Gerald Hill and the murder of J.D Tippit

First topic message reminder :

Inspired by the research of both Lee Farley and Duke Lane, I wrote an article on my blog entitled "Gerald Hill and the murder of Officer Tippit", in which I argued that Hill had framed Oswald for the murder of J.D Tippit.

I'm not gonna go into detail here about Hill's complicity, and will leave it up to anyone interested in learning about Hill's suspicious actions following the assassination to read my article on my blog.

On John Simkin's education forum, Duke Lane made the claim that Hill had his arm (almost) handcuffed inside the Texas Theatre, during the scuffle with Oswald. I trust Lane, as I consider him to be an honest researcher, but I have been unable to locate the interview/report in which this claim was made.

The reason I ask is because Officer Ray Hawkins made the claim that Hill had grabbed "Oswald's" revolver during the scuffle; whereas the Official version has it that Officer Bob Carroll did. Keep in mind that Hawkins was the Officer who had pulled out his handcuffs and Cuffed Oswald. Now if it turns out that it was Hill that had his arm grabbed and (almost) handcuffed, and it was Hawkins who had grabbed it, then it would strengthen the case against Hill.

Why would it you ask? Because if Hawkins saw the revolver in Hill's hand inside the dimly lighted Theatre, then he would have grabbed Hill's arm believing it was in fact Oswald's arm. If someone could inform me if a). It was Hill's arm that was grabbed and b). If it was Hawkins who grabbed it, I would greatly appreciate it.


P.S If anyone wants to discuss my article on Hill, I would be more than happy to do so.

I would like to add the following from the testimony of Charles Walker concerning the ALT.

“I got back in my car and started cruising the area again. I went up and down the alleys and streets. And there was one incident that really didn't have anything to do with it. I guess I was cruising up the alley with the newspaperman in the car, and I saw a man in long white sleeves, white shirt, walking across the parking lot there of the church, and I couldn't see below his legs, and there was a picket fence there, and when he got about 30 feet from me, I stopped the car, and he was walking toward me, and I had my gun in my lap at the time, and I said, "What is your name?" And he just looked at me. And at that time I didn't know whether he had a rifle or what he had, and he just looked at me, and he bent over, and I stuck my gun in the window and he raised up and had a small dog and he said, "What did you say?" And of course that newspaperman said, "My God, I thought he was going to shoot us." I said, "I thought he was reaching down for a rifle." Of course, he reached down and picked up a little dog. Then we got around to Beckley and 10th Street, still cruising the area, when I heard the call come over the radio that the suspect was supposed to be at the theatre on Jefferson.”

This occured after the false alarm at the Jefferson branch library. If Bob Apple was really at the ALT as Hill claimed, then Walker would probably have seen him and his squad car.

BTW, does anyone know the identity of the man Walker spotted?

Well, Hasan, were going to have to agree to disagree on Car 207. True, Code 3 is Emergency and 8 minutes is a long time for a squad car running its sirens totravel one mile from City Hall to the TSBD, even with a traffic jam. Hill evidently made the 12:47 transmission right when they left. Hey, maybe they actually arrived at 12:52 or 53, and Myers spun the time to his liking, i.e. "about 12:55". Ewell's memory may have been a bit off. And I can't see the Sixth Floor being as inaccurate as you are suggesting, in their time estimate for Tape 8 in the KRLD-TV collection. I'd think that kind of dishonesty would get found out, putting a black eye on their reputation. Generally, their facts are quite accurate and they should be trusted. It's their interpretation of the facts that researchers find obnoxious.

Hill was involved in the early part of the 6th floor search, and was there for several minutes after 1:00 PM, no matter what timestamp is placed on the shells' discovery. And Earlene Roberts' friend apparently had been watching TV when the 12:58 news bulletin came on. It was only a minute or so later when Oswald barged in. I don't see any way Hill gets out there in time.

When i began to study Roberts' Car 207 story, on my own, some years ago, it smelled fishy and I couldn't buy it. She had an afternoon radio interview on the 22nd and didn't mention it. She had a suspicious-sounding sister. Reputable researchers have run with the 207 story and said Roscoe White was driving, or even Tippit himself stopped by, but the story smells like disinformation to me. Two cops honking at Oswald's door, and one cop dead a mile away soon after. It doesn;t seem the story helps the Tippit homicide investigation one bit, and one could speculate from here to Tierra del Fuego until 2063 and not come any closer to definitive answers. So Car 207 is not for me.

I think that Hill's testimony about the killer's description morphed it in favor of someone resembling Oswald; it was far from accurate. Roy Walker, Tippit's former partner, had broadcast at 1:22, a couple minutes before Hill arrived, that "He's a white male, about 30, 5-8, black hair, slender, wearing a white jacket, white shirt and dark slacks." There was a fair crowd of people gathering around Tippit's squad car and just about anyone could have approached Hill with a description. More importantly, moments later a different citizen approached Hill & Sgt. Owens and told them he'd seen the gunman toss his jacket. Myers speculates this was B.M. Patterson, who said in an FBI memo (9-2-64, RIF 124-10041-10126) that he "sawhim discard his Zipper jacket." But Myers cautiously concludes that Patterson didn't actually see this, but was summarizing what had been thought to have transpired. See also Patterson Exhibit A.

The cat to look into in the Tippit murder is Igor Vaganov. I'm pressed for time, but look I think in the Dealey Plaza Echo under author Mark Bridger. An old researcher I've spoken with, Jones Harris, says Vaganov approached Kenneth Croy and handed him that wallet found at the scene, with Oswald and Hidell IDs. I agree with him. Gotta go.

Richard, we definitely disagree about car 207, but I respect your opinion. I think Hill was the first cop on the 6th floor- before Mooney got there. I also don't think there is any doubt that Hill lied about going to oak cliff with Owens. The transcript plus Owens and Ewell prove it. I think we both agree that Hill is a very suspicious man. We just disagree on certain things about him. Given Gary Mack's deliberate deceptions (such as putting Jackie in the line of fire in "Inside the target car") I think that he and the sixth floor museum are perfectly capable of lying.

I totally agree that there was a wallet containing Id for Oswald and Hidell at the Tippit murder scene. In fact, I wrote about it on my blog. Also, I agree with Lee Farley that Vaganov was one of the two "IBM" men in Hardy's shoe store.

Before I forget (again), I only recently came across the following:

http://digitalcollections.baylor.edu/cdm/compoundobject/collection/po-arm/id/26565/rec/8 (Page 13).

“The Police car arrived at 10th and Crawford, a couple of miles away, and the ambulance pulled out, witnesses were gathered around as the Police car arrived a few minutes later”.

First of all, 10th and Crawford was not “a couple of miles away” but merely one block to the West of 10th and Patton. Secondly, this is not what Hill claimed during his testimony:

“We crossed the Commerce Street viaduct and turned, made a right turn to go under the viaduct on North Beckley to go up to 10th Street. As we passed, just before we got to Colorado on Beckley, an ambulance with a police car behind it passed us en route to Methodist Hospital. We went on to the scene of the shooting where we found a squad car parked against the right or the south curb on 10th Street, with a pool of blood on the left-hand side of it near the side of the car.”

For anyone interested in why Bill Alexander should not be considered a reliable witness, please refer to my review of Larry Sneed’s book:

http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/2013/03/no-more-silence-by-larry-sneed.html

Besides, the DPD Channel 1 transcript proves that Hill was lying about going to Oak Cliff with Alexander and Calvin Owens.

Redfern wrote:I doubt very much if the timeline would allow for Hill to be in the car, since he was occupied in the TSBD search

When I have written my upcoming essay on Hill, maybe you will be convinced that he was in car 207. He was not on the 6th floor when the shells were found by Luke Mooney.

Hasan Yusuf wrote:

Redfern wrote:I doubt very much if the timeline would allow for Hill to be in the car, since he was occupied in the TSBD search

When I have written my upcoming essay on Hill, maybe you will be convinced that he was in car 207. He was not on the 6th floor when the shells were found by Luke Mooney.

Hasan,

I await with interest.

If Hill was brazenly lying about his TSBD escapades, though, several police officers and deputy sheriffs would surely be aware.

If Hill was brazenly lying about his TSBD escapades, though, several police officers and deputy sheriffs would surely be aware.

I am convinced that they were aware, Redfern. However, are we seriously to believe that the DPD and Sheriff's Office would make a liar out of Hill; knowing that this would imply he was part of a conspiracy involving the DPD? I don't think so.

just to a drop another into it, wasn't Olsen (I hope I have his name right), the guy who was guarding an imaginary estate, also likely involved in the Tippit frame?

Yeah, Harry Olsen is the guy, Allen.

Richard Gilbride wrote:My own view is that he got picked up by the Rambler, which had probably circled the block after dropping him off at the rooming house, which then took him straight to the Texas Theater. And concessionaire Butch Burroughs stated Oswald entered the Theater sometime between 1:00 and 1:07, I think it's about a 5-minute drive from 1026 North Beckley so I'd put it closer to 1:08.

Burroughs, in his testimony to the Warren Commission, was asked if he saw a struggle between a man and some officers inside the theater.  He said that he did.  He was then asked by Ball if he saw this man enter the theater.  Below was his reply:

"No, sir; I didn't."

Mr. Bill Brown:

This is a warning. You will cease your smarmy postings at once or get booted off this forum. Members here do not need curt reminders of what the Warren Commission alleges is truth. You are encouraged to take your LN vs. CT act elsewhere.

JFK and the Unspeakable, p. 291:

According to Warren H. "Butch" Burroughs, the concession stand operator at the Texas Theater, Lee Harvey Oswald entered the theater sometime between 1:00 and 1:07 P.M., several minutes before Officer Tippit was slain seven blocks away. If true, Butch Burroughs' observation would eliminate Oswald as a candidate for Tippit's murder. Perhaps for that reason, Burroughs was asked by a Warren Commission attorney the apparently straightforward question "Did you see (Oswald) come in the theater?" and answered honestly, "No, I didn't". What someone reading this testimony would not know is that Butch Burroughs was unable to see anyone enter the theater from where he was standing at his concession stand, unless that person came into the area where he was working. As explained to me in an interview, there was a partition between his concession stand and the front door. Someone could enter the theater, go directly up a flight of stairs to the balcony, and not be seen from the concession stand. That, Burroughs said, is what Oswald apparently did. However, Burroughs still knew that Oswald had come into the theater "between 1:00 and 1:07 P.M." because he saw him inside the theater soon after that. As he told me, he sold popcorn to Oswald at 1:15 P.M.- information that the Warren Commission did not solicit from him in his testimony.

Repeat. Mr. Bill Brown, this is a warning. You will cease your smarmy postings at once or get booted off this forum. Members here do not have time for your immature understanding of President Kennedy's homicide.

Richard Gilbride wrote:Mr. Bill Brown:

This is a warning. You will cease your smarmy postings at once or get booted off this forum. Members here do not need curt reminders of what the Warren Commission alleges is truth. You are encouraged to take your LN vs. CT act elsewhere.

JFK and the Unspeakable, p. 291:

According to Warren H. "Butch" Burroughs, the concession stand operator at the Texas Theater, Lee Harvey Oswald entered the theater sometime between 1:00 and 1:07 P.M., several minutes before Officer Tippit was slain seven blocks away. If true, Butch Burroughs' observation would eliminate Oswald as a candidate for Tippit's murder. Perhaps for that reason, Burroughs was asked by a Warren Commission attorney the apparently straightforward question "Did you see (Oswald) come in the theater?" and answered honestly, "No, I didn't". What someone reading this testimony would not know is that Butch Burroughs was unable to see anyone enter the theater from where he was standing at his concession stand, unless that person came into the area where he was working. As explained to me in an interview, there was a partition between his concession stand and the front door. Someone could enter the theater, go directly up a flight of stairs to the balcony, and not be seen from the concession stand. That, Burroughs said, is what Oswald apparently did. However, Burroughs still knew that Oswald had come into the theater "between 1:00 and 1:07 P.M." because he saw him inside the theater soon after that. As he told me, he sold popcorn to Oswald at 1:15 P.M.- information that the Warren Commission did not solicit from him in his testimony.

Repeat. Mr. Bill Brown, this is a warning. You will cease your smarmy postings at once or get booted off this forum. Members here do not have time for your immature understanding of President Kennedy's homicide.

"Burroughs was asked by a Warren Commission attorney the apparently straightforward question "Did you see (Oswald) come in the theater?" and answered honestly, "No, I didn't"."


Perhaps you should go back and read my post again.  I offered no opinion, simply fact.


"Repeat. Mr. Bill Brown, this is a warning. You will cease your smarmy postings at once or get booted off this forum. Members here do not have time for your immature understanding of President Kennedy's homicide."


Is this how you choose to deal with adversity?  Is this how you choose to deal with someone who has a different opinion than you?  My only post in this thread (present post excluded) did nothing more than state a fact, the same fact which your post included.

To "boot" me off this forum, with my limited posting history thus far (and lack of a single insulting post) would simply say more about you than me.  I'll continue to post in the same manner which I have these past two days if I wish.  If you feel the need to abuse your "Admin" powers, then so be it.  It's no skin off my back.  You're nobody to me.

Bill Brown wrote:

Richard Gilbride wrote:My own view is that he got picked up by the Rambler, which had probably circled the block after dropping him off at the rooming house, which then took him straight to the Texas Theater. And concessionaire Butch Burroughs stated Oswald entered the Theater sometime between 1:00 and 1:07, I think it's about a 5-minute drive from 1026 North Beckley so I'd put it closer to 1:08.

Burroughs, in his testimony to the Warren Commission, was asked if he saw a struggle between a man and some officers inside the theater.  He said that he did.  He was then asked by Ball if he saw this man enter the theater.  Below was his reply:

"No, sir; I didn't."

Perhaps you should go back and read my post again.  I offered no opinion, simply fact.

Bill, it is indeed a fact that Burroughs said he did not see Oswald enter.

But it is also a fact that he could not have seen him enter.

And yet another fact that Richard never claimed Burroughs was an eye-witness to Oswald entering (to use your own words "go back and read Richard's post again")

One last fact: you don't need to actually witness an event to be able to accurately guestimate what time it happened.

Give those last 3 facts, what was the point of yours - if not to start some type of CT v LN debate? Your "fact" is irrelevant. The Warren Commission Report is irrelevant. CT vs LN debate is irrelevant. Your being here is on the cusp of irrelevancy. It's up to you. We are here to conduct and discuss new research. Our aim is having the case reopened. Get on board that program, or leave the group.

Richard Gilbride wrote:Mr. Bill Brown:

This is a warning. You will cease your smarmy postings at once or get booted off this forum. Members here do not need curt reminders of what the Warren Commission alleges is truth. You are encouraged to take your LN vs. CT act elsewhere.

JFK and the Unspeakable, p. 291:

According to Warren H. "Butch" Burroughs, the concession stand operator at the Texas Theater, Lee Harvey Oswald entered the theater sometime between 1:00 and 1:07 P.M., several minutes before Officer Tippit was slain seven blocks away. If true, Butch Burroughs' observation would eliminate Oswald as a candidate for Tippit's murder. Perhaps for that reason, Burroughs was asked by a Warren Commission attorney the apparently straightforward question "Did you see (Oswald) come in the theater?" and answered honestly, "No, I didn't". What someone reading this testimony would not know is that Butch Burroughs was unable to see anyone enter the theater from where he was standing at his concession stand, unless that person came into the area where he was working. As explained to me in an interview, there was a partition between his concession stand and the front door. Someone could enter the theater, go directly up a flight of stairs to the balcony, and not be seen from the concession stand. That, Burroughs said, is what Oswald apparently did. However, Burroughs still knew that Oswald had come into the theater "between 1:00 and 1:07 P.M." because he saw him inside the theater soon after that. As he told me, he sold popcorn to Oswald at 1:15 P.M.- information that the Warren Commission did not solicit from him in his testimony.

Repeat. Mr. Bill Brown, this is a warning. You will cease your smarmy postings at once or get booted off this forum. Members here do not have time for your immature understanding of President Kennedy's homicide.

Am I missing something here? I certainly seem to be - Bill posts one post in this thread (at this particular time) wherein he reiterates what Burroughs said according to his WC testimony and he's immediately pilloried for it????

I don't get it - all "sides" so to speak should surely be free to proffer opinions etc. and then defend them?

This does not look good for this forum, I fear.

ianlloyd wrote:

Richard Gilbride wrote:Mr. Bill Brown:

This is a warning. You will cease your smarmy postings at once or get booted off this forum. Members here do not need curt reminders of what the Warren Commission alleges is truth. You are encouraged to take your LN vs. CT act elsewhere.

JFK and the Unspeakable, p. 291:

According to Warren H. "Butch" Burroughs, the concession stand operator at the Texas Theater, Lee Harvey Oswald entered the theater sometime between 1:00 and 1:07 P.M., several minutes before Officer Tippit was slain seven blocks away. If true, Butch Burroughs' observation would eliminate Oswald as a candidate for Tippit's murder. Perhaps for that reason, Burroughs was asked by a Warren Commission attorney the apparently straightforward question "Did you see (Oswald) come in the theater?" and answered honestly, "No, I didn't". What someone reading this testimony would not know is that Butch Burroughs was unable to see anyone enter the theater from where he was standing at his concession stand, unless that person came into the area where he was working. As explained to me in an interview, there was a partition between his concession stand and the front door. Someone could enter the theater, go directly up a flight of stairs to the balcony, and not be seen from the concession stand. That, Burroughs said, is what Oswald apparently did. However, Burroughs still knew that Oswald had come into the theater "between 1:00 and 1:07 P.M." because he saw him inside the theater soon after that. As he told me, he sold popcorn to Oswald at 1:15 P.M.- information that the Warren Commission did not solicit from him in his testimony.

Repeat. Mr. Bill Brown, this is a warning. You will cease your smarmy postings at once or get booted off this forum. Members here do not have time for your immature understanding of President Kennedy's homicide.

Am I missing something here? 

I assume so, Ian.

But while you're looking for it perhaps you would like to enter into a "debate" with Bill about whether I was implying that men with suits were placed in the lineups
when I posted a picture of Lee Oswald's mangled face..

...or alternatively you could get on the merry-go-round "discussion" about Bill's beliefs that "Every single piece of evidence in the Tippit case points to Lee Oswald as the culprit."

Should be fun.

I'm sure we'll all be riveted. 

In the meantime I'm going to head over to Duncan MacRae's forum to see what all this "taking sides" business is all about.



I don't know about anyone else's thoughts but Bill Brown is simply a waste of everyone's time here.  He has his venue for posting utter nonsense so I fail to see why he requires a new one.  If it's sides people want then MacRae's forum will fit the Bill [so to speak] because in addition to offering members "sides" related to "Lone Nuts" and "Conspiracy Theorists" you will also be able to mingle with sexists, racists and homophobes.  It sure is a classy venue.

Oh, and if you're really lucky, you may get to interact with one of Bill's best "LN" buds.  The one and only Paul May.  The man with so many pseudonyms I'm sure he struggles to remember his real name on occasion, and a "man" who has in the past accused people he "debates" with of "child molestation" and "anti-American" beliefs.  Shall we let him in too so we can debate "sides"?  The single worst human being I have ever had the misfortune to communicate with.

Yeah, Ian, I "fear" for this forum too.  I do not want to "debate" self-proclaimed Lone Nuts, I do not want to be antagonised and "trolled" by them through thread "bumps", and I'd sooner go and book myself in for root canal work than read other members here go around in circles and be on the receiving end of Bill Brown's endless rhetorical questions. 

"Are you implying this..." 
"Are you suggesting that..."
"Are you saying the other..."
"What is your evidence for x, y, z..." 
"Bump, bump, bump, bump..."

Not for me, thanks.

Mr. Bill Brown:

I am familiar with your personal history, from very occasionally reading your posts at the jfkassassination forum. There is a sassy, spiteful tone to that forum, of which tone you have partaken, which will not be tolerated here.

I was away from the computer this weekend. I returned last night to see your posts on the Leavelle thread, and then found your reply to me on this thread. Your reply, awakening a thread that had been slumbering for quite a while, served no purpose other than to start a LN vs. CT argument, using the empty fact that you reiterated. Your reply awakened my anger, which is no sin. It is a waste of my time to reply to empty facts, which were posted for the purpose of starting an argument.

Do you care to reply to the substantive message in my reply to your post? Can you accept that there are deeper textures to what ostensibly look like facts?

In other words, what do you have to say to Burroughs stating he sold popcorn to Oswald at 1:15? To me, he sounds like a man telling the truth.

ianlloyd wrote:

Richard Gilbride wrote:Mr. Bill Brown:

This is a warning. You will cease your smarmy postings at once or get booted off this forum. Members here do not need curt reminders of what the Warren Commission alleges is truth. You are encouraged to take your LN vs. CT act elsewhere.

JFK and the Unspeakable, p. 291:

According to Warren H. "Butch" Burroughs, the concession stand operator at the Texas Theater, Lee Harvey Oswald entered the theater sometime between 1:00 and 1:07 P.M., several minutes before Officer Tippit was slain seven blocks away. If true, Butch Burroughs' observation would eliminate Oswald as a candidate for Tippit's murder. Perhaps for that reason, Burroughs was asked by a Warren Commission attorney the apparently straightforward question "Did you see (Oswald) come in the theater?" and answered honestly, "No, I didn't". What someone reading this testimony would not know is that Butch Burroughs was unable to see anyone enter the theater from where he was standing at his concession stand, unless that person came into the area where he was working. As explained to me in an interview, there was a partition between his concession stand and the front door. Someone could enter the theater, go directly up a flight of stairs to the balcony, and not be seen from the concession stand. That, Burroughs said, is what Oswald apparently did. However, Burroughs still knew that Oswald had come into the theater "between 1:00 and 1:07 P.M." because he saw him inside the theater soon after that. As he told me, he sold popcorn to Oswald at 1:15 P.M.- information that the Warren Commission did not solicit from him in his testimony.

Repeat. Mr. Bill Brown, this is a warning. You will cease your smarmy postings at once or get booted off this forum. Members here do not have time for your immature understanding of President Kennedy's homicide.

Am I missing something here? I certainly seem to be - Bill posts one post in this thread (at this particular time) wherein he reiterates what Burroughs said according to his WC testimony and he's immediately pilloried for it????

I don't get it - all "sides" so to speak should surely be free to proffer opinions etc. and then defend them?

This does not look good for this forum, I fear.

Ian,

I am only giving a personal opinion as a member here. There was no well-meaning reason for Bill to post what he did. It didn't "refute" what Richard said, nor did it add anything to what Richard said.  However, if you were just a casual observer, you might miss that it wasn't a refutation and actually mistake it for one. 

I appreciate that other members and admin are keen to preserve the integrity of this forum. In some cases, it is the very thing that brought them here. To my mind, part of preserving that integrity is - as I have explained before - found in extending a benefit of the doubt. 

Bill has had the benefit extended in other threads. He has had the Raison d'être of this forum explained. It has further been explained what we are not - and that is a CT v LN debating forum.  That is as about as useful as the Dems and Repubs debating the Afghan War. 

I would be happy for Bill to stay, but as I have hinted to him - it's up to him to fit in with our vision of this place - not up to us to fit in with what he wants it to be.

ianlloyd wrote:

Richard Gilbride wrote:Mr. Bill Brown:

This is a warning. You will cease your smarmy postings at once or get booted off this forum. Members here do not need curt reminders of what the Warren Commission alleges is truth. You are encouraged to take your LN vs. CT act elsewhere.

JFK and the Unspeakable, p. 291:

According to Warren H. "Butch" Burroughs, the concession stand operator at the Texas Theater, Lee Harvey Oswald entered the theater sometime between 1:00 and 1:07 P.M., several minutes before Officer Tippit was slain seven blocks away. If true, Butch Burroughs' observation would eliminate Oswald as a candidate for Tippit's murder. Perhaps for that reason, Burroughs was asked by a Warren Commission attorney the apparently straightforward question "Did you see (Oswald) come in the theater?" and answered honestly, "No, I didn't". What someone reading this testimony would not know is that Butch Burroughs was unable to see anyone enter the theater from where he was standing at his concession stand, unless that person came into the area where he was working. As explained to me in an interview, there was a partition between his concession stand and the front door. Someone could enter the theater, go directly up a flight of stairs to the balcony, and not be seen from the concession stand. That, Burroughs said, is what Oswald apparently did. However, Burroughs still knew that Oswald had come into the theater "between 1:00 and 1:07 P.M." because he saw him inside the theater soon after that. As he told me, he sold popcorn to Oswald at 1:15 P.M.- information that the Warren Commission did not solicit from him in his testimony.

Repeat. Mr. Bill Brown, this is a warning. You will cease your smarmy postings at once or get booted off this forum. Members here do not have time for your immature understanding of President Kennedy's homicide.

Am I missing something here? I certainly seem to be - Bill posts one post in this thread (at this particular time) wherein he reiterates what Burroughs said according to his WC testimony and he's immediately pilloried for it????

I don't get it - all "sides" so to speak should surely be free to proffer opinions etc. and then defend them?

This does not look good for this forum, I fear.

Thanks Ian.  

Richard Gilbride wrote:Mr. Bill Brown:

I am familiar with your personal history, from very occasionally reading your posts at the jfkassassination forum. There is a sassy, spiteful tone to that forum, of which tone you have partaken, which will not be tolerated here.

I was away from the computer this weekend. I returned last night to see your posts on the Leavelle thread, and then found your reply to me on this thread. Your reply, awakening a thread that had been slumbering for quite a while, served no purpose other than to start a LN vs. CT argument, using the empty fact that you reiterated. Your reply awakened my anger, which is no sin. It is a waste of my time to reply to empty facts, which were posted for the purpose of starting an argument.

Do you care to reply to the substantive message in my reply to your post? Can you accept that there are deeper textures to what ostensibly look like facts?

In other words, what do you have to say to Burroughs stating he sold popcorn to Oswald at 1:15? To me, he sounds like a man telling the truth.

"In other words, what do you have to say to Burroughs stating he sold popcorn to Oswald at 1:15? To me, he sounds like a man telling the truth."

Since you asked, I think Burroughs was very obviously lying.

greg parker wrote:

Bill Brown wrote:

Richard Gilbride wrote:My own view is that he got picked up by the Rambler, which had probably circled the block after dropping him off at the rooming house, which then took him straight to the Texas Theater. And concessionaire Butch Burroughs stated Oswald entered the Theater sometime between 1:00 and 1:07, I think it's about a 5-minute drive from 1026 North Beckley so I'd put it closer to 1:08.

Burroughs, in his testimony to the Warren Commission, was asked if he saw a struggle between a man and some officers inside the theater.  He said that he did.  He was then asked by Ball if he saw this man enter the theater.  Below was his reply:

"No, sir; I didn't."

Perhaps you should go back and read my post again.  I offered no opinion, simply fact.

Bill, it is indeed a fact that Burroughs said he did not see Oswald enter.

But it is also a fact that he could not have seen him enter.

And yet another fact that Richard never claimed Burroughs was an eye-witness to Oswald entering (to use your own words "go back and read Richard's post again")

One last fact: you don't need to actually witness an event to be able to accurately guestimate what time it happened.

Give those last 3 facts, what was the point of yours - if not to start some type of CT v LN debate? Your "fact" is irrelevant. The Warren Commission Report is irrelevant. CT vs LN debate is irrelevant. Your being here is on the cusp of irrelevancy. It's up to you. We are here to conduct and discuss new research. Our aim is having the case reopened. Get on board that program, or leave the group.

"Bill, it is indeed a fact that Burroughs said he did not see Oswald enter.

But it is also a fact that he could not have seen him enter.

And yet another fact that Richard never claimed Burroughs was an eye-witness to Oswald entering (to use your own words "go back and read Richard's post again")

One last fact: you don't need to actually witness an event to be able to accurately guestimate what time it happened."


If one believes Burroughs was not being truthful many years after testifying to the Warren Commission, then NO, it is certainly NOT a fact that Oswald entered the theater lobby but Burroughs could not have seen Oswald enter the theater lobby.  You and I have a difference of opinion on what constitutes something to be factual.

How do you know Burroughs was telling the truth when he said that Oswald entered the theater at a certain time, yet he did not actually see Oswald enter?  Because he "sounds believable?  Please.

Hell, for that matter, if he was telling the truth, how do you know that Burroughs was correct when he said Oswald entered while he was otherwise occupied and therefore, never saw Oswald enter?  If he never saw Oswald enter, how could he possibly know for a fact when Oswald entered?

Had Lee Oswald went to trial for the murder of J.D. Tippit, a defense attorney wouldn't use Burroughs as a witness in an attempt to prove that his client was inside a movie theater at a time that coincides with when almost a dozen witnesses identified him as the man who they saw shoot a police officer.  As soon as Burroughs states that he never saw the defendant enter the theater, then no one is gong to care about his "opinion" on when it was that the defendant actually entered.

In my opinion, regarding what time it was that Lee Oswald entered the Texas Theater, Johnny Brewer trumps Butch Burroughs any day of the week.

Just for laughs, I'll post some more excerpts from JFK and the Unspeakable, which I agree with wholeheartedly on this Burroughs issue.

p. 460, footnote 435

Butch Burroughs tried to explain to the Warren Commission why Lee Harvey Oswald, on entering the theater, must have gone directly up the stairs to the balcony. If so, it was impossible for Burroughs to see his entry from the concession stand. Burroughs said he was in the process of counting stock candy and putting it in his candy case: "if he had came around in front of the concession out there, I would have seen him, even though I was bent down, I would have seen him, but otherwise- I think he sneaked up the (balcony) stairs real fast." Burroughs knew that, if he had not seen Oswald come in, he must have gone immediately up the balcony stairs on entering the theater. Julia Postal, the ticket-seller for the Texas Theater, also tried to explain this logistical fact in her Warren Commission testimony: "You can go up in the balcony and right straight down, those steps come back down, and that would bring you into (the orchestra seating). He wouldn't have to go by Butch at all."

So, Bill Brown, we're light years apart in our positions on this, and I get the feeling that we'll remain that way no matter how many times we discuss this matter.

Mrs. POSTAL. We talked about that, and the concession stand is along here, and if he came in on the other end, which we summarized that is what Oswald did, because the steps, immediately as you open the door there. It has been done before with kids trying to sneak in, run right on up in the balcony. 

Mr. BALL. You asked Warren Burroughs why he didn't see him. did you? 
Mrs. POSTAL. Yes; we kidded him quite a bit anyway, because some people do then get by him. 


Small world. Did the same thing as a kid with a few other kids... at the movie house in Liverpool... (yes, Lee, I grew up partly near a place called Liverpool) "Our" version of Julia Postal used to arrive about 10 minutes into the movie... with tickets in hand for us. So it became a kind a game where we "won" (i.e. successfully penetrated the balcony unseen) if "Julia" didn't appear on schedule. She must have been a very kind-hearted woman. We really were just a bunch of street-urchins...