Texas Theatre Theatrics

First topic message reminder :

Ed Ledoux wrote:




When police were called to the Texas Theater the description was of a man sneaking into the theater with a shotgun.
This was broadcast by the Dallas Police Department dispatcher. 
Why else would police descend upon the TT in such force? Dozens of armed cops for a kid sneaking into the balcony? 
So,,,Whom gave Julia Postal this description? Since she claims not to have actually seen the individual whom Brewer asked her about.
Brewer claims he is responsible for that description since he followed the person from down the street. Wouldn't Julia tell police this?
Surely she did not tell them she saw the person, so she had to rely on Brewer for this. Yet where did a shotgun get introduced if not by Postal. 

greg_parker wrote:I believe he took at least 2 buses to get directly there. That was what Inspector Kelley stated in his interrogation report before later stating that Oswald changed his tune after finding out they had different informatioon from  a cab driver.  That change in story though was just more police "verbaling". 

Here is some testimony from Truly that may hold a clue.

Mr. McCLOY. Did he have the use of a telephone when he was in the building?
Mr. TRULY. Yes, sir. We have a telephone on the first floor that he was free to use during his lunch hour for a minute. He was supposed to ask permission to use the phone. But he could have used the phone.
Mr. DULLES. Pay telephone or office telephone?
Mr. TRULY. No, sir; it is a regular office telephone. It is a pushbutton type.
Mr. McCLOY. Did he strike you as being a frequent user of that telephone?
Mr. TRULY. I never remember ever seeing him on the telephone.
Mr. DULLES. Would you have any record or be able to find out now whether he had ever used it?
Mr. TRULY. No, sir.

So there was a phone he could use for free and that he could potentially use any time. 

Shelley saw him near that phone at about 11:50.

Mr. BALL. On November 22, 1963, the day the President was shot, when is the last time you saw Oswald?
Mr. SHELLEY. It was 10 or 15 minutes before 12.
Mr. BALL. Where?
Mr. SHELLEY. On the first floor over near the telephone.

I have a lot of trouble writing off the Rambler story, and Oswald's alleged statement to Roger Craig. The Rambler incident has rock solid independent corroboration, specifically from Marion Meharg. 

The FBI went to extreme lengths to portray Meharg as a nut, using his custody battle with his ex-wife to annihilate his credibility. They threatened prosecution for making false statements, and may have even manufactured a false accusation of his ex-wife's husband to the assassination itself just to discredit him:

https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t585-the-case-of-the-nuisance-phone-calls-redux

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=96312#relPageId=1

Could Oswald have been making a phone call at the TSBD because he needed a ride? Also, if the tip at the TT really didn't come from Postal and was truly an "anonymous tip", who better to know Oswald was at the theater than whoever dropped him off? 

IF Craig is credible, Oswald clearly didn't want anyone knowing he got picked up at the TSBD. I don't know how witnesses seeing him hop in a station wagon would "blow his cover" or whatever, but it might explain why he'd go along with the story of taking the bus.

Craig obviously thought he saw what he said he saw. And the thought it significant enough to report this. We know this because Chief Curry mentioned the incident on a TV interview, indicating that Craig was regarded as credible.

Plus there was a photograph of a Rambler in Dealey Plaza at about the time that Craig said the events took place.

Why didn’t Oswald call his wife? “Hey it looks like someone tried to take a shot at Kennedy. It’s completely crazy here, I don’t think there’s going to be any more work today. Do you want to meet at that shoe store on Jefferson?”

Mick_Purdy wrote:

JFK_Case wrote:OK so the report says he said he had a pistol, didn't go to Mexico, and didn't own a rifle. So why in the world would they fake it here and fake that he did have a pistol, but not fake that he didn't go to Mexico and didn't have the rifle? Faking these would have helped their case, yet they left those alone.

Your logic, Mick, makes no sense.

No, you're wrong -read what I've said. I said the report states he had a pistol. End of story faking this and faking that has nothing to do with it. 
It's you who has stated that Oswald said he carried a pistol - I say that's what they wrote down in a report - it does not make it true. They wrote many things which didn't add up or make sense.
We don't know what Oswald said period! Except for those fleeting moments when he was caught on camera in the hallways and at the media gathering.

Your logic, Mick, makes no sense.


And to imply that my logic makes no sense is to infer that the DPD's the FBI, the Secret Service, and The Warren Commission's logic was sound. This frame and subsequent cover up was done on the fly - It is imperfect because that's what the evidence shows us. Every single report is loaded with conflicting narrative and contradictions - The WC merely rubber stamped most of it. I'll stick with my logic - cheers Mick

I saw the Baltimore case you referenced (seems like a thing in Baltimore as there were others) during my search. I have used up my monthly allowance of free Baltimore Sun articles.

From what I can tell, the suspect was shot and perhaps incapacitated. He was later brought to the hospital and the gun was found nearby. The claim was that the police had to rub the gun against the steering wheel of suspect’s vehicle to get the suspect’s DNA on the gun. So it does not look like it was planted on the suspect’s body or placed in his hand as is thought to have been done with Oswald at the TT.

https://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2016/11/23/police-man-shot-by-baltimore-officer-a-violent-repeat-offender/

lanceman wrote:I saw the Baltimore case you referenced (seems like a thing in Baltimore as there were others) during my search. I have used up my monthly allowance of free Baltimore Sun articles.

From what I can tell, the suspect was shot and perhaps incapacitated. He was later brought to the hospital and the gun was found nearby. The claim was that the police had to rub the gun against the steering wheel of suspect’s vehicle to get the suspect’s DNA on the gun. So it does not look like it was planted on the suspect’s body or placed in his hand as is thought to have been done with Oswald at the TT.

https://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2016/11/23/police-man-shot-by-baltimore-officer-a-violent-repeat-offender/

Having lost the case, the DA said he did not wish to retry it (presumably via the media), but did anyway by still debating about how the DNA got on the weapon. It is really an attempt to gaslight readers by stating that the only way the DNA could get on it is if there was a struggle for possession of it  - he then suggests that the only other option was the silly idea that they were planting it on him. 

The alternatives put forward by the defense were that they wiped it on the steering wheel or that the DNA was caused by being shot at short distance.

The whole line of argument here by the DA is suspicious in itself. Why not just say the DNA was on the weapon because he owned it? Why say it could only get there in a struggle over the possession of it?  He is overthinking the solution to "proving" no wrongdoing by the cops and overlooking the main reason why someone's DNA would be on something -ownership of the object.

Although it does not specify in the story, it would seem that the victim was the one saying they were trying to plant it on him - with his defense team throwing in more alternatives to counter the DAs counter. 

I agree - not the usual method cops would use, but saves having to plant DNA on it after the fact - and if the weapon is disabled, none of the planters are getting hurt.

And there are examples of drugs being dropped into pockets. If that works, why not a disabled gun? Even with witnesses around, if it is dark and you have the action protected from view by a bunch of cops, you could plant anything on someone and use it as reason to shoot, or arrest them. 

The Dallas police show that you don't even really have to plant  evidence. You just claim it was found - like the shells in his pocket and Hidell ID in his wallet.

JFK_FNG wrote:

greg_parker wrote:I believe he took at least 2 buses to get directly there. That was what Inspector Kelley stated in his interrogation report before later stating that Oswald changed his tune after finding out they had different informatioon from  a cab driver.  That change in story though was just more police "verbaling". 

Here is some testimony from Truly that may hold a clue.

Mr. McCLOY. Did he have the use of a telephone when he was in the building?
Mr. TRULY. Yes, sir. We have a telephone on the first floor that he was free to use during his lunch hour for a minute. He was supposed to ask permission to use the phone. But he could have used the phone.
Mr. DULLES. Pay telephone or office telephone?
Mr. TRULY. No, sir; it is a regular office telephone. It is a pushbutton type.
Mr. McCLOY. Did he strike you as being a frequent user of that telephone?
Mr. TRULY. I never remember ever seeing him on the telephone.
Mr. DULLES. Would you have any record or be able to find out now whether he had ever used it?
Mr. TRULY. No, sir.

So there was a phone he could use for free and that he could potentially use any time. 

Shelley saw him near that phone at about 11:50.

Mr. BALL. On November 22, 1963, the day the President was shot, when is the last time you saw Oswald?
Mr. SHELLEY. It was 10 or 15 minutes before 12.
Mr. BALL. Where?
Mr. SHELLEY. On the first floor over near the telephone.

I have a lot of trouble writing off the Rambler story, and Oswald's alleged statement to Roger Craig. The Rambler incident has rock solid independent corroboration, specifically from Marion Meharg. 

The FBI went to extreme lengths to portray Meharg as a nut, using his custody battle with his ex-wife to annihilate his credibility. They threatened prosecution for making false statements, and may have even manufactured a false accusation of his ex-wife's husband to the assassination itself just to discredit him:

https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t585-the-case-of-the-nuisance-phone-calls-redux

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=96312#relPageId=1

Could Oswald have been making a phone call at the TSBD because he needed a ride? Also, if the tip at the TT really didn't come from Postal and was truly an "anonymous tip", who better to know Oswald was at the theater than whoever dropped him off? 

IF Craig is credible, Oswald clearly didn't want anyone knowing he got picked up at the TSBD. I don't know how witnesses seeing him hop in a station wagon would "blow his cover" or whatever, but it might explain why he'd go along with the story of taking the bus.

Craig can be credible and still be mistaken. Lee was kinda generic looking. 

I know Lee Farley was keen on the Meharg story - and he may have been right - but as interesting as it was, all I can say is that I did struggle to follow it logically. 

The twin ideas that he was picked up AND was accurately quoted by Craig, does not add up. According to Craig, Oswald seems genuinely baffled by talk of a station wagon (that it was a Rambler was not mentioned in front of Oswald) and Oswald can only think of Ruth Paine as driving such a car. By telling them NOT to bring her into it, he is in danger of doing the reverse and convincing them it WAS her car. Yet he seems to be genuinely concerned about protecting her. 

In short, it is Craig's testimony itself that convinces me it a case of mistaken identity. Even if the person was somehow involved... for me to think otherwise, I would have to believe that Lee was a first class actor.

None of it explains the Beckley Bus Blackout.
No authorities were at all interested in his means of transport to work?
Or to his room?
It is a really odd hole they left themselves.


As I asked Roe, where's the evidence.
Does the Pistol match the holster (it is the type used for 38s, but specifically this holster)
Where is the holsters lab report.
Did the Pistol match the holster.
Did the marks, scrapes match the Pistol.
Where did the holster come from if not Seaport Traders at the same time as pistol....
He couldn't whip up a good excuse.

Craig can be credible and still be mistaken.


Absolutely. And that's where I tend to sit these days until shown otherwise.

If the bus transfer was planted on Oswald, was it to counter what Roger Craig claimed to have seen?

Was Oswald wearing the clothes where the bus transfer and bullets were found at the time they were found?

Craig apparently had good eyesight, the seeing conditions were excellent, the subject he was watching was of the same race and he reported his observations later that afternoon. When he confirmed it was Oswald, they were no more than a few feet apart.

On the other hand, he was approximately 50 feet away from the person he saw descend the hill and get into the car.

If it was a planned escape of Oswald or somebody else, would they have planned it in such an exposed location? Could they be assured the traffic would allow it? Or that there wouldn’t be cops all over the place?

If it was an unplanned escape how was the need communicated? It’s been suggested that Oswald used the phone but there is no evidence of this. If he had, there would have been no more than about 10 minutes between the assassination and the pickup. Given the traffic, it would have been faster to walk to the car. At the time of such a call, the traffic probably was still held up at Elm and Houston.

I think Craig believed what he saw but was likely mistaken.

greg_parker wrote:The twin ideas that he was picked up AND was accurately quoted by Craig, does not add up. According to Craig, Oswald seems genuinely baffled by talk of a station wagon (that it was a Rambler was not mentioned in front of Oswald) and Oswald can only think of Ruth Paine as driving such a car. By telling them NOT to bring her into it, he is in danger of doing the reverse and convincing them it WAS her car. Yet he seems to be genuinely concerned about protecting her. 

In short, it is Craig's testimony itself that convinces me it a case of mistaken identity. Even if the person was somehow involved... for me to think otherwise, I would have to believe that Lee was a first class actor.

I have thought of an original solution to make sense of the Oswald "leave Ruth Paine out of this" statement overheard by Roger Craig. I have separately made a lot of argument that the Furniture Mart and Irving Sports Shop sightings of Lee and Marina with Lee driving Ruth Paine's car in fact happened with Lee and Marina and dated Mon Nov 11, 1963 when Lee had access to Ruth's car and Ruth was gone most of that day.

It is independently known that someone anonymous phoned in a tip to the Dallas Police Department that weekend that Oswald had had a rifle sighted at a gun shop, with enough information given by the anonymous caller to enable the Irving Sports Shop to be identified. There may be a discrepancy of a day in the timing, I don't recall. But if the DPD did receive an early tip--for whatever reason from whoever--concerning Oswald having that scope installed at the Irving Sports Shop--a logical response on the part of DPD would be for Fritz to ask Oswald about that. 

If Lee was being questioned by Fritz about that--my idea is that Roger Craig walked into Fritz's office just as Oswald was answering a question from Fritz about that. The question (unheard by Craig) might have been Fritz trying to pin down Oswald, saying (based on the tip) "someone saw you in a station wagon that looked such-and-such". Oswald trying to defend Ruth Paine (Oswald had driven her car that day without her knowledge in my reconstruction) ... "That's Ruth Paine's car, leave her out of this". 

In other words, Lee is referring to Ruth Paine's car in response to Fritz questioning him about Nov 11. Roger Craig heard Lee's words and he thought Lee was referring to the car of which Roger Craig was speaking. Alternatively, Roger Craig tells Fritz about the Dealey Plaza Rambler and Fritz asks Oswald about that but Oswald misunderstands the question thinking Fritz is still asking about Nov 11 and answers. Either way it is a miscommunication in which Roger Craig heard Oswald's words correctly but Oswald was not speaking of Ruth Paine's car at Dealey Plaza or on Nov 22, 1963. Anyway a possibility to consider.

Greg_Doudna wrote:

greg_parker wrote:The twin ideas that he was picked up AND was accurately quoted by Craig, does not add up. According to Craig, Oswald seems genuinely baffled by talk of a station wagon (that it was a Rambler was not mentioned in front of Oswald) and Oswald can only think of Ruth Paine as driving such a car. By telling them NOT to bring her into it, he is in danger of doing the reverse and convincing them it WAS her car. Yet he seems to be genuinely concerned about protecting her. 

In short, it is Craig's testimony itself that convinces me it a case of mistaken identity. Even if the person was somehow involved... for me to think otherwise, I would have to believe that Lee was a first class actor.

I have thought of an original solution to make sense of the Oswald "leave Ruth Paine out of this" statement overheard by Roger Craig. I have separately made a lot of argument that the Furniture Mart and Irving Sports Shop sightings of Lee and Marina with Lee driving Ruth Paine's car in fact happened with Lee and Marina and dated Mon Nov 11, 1963 when Lee had access to Ruth's car and Ruth was gone most of that day.

It is independently known that someone anonymous phoned in a tip to the Dallas Police Department that weekend that Oswald had had a rifle sighted at a gun shop, with enough information given by the anonymous caller to enable the Irving Sports Shop to be identified. There may be a discrepancy of a day in the timing, I don't recall. But if the DPD did receive an early tip--for whatever reason from whoever--concerning Oswald having that scope installed at the Irving Sports Shop--a logical response on the part of DPD would be for Fritz to ask Oswald about that. 

If Lee was being questioned by Fritz about that--my idea is that Roger Craig walked into Fritz's office just as Oswald was answering a question from Fritz about that. The question (unheard by Craig) might have been Fritz trying to pin down Oswald, saying (based on the tip) "someone saw you in a station wagon that looked such-and-such". Oswald trying to defend Ruth Paine (Oswald had driven her car that day without her knowledge in my reconstruction) ... "That's Ruth Paine's car, leave her out of this". 

In other words, Lee is referring to Ruth Paine's car in response to Fritz questioning him about Nov 11. Roger Craig heard Lee's words and he thought Lee was referring to the car of which Roger Craig was speaking. Alternatively, Roger Craig tells Fritz about the Dealey Plaza Rambler and Fritz asks Oswald about that but Oswald misunderstands the question thinking Fritz is still asking about Nov 11 and answers. Either way it is a miscommunication in which Roger Craig heard Oswald's words correctly but Oswald was not speaking of Ruth Paine's car at Dealey Plaza or on Nov 22, 1963. Anyway a possibility to consider.

Roger Craig’s presence at the Oswald interrogation was somewhere around 5:30 PM on the day of the assassination. Is it known for sure if and when the tip regarding the rifle scope was made by that time?

If Craig really did see Oswald picked up, it removes a lot of constraints on Oswald’s location and activities between 12:30 and 1:50. It would eliminate the time constraint that rules out placing Oswald at the scene of the Tippit killing but there would still be the matter of why Oswald would be in that area. If he was extracted by fellow conspirators, why is he walking the streets? If he’s enjoying an unexpected day off, where is he going?

My speculation is that the Rambler was stuck in traffic a few blocks away and the radio announced that news of shots fired. The passenger in the Rambler decides to walk on ahead to Dealey Plaza and see what happened. When the traffic is released, the Rambler drives on and upon reaching Dealey Plaza is now looking for the passenger, spots him and whistles to get his attention.

Added later: An even more likely explanation is that the passenger in the stuck Rambler heard the shots, sirens or otherwise found out (from a bystander?) and wanted to see for himself. Might have left even earlier hoping to glimpse the motorcade. The timing works out  better since I don’t think the news of shots fired was broadcast until a few minutes after it happened and the Craig incident happened about 12:45.

lanceman wrote:
Roger Craig’s presence at the Oswald interrogation was somewhere around 5:30 PM on the day of the assassination. Is it known for sure if and when the tip regarding the rifle scope was made by that time?

If Craig really did see Oswald picked up, it removes a lot of constraints on Oswald’s location and activities between 12:30 and 1:50. It would eliminate the time constraint that rules out placing Oswald at the scene of the Tippit killing but there would still be the matter of why Oswald would be in that area. If he was extracted by fellow conspirators, why is he walking the streets? If he’s enjoying an unexpected day off, where is he going?

My speculation is that the Rambler was stuck in traffic a few blocks away and the radio announced that news of shots fired. The passenger in the Rambler decides to walk on ahead to Dealey Plaza and see what happened. When the traffic is released, the Rambler drives on and upon reaching Dealey Plaza is now looking for the passenger, spots him and whistles to get his attention.

Added later: An even more likely explanation is that the passenger in the stuck Rambler heard the shots, sirens or otherwise found out (from a bystander?) and wanted to see for himself. Might have left even earlier hoping to glimpse the motorcade. The timing works out  better since I don’t think the news of shots fired was broadcast until a few minutes after it happened and the Craig incident happened about 12:45.

If it wasn't Oswald in the Rambler, I still have a lot of trouble believing the incident has an innocent explanation.  

Craig sees someone running down the grass from the direction of the TSBD, and jump in a Rambler; Marvin Robinson sees someone running down the grass from the direction of the TSBD. 

Richard Randolph Carr sees a guy in the window of the "top floor" of the TSBD, then sees a guy running down the grass from the direction of the building and jump in a station wagon. Says it was the same man. Describes the guy as wearing a "tan sportcoat and a hat". 

Jean Hill sees a guy wearing a "brown raincoat and hat" running from the direction of the TSBD 

Marion Meharg witnesses the same incident, including the man jumping in a station wagon, but is the only witness who sees someone come out the back door of the TSBD and jump off the loading dock. Meharg is subsequently crucified by the FBI. 

Craig described the guy as having sandy hair, but mentioned nothing about at hat. Could he have seen the same guy as Hill and Carr? 

Greg P.'s explanation makes perfect sense with a verbatim reading of Craig's testimony, but according to subsequent statements by Craig, like his Clay Shaw trial testimony, the order of the conversation in Fritz's office was reversed - which does make a bit more sense. Fritz said something like "this man saw you leaving the scene...", Oswald replied with "I told you people I did", Fritz then said "what about this station wagon?" and Oswald made the Paine comment, sat back and said "everyone will know who I am now."

Greg's explanation still fits, but according to later interviews by Craig, Fritz actually said "this man saw you leave the scene and jump in a car", and Oswald said "I told you people I did"...etc. I'd write this off as an embellishment by Craig, but the Secret Service wrote in their official "personal history of prisoner" report that Bill Randle drove Oswald to and from work. What's interesting about this is basically all of the other information in the report looks to have come from Oswald's interrogations:

11/26 Secret Service Report

If Fritz really did say "...and jump in a car" Oswald could have admitted to getting a ride from the scene, just not necessarily in a station wagon. Hell there could have been two different station wagons. Basically Greg's evaluation of Craig can still be true, without ruling out the possibility that Craig really did witness Oswald contradict the official story in Fritz's office. Just food for thought.

Tippit was having an affair with a waitress from Austin's Barbecue. Some researchers believe that her husband might have killed Tippit out of jealousy.

The only one of the witnesses that saw suspicious people leaving the environs of the TSBD that come close to the description of Oswald and the clothes he was believed to be wearing at the time was Roger Craig.

According to Craig’s WC testimony, he arrived at the Homicide Bureau around 5:00-5:30 PM on November 22. Craig and Fritz apparently had a short discussion outside Fritz’s office before going in and questioning Oswald regarding Oswald’s departure from the TSBD and the “station wagon”.

I am trying to determine how the station wagon might have been thought to be Ruth Paine’s. My first thought was that the DPD detectives that went to search the Paine home in Irving that afternoon (Rose, Stovall and Adamcik) might have overheard the Craig-Fritz discussion and mentioned the station wagon parked in the Paine driveway. But they did not return to the DPD headquarters until about 6:00PM. Plus they had Ruth Paine, Marina Oswald and her two children in tow. So the timeline makes it unlikely that Fritz found out that way.

Strange that Paine herself was not asked (as far as I know) since she was now in the same building.

Vinny wrote:Tippit was having an affair with a waitress from Austin's Barbecue. Some researchers believe that her husband might have killed Tippit out of jealousy.

It would have to be explained how the jealous husband came upon Tippit at that place and time, particularly since Tippit would not be in that area when on his normal patrol. The jealous husband could not have known that Tippit had been redeployed just an hour ago. Did the girlfriend live in that area and Tippit was paying a call to get some “afternoon delight”? I had wondered whether there was some location in that particular area that had something shady going on for the cops such as a gambling joint or whorehouse but I haven’t seen any indication of it.

By all indications, Tippit initiated the interaction with his killer. Would he have done that with a guy whose wife he was banging? I doubt it. More likely, the jealous husband would have flagged Tippit down to have a word with him or simply to shoot him. Further, would he choose to shoot a cop while the cop is armed and on duty?

lanceman wrote:The only one of the witnesses that saw suspicious people leaving the environs of the TSBD that come close to the description of Oswald and the clothes he was believed to be wearing at the time was Roger Craig.

According to Craig’s WC testimony, he arrived at the Homicide Bureau around 5:00-5:30 PM on November 22. Craig and Fritz apparently had a short discussion outside Fritz’s office before going in and questioning Oswald regarding Oswald’s departure from the TSBD and the “station wagon”.

I am trying to determine how the station wagon might have been thought to be Ruth Paine’s. My first thought was that the DPD detectives that went to search the Paine home in Irving that afternoon (Rose, Stovall and Adamcik) might have overheard the Craig-Fritz discussion and mentioned the station wagon parked in the Paine driveway. But they did not return to the DPD headquarters until about 6:00PM. Plus they had Ruth Paine, Marina Oswald and her two children in tow. So the timeline makes it unlikely that Fritz found out that way.

Strange that Paine herself was not asked (as far as I know) since she was now in the same building.

Oh I totally agree. That was kind of the point of my last comment. Someone definitely ran from the TSBD and jumped in a station wagon, so if it wasn’t Oswald I highly doubt it was just some innocent bystander. There is just too much independent corroboration; the incident definitely happened. 

As for Craig, if he saw the tan jacket hat man - it was obviously a misidentification thinking it was Oswald. What’s most interesting about Craig though IMO is the alleged conversation in Fritz’s office. Did Oswald admit to getting a ride from the scene, even if Craig didn’t actually see him leave? According to Craig he did - then he sat back, dejected, and said “everyone will know who I am now”. Why would Oswald say that? 

Getting back to the theater and the gun, has anyone actually verified the initials on the pistol? McDonald, Hill, Carroll, and weirdly Paul Bentley all said they signed the gun hours later in Westbrook’s office before turning it over to the homicide bureau. The chain of custody is a complete mess. 

In the archive photos, the most visible initials look like Bentley’s etched into the butt of the gun - who according to the WC didn’t even sign it. There is what looks like a faint “M” for McDonald on the butt right where McDonald testified he signed it, but it is in pencil, not etched in. The only other visible initials look like an “H” etched the side of the gun, but Hill testified that he etched “Hill” in a completely different location - the metal strip on the inside of the butt under the trigger guard. Just wondering if anyone here has looked into this - as it would be rock solid evidence the gun was at least switched, if not planted in the first place. 

https://catalog.archives.gov/id/305138

I don’t recall Craig identifying the tan jacket man (TJM). Craig just identified someone strongly resembling Oswald. It was Carr who identified TJM that he had seen at one of the windows of the 6th floor of the TSBD. My recollection is that Carr later saw the TJM emerge from the rear of the TSBD, walk down Houston turn east on Commerce and get into a waiting vehicle.

There are two separate issues regarding the interrogation. The first was Oswald leaving the TSBD soon after the assassination which he admitted as he didn’t think there’d be any work that afternoon. The second issue is HOW he left the TSBD to arrive at the theater by 1:50 PM (I think everyone agrees Oswald was at the theater at 1:50 PM except the Harvey and Lee cult) - whether by the wagon or other means.

If one of the three detectives that visited the Paine house went on ahead to brief Fritz on what they found, it’s possible that given  the large uncertainty over when exactly Craig and the detectives might have interacted at the Homicide Bureau might make the timeline work. Still kind of iffy. Kind of sloppy of all involved to not have a more precise timing of their actions. Totally unlike Joe Friday of the “Dragnet” TV series.

I viewed the Jessie Curry press briefings of November 22 and 23. As of the morning of the 23rd, they still were interested in talking to the negro who might have picked up Oswald from the TSBD. I thought by this time they had found (or planted) the bus transfer.

If these suspects were running from the TSBD, they were not cold professionals. They took a big risk drawing attention to themselves as well as the driver picking them up. Either their plan went very wrong, they were not professionals or they really were bystanders. That’s what drew Roger Craig’s attention, that this guy was running away while most people were running toward the scene.

I lean toward the bystander theory as I have done something similar when stuck in traffic in the pre-smartphone days.

If Oswald or whoever Craig saw get into the car really was involved with the assassination, it is a forensic dead end as there is no way to proceed on what happened between 12:45-1:50 PM unless new information comes out.

lanceman wrote:

Vinny wrote:Tippit was having an affair with a waitress from Austin's Barbecue. Some researchers believe that her husband might have killed Tippit out of jealousy.

It would have to be explained how the jealous husband came upon Tippit at that place and time, particularly since Tippit would not be in that area when on his normal patrol. The jealous husband could not have known that Tippit had been redeployed just an hour ago. Did the girlfriend live in that area and Tippit was paying a call to get some “afternoon delight”? I had wondered whether there was some location in that particular area that had something shady going on for the cops such as a gambling joint or whorehouse but I haven’t seen any indication of it.

By all indications, Tippit initiated the interaction with his killer. Would he have done that with a guy whose wife he was banging? I doubt it. More likely, the jealous husband would have flagged Tippit down to have a word with him or simply to shoot him. Further, would he choose to shoot a cop while the cop is armed and on duty?

Good points. I agree.

lanceman wrote:I don’t recall Craig identifying the tan jacket man (TJM). Craig just identified someone strongly resembling Oswald. It was Carr who identified TJM that he had seen at one of the windows of the 6th floor of the TSBD. My recollection is that Carr later saw the TJM emerge from the rear of the TSBD, walk down Houston turn east on Commerce and get into a waiting vehicle.

There are two separate issues regarding the interrogation. The first was Oswald leaving the TSBD soon after the assassination which he admitted as he didn’t think there’d be any work that afternoon. The second issue is HOW he left the TSBD to arrive at the theater by 1:50 PM (I think everyone agrees Oswald was at the theater at 1:50 PM except the Harvey and Lee cult) - whether by the wagon or other means.
If these suspects were running from the TSBD, they were not cold professionals. They took a big risk drawing attention to themselves as well as the driver picking them up. Either their plan went very wrong, they were not professionals or they really were bystanders. That’s what drew Roger Craig’s attention, that this guy was running away while most people were running toward the scene.

I lean toward the bystander theory as I have done something similar when stuck in traffic in the pre-smartphone days.

If Oswald or whoever Craig saw get into the car really was involved with the assassination, it is a forensic dead end as there is no way to proceed on what happened between 12:45-1:50 PM unless new information comes out.

I agree, there’s not much room to go anywhere with this without more information. That said, I still think whoever jumped in the station wagon, if it wasn’t Oswald, was most likely someone involved in the shooting. If it really was a bystander we have to write off Hill, Carr, and most importantly Meharg. Hill and Carr gave independent, identical descriptions of the escaping suspect (TJM); and Carr said he saw the guy on the top floor of the TSBD, then later jump in a station wagon. Meharg saw a man run out the back door of the TSBD and jump off a loading dock, then jump in a station wagon. 

Both Carr and Meharg were threatened with prosecution by the FBI for giving false statements, and both stuck to their stories. When you add Craig in the mix, it’s just too many layers of independent corroboration to write off as a mistake or a coincidence IMO. 

I see your point about the method of escape being unprofessional, but maybe they just weren’t particularly afraid of getting caught. Most people’s attention had been directed behind the picket fence, and the escape could have been timed and/or organized with a lookout so that the man knew he’d be able to get the hell out of there safely. Also, if the assassination was an intel operation, there would be several layers of contingency, cover stories, false alibis, fake identities, etc. Basically, even if Craig was able to bring the guy into custody he would have walked within hours, at least by the time the “real assassin” Oswald was arrested. Hell for all we know the three tramps could have been the killers. If you’re dealing with professional operatives you bet they’d have completely verifiable false identities - family members to corroborate their story, etc. even if the their arrest records only became public thirty years later…

I know this has been discussed here before, but the more I look into Oswald’s arrest, the more suspicious I get of Paul Bentley. He’s obviously pretty near the top of the list of important witnesses never called to testify to the WC; and his movements after the assassination, fortuitously hitching rides from City Hall, to the Tippit crime scene, to the Texas Theater in time to get to the balcony, demand that the house lights get turned on, go back downstairs and jump in the fight, sprain his ankle, take Oswald into custody, ride in the car next to him, be the guy who ‘searches’ his wallet, then head immediately to Westbrook’s office and sign his initials on a gun he never officially handled just seems a bit much.

If anyone deserves an Oscar for best performance in a drama its Westbrook.
His Texas Theater Theatrics are legendary!
Of course he doesn't press for any charges against Lee's attempting murder in the Theater against fellow officers nor claims Lee responsible for his sprained ankle. How gentlemanly of him and McD.

I was wondering since Brewer mentioned Lee buying shoes at his store did Postal ever mention seeing Lee.
Was Lee a Texas Theater virgin!?!
I recall Lee's only vice in Russia was The Movies.
I don't see Lee living within walking distance of a Theater and not making that a regular haunt.

I just doubt his 11/22 TT visit was his first time.




I was thinking about Jack Davis.
18 yrs old and alone?
alone at TT no friends no classmates....
sounds to me like Jack got singled out.
Was Jack really in the Balcony?
Did Jack sneak in?
Why did Jack go downtown with police?
Was it due to sneaking in and hiding out up in balcony. Balcony where reports place a person being questioned on the stairs?
It would tie up a lot of loose ends.
Cheers

PS
Sent the pic to Jack.