JFK Assassination Documents to be released this year

[cobalt]

Yes, I read the article some years ago and seem to have remembered most of it. What struck me on re-reading the piece was Tippit misreporting his position when at the Gloco station by around 5 miles. As a former taxi driver I am familiar with misleading the base operator over the radio but not by that distance: you could be caught out big time.

I'd forgotten that Tippit was an occasional user of the Top Ten Record shop telephone, presumably for personal calls. But given the events of 22nd November I doubt that Tippit would have been attending to personal issues in his life at that particular time. He must have been seeking information of some sort.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Not just by phone. His 10 minute (?) stop at the GLOCO station suggests he was looking for a particular vehicle crossing the viaduct. Tippit's decision to stop a man walking along an innocuous street miles from the assassination is probably connected to this search.
Whether any of Tippit's activities before his death are connected to the JFK assassination takes us down a different route. The idea of him being a planned sacrificial lamb for the conspiracy is miles too far for me. But I can accept that he was being used in some way (whether knowingly or not) to help the conspiracy: not to hinder it. Something went wrong.

I do not know whether you have read the article from which I quote below:


In most homicide investigations it is a routine procedure to establish the activities of the victim in the last several hours of his life. Common sense tells us that this should be extremely helpful in establishing unknown information, locations of incidents, and in some cases possible motives for the murder. In the case of Officer J.D. Tippit, to my knowledge these routine procedures were never properly done. Therefore, the information presented in this article has never been assembled in one place for scholars of the Kennedy Assassination. Given the magnitude surrounding the Tippit murder, I believe that this timeline should have been done in November of 1963 while memories of events were fresh in the witnesses' minds, all the witnesses were still alive, and could have been easily located.


Professor Bill Pulte has a possible explanation for Tippit’s erratic movements in the final minutes of his life. Bill explained to me that Tippit’s movements are consistent with the actions of a man frantically looking for someone. Let us look at Tippit’s movements:

Sitting at the Gloco station watching the cars come over the Houston Street Viaduct.
Leaves the Gloco station and “tears” down Lancaster Road at a fast rate of speed.
Could have possibly been involved in a “fight” at 12th and Marsalis.
Makes a hurried phone call at the Top Ten Record Shop, and does not get an answer.
Stops James A. Andrews car by cutting in front of him, does not say a word but looks between the front and back seats, and then leaves the scene without saying a word.

The 12:45 P.M. Dallas Police Radio broadcast alerted all police units to the description of the suspect in the assassination and the ‘manhunt’ began. It is not known if Tippit was performing police business or personal business during this time frame in question, but it seems that Tippit was searching for a certain individual at certain locations for reasons that are still unknown. The best current information is that in the moments before his death, Tippit knew nothing more about the assassin than his description, which could have fit the description of hundreds of men on the streets of Oak Cliff that day.

https://www.jfk-assassination.net/car10.htm

[cobalt]

Not just by phone. His 10 minute (?) stop at the GLOCO station suggests he was looking for a particular vehicle crossing the viaduct. Tippit's decision to stop a man walking along an innocuous street miles from the assassination is probably connected to this search.
Whether any of Tippit's activities before his death are connected to the JFK assassination takes us down a different route. The idea of him being a planned sacrificial lamb for the conspiracy is miles too far for me. But I can accept that he was being used in some way (whether knowingly or not) to help the conspiracy: not to hinder it. Something went wrong.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

It does seem that Tippit was looking for somebody. The GLOCO sightings are very reliable since they were made by people who knew him, at a time when Tippit was misreporting his location. I would tend to accept the Top Ten Record sightings as well, which are relevant in so far as Tippit did not wish to use his police radio since he wanted to use their phone. The Andrews' (?) claim of being stopped by Tippit is a latecomer to the scene and should be treated with more scepticism. What does seem clear from various witnesses is that Tippit was alternating between very fast driving and steady cruising which is odd given his instructions were merely to keep an eye on Oak Cliff.

Again from witness testimony, there is no indication that Tippit saw any threat from his first encounter with the pedestrian. This clearly changed at some point. For me it resembles the Skripal poisoning in the UK: a rendez-vous or a pre-arranged handover of materials that goes wrong and has to be covered up, except we don't know which side the victim was actually on.

Can we take it then that you suspect that the killer was the person whom Tippit had desperately been trying to contact by phone?

[cobalt]

It does seem that Tippit was looking for somebody. The GLOCO sightings are very reliable since they were made by people who knew him, at a time when Tippit was misreporting his location. I would tend to accept the Top Ten Record sightings as well, which are relevant in so far as Tippit did not wish to use his police radio since he wanted to use their phone. The Andrews' (?) claim of being stopped by Tippit is a latecomer to the scene and should be treated with more scepticism. What does seem clear from various witnesses is that Tippit was alternating between very fast driving and steady cruising which is odd given his instructions were merely to keep an eye on Oak Cliff.

Again from witness testimony, there is no indication that Tippit saw any threat from his first encounter with the pedestrian. This clearly changed at some point. For me it resembles the Skripal poisoning in the UK: a rendez-vous or a pre-arranged handover of materials that goes wrong and has to be covered up, except we don't know which side the victim was actually on.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

'If Oswald was a lone assassin, his logical next move was to get out of Dallas, out of Texas, and out of America, in that order.'

The Tippit shooting looks like a rendez-vous which has gone wrong to me.

If Tippit and his killer had arranged to meet and for reasons unknown to us were mutually mistrustful, and that led to the shooting, and the idea of framing Oswald for it was an afterthought, could that explain why it took some thirty minutes for the police to locate Oswald, again supposedly mysteriously wandering the streets?

[cobalt]

'If Oswald was a lone assassin, his logical next move was to get out of Dallas, out of Texas, and out of America, in that order.'

I don't think that could be denied by anyone, no matter which side of the debate they sit on. Yet Oswald did not do this.

If Oswald didn't need a revolver to help carry out an assassination, it's baffling as to why he needed one to visit the local cinema.

'I suggest that Tippit was set up to be murdered and that is why he was not directed to Dealey Plaza.'

That's taking what evidence we have a very long way. The gunman could have shot Tippit through the side window (open or not seems disputed) and would surely have stopped Tippit by a hand signal rather than wait to approached himself. The Tippit shooting looks like a rendez-vous which has gone wrong to me.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

The taxi journey to the rooming house to pick up a revolver is evidence that Oswald had no plan of escape worth the name. To me this points to him being innocent of the assassination and acting on impulse when realising he had been set up.

I've heard it claimed that Oswald was expecting to be killed inside the TSBD after assassinating JFK but that is completely at odds with him later turning up inside a cinema carrying a concealed revolver. If he was prepared to die why not go down in a shoot out inside the cinema with Cry of Battle on the screen?

Oswald could be fairly confident that he was not going to be arrested in the TSBD because when police entered the building, he was not in possession of a rifle.

I am suggesting that he had foreknowledge of the assassination and that he was suspicious of the purpose of his being required to make contact with an unnamed person in the cinema.

If Oswald was a lone assassin, his logical next move was to get out of Dallas, out of Texas, and out of America, in that order.

In answer to those who say he was not logical because he was obviously a psycho, anyone who could plan the assassination of the President at three days' notice and calmly walk out of the building from which he fired the shots without arousing any suspicion, would have to be a cool customer and perfectly logical.

Why would such a person get his revolver and then rush to Oak Cliff as if on an assignment to murder a policeman there?

I suggest that Tippit was set up to be murdered and that is why he was not directed to Dealey Plaza.

Oswald was the fall guy again and this time, he 'confirms' that he is the kind of person who would have murdered the President.

Six witnesses confirmed that he could not both have been wearing the grey jacket found and have shot Tippit: four witnesses to the shooting who were definite that the jacket was darker, Mrs Roberts, who saw him leaving his rooming house with a dark jacket, and Frazier, who said he had never seen him wearing a jacket like that found.

Two witnesses said that Tippit's murderer was wearing a sport jacket.

Oswald did not own a sport jacket.

Five witnesses described a murderer with hair that obviously did not belong to Oswald: slightly bushy, bushy, wavy, curly, and black.

Based on Roberts' and Benavides' evidence, Oswald had perhaps seven minutes to get from the bus stop to Oak Cliff, find Tippit, and shoot him.

But why?

The whole prosecution case against him is of a murderer fleeing the scene of an assassination and, in desperation, shooting a policeman who is about to arrest him.

But why would Oswald go to Oak Cliff?

[cobalt]

The taxi journey to the rooming house to pick up a revolver is evidence that Oswald had no plan of escape worth the name. To me this points to him being innocent of the assassination and acting on impulse when realising he had been set up.

I've heard it claimed that Oswald was expecting to be killed inside the TSBD after assassinating JFK but that is completely at odds with him later turning up inside a cinema carrying a concealed revolver. If he was prepared to die why not go down in a shoot out inside the cinema with Cry of Battle on the screen?

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Why did Oswald go back to the rooming house? Presumably to obtain a jacket since it would become cooler later in the day but also, we are led to assume, to pick up a revolver. Had Oswald been planning an assassination that day it might have been a good idea to have taken the revolver to the TSBD in the event of his being confronted whilst making his 'escape.' If he intended going down James Cagney style in a hail of police bullets, then Elm Street or the roof of the TSBD would have been a good location, better than a small local cinema. At the very least taking a revolver to the TSBD would have saved Oswald a taxi fare and given him more time to go where on earth he was headed.

If Oswald felt he needed a revolver for security I cannot see how that ties in with a suicidal shoot out with the police. I have never placed much trust in the melodramatic arrest account in the cinema as relayed by the DPD. More likely to me is Oswald meeting a contact at a pre-arranged place but fearing he might be double crossed at the meeting.

I didn't get your point about the taxi, but your earlier point about the revolver is important.

One might ask why if Oswald took a rifle into the TSBD, intending to leave it there, he did not take a revolver with.

I agree with you that he took the revolver to the cinema because he smelled a rat, and that makes sense if he had reason to think that he would be blamed for the assassination even if he had some assurance that he would be able to get away with his alleged crime.

Why would he go back to his room to get his revolver for a trip to Oak Cliff, to walk around there?

[cobalt]

Why did Oswald go back to the rooming house? Presumably to obtain a jacket since it would become cooler later in the day but also, we are led to assume, to pick up a revolver. Had Oswald been planning an assassination that day it might have been a good idea to have taken the revolver to the TSBD in the event of his being confronted whilst making his 'escape.' If he intended going down James Cagney style in a hail of police bullets, then Elm Street or the roof of the TSBD would have been a good location, better than a small local cinema. At the very least taking a revolver to the TSBD would have saved Oswald a taxi fare and given him more time to go where on earth he was headed.

If Oswald felt he needed a revolver for security I cannot see how that ties in with a suicidal shoot out with the police. I have never placed much trust in the melodramatic arrest account in the cinema as relayed by the DPD. More likely to me is Oswald meeting a contact at a pre-arranged place but fearing he might be double crossed at the meeting.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

According to Earlene Roberts' affidavit, Oswald was standing at a bus stop near her home at somewhere in the region of 1.05 p.m.

According to Domingo Benavides' testimony, the shooting of Tippit could not have taken place later than about 1.12 p.m.

How could Oswald have got to the scene of Tippit's shooting in less than seven minutes and why would he have done so?

The bus stop at which Oswald was standing was for buses headed north. The Tippit site was to the south. ...Testimony stated that Tippit's murderer approached from the east, but Oswald would have been approaching from the west. So did he walk past the site of the murder, and seeing Tippit driving down the street, and being on the run, turn around and go back to confront him?

(GBinOz)


It would hardly have been possible for Oswald to have shot Tippit unless he had hailed a cab to take him to the site of the Tippit shooting.

Why would he have done that?

[FISHY1118]

The bus stop at which Oswald was standing was for buses headed north. The Tippit site was to the south. So whether he was waiting for a bus or for someone to pick him up, the theory is that he tired of that and started walking. Testimony stated that Tippit's murderer approached from the east, but Oswald would have been approaching from the west. So did he walk past the site of the murder, and seeing Tippit driving down the street, and being on the run, turn around and go back to confront him?

Four shots were fired into Tippit. Bullets recovered were 3 Winchester and 1 Remington. The original radio call-in identified the casings as 38 Auto, later to become just 38, 2 Winchester and 2 Remington. Also found was a wallet containing credit cards and a driver's licence in Oswald's name, and an ID for A Hidell. So according to the WC, Oswald had shot Tippit with 4 shots from a revolver, opened the cylinder and picked out the expended casings and thrown them on the ground, and then took out his wallet and threw that on the ground as well. Very accommodating of him to be sure.

He then allegedly took himself off to the Texas Theatre where he was arrested, after all the audience had been removed from the theatre, and allegedly drew a fully loaded revolver. Also found upon him was was a another wallet containing credit cards and a driver's licence in Oswald's name, and an ID for A Hidell. Doesn't everyone carry two wallets with forged driver's licences and ID for aliases? After all, you never know if you may need to throw down one of them after you have just shot someone.

The usual reply will be that none of this happened, but there is contemporaneous news footage to show that it did. Didn't seem to bother the WC theorists in the slightest.

Cheers, George

More solid evidence of contradictions of the W.C ,thanks again George .

And yes apologist will certainly claim all that never happened. .

[FISHY1118]

This question has long been asked and has no answer after 60 years. The WC could not answer it so tried to move back the time of the Tippit shooting. The Benavides testimony, the Earlene Roberts testimony, the Helen Markham testimony and even those who picked up the dead body of Tippit all undermine the WC timing.

The three problems remain.
1. If Oswald was at the bus stop at 1.03 (a fair estimate accepted by almost all parties) then he could not have been able to WALK to the scene of the Tippit shooting in time. Jog or trot maybe. But nobody saw him. And where was he walking to? He could of course been driven there but no evidence exists that he did or for what purpose. Surely a car would have dropped him off at the cinema.

2. Why did Tippit stop to speak to a man on the sidewalk? He must have passed several others who resembled the vague ID supplied by Brennan- in fact Benavides came close to the ID himself. We will never know the reason since the two men involved (allegedly) died within two days of each other so all we have is supposition. I fear it shall remain a mystery and may not even be connected to the JFK assassination. We do know that Oswald and Tippit had been in the same cafe two days prior when Oswald had mouthed off about his 'eggs over light' so maybe Tippit remembered him and just wanted to make a point. But the man was probably not Oswald.

3. Why was Tippit shot? He seemed to making run of the mill enquiries according to his actions and witness testimony, yet something changed in the mood of this and he exited the car with, we are told, his hand on his revolver. [I have no idea how reliable this claim is, but he did clearly leave the vehicle.] I can see a reason for Oswald shooting Tippit, fearing he was to be executed himself. But since I think Oswald was in the cinema at this point, I still struggle to see why any other Dallas man walking down the street would have had a reason to shoot Tippit either, although Tippit's actions after the assassination are open to a wide interpretation.

Tippet was supposed to take Oswald out , when he faulted or could do the job ( i.e he hesitated ) . Roscoe white shot him to death .

[GBinOz]

If Oswald was at the bus stop at 1.03 (a fair estimate accepted by almost all parties) then he could not have been able to WALK to the scene of the Tippit shooting in time. Jog or trot maybe. But nobody saw him. And where was he walking to? He could of course been driven there but no evidence exists that he did or for what purpose. Surely a car would have dropped him off at the cinema.

The bus stop at which Oswald was standing was for buses headed north. The Tippit site was to the south. So whether he was waiting for a bus or for someone to pick him up, the theory is that he tired of that and started walking. Testimony stated that Tippit's murderer approached from the east, but Oswald would have been approaching from the west. So did he walk past the site of the murder, and seeing Tippit driving down the street, and being on the run, turn around and go back to confront him?

Four shots were fired into Tippit. Bullets recovered were 3 Winchester and 1 Remington. The original radio call-in identified the casings as 38 Auto, later to become just 38, 2 Winchester and 2 Remington. Also found was a wallet containing credit cards and a driver's licence in Oswald's name, and an ID for A Hidell. So according to the WC, Oswald had shot Tippit with 4 shots from a revolver, opened the cylinder and picked out the expended casings and thrown them on the ground, and then took out his wallet and threw that on the ground as well. Very accommodating of him to be sure.

He then allegedly took himself off to the Texas Theatre where he was arrested, after all the audience had been removed from the theatre, and allegedly drew a fully loaded revolver. Also found upon him was was a another wallet containing credit cards and a driver's licence in Oswald's name, and an ID for A Hidell. Doesn't everyone carry two wallets with forged driver's licences and ID for aliases? After all, you never know if you may need to throw down one of them after you have just shot someone.

The usual reply will be that none of this happened, but there is contemporaneous news footage to show that it did. Didn't seem to bother the WC theorists in the slightest.

Cheers, George