Youtube Interview I Did, Tippit Case

[Bill Chapman]

Thank you to Jack and Bill B.

My not knowing the area and given the circumstances I would have thought he might have stayed on say, Beckley or Jefferson.

The (presumably) heavier traffic on those routes (well, at least as compared to the, apparently, 'go-nowhere street' claimed here recently)  would potentially lead to more 'eyes on' from motorists listening to a description of events. Not to mention potentially more pedestrians as well. Especially those who want to go somewhere 

And as far as Oswald knew, the cops might already have his address, and in that case one would be more than a little foolhardy to remain on streets that would lead them directly to the Lee safe-house. In fact, weren't the cop cars that the alert citizen Brewer noticed (while seeing the nobody duck out of sight to look at tennis shoes) heading up Jefferson at some point?

[Bill Chapman]

No he didn't. If the reports are to believed he merely admitted having a revolver, which he said he had bought in Fort  With

You missed the part where Oswald wouldn't tell the cops where he bought the firearm in Fort Worth. So that claim remains, well, worthless..

[Colin Crow]

The (presumably) heavier traffic on those routes (well, at least as compared to the, apparently, 'go-nowhere street' claimed here recently)  would potentially lead to more 'eyes on' from motorists listening to a description of events. Not to mention potentially more pedestrians as well. Especially those who want to go somewhere 

I was referring to Tippit, why not stick to main streets? I assume you did not see my original post questioning Tippit cruising east on 10th.

[Bill Chapman]

I was referring to Tippit, why not stick to main streets? I assume you did not see my original post questioning Tippit cruising east on 10th.

No problem... police would be (or at least should be) savvy to the fact that fugitives would most likely go off the beaten track; play hide 'n seek. Therefore placing 'sentinels' (if you will) in relatively off-the-grid areas seems a no-brainer to me.


----------
EDIT
BONUS
----------
> 'play hide
'n seek'

[Colin Crow]

No problem... police would be (or at least should be) savvy to the fact that fugitives would most likely go off the beaten track; play hide 'n seek. Therefore placing 'sentinels' (if you will) in relatively off-the-grid areas seems a no-brainer to me.


----------
EDIT
BONUS
----------
> 'play hide
'n seek'

But he was there to prevent crime and be of assistance for armed robbery or clear traffic jams. His predominant purpose in Oak Cliff was not seeking fugitives.

[Martin Weidmann]

You missed the part where Oswald wouldn't tell the cops where he bought the firearm in Fort Worth. So that claim remains, well, worthless..

Who says that Oswald wouldn't tell the cops where he bought the revolver?

And, if he did, what's wrong with a suspect saying "you are the cop, you figure it out"?

You don't conduct an investigation or interrogation without verifying if what the suspect said is true or not.

The FBI spend weeks checking some 400 dry cleaners to find out where Oswald's gray jacket came from
Nobody made any effort to check out the origin of the revolver. Go figure

[Richard Smith]

You are implying that the evidence was planted after the fact with no basis at all to reach that conclusion.

Wrong. The fact that Hill carried a piece of crucial evidence around leaves the door wide open for the possibility of manipulation. Evidence is to be submitted to the Identification Bureau as soon as possible. In this case several pieces of evidence, including the jacket, the revolver and the wallet were not submitted until hours after Oswald's arrest.

So again, here is Martin/Roger arguing that because Hill "carried a piece of crucial evidence around" that it "leaves the door wide open for the possibility of manipulation."  Something he now claims that no one has argued.  Martin/Roger has a very ambiguous relationship with the truth.  My point - once again - is that even if Hill carried the pistol around that is not evidence of "manipulation" of the evidence.  The evidence remains the evidence even if Hill did not follow the proper procedure (again something Martin/Roger has claimed but not demonstrated).

[Richard Smith]

Oh I understood what you were saying alright. It's BS as per usual.

And there is nothing about Hill allegedly maintaining control over the pistol for a couple of hours that leads to the conclusion that it was "manipulated" as you stupidly and without any basis whatsoever suggested.

Are you always this dumb or do you only act that way on this forum? Nobody has claimed that Hill walking around with a revolver would justify the conclusion that it was manipulated. That's just another one of your long list of strawman.


Your making up stuff again, as per usual

Who is making up stuff Roger?

"The fact that Hill carried a piece of crucial evidence around leaves the door wide open for the possibility of manipulation."