JFK Assassination Documents to be released this year

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

the radio alert sent to police cars at approximately 12:45 p.m... described the suspect as white, slender, weighing about 165 pounds, about 5'10" tall, and in his early thirties ... [at about 1.36 or 1.37 p.m.] the police radio reported that "an eyeball witness" described the suspect in the Tippit shooting as "a white male, 27, 5'11", 165 pounds, black wavy hair."

(Warren Commission Report, Chapter 4, page 144)


According to his enlistment record, Oswald was 5 ft 8 ins tall, and according to his arrest record in August 1963, he was just under 5 ft 9 ins.

He was 24, not in his early thirties.

He weighed about 135 lbs, not 165 lbs.

When I cited a description given by a witness to the Tippit shooting which included black wavy hair, you corrected me and insisted that it did not include the word wavy.

As you can see, the Warren Commission did include it.

Oswald did not fit that description either: he was not 5 ft 11 ins tall, did not weigh 165 lbs and did not have black wavy hair.

As far as I can see, Fiver has not explained how a description of Tippit's killer which is of someone at least two inches taller than Oswald, 34 lbs heavier than Oswald, and with wavy hair, which Oswald did not have, can be Oswald.

Oswald's height was recorded as 5 ft 8 ins in the Marines, but just under 5 ft 9 ins - with a scale showing his height in a mugshot - in August 1963.

His weight, according to his arrest record in November 1963, was 131 lbs.

I would like to know how you would present such eyewitness evidence to a jury - that a man who was two inches taller than Oswald, 34 lbs heavier, and had wavy hair was obviously Oswald.

Would you call Marrion Baker and suggest to the jury that any reasonable witness should be expected to make the same mistakes as Baker made and in addition make mistakes about his hair?

Markham said the killer's hair was slightly bushy, Clemons said it was bushy, Benavides said it was curly, and another witness, according to the Warren Commission, said it was wavy.

Is it not obvious that they were describing someone other than Oswald?

[Fiver]

I think that is not true.

It is true. Here's Bowers Warren Commission testimony - again..

Bowers said the shots came "either from up against the School Depository building or near the mouth of the triple underpass".

Bowers described the two men he saw and said they "gave no appearance of being together", "facing and looking up towards Main and Houston and following the caravan as it came down." Bowers also said that at least one of the two men was still there after the shooting.

No flash of light, No smoke cloud. No indications that either of the two men were armed.

But witnesses stories did tend to change once Mark Lane got ahold of them.

I would recommend anyone interested in this question to view the transcript of Bowers' testimony at

https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh6/pdf/WH6_Bowers.pdf

and his interview by Mark Lane at

https://alchetron.com/Lee-Bowers#lee-bowers-7559c049-9d61-44fc-b18a-44f09067986-resize-750.jpeg

The two accounts are remarkably similar - especially his description of the first of three cars he saw entering the area.

In both cases, he mentioned seeing something which he could not pinpoint.

In the testimony, he called it something out of the ordinary and in the interview some unusual occurrence.

The comparison is useful for showing how witness stories tended to change when Mark Lane got ahold of them.

[Fiver]

I don't know where your quote comes from, but Captain Fritz's notes have the following:

Says two negr. came in

one Jnr. & short negro - ask ? for lunch says cheese sandwiches & apple.

I was quoting FBI Agent James Bookhout - "OSWALD stated that on November 22, 1963, he had eaten lunch in the lunch room at the Texas School Book Depository, alone, but recalled possibly two Negro employees walking through the room during this period. He stated possibly one of these employees was called ‘Junior’ and the other was a short individual whose name he could not recall but whom he would be able to recognize."

"short" is hardly a detailed description.

Jarman testified that he ate his lunch while walking around on the first floor, not in the domino room.
Norman ate his luinch in the domino room. He didn't see Oswald.
Troy West said he ate lunch in the domino room. He didn't see Oswald.
Danny Acre said he ate lunch in the domino room. He didn't see Oswald.
Jack Dougherty said he ate lunch in the domino room. He didn't see Oswald.
And Oswald claimed he had been alone, somehow failing to see West, Acre, and Dougherty.

[Fiver]

[SIZE=14px]I am always interested in the comment that a conspiracy has to be near perfect to succeed. If that was the case nobody would bother conspiring in the first place. Controlling the repercussions of a conspiracy is as important to its success than the planning beforehand.

Conspiracies can succeed in spite of being ramshackle blundering by untrained amateurs - like the assassination that started World War I. OTOH, those conspirators were also swiftly and easily caught.

All the JFK conspiracy theories I have seen require the Conspiracy to be composed of people who make the Sarajevo assassins look like crack professionals and yet never get caught. Among their many alleged blunders.

* Using imposters that don't look like the person they are pretending to be.
* Planting the wrong rifle.
* Planting the wrong number of spent rifle shells.
* Picking a lone gunman instead of the Cubans as a patsy when they are planning to use multiple shooters.
* Using multiple assassins that are notably bad at their jobs - only half the shots hit the intended target and only 1/3 of the actual hits are fatal.
* Letting the patsy escape instead of being found dead of an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound.
* Letting the patsy be captured alive.
* Letting the patsy speak with the press.

Yet this same group of bumbling amateurs is able to fake fiber evidence, print evidence, ballistics evidence, autopsy evidence, xray evidence, photographic evidence, handwriting evidence, get dozens of people to lie in support of the Conspiracy, and never be detected.

[Fiver]

the radio alert sent to police cars at approximately 12:45 p.m... described the suspect as white, slender, weighing about 165 pounds, about 5'10" tall, and in his early thirties ... [at about 1.36 or 1.37 p.m.] the police radio reported that "an eyeball witness" described the suspect in the Tippit shooting as "a white male, 27, 5'11", 165 pounds, black wavy hair."

(Warren Commission Report, Chapter 4, page 144)


According to his enlistment record, Oswald was 5 ft 8 ins tall, and according to his arrest record in August 1963, he was just under 5 ft 9 ins.

He was 24, not in his early thirties.

He weighed about 135 lbs, not 165 lbs.

When I cited a description given by a witness to the Tippit shooting which included black wavy hair, you corrected me and insisted that it did not include the word wavy.

As you can see, the Warren Commission did include it.

Oswald did not fit that description either: he was not 5 ft 11 ins tall,, did not weigh 165 lbs and did not have black wavy hair.

Congratulations, you finally found an unnamed witness that described the suspect as having wavy hair.

So what? Most witnesses didn't

At his arrest, Oswald gave his weight as 140 lbs. His autopsy gave his weight as 150 pounds.

"The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket." Officer Baker, describing Oswald.

Note how Baker mistakes Oswald's shirt for a jacket. And estimates his age at 30. And his weight at 165 pounds. And says he has dark hair.

We have the description of JFK's killer given by the police dispatcher - "White male, approximately thirty, slender build, height five ten, weighs one sixty-five, is all the information."

We have the description given by Officer Walker of Tippet's killer - "He's a white male, about thirty, five eight, black hair, slender, wearing white jacket, a white shirt and dark slacks."

Both descriptions are second hand, but they are similar to each other and to Baker's description of Oswald.

All three estimate his age as about 30.
Two mention slender build. One does not mention build.
Height estimates vary from 5'8" to 5'10".
Two estimate weight as 165lb. One does not mention weight.
One says dark hair. One says black hair. One does not mention hair color.

That's a very close match for descriptions of a stranger seen for only a few moments.

[cobalt]

‘According to Williams' testimony, he may have still been eating lunch on the sixth floor as late as 12.15 p.m. on the day of the assassination.’

If you read his testimony in conjunction with that of Norman and Jarman it must have been later than that. We know that the latter two came in the back door at 12.23 and made their way to the 5^th floor, where they were heard by Williams. According to Williams that is why he stopped off at the 5^th floor to meet up with them. Remember he said things were too quiet on the 6^th floor - and this must have been close to 12.25.

In his testimony, Norman said he could not remember if Williams was already there when he and Jarman arrived, but Williams seems to be clear that he was not.

There was clearly some vague arrangement between the three men to watch the parade together and Williams seems to have assumed this would be on the 6^th floor, the place where he had been working and where he spoken to Norman before noon. Norman was asked an interesting question by the WC as to why he went to the 5^th floor and not say the 4^th or 6^th. He was not very clear about this but suggested that most of his work was done on the 5^th floor and that he was familiar with it.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

[/B]

Nobody has claimed that Tippet expected to find JFK's killer. But when he saw a man walking down the street that matched the description of JFK's killer, it was Tippet's job to stop and question the man. And when Tippet tried to do that, he was murdered.



He wasn't.

At 12;45 the dispatcher, a personal friend and former partner of Tippet's ordered "87, 78, move into central Oak Cliff area." 78 was Tippet's call sign. 87 was the call sign of RC Nelson, who ignored orders and went to Houston and Elm.

the radio alert sent to police cars at approximately 12:45 p.m... described the suspect as white, slender, weighing about 165 pounds, about 5'10" tall, and in his early thirties ... [at about 1.36 or 1.37 p.m.] the police radio reported that "an eyeball witness" described the suspect in the Tippit shooting as "a white male, 27, 5'11", 165 pounds, black wavy hair."

(Warren Commission Report, Chapter 4, page 144)


According to his enlistment record, Oswald was 5 ft 8 ins tall, and according to his arrest record in August 1963, he was just under 5 ft 9 ins.

He was 24, not in his early thirties.

He weighed about 135 lbs, not 165 lbs.

When I cited a description given by a witness to the Tippit shooting which included black wavy hair, you corrected me and insisted that it did not include the word wavy.

As you can see, the Warren Commission did include it.

Oswald did not fit that description either: he was not 5 ft 11 ins tall,, did not weigh 165 lbs and did not have black wavy hair.

[Fiver]

Why would Tippit expect to find JFK's assassin in Oak Cliff?

Nobody has claimed that Tippet expected to find JFK's killer. But when he saw a man walking down the street that matched the description of JFK's killer, it was Tippet's job to stop and question the man. And when Tippet tried to do that, he was murdered.

Why would he alone have been asked to stay in Oak Cliff?

He wasn't.

At 12;45 the dispatcher, a personal friend and former partner of Tippet's ordered "87, 78, move into central Oak Cliff area." 78 was Tippet's call sign. 87 was the call sign of RC Nelson, who ignored orders and went to Houston and Elm.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Please see my replies below.

Marina Oswald identified the jacket as belonging to her husband.

Marina Oswald was helpful to the authorities but is convinced that Oswald was innocent.



color picture of it was posted earlier in the thread. It's certainly light enough for someone to perceive it as white.


It certainly is not!

You can see here a woman wearing a white garment while holding the jacket in question and it appears to be grey, not white:

JFK Assassination Warren Commission Exhibit - CE 162 gray zipper jacket worn by Oswald

(on YouTube)



Oswald's hair did look black or blond, depending on the witness.

Officer Baker, who saw Oswald on the 2nd floor of the Depository, described Oswald's hair as dark.

Buell Frazier, who took Oswald to work that day, described Oswald's hair as blond.


Can you name any witnesses to the Tippit shooting who described the murderer's hair as blond?



And you're still dodging the question.

"The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket." Officer Baker, describing Oswald.

Note how Baker mistakes Oswald's shirt for a jacket. And estimates his age at 30. And his weight at 165 pounds. And says he has dark hair.

We have the description of JFK's killer given by the police dispatcher - "White male, approximately thirty, slender build, height five ten, weighs one sixty-five, is all the information."

We have the description given by Officer Walker of Tippet's killer - "He's a white male, about thirty, five eight, black hair, slender, wearing white jacket, a white shirt and dark slacks."

Both descriptions are second hand, but they are similar to each other and to Baker's description of Oswald.

All three estimate his age as about 30.
Two mention slender build. One does not mention build.
Height estimates vary from 5'8" to 5'10".
Two estimate weight as 165lb. One does not mention weight.
One says dark hair. One says black hair. One does not mention hair color.

That's a very close match for descriptions of a stranger seen for only a few moments.


What would you be saying if their descriptions were of a man in his mid-twenties, weighing about 135 lbs, with light brown hair?

Would you not be saying that the killer must have been Oswald?



Tippet saw a man who matched the dispatcher's description of JFK's killer. Tippet stopped the man. Tippet got out of his car and attempted to draw his weapon on the man.

Which means Tippet clearly saw the man as dangerous. Why would Tippet think the man was dangerous unless Tippet suspected the man had killed might be JFK's killer.


Why would Tippit expect to find JFK's assassin in Oak Cliff?

Why would he alone have been asked to stay in Oak Cliff?



After the JFK killing, all squads in the downtown area were directed to Houston and Elm. Tippet was directed to remain in Oak Cliff.

After the Tippet killing, several patrol cars were directed to the area.


Aren't you dodging the question now?



More correctly, in 1997 Bill Drenas claimed that Bill Putle claimed that Greg Lowrey claimed that James A Andrews had claimed that his car was stopped by Tippet shortly after 1 PM.

So it might have happened, but we don't know that Tippet stopped Andrews at 1:03. Even if he did, we don't know how accurate Andrews memory was, let alone how accurately his statements passed form Andrews to Lowrey to Pulte to Drenas.


If you look at all the evidence of Tippit's movements and actions that day, the account given by Andrews is plausible.

Tippit was obviously looking for something or someone.

[Fiver]

The frangible bullets, particularly the mercury projectiles do in fact explode creating a large exit wound. David Mantik stated that there was amorphous debris shown in the X-rays that looked more like liquid than metal. These projectiles do not exit in large pieces like a FMJ. They fragment into many tiny pieces.

Mercury bullets appear in works of fiction. The bullets and the weapon would have to be kept at almost -40 degrees to keep the bullet from melting. and mercury is not explosive.

Mercury could be put in the tip of a bullet but that won't make the bullet casing magically disappear.

Mercury fulminate is explosive, but if you put that in a bullet, odd are it will blow up inside the gun, since it's highly sensitive to shock.

Exploding bullets do exist. They are notoriously unreliable. When Hinckley tried to assassinate Reagan he fired 6 explosive bullets, only one of which exploded.

And Mythbusters showed that frangible bullets that leave no trace are mythical.

[Fiver]

A grey jacket which is unproven to have been worn by Oswald - who had been seen putting on a dark jacket a few minutes earlier - could look white to a witness.

Marina Oswald identified the jacket as belonging to her husband. A color picture of it was posted earlier in the thread. It's certainly light enough for someone to perceive it as white.

Oswald's hair can look black or blond, depending on the witness.

Oswald's hair did look black or blond, depending on the witness.

Officer Baker, who saw Oswald on the 2nd floor of the Depository, described Oswald's hair as dark.

Buell Frazier, who took Oswald to work that day, described Oswald's hair as blond.

And you're still dodging the question.

"The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket." Officer Baker, describing Oswald.

Note how Baker mistakes Oswald's shirt for a jacket. And estimates his age at 30. And his weight at 165 pounds. And says he has dark hair.

We have the description of JFK's killer given by the police dispatcher - "White male, approximately thirty, slender build, height five ten, weighs one sixty-five, is all the information."

We have the description given by Officer Walker of Tippet's killer - "He's a white male, about thirty, five eight, black hair, slender, wearing white jacket, a white shirt and dark slacks."

Both descriptions are second hand, but they are similar to each other and to Baker's description of Oswald.

All three estimate his age as about 30.
Two mention slender build. One does not mention build.
Height estimates vary from 5'8" to 5'10".
Two estimate weight as 165lb. One does not mention weight.
One says dark hair. One says black hair. One does not mention hair color.

That's a very close match for descriptions of a stranger seen for only a few moments.

'Tippet thought the man was potential danger, which only makes sense if he thought the man might be JFK's murderer.'

JFK's murderer was not the only dangerous man in Dallas and there was no reason to suspect him of wandering the streets in Oak Cliff.

Tippet saw a man who matched the dispatcher's description of JFK's killer. Tippet stopped the man. Tippet got out of his car and attempted to draw his weapon on the man.

Which means Tippet clearly saw the man as dangerous. Why would Tippet think the man was dangerous unless Tippet suspected the man had killed might be JFK's killer.

No other policeman had been directed to that area.

After the JFK killing, all squads in the downtown area were directed to Houston and Elm. Tippet was directed to remain in Oak Cliff.

After the Tippet killing, several patrol cars were directed to the area.

James A. Andrews claimed his car was stopped by Tippit shortly after 1 p.m. and that Tippit looked in the back of his car.

More correctly, in 1997 Bill Drenas claimed that Bill Putle claimed that Greg Lowrey claimed that James A Andrews had claimed that his car was stopped by Tippet shortly after 1 PM.

So it might have happened, but we don't know that Tippet stopped Andrews at 1:03. Even if he did, we don't know how accurate Andrews memory was, let alone how accurately his statements passed form Andrews to Lowrey to Pulte to Drenas.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

In answer to Fiver's # 2377:

I think you are being so flexible in your treatment of eyewitness evidence that almost whomever a witness describes can be Oswald.

A grey jacket which is unproven to have been worn by Oswald - who had been seen putting on a dark jacket a few minutes earlier - could look white to a witness.

Oswald's hair can look black or blond, depending on the witness.

'Tippet thought the man was potential danger, which only makes sense if he thought the man might be JFK's murderer.'

JFK's murderer was not the only dangerous man in Dallas and there was no reason to suspect him of wandering the streets in Oak Cliff.

No other policeman had been directed to that area.

James A. Andrews claimed his car was stopped by Tippit shortly after 1 p.m. and that Tippit looked in the back of his car.

[Fiver]

The JFK Texas trip was announced in June 1963 and the Dallas stop off by 25th September, just before Oswald allegedly took his trip to Mexico City in search of a visa that was never likely to be issued.

Oswald got his Mexican tourist card on September 17.

JFK had been considering a Texas trip since June, but the first public announcement came on September 26 in an exclusive to the Dallas morning news.

[Fiver]

Hardly!

Oswald did not even own a white jacket - and his shirt could not have been mistaken for a jacket as both a shirt and jacket were mentioned.

Moreover, Oswald did not have black hair.

"The man I saw was a white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a light brown jacket." Officer Baker, describing Oswald.

Note how Baker mistakes Oswald's shirt for a jacket. And estimates his age at 30. And his weight at 165 pounds. And says he has dark hair.

And we've seen the color picture of Oswald's jacket. The one found in the parking lot. The one identified by Marina Oswald as belonging to her husband.

It certainly is light enough in color for someone to perceive it as being white.

We have the description of JFK's killer given by the police dispatcher - "White male, approximately thirty, slender build, height five ten, weighs one sixty-five, is all the information."

We have the description given by Officer Walker of Tippet's killer - "He's a white male, about thirty, five eight, black hair, slender, wearing white jacket, a white shirt and dark slacks."

Both descriptions are second hand, but they are similar to each other and to Baker's description of Oswald.

All three estimate his age as about 30.
Two mention slender build. One does not mention build.
Height estimates vary from 5'8" to 5'10".
Two estimate weight as 165lb. One does not mention weight.
One says dark hair. One says black hair. One does not mention hair color.

That's a very close match for descriptions of a stranger seen for only a few moments.

This is the same Oswald who you have claimed had hair that was so light in colour that it could have been described by witnesses in Mexico as blond.

No, I have stated that the hair color - as remembered by the witness - was blond. I have noted that this is a discrepancy from Oswald's actual appearance. I have also noted that witnesses identified the man they saw as Oswald based on a seeing his photo.

These contradictions lead to two possibilities.

1) It was Oswald, but eyewitnesses misperceived or misremembered some things about him.

2) A Conspiracy that was expert at forging documents was also mindbogglingly stupid enough to send an imposter that didn't look anything like Oswald. The Conspiracy were magically able to manipulate events so that Oswald had no alibi all while keeping the manipulation completely undetected from Oswald and his wife. The Conspiracy were even magically able to get Oswald to tell his wife that he had been in Mexico. The Conspiracy were mindbogglingly stupid enough spend the time and resources creating a fictional narrative that would undermine their lone gunman ploy. And the Conspiracy had the psychic powers to predict a parade route for a city that might not even be on JFK's Texas tour and that Oswald would get and keep a job that would allow him to be setup as a patsy.

Well, that really is an assumption - is it not?

It's a reasonable assumption based on the facts.

Tippet got out of his car, approached the man with his hand on the butt of his gun, and had drawn the gun before he was killed. That shows that Tippet thought the man was potential danger, which only makes sense if he thought the man might be JFK's murderer.

Even in 1963, police officers didn't draw their guns on white men unless they thought the man might be a threat.

We know that Tippit stopped a car about a quarter of an hour before he was shot and looked at the space between the back seat and front seat of it.

Does that make sense only if he was looking for the assassin of President Kennedy?

Where is the evidence of Tippet stopping a car about 15 minutes before he was murdered?

[cobalt]

A conspiracy by definition cannot be perfect since it is a perversion of reality. Nor does it need to be anything remotely like perfect in order to be presented to the public as fact. The recent conspiracy that blew up the Nord Stream 2 pipeline is an example of this, complete with 'magic bullet' elements of unidentified scuba divers hiring a boat laden with explosives so heavy the boat would have sunk. No doubt NATO scientists will soon appear to tell us that this apparent impossibility is in fact what actually happened and that Russians along with German 'marxists' blew up their own pipeline. Anyone disputing this will be called a conspiracy theorist.

Any evidence derived from 'line ups' in this case is contaminated, as Brennan himself conceded. Marina Oswald's evidence is unreliable as the WC acknowledged and would, I think, have been inadmissible in court. It's worthless in terms of hard evidence.

The JFK Texas trip was announced in June 1963 and the Dallas stop off by 25th September, just before Oswald allegedly took his trip to Mexico City in search of a visa that was never likely to be issued. Oswald was the patsy of choice although that does not discount others being 'sheep-dipped' as back up. The TSBD was not essential to any conspiracy: the killing could have happened at the Trade Mart or indeed anywhere on the motorcade route where Oswald and his rifle could be linked to the shooting. Given Oswald's transient work record this could have been done as easily as finding him the job at the TSBD.
Oswald had never missed a day's work at the TSBD and manual workers never missed a Friday in the days when they were handed a weekly pay packet at the end of the day. As it turned out Oswald did have an alibi but had he been photographed waving to the presidential car he would still have been 'patsied' as part of the conspiracy in respect of bringing into work one of the weapons. I say 'one of the weapons' because the conspiracy had no inkling that the Lone Gunman theory would emerge after the fact. The Mexico City farrago was about establishing a pro-Cuban conspiracy, not a LG theory.