Interview With James Leavelle

Whether you like it or not, Leavelle was convinced (and rightly so, in my opinion) that Oswald was guilty.


Jim Leavelle, when speaking with Oswald for the murder of J.D. Tippit (before Leavelle knew that Oswald would be a suspect in the murder of the President):

"Lee, you strike me as an individual who has a lot of sense, very intelligent.  You know that we can take the bullet that killed the officer and run tests on your pistol that you had on you when you was arrested in the theater and match it up and prove that it came from your gun.  You understand that, don't you?"

Since Leavelle was convinced that Oswald was guilty for Tippit's murder, he obviously wanted Oswald to be identified as the killer.  There's nothing suspicious about that.  However, nothing has been presented to suggest that Leavelle did anything to influence the positive identifications by either Scoggins or Whaley... and make no mistake... Scoggins and Whaley both positively identified Oswald.  Of course, you know that.

Lee Farley wrote:

Oswald: "Will somebody...please...go get me my lucky assassin shirt."

Lee Farley wrote:

Oswald: "Will somebody...please...go get me my lucky assassin shirt."

JFK Student wrote:http://stillwatergazette.com/2013/08/29/dallas-detective-still-answering-questions-about-jfk-assassination/

greg parker wrote:

Whether you like it or not, Leavelle was convinced (and rightly so, in my opinion) that Oswald was guilty.


Jim Leavelle, when speaking with Oswald for the murder of J.D. Tippit (before Leavelle knew that Oswald would be a suspect in the murder of the President):

Okay. So you've gone from arguing that the DPD already had "every single piece of evidence in the Tippit case points to Lee Oswald as the culprit" prior to Scoggins viewing any lineup to now saying that "Leavelle was convinced that Oswald was guilty". Police instinct, no doubt because the EVIDENCE was not all in as you initially claimed. 

"Lee, you strike me as an individual who has a lot of sense, very intelligent.  You know that we can take the bullet that killed the officer and run tests on your pistol that you had on you when you was arrested in the theater and match it up and prove that it came from your gun.  You understand that, don't you?"

 This and other quotes you've pulled from Bugliosi's book are remarkable in that it appears that Leavelle's memory improved dramatically over the years - or maybe Bugliosi drew all those memories out using hypnosis?

From Leavelle's WC testimony regarding the Scoggins/Whaley lineup
Mr. BALL. Did you go down with them to the showup? 
Mr. LEAVELLE. I am sure that I did. I do not recall but I am sure I must have. 
Mr. BALL. Here's some other notes that you might look at to refresh your memory [notes to witness]. 
Mr. LEAVELLE. From these notes here it indicates I was there along with them at that time. 
Mr. BALL. What is your memory? Is your memory different from the notes? 
Mr. LEAVELLE. I do not remember who else was there, if anyone was. 
Mr. BALL. You know that you were there with Scoggins and Whaley? 
Mr. LEAVELLE. Yes. 
Mr. BALL. Do you remember the men in the showup? 
Mr. LEAVELLE. I do not recall who was in there. I know it says who was here but I could not tell you. 

So on April 7, 1964, Leavelle could remember very little about that lineup. In fact, he didn't seem to recall even being there. But suddenly Bugliosi has him quoting large chunks of conversations with Oswald and Scoggins. Give me a break. 

Since Leavelle was convinced that Oswald was guilty for Tippit's murder, he obviously wanted Oswald to be identified as the killer.  There's nothing suspicious about that.  However, nothing has been presented to suggest that Leavelle did anything to influence the positive identifications by either Scoggins or Whaley... and make no mistake... Scoggins and Whaley both positively identified Oswald.  Of course, you know that.

Leavelle was convinced based on... [fill in the blank with the evidence you can prove Leavelle had access to prior to the Scoggins lineup]

Mr. BALL. You took part in the investigation, did you not, as a member of the Dallas Police Department? 
Mr. LEAVELLE. A minor part you might say. I didn't have much to do with Oswald, myself. 

As you now know, thanks to Hasan, Scoggins was less than certain about his ID of Oswald two days after making it.

And Whaley admitted in testimony anyone could have picked Oswald out in that lineup. He was the only one whose photo had been plastered all over the media. He was the only one showing signs of a beating. He was the only one not a teenager or Latino. He was the only one complaining about his treatment.

Bill Brown wrote:

greg parker wrote:

Whether you like it or not, Leavelle was convinced (and rightly so, in my opinion) that Oswald was guilty.


Jim Leavelle, when speaking with Oswald for the murder of J.D. Tippit (before Leavelle knew that Oswald would be a suspect in the murder of the President):

Okay. So you've gone from arguing that the DPD already had "every single piece of evidence in the Tippit case points to Lee Oswald as the culprit" prior to Scoggins viewing any lineup to now saying that "Leavelle was convinced that Oswald was guilty". Police instinct, no doubt because the EVIDENCE was not all in as you initially claimed. 

"Lee, you strike me as an individual who has a lot of sense, very intelligent.  You know that we can take the bullet that killed the officer and run tests on your pistol that you had on you when you was arrested in the theater and match it up and prove that it came from your gun.  You understand that, don't you?"

 This and other quotes you've pulled from Bugliosi's book are remarkable in that it appears that Leavelle's memory improved dramatically over the years - or maybe Bugliosi drew all those memories out using hypnosis?

From Leavelle's WC testimony regarding the Scoggins/Whaley lineup
Mr. BALL. Did you go down with them to the showup? 
Mr. LEAVELLE. I am sure that I did. I do not recall but I am sure I must have. 
Mr. BALL. Here's some other notes that you might look at to refresh your memory [notes to witness]. 
Mr. LEAVELLE. From these notes here it indicates I was there along with them at that time. 
Mr. BALL. What is your memory? Is your memory different from the notes? 
Mr. LEAVELLE. I do not remember who else was there, if anyone was. 
Mr. BALL. You know that you were there with Scoggins and Whaley? 
Mr. LEAVELLE. Yes. 
Mr. BALL. Do you remember the men in the showup? 
Mr. LEAVELLE. I do not recall who was in there. I know it says who was here but I could not tell you. 

So on April 7, 1964, Leavelle could remember very little about that lineup. In fact, he didn't seem to recall even being there. But suddenly Bugliosi has him quoting large chunks of conversations with Oswald and Scoggins. Give me a break. 

Since Leavelle was convinced that Oswald was guilty for Tippit's murder, he obviously wanted Oswald to be identified as the killer.  There's nothing suspicious about that.  However, nothing has been presented to suggest that Leavelle did anything to influence the positive identifications by either Scoggins or Whaley... and make no mistake... Scoggins and Whaley both positively identified Oswald.  Of course, you know that.

Leavelle was convinced based on... [fill in the blank with the evidence you can prove Leavelle had access to prior to the Scoggins lineup]

Mr. BALL. You took part in the investigation, did you not, as a member of the Dallas Police Department? 
Mr. LEAVELLE. A minor part you might say. I didn't have much to do with Oswald, myself. 

As you now know, thanks to Hasan, Scoggins was less than certain about his ID of Oswald two days after making it.

And Whaley admitted in testimony anyone could have picked Oswald out in that lineup. He was the only one whose photo had been plastered all over the media. He was the only one showing signs of a beating. He was the only one not a teenager or Latino. He was the only one complaining about his treatment.

"Lee, you strike me as an individual who has a lot of sense, very intelligent.  You know that we can take the bullet that killed the officer and run tests on your pistol that you had on you when you was arrested in the theater and match it up and prove that it came from your gun.  You understand that, don't you?" -  Bill Brown (quoting Jim Leavelle)

"This and other quotes you've pulled from Bugliosi's book are remarkable in that it appears that Leavelle's memory improved dramatically over the years - or maybe Bugliosi drew all those memories out using hypnosis?" - Greg Parker


No.  I've never read Reclaiming History.  What page of Bugliosi's book did this appear on?  Do you know?

Bill Brown wrote:I quoted Leavelle (verbatim) from a C-SPAN video.  However, this site is not allowing me to post the link (to the video) for some reason.  I get an error message saying that new members are not allowed to post external links or emails for seven days.

I do own Four Days In November.  What page?  Do you know?  I would like to have a look.

greg parker wrote:

Bill Brown wrote:I quoted Leavelle (verbatim) from a C-SPAN video.  However, this site is not allowing me to post the link (to the video) for some reason.  I get an error message saying that new members are not allowed to post external links or emails for seven days.

I do own Four Days In November.  What page?  Do you know?  I would like to have a look.

The "he can bitch all he wants" quote is on page 363. The ban on newbies not posting links for 7 days is a safeguard against anyone coming here for the sole purpose of spamming.

Mr. BALL. Did you go down with them to the showup? 
Mr. LEAVELLE. I am sure that I did. I do not recall but I am sure I must have.

Bill Brown wrote:

greg parker wrote:

Bill Brown wrote:I quoted Leavelle (verbatim) from a C-SPAN video.  However, this site is not allowing me to post the link (to the video) for some reason.  I get an error message saying that new members are not allowed to post external links or emails for seven days.

I do own Four Days In November.  What page?  Do you know?  I would like to have a look.

The "he can bitch all he wants" quote is on page 363. The ban on newbies not posting links for 7 days is a safeguard against anyone coming here for the sole purpose of spamming.

Mr. BALL. Did you go down with them to the showup? 
Mr. LEAVELLE. I am sure that I did. I do not recall but I am sure I must have.

Okay.  The Scoggins comment appears in Four Days In November.  It appears other places as well.  I got it from With Malice.  It was a false assumption on your part.

But, I thought you said the Leavelle quote came from "Bugliosi's book".  Which book and what page?

Might not be exactly the same, but something similar on p236 in regard to "wrapping Oswald up real tight..." 

Also, you criticize me and tell me that it is "bad form" for not revealing where I got my quote from, yet your own rule does not allow me to post the source.

You don't need to provide a link. You just need to name your source so that it can be checked. 

Alan Dixon wrote:Once at the police station we were brought out to the defendant and his solicitor and it was their choice as to who took part in the line up.

Bill Brown wrote:

Hasan Yusuf wrote:Clearly, Leavelle and the DPD didn't desperately want Oswald to be identified as Tippit's shooter.

Of course Leavelle and the rest of the Dallas Police Department wanted Oswald to be identified as the cop-killer.  Oswald was the cop-killer.  Why wouldn't Leavelle and the rest of the Dallas Police Department want the man who killed the cop to be identified as such?

• A murder weapon that the prosecution says you ordered from a mail order magazine but the weapon in evidence didn't actually match the mail order advertisement;
  
• The empty cartridges ascribed to this weapon had a dubious chain of custody;
  
• Witnesses who identify you as the shooter and others who cannot or do not;
  
• The prosecution alleges you took the weapon to the scene of the crime in paper bag that wasn't photographed at the scene and the only 2 people who saw you actually carrying anything that morning say that the bag was a different bag;
  
• The taxi cab you allegedly escaped the scene of the crime in had a manifest that showed you boarded at a particular time yet that would have been impossible in terms of the crime committed, so the prosecution alleges that the taxi manifest is completed in a different way, whereas the actual manifest itself contradicts that.
  

Bill Brown wrote:Smart arse?  So name calling is allowed?  Please clarify.
 
"He can bitch and holler all he wants, but that is the man I saw running from the scene." - William Scoggins

Lee Farley wrote:

Alan Dixon wrote:Once at the police station we were brought out to the defendant and his solicitor and it was their choice as to who took part in the line up.

Well, there's the problem.  Why didn't Lee Oswald's solicitor...

...wait...

...oh yeah.  He didn't have one did he? 

ianlloyd wrote:

Bill Brown wrote:

Hasan Yusuf wrote:Clearly, Leavelle and the DPD didn't desperately want Oswald to be identified as Tippit's shooter.

Of course Leavelle and the rest of the Dallas Police Department wanted Oswald to be identified as the cop-killer.  Oswald was the cop-killer.  Why wouldn't Leavelle and the rest of the Dallas Police Department want the man who killed the cop to be identified as such?

Hi Bill,


It's been a while!!!

Hypothetical question - let's say you were facing murder charges which you deny where there was, for (a very limited) example:

• A murder weapon that the prosecution says you ordered from a mail order magazine but the weapon in evidence didn't actually match the mail order advertisement;
  
• The empty cartridges ascribed to this weapon had a dubious chain of custody;
  
• Witnesses who identify you as the shooter and others who cannot or do not;
  
• The prosecution alleges you took the weapon to the scene of the crime in paper bag that wasn't photographed at the scene and the only 2 people who saw you actually carrying anything that morning say that the bag was a different bag;
  
• The taxi cab you allegedly escaped the scene of the crime in had a manifest that showed you boarded at a particular time yet that would have been impossible in terms of the crime committed, so the prosecution alleges that the taxi manifest is completed in a different way, whereas the actual manifest itself contradicts that.
  

etc. etc. and the prosecution states that these are all just "honest mistakes" by both law enforcement officials and lay people.

Now, would you instruct your defence lawyer not to question any of this since you agree that they must all be honest mistakes as the prosecution alleges and must therefore be correct since the prosecution alleges it and has the support of the law enforcement agencies?

After all, this is essentially how you are levelling the case against Oswald.

Hasan Yusuf wrote:

Bill Brown wrote:Smart arse?  So name calling is allowed?  Please clarify.
 
"He can bitch and holler all he wants, but that is the man I saw running from the scene." - William Scoggins

You make one more smart arse comment against Greg, and I will kick your arse off the forum! Mark my words, Mr Troll.

Bill Brown wrote:

Lee Farley wrote:

Alan Dixon wrote:Once at the police station we were brought out to the defendant and his solicitor and it was their choice as to who took part in the line up.

Well, there's the problem.  Why didn't Lee Oswald's solicitor...

...wait...

...oh yeah.  He didn't have one did he? 

Hi Lee.  You're aware, according to Louis Nichols, that Oswald was offered legal representation but turned it down.  Right?

Oswald was visited by Louis Nichols, the President of the Dallas County Bar Association, to make sure that Oswald was NOT being denied legal representation.  Nichols had received calls from colleagues who expressed to him a concern that Oswald was possibly being denied legal representation.

Nichols offered legal representation to Oswald, which was denied by the wretched waif.

Oswald said he wanted a New York lawyer named John Abt or a lawyer associated with the American Civil Liberties Union to represent him.  Oswald also wanted a lawyer "who believes as I believe, and believes in my innocence."

Nichols:  "What I am interested in is knowing right now, do you want me or the Dallas Bar Association to try to get you a lawyer?"

Oswald:  "No.  Not right now."

Lee Farley wrote:

Bill Brown wrote:

Lee Farley wrote:

Alan Dixon wrote:Once at the police station we were brought out to the defendant and his solicitor and it was their choice as to who took part in the line up.

Well, there's the problem.  Why didn't Lee Oswald's solicitor...

...wait...

...oh yeah.  He didn't have one did he? 

Hi Lee.  You're aware, according to Louis Nichols, that Oswald was offered legal representation but turned it down.  Right?

Oswald was visited by Louis Nichols, the President of the Dallas County Bar Association, to make sure that Oswald was NOT being denied legal representation.  Nichols had received calls from colleagues who expressed to him a concern that Oswald was possibly being denied legal representation.

Nichols offered legal representation to Oswald, which was denied by the wretched waif.

Oswald said he wanted a New York lawyer named John Abt or a lawyer associated with the American Civil Liberties Union to represent him.  Oswald also wanted a lawyer "who believes as I believe, and believes in my innocence."

Nichols:  "What I am interested in is knowing right now, do you want me or the Dallas Bar Association to try to get you a lawyer?"

Oswald:  "No.  Not right now."

Oh, for fucks sake.  Maybe this shit-for-brains needs to read some of the damn threads here before opening his mouth.

Now we're going to have to go over the Nichols bullshit?

Someone give me a call when this prick has left please.

I'm outta here.