Oswald's Light-Colored Jacket

[Walt Cakebread]

I happen to agree with your interpretation, but the statement is ambiguous and could be interpreted either way.

"They knew what they were doing and they were trying to railroad him". ...William Whaley at a police line up on 11/23/63

These are the words of a simple cabbie.....  Whaley observed  the unfairness of the line up and recognized that Lee was being "railroaded"......when he said...."they were trying to railroad him"

[John Iacoletti]

You'd have to ask Lee that.

Still, no harm in having the cab go past the rooming house before getting out.

Maybe Whaley's passenger got out at the 500 block of North Beckley because that's where he was going.  Or even south of there as Whaley mentioned he was angled south when he got out of the cab.

[Bill Brown]

Maybe Whaley's passenger got out at the 500 block of North Beckley because that's where he was going.  Or even south of there as Whaley mentioned he was angled south when he got out of the cab.

Whaley's passenger did not get out at the 500 block.  The passenger gave the 500 block of North Beckley as the destination when he entered the cab, but once the cab passed the rooming house, the passenger told Whaley to stop and he exited the cab a couple blocks short of the original destination (and about three blocks past the rooming house).

[Bill Brown]

You stopped making sense a while back.

Great contribution.  Keep up the good work.

[Martin Weidmann]

You stopped making sense a while back.

Not only that but he is lousy at "translations" as well

[Bill Brown]

You stopped making sense a while back.

Not only that but he is lousy at "translations" as well

[Bill Brown]

In an FBI report dated 12/13/63, William Smith stated that the man he saw shoot Tippit was wearing a "light brown jacket".

This is, of course, the same man Markham saw shoot Tippit, who was wearing a "light short jacket" and who she later identified as Lee Oswald.

This is, of course, the same man who Scoggins saw wearing a "light-colored jacket" with a gun in his hands within a spit second of hearing shots and seeing Tippit fall to the ground.  Scoggins identified this man, who he watched turn the corner from Tenth and run down Patton, as Lee Oswald.

This is, of course, the same man who Callaway saw come from the corner of Tenth and run down Patton in his direction, the man who Callaway said was wearing a "light tannish gray windbreaker jacket" and had a gun in his hands.  Callaway positively identified this man as Lee Oswald.

This is, of course, the same man seen by Barbara Davis, Virginia Davis and Sam Guinyard, who all stated that the man was Lee Oswald, had a gun in his hands and was wearing a jacket.

Why did Oswald ditch his jacket by the time he was seen by Brewer on Jefferson?

[Gary Craig]

In an FBI report dated 12/13/63, William Smith stated that the man he saw shoot Tippit was wearing a "light brown jacket".

This is, of course, the same man Markham saw shoot Tippit, who was wearing a "light short jacket" and who she later identified as Lee Oswald.

This is, of course, the same man who Scoggins saw wearing a "light-colored jacket" with a gun in his hands within a spit second of hearing shots and seeing Tippit fall to the ground.  Scoggins identified this man, who he watched turn the corner from Tenth and run down Patton, as Lee Oswald.

This is, of course, the same man who Callaway saw come from the corner of Tenth and run down Patton in his direction, the man who Callaway said was wearing a "light tannish gray windbreaker jacket" and had a gun in his hands.  Callaway positively identified this man as Lee Oswald.

This is, of course, the same man seen by Barbara Davis, Virginia Davis and Sam Guinyard, who all stated that the man was Lee Oswald, had a gun in his hands and was wearing a jacket.

Why did Oswald ditch his jacket by the time he was seen by Brewer on Jefferson?

"This is, of course, the same man Markham saw shoot Tippit, who was wearing a "light short jacket"



"and who she later identified as Lee Oswald."

from
"VINNIE IT IS ROUND"
by Mark Lane


                     "The Commission claimed that Mrs. Markham identified Lee Harvey Oswald as the man who shot the policeman at a line up on November 22 and that in testimony before the Commission, Mrs. Markham confirmed herpositive identification of Lee Harvey Oswald as the man she saw kill Officer Tippit. Captain Fritz - who needed that identification real quickly -- testified that the lineup was hurriedly arranged at 4:30 that afternoon, less than three and a half hours after Tippit's death and less than that after Oswald's arrest. Mrs Markham was "quite hysterical"when she arrived at police headquarters. Her state and the atmosphere in the lineup room are best described by therecord of her testimony."

Q: Now when you went into the room you looked these people over, these four men?

Markham: Yes , sir.

Q: Did you recognize anyone in the lineup?

Markham: No, sir

Q: You did not? Did you see anybody-I have asked you that question before-did you recognize anybody from their face?

          "Counsel wished to remind Mrs. Markham that when he had prepared her for her testimony, before
a record of her answers was made, the matter had been discussed. To prepare a witness for testimony may
be acceptable where adversary and hostile cross-examination is expected, and it is also a legitimate way of
preventing repetition and irrelevant conjecture. The record of the Warren Commission, however, reveals no
such cross-examination and was burdened to such a degree by repetition and irrelevance that the initial
preparation seems to have been for the purpose of leading the witness to give an appropiate answer."

Markham: From their face, no.

Q: Did you identify anybody in these four people?

Markham: I didn't know nobody.

Q: I know you didn't know nobody, but did anybody in that lineup look like anybody you had seen before?

Markham: No. I had never seen none of them, none of these men.

Q: No one of the four?

Markham: No one of them.

Q: No one of the four?

Markham: No, sir.

        "At this point counsel, a teacher of criminal law and procedure at the University of Southern California anda member of the U.S. Judical Conference Advisory Committee on Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, asked arather leading question. Mrs. Markham said that she recognized no one at the lineup; counsel tried five times for amore acceptable answer. Then, departing a little from the legal procedure he teaches, he next asked his friendly but disconcerting witness, "Was there a number two man in there?" Mrs. Markham replied, "Number two is the one I picked." Counsel began another question:"I thought you just told me that you hadn't, but Mrs. Markham interrupted to answer inexplicably, "I thought you wanted me to describe their clothing."

Counsel then inquired:

Q: You recognized him from his appearance?

Markham: I asked-I looked at him. When I saw this man I wasn't sure, but I had cold chills just run all over me.

        "A mystical identification at best. However, the Commission was satisfied that its lawyer had at last
obtained the right answer: "Addressing itself solely to the probative value of Mrs. Markham's contemporaneous discription of the gunman and her identification of Oswald at a police lineup, the Commission considers her testimony reliable."