The Tippit Case in the New Millenium

[Milo Reech]

12. All of the witness testimony, whether from Dealey Plaza or on Oswald's escape route, all of it was grossly fabricated and coerced. None of the witness' stories had any agreement or consistency. That's why all these witnesses or other police officers could not have been all gathered in a room and told to memorize their part in a sort of play with a script and props, etc. before the JFK hit. It was done (1) on the fly or (2) drilled into the witnesses after the fact with threat of murder (implicity murder at the hands of the Dallas Police) which would intimidate anybody and any witness, beyond doubt. Because it is all phony, it doesn't do much good to try and straighten it out or to learn much of anything from it.

James Lateer

If this is so what is the basis for items 1-11?

[James Lateer]

Posted by JL:

"12. All of the witness testimony, whether from Dealey Plaza or on Oswald's escape route, all of it was grossly fabricated and coerced. None of the witness' stories had any agreement or consistency. That's why all these witnesses or other police officers could not have been all gathered in a room and told to memorize their part in a sort of play with a script and props, etc. before the JFK hit. It was done (1) on the fly or (2) drilled into the witnesses after the fact with threat of murder (implicity murder at the hands of the Dallas Police) which would intimidate anybody and any witness, beyond doubt. Because it is all phony, it doesn't do much good to try and straighten it out or to learn much of anything from it."


Posted by Mr. Reech:

"If this is so what is the basis for items 1-11?"

I certainly don't want to diminish in any way the totally brilliant and professional analysis of the Oswald flight and the murder of Tippit found on this forum. Mr. Reech should probably be working on the Skripal poisoning case or the Kashoggi murder case, because his analytics far surpass any others in clarity and connecting dots that I can think of.

Indeed, such research could ultimately prove which particular individual really murdered Tippit.

But let me add as follows as an example of evidence that is not eyewitness, physical or forensic:

If there were 1,000,000 workers in Dallas and if there were 100 of them working right on the flight path of Oswald, then the odds of encountering any one such worker would be 1 in 10,000. If Ruby had 100 close friends, then the odds of one of Ruby's friends being among the 100 workers on the flight path is reduced to 1 in 100. So if Oswald called on ALL 100 SUCH WORKERS, the odds of LHO encountering one of Ruby's friends would be 1 in 100.

BUT LHO ONLY LOOKED INTO ONE WORKPLACE. That boosts the odds back up to 1 in 10,000 for encountering Ruby's friend in the store.

I guess that the fact that Rowe was working at the store and the fact that LHO stopped at the store was eyewitness testimony. But it really was a proven fact, presumably discovered by researchers and not subject to obfuscation. Probability is key here.

Similarly, the fact that Sgt. Westbrook had handled all the key evidence was eyewitness testimony of a sort, but it was also likely something discovered and put together by investigative researchers and not dependent on the credibility of a particular witness. Ditto the fact he was transferred to Saigon.

And Judyth Vary Baker's account of her bus rides with LHO was eyewitness testimony. But there again, JVB was an investigator and researcher.

In my 11 points which were mentioned by Mr. Reech, I pretty much only used the following:

1. The situation and employment of Ruby's friend Tommy Rowe.
   
2. The situation of Captain Williarm R, Westbrook and Sgt. Kenneth Croy.
   
3. Mayor Earl Cabell being a CIA asset.
   
4. Judyth Vary Baker and Oswald's habits on the bus rides.
   
6. The map of the flight path of Oswald and the geography of Oak Cliff.
   

My point is only this: by the evening of 11-22-63, J. Edgar Hoover already had on his desk a listing of all the key evidence, i.e. the number of shots, the identity of key eyewitnesses in Dealey Plaza, the type of murder weapon, the whereabouts of the bullets and shells, the results of the "autopsy", etc. etc.

It seems to me that almost all of (1) singular eyewitness statements, (2) physical evidence and (3) forensic evidence has been so grossly tampered with, falsely discredited etc. that it can't really be used to prove anything more THAN THE FACT THAT IT HAS BEEN TAMPERED WITH.

Another way of saying this is that if there were any kind of "smoking gun" proof anywhere in the 26 volumes of the WC report or elsewhere in the media, then it would quickly be rendered useless by the likes of J. Edgar Hoover and his associates and successors. Just look at the infamous dictabelt cited by the HSCA to prove the four shots and the "conspiracy." There was a hireling who quickly discredited this dictabelt analysis.

Another example is the existence of the "two wallets of LHO". The police officer who "found the wallet of the scene" could have merely taken out his own wallet and have it photographed. Then he could put his wallet back into his pocket. At a trial, he could have used the picture of the wallet (his own) being "discovered" at the scene and matching the picture to Oswald's real wallet taken from Oswald after his apprehension.

Imagine how many criminal convictions could have been done by "having the defendant's wallet discovered at the scene" when it was only a picture of a policeman's wallet in a photo.

So this is why I believe that circumstantial evidence is 100 times more useful in solving the JFK case than anything else. And a lot of this is based on deciding on what is probable and what is improbable.

Finally, I believe that I definitely know who plotted the JFK murder and their reasons for doing it. That's why I put together my JFK organizational chart with about 70 persons on it and published it.

I think it's more efficient to identify the general plan and members of the plot and work downward to the details, rather than vice versa.

James Lateer

[Milo Reech]

Thanks, Mr Lateer, for the compliments, much appreciated.

So this is why I believe that circumstantial evidence is 100 times more useful in solving the JFK case than anything else. And a lot of this is based on deciding on what is probable and what is improbable.


Finally, I believe that I definitely know who plotted the JFK murder and their reasons for doing it. That's why I put together my JFK organizational chart with about 70 persons on it and published it.


I think it's more efficient to identify the general plan and members of the plot and work downward to the details, rather than vice versa.

When reviewing the evidentiary basis, either in descent from a lofty hypothesis or as a preliminary to raising one from the ground up, it hardly matters in one respect -- the devil is in the dirty details, wherein reside gangs of brutal facts poised to murder any number of beautiful theories. The urge to alter or suppress them to fit a hypothesis is the same both ways, up or down, which few can resist even if honest.

Likewise the relative importance of eyewitness versus circumstantial evidence does not matter in this key respect -- both must be given the closest scrutiny in a case replete with evidence manufacture & mutilation.

[Milo Reech]

Do you think they just shifted the timing of these calls? I mean, if POSTAL calls in at 1:43... it takes a hurried shooter 35 minutes to go 1/2 mile... ???

DJ, pondering this since you asked, still coming up empty. Now a similar question posted to the ed forum (http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/...ent-389080), resting my dogs for a while to see what develops, but early outlook isn't rosy. Tampering with Bowley's watch is bad enough but relying on the phony Davis women for anything other than picking up planted hulls is far worse, fatal to any timeline reconstruction.

[James Lateer]

On Ancestry.com, each member has his own version of his family tree. On FamilySearch.com which is run by the LDS Church, they assume there is only one true version of the ancestry of everybody and they strive to record and perfect that one true huge tree.

The search for the JFK plotters is somewhat analogous. We all know that there is only one true cast of characters in the murder of JFK. The problem is, no two people agree on precisely who is on the list.

Sadly, this leads to the unfortunate impression that there is a "democracy of theories" where everyone's list of JFK plotters deserves equal respect and should be recognized as equally credible.

In reality, there was only one organizational chart of the JFK assassination. There could not have been two unrelated groups, each of whom plotted the JFK hit independently and pulled the triggers independently at the same time at 12:30 pm on 11-22-63.

But the JFK experts both write about and use logic which implies that there are multiple theories and all of them can be true all at once. This is the operating principle used by Ancestry.com as a concession to reality, even though virtually everyone on Ancestry has at least a slighty erroneous tree. And if you combined all the trees on Ancestry by computer, you would never come up with just one tree.

Maybe the shooter in the JFK assassination had two heads. Or he was really Siamese twins with each brandishing his own gun.

That's kind of the drift of the "democracy of theories" put forth by the JFK research community. I don't think that the best writers "alter or suppress" evidence. Not in my opinion after reading of 200 books on the subject.

The Harvey and Lee approach is about the same as the "Secret Service Accident" theory. Sadly, the "just for fun" theories are put on the same stage as those which are much more credible.

Probably the best author, Dick Russell in The Man Who Knew Too Much just frankly laid out a smorgasboard of evidence, potential plotters and guilty entities. It will be someone in the future who nails the entire JFK assassination enterprise by standing on the shoulders of giants and using the smorgasboard of Russell and others.

But I'm not sure that those who purport to advocate multiple inconsistent theories as being equally valid are helping the cause. Some (including on this website) seem to be priortizing courtesy ahead of realism. Of course, multiple theories means multiple books, multiple speeches and multiple recognition.

But there were just a finite group who killed JFK. IMHO, this is a fact which can be discovered and at some point proven.

Maybe artificial intelligence can evolve to the level of solving crimes and in particular the JFK murder. Maybe some day we can ask Siri "who killed JFK?" and the true answer will be forthcoming. Or maybe not.

James Lateer

[Milo Reech]

That's kind of the drift of the "democracy of theories" put forth by the JFK research community. I don't think that the best writers "alter or suppress" evidence. Not in my opinion after reading of 200 books on the subject.

Sticking to the Tippit murder that is the theme of this thread, the basic alteration/suppression device is to allow the myriad of witnesses gathered around the murder scene to operate in isolation chambers, oblivious to the presence of each other.

Two examples. First is Benavides who saw everything Belin wanted him to see & missed everything else happening at the same time, specifically Holan & the second police car. Second is Russell, who actually broke through his isolation chamber to declare he did not recognize the man who grabbed Tippit's gun and commandeered the cab. Impossible if it were Callaway, the man who worked across the street whom he must have seen & followed on Patton Street.

Both anomalies are preposterous, but what author (good or bad) deals with the implications, or even acknowledges them? Benavides is stuffed under his dashboard for varying lengths of time as needed to excuse the things he missed, and Russell is ignored altogether.

[James Lateer]

I can see how peope get hooked on the Tippit case--kinda like the OJ Simpson case about which I watched Geraldo Riviera every night for six months back in the 1990's.

Not to sound too tiresome and picky---but....

For all the superb graphics, aerial photos of Dallas and the Oswald flight path, I'm still not entirely clear what the end goal is for analyzing the Tippit murder? Is it just prove that there were many witnesses who lied? Is it to prove that the Warren Commission evidence was mostly fake? If if is, then we already know that. As they say in the legal world, "we can stipulate to that fact."

I would think that the goal would be to find out how, why and by whom was Tippit killed. For that, you can't rely on proving who is lying---you need to prove who is telling the truth. Without that, I don't see how you can get the truth solely from proven false testimony.

Even though the maps and spreadsheet comparisons of the timelines of the police radio transmissions are really helpful (and kind of shocking), I myself feel that there are basic questions that should be targeted for answering:

1. What was the chain of command from (presumably) the Pentagon (where the command center for the assassination was likely in place) to the murder scene of Tippit?

2. If more than one or two Dallas policemen were involved before-the-fact in a plot that included the murder of Tippit, how could they include the murder of one of their own as part of the plot? On the surface, that doesn't sound realistic. It's similar to the question as to why would Conservative Democrats like LBJ or James O. Eastland want to risk one of their own (Gov. John B. Connally) to be sacrificed? Both of these things would be against the self-interest of the Dallas police and Dixie-crats respectively. After all, which Southern politician or Dallas policeman would be sacrificed next?

3. Is it possible to divide the Tippit murder witnesses into three categories: (1) witnesses who were by chance on the Tippit scene for legitimate reasons, (2) those who really had no business being on the scene and (3) those where were too far away from the Tippit scene to really see anything and who embellished.?

4. The Subcommittee on Juvenile Delinquency chaired by Senator Thomas Dodd was investigating Klein's Sporting Goods and Seaport Trading (Oswald's weapons vendors) as early as January, 1963. That being the case, you would have to believe that Dodd knew that there was a plan for Oswald to use a rifle to kill JFK and a pistol to kill Tippit. Why else would they be investigating Oswald's purchase of a rifle and a pistol? I know this sounds unbelievably crass on the part of Senator Dodd and his friends the plotters, it is pretty well proven that this was the fact.

5. This, to me, almost completely proves that the plot was hatched in detail by Dodd and friends on his many trips over to Europe (and specifically Germany) in 1963. If there was this level of detail known to anyone physically in the US, then the likelihood of leaks would be too great. Also, people would be observed meeting together for no apparent reason. This would inevitably come to light later.

6. Another reality is that this level of detail in the plot in early 1963 would have required the inclusion and compliticy of the owner of the TSBD D. Harold Byrd at a very early date in 1963. If the plotters had the weapons and the sniper's nest nailed down in mid 1963, then all they had extra to do was to lure JFK to Dallas and for him to ride in a motorcade there. And LBJ began planning JFK's Dallas trip while in El Paso in June, 1963.

7. The fact that Jack Ruby's friend Tommy Rowe was along Oswald's flight path kind of cements the planning of the entire flight path (including the murder of Tippit) into a fairly early time frame, probably September or October 1963.

8. All of the above suggests to me that somebody over in Europe had a full mock-up model of Dealey Plaza and had a small "think tank" of assassination veterans (maybe from the DeGaulle attempts or something similar). All of these details could not have been invented "on the fly". Not even close.

9. Because of all these details that had to be carefully put in place beginning in 1963, it seems like almost all the planning had to be done outside of the reach of US signals intelligence, i.e. over in Europe. We know that U S signals intelligence officer Eugene B. Dinkin actually got prior knowledge of the plot because he was serving in Metz, France, only 120 miles from Bonn, Germany.

10. The role of TSBD owner D. Harold Byrd looms larger and larger with each new revelation (such as the information in The Skorzeny Papers by Ralph Ganis). Byrd was both a cousin of Virginia Senator Harry F. Byrd as well as a hunting buddy of Nazi connected Baron Werner von Alvensleben whose father was invoved the the Valkyrie Hilter assassination plot in on July 20, 1944.

James Lateer

[Milo Reech]

7. The fact that Jack Ruby's friend Tommy Rowe was along Oswald's flight path kind of cements the planning of the entire flight path (including the murder of Tippit) into a fairly early time frame, probably September or October 1963.

It may cement the planning in advance of the Texas Theater as a rendezvous point, with Rowe as a control, but Tippit's murder was a slapdash affair, something cobbled together on the fly, and my high reach can grasp no more when it comes to the matter of top level planning.

Let's get back to the mise en scène. Holan told the truth about the presence of the second cop car in the alley between 404 & 410, which is why Tippit foolishly let his guard down. He thought his flank was covered.

But this is a difficult case, very hard to get the pieces to fit together. What do you make of Frank Cimino's statement to the FBI (12/4/63)?

FRANK CIMINO, 403 East Tenth Street, Apartment 7, Dallas, Texas, advised that on November 22, 1963, he was residing in an apartment at 405 East Tenth Street. He Stated that at around 1 p.m. he was at his apartment listening to the radio. He heard four loud noises which sounded like shots and then he heard a women scream. He jumped up, put on his shoes and ran outside the house, and a woman dressed like a waitress was out in front of his residence shouting, "Call the police". She also advised a man had just shot a police officer and stated he had run west on Tenth Street and pointed in the direction of an alley which runs between Tenth Street and Jefferson off Patton Street. He looked in this direction but did not see anyone. He then walked over to the officer and saw he had been shot in the head. The officer was lying on his side with his head in front of the left front headlight of his car. His gun was out of the holster and lying by his side. The officer moved slightly and groaned but never said anything that he could understand. About this time people came from all directions, and he walked up to the corner of Patton and East Tenth Street and looked through the alleyway but could not see anyone running up the alley. He then walked back to where the officer was being removed by an ambulance and then turned back to him apartment. He stated he was not acquainted with LEE OSWALD or JACK RUBY.

Here's the problem -- easy to understand why he did not see Benavides, but where was Holan?

[James Lateer]

[James Lateer]

Mr. Reech---In the picture in pasted on my prior reply, it looks like Oswald was walking or traveling north on Beckley Avenue which eventually led him to a block or two west of the Texas Theater. He had to turn right and east to the Texas Theater from his North Beckley path.

The murder scene of Tippit was 10th and Patton which was about three blocks to the West of Oswald's path which was heading LHO north on Beckley going toward the Texas Theater.

Why would Oswald go west three blocks to the murder scene of Tippit, and then go the same three blocks back to North Beckley and go north again a few blocks and finally turn east toward the Texas Theater?

If Oswald's path was straight North along Beckley toward the Texas Theater, it looks like the murder of Tippit was deliberately planned THREE BLOCKS WEST OF NORTH BECKLEY so it could happen NEAR TO OSWALD'S PATH, yet far enough west of his flight path so as to assure Oswald did not actually pass near to the Tippit murder.

(When I say "north", it might be just turned around since I assumed the top of the picture was north. It was more likely south, with the Tippit murder to the east of Beckley).

In other words, Tippit was murdered close enough to allege that Oswald did it, yet three blocks west of his flight path so Oswald didn't actually encounter Tippit or the "witnesses" (not!!).

The only rational explanation I can see is that Oswald was headed as planned to the Texas Theater along North Beckley. The Tippit murder was not on his path. So it was carried out NOT IN THE PRESENCE OF OSWALD.

If I'm wrong about this, please set me straight.

James Lateer