So are we assuming that Oswald really did this?
He went to home, to grab a jacket at 1:00 p.m. in the afternoon on a hot sunny Texas day to wear over his long sleeved flannel, and his handy pistol, so he could make it as quickly as possible to 10th and Patton.... to kill a cop.
Why would Oswald go to 10th & Patton in the first place? Because he knew Tippit would be there? I don't even think Tippit knew he would be there, because he was clearly looking for someone if he was pulling over cars and driving like a crazy man.
Wouldn't it be more plausible that Tippit was just in the wrong place, at the wrong time, and ran into the wrong person? Otherwise why would 10th & Patton be such an important meeting place, for Oswald or anyone else? If Tippit was supposed to meet someone there, why was he making stops to use the phone and pulling over cars searching for people?
It seems people are taking witness stories as gospel. "So and so saw Oswald at 1:04 p.m. at blah blah blah." Why are people still putting so much faith into witness descriptions and allegations when we know witnesses were being persuaded and threatened to recant & fabricate stories?
It's all hearsay evidence, and hearsay isn't even allowed in court cases. For good reason. Plus we know the police were dirty and covering things up. Everything should be considered tainted. Can't trust any of it. It's like people calling Oswald guilty based on the rifle found at the TBD, when there was clearly more than 1 being used to frame him. It just doesn't make any sense.
Asking if he ran or walked to a specific area without knowing if he was even there at all is silly.