Morning News (21 March 1974) says that he was
>survived by his wife Elvis C. Benavides, his sons Donnie J. Benavides and
>Thomas Benavides, and daughters Mrs. Kenneth =85 (and there my free view
>of the death notice ends, and I'm not paying $10 to read the rest).
I'll try to find this, but going in through the Marquette library is a
complete mess.
I found the 1986 and more recent numbers of the Dallas Morning News,
and then I found it for back in the 1920s.
But somehow I can't find the 60s and 70s stuff.
I'll holler at the library people tomorrow, and maybe they can figure
it out.
I don't know how I managed to do it Friday night.
Bud
It`s standard procedure to put the comment under the point being
addressed.
But it does explain that Domingo`s brother being shot had nothing to do
with what Domingo testified to, which is the only real point to this whole
affair. You can try to draw people`s attention from this by squawking
about a "z' instead of an "s", but this going to distract focus from the
fact that another CTer claim has gone down in flames.
> >> I don't see anything wrong with his brother changing the spelling of his
> >> last name as long as it is done legally, but don't claim that the entire
> >> family always spelled their names with a Z unless you you have the
> >> records to prove it.
>
> >> Have you ever heard of a thing called genealogy and searched family names?
> >> I don't mind if some of my relatives spelled their name March, but I am
> >> not going to go into court and spell my name March. I consider that to
> >> be perjury.
>
> >> When I applied for Social Security my SSI card said W. Anthony Marsh and
> >> the clerk called me Wanthony. She said that I would have to go to court
> >> to legally change my name from William A. Marsh to W. Anthony Marsh and
> >> I would lose all my credits to date in the process.
>
> >>> As for "Benevidez," is you just look at the death notice, you'll see
> >>> that some members of the family seem to have anglicized their names,
> >>> and others not.
>
> >> What death notice? What was uploaded is not a legal document. It is an
> >> ad from the funeral home. You can't tell an ad from a primary document?
> >> That explains a lot.
>
> > The whole affair explains a lot. It shows that some CTers are not
> > interested in the truth. And when it comes down to it, it isn`t incumbent
>
> It shows that McAdams is not a reliable source.
I doubt he had any first hand knowledge of this Benavides thing
anyway.
> > on anyone to try to prove or disprove a claim, it`s up to the person
> > making the claim to support it. The rote LN answer to any CTers claims
> > like the one about Benavides` brother should be "I haven`t seen any
> > support for that claim, and it is meaningless without support". Of course
> > they will refer you to the half-dozen conspiracy books that parrot the
> > claim, as if that is support.
>
> This particular argument is not about the wacky conspiracy theory that his
> brother was killed to intimidate him.
But that is the claim that motivated a few LNers to get to the
bottom of this. And they have.
> This is only about the spelling and
> misspelling of his name and the caveat that one should look for
> misspellings when searching for a name, especially a latino name.
Who cares what you want to try to make it about?
Anthony Marsh
It's not about the fact of an event happening. It's ONLY about the
spelling of a name.
Anthony Marsh
Millions. You have some in mind which spell all the names incorrectly?
Anthony Marsh
The bone of contention is not that he died. Obviously he died.
Anthony Marsh
> On Apr 4, 2:42 pm, Anthony Marsh<anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> On 4/3/2010 11:54 PM, yeuhd wrote:
>
>>> From the Texas birth index, 1903-1997. Exact spellings as given:
>>
>>> 1. Lee Roy Benavides (b. 1 July 1933, Falls County, Texas), parents
>>> Domingo Benavides and Elvis Black. [My guess is that "Black" is a
>>> clerical or OCR misreading of "Clark".]
>>
>>> 2. Domingo Benavides (b. 9 April 1937, Dallas County, Texas), parents
>>> Domingo Benavides and Elvis Clark.
>>
>>> 3. T.J. Benavidez (sic) (male) (b. 5 March 1944, Dallas County,
>>> Texas), parents Domingo Medrano Benavidez and Elvis Clark.
>>
>> So even the Texas birth index which is supposed to be a primary source can
>> mispell the names? I'd like to see some documents about each person, like
>> Social Security, birth records, death certificate, payroll.
>
> "Mispell"? Misspell.
>
> The Texas birth index is *not* a primary document; it is a secondary
> document because it is based on primary documents (the certificates
> themselves), and the person(s) creating the index has no personal
> knowledge of the births. However, the index simply repeats the spelling
> used in the certificates. If the birth certificate says T.J. Benavidez is
> the son of Domingo Medrano Benavidez, then that is what the index will
> report too.
>
If the clerk doesn't make an error.
> The "correct" way to spell a person's name is however the person chooses
> to spell it. See my post above: there is a common-law right to change
> one's name as one wishes, absent fraud.
>
Let me repeat this for the fifth time? I have no problem with his
wanting to spell it with a "z." It just made it harder for some people
to look up.
>
>> It is not an official document. It is not a primacy document.
>
> When you start criticizing people for their misspelling, you might want to
> check your own spelling.
>
The spellchecker does not always spot every misspelling.
Save your bricks.
Anthony Marsh
> On Apr 3, 5:55 pm, Anthony Marsh<anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> Again, do you have the birth certificates? There is nothing wrong with
>> changing your name, but usually that has to be done legally in a court
>> and court records need to exist to prove it.
>
>
> Corpus Juris Secundum
>
> IV. Change of Name
> A. In General
>
>
> In the absence of statutory restriction, a person may lawfully change his
> or her name without resort to any legal proceedings where it does not
> interfere with the rights of others and is not done for a fraudulent
> purpose.
>
> Under common law, any adult or emancipated person has the right to change
> his or her name without legal formality or permission of court to any name
> he or she lawfully chooses. The common-law and statutory right to change
> one's name belongs to the individual whose name is being changed, and in
> the absence of statutory restriction, a person may lawfully change his or
> her name without resort to any legal proceedings at any time as long as it
> does not interfere with the rights of others and it is not done for a
> fraudulent purpose but with an honest purpose.
>
> Under the common law, a change of name is accomplished by usage or habit.
> The name thus assumed will constitute the person's legal name for all
> purposes just as much as though he or she had borne it from birth or as
> though it had been provided for by a court order even though the name
> taken is the name of another living person. An individual's decision to
> use a name other than his or her birth name does not imply an intent to
> set aside his or her birth name or the identity associated with that name.
>
>
> The grant of an application for a change of name is a matter of judicial
> discretion, but ordinarily, such an application should be granted unless
> there exists some substantial reason for its denial. Statutes permitting a
> change of name generally do not abrogate the common-law right of an
> individual to change his or her name without resort to legal proceedings.
>
>
> American Jurisprudence, Second Edition
>
> II. Change of Name A. Basic Rules 1. In General
>
>
> A person has a common-law right to assume any name he or she lawfully
> chooses. In the absence of a statute to the contrary, at common law any
> person may ordinarily change his or her name at will, without any legal
> proceedings, merely by simple usage or habit, absent fraud,
> misrepresentation or an interference with the rights of others. There is
> nothing in the common law requiring a showing of a compelling need to
> justify a change of name and any such requirement is inconsistent with the
> common-law principle that names may be changed in the absence of a
> fraudulent purpose.
>
>
> In most jurisdictions, a change of one's name is regulated by statutes
> which prescribe the proceedings by which such change is to be
> accomplished. Statutes which set forth procedures to be followed in
> changing one's name merely provide a codified process to aid the
> individual's common-law right to adopt another name at will. The statutory
> method of changing one's name has distinct advantages, as it is speedy and
> definite, provides a record by which the change of name is definitely and
> specifically established, and is easily proved, even after the death of
> all contemporaneous witnesses.
>
> Practice Guide: Statutory procedures enabling a person to petition for a
> court order changing his or her name are generally an alternative
> procedure to the common-law procedure, and such procedures are neither a
> substitute nor a replacement for the common law, and conversely, the
> common-law right to change a name does not preclude the use of a statutory
> method, as neither method is generally exclusive.
>
Talk about beating a dead horse. I don't care if he changed his name. My
complaint is about McAdams citing a newspaper ad as a primary, official
document and realizing that it misspelled almost all the names.
David Von Pein
>>> "The bone of contention is not that he [Edward H. Benavidez] died. Obviously he died." <<<
But why would you (of all people) be willing to jump to that wholly
unwarranted assumption, Mr. W. Anthony Marsh?
According to your own beliefs, you haven't seen anything that remotely
resembles a "primary" document to confirm Edward Benavidez' death. So
how do you know Eddy died at all, since you're unwilling to accept the
2/18/65 Dallas Morning News death notice as "primary" documentation?
Sean Smiley
> On Apr 3, 1:18 pm, Sean Smiley <seansmileyran...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Looking good, but as I told Bud, once bitten, twice shy. You've been
> > bitten, too, as I recall--e.g., originally situating Warren Reynolds'
> > sighting of a suspect some blocks away from the Tippit murder site
>
> Actually, I said the same block as the Tippit shooting site (the block
> surrounded by Denver, 10th Street, Jefferson, and Patton), not some
> blocks away. Based on the WC testimony of Dallas police Sgt. Calvin
> Budd Owens:
Okay, you were only a block off. And you did correct yourself, with
some help. Notice, however, you still haven't retracted your claim
that Callaway & Guinyard had the suspect taking the same route down
Patton....
dcw
> Mr. ELY. Can you tell us specifically what block you blocked off?
> Mr. OWENS. I believe it was the 400 block of East Jefferson — the 400
> or 500 block. It was this block bound by Jefferson, 10th, Patton, and
> Denver — I believe that was the area. Then we started searching the
> buildings and houses — there are some old two-story houses there used
> as businesses.