Who Killed J.D. Tippit?

[Martin Weidmann]

I agree that it may be impossible to ever determine with certainty what they are looking at, but it makes a lot more sense to me that it is a citation or notebook belonging to Tippit.  The investigators are looking through it.  That means no one in the vicinity, like a witness. is in possession of the item and can provide whatever they need from the wallet or book.  In a traffic stop, the officer doesn't take your wallet and look through it for an ID.   It is being handled more like evidence.  And a citation book might provide some indication of the last person Tippit encountered.  For all they knew, maybe Tippit had stopped someone and was writing that person a citation when he was shot. The DPD would have every reason to look through it as depicted for a name of a potential suspect.  A bystander might conclude it is a wallet of the suspect and when Oswald later comes to be known link the events in their mind (i.e. they were looking at Oswald's wallet).

An Oswald wallet makes no sense at all if the DPD was involved in framing Oswald.  An Oswald wallet left at the scene - either dropped by Oswald himself or planted to frame him for the Tippit crime - would have been a critical piece of evidence.  The entire point of any planting an Oswald wallet would be to link him to the crime.  There is no logical reason in either the LNer or CTer view to suppress a wallet that links Oswald to the crime.  Whether real or fake it would be critical evidence.  And why not immediately call in the name of the suspect linked to the wallet if that is what the item is?  That didn't happen but if a wallet had been left at the scene it would have been reasonable for the police to conclude it was dropped by the shooter.  Under the circumstances, the very first thing they do is call in the name of the individual linked to the wallet.  It just doesn't add up as a wallet left at the scene.

Let's revisit your pathetic arguments...

it makes a lot more sense to me that it is a citation or notebook belonging to Tippit.  The investigators are looking through it.

Nobody is looking through anything. In the footage you see the wallet being held but not opened, so where does this BS comes from?

In a traffic stop, the officer doesn't take your wallet and look through it for an ID.

There was no traffic stop.

For all they knew, maybe Tippit had stopped someone and was writing that person a citation when he was shot. The DPD would have every reason to look through it as depicted for a name of a potential suspect.

If it was a notebook, sure.. I would agree. But if it was, where did Westbrook get the names Oswald and Hidell from? Bob Barrett said Westbrook asked him if he knew either name, so where did he get those names? It couldn't have been a notebook because in the sequence of events there was no time for Tippit to write down either name and the person he was talking to wouldn't have given him two names to begin with.

A bystander might conclude it is a wallet of the suspect and when Oswald later comes to be known link the events in their mind (i.e. they were looking at Oswald's wallet).

So now an FBI agent becomes "a bystander"? Are you for real?

An Oswald wallet makes no sense at all if the DPD was involved in framing Oswald.

Who ever said that the DPD was involved in framing Oswald? Some officers perhaps (just like they framed all those others later cleared by the innocence project) but the entire department? Nobody ever claimed that!

An Oswald wallet left at the scene - either dropped by Oswald himself or planted to frame him for the Tippit crime - would have been a critical piece of evidence.  The entire point of any planting an Oswald wallet would be to link him to the crime.

Indeed.

There is no logical reason in either the LNer or CTer view to suppress a wallet that links Oswald to the crime.

True, but what makes you think the wallet found at the Tippit scene was the one that they suppressed?

That didn't happen but if a wallet had been left at the scene it would have been reasonable for the police to conclude it was dropped by the shooter.

Reasonable maybe. At first glance, but if you think about it; No! An officer at the scene isn't in a position to reach that conclusion. It's not the job of a police officer (not even a Captain) to make such a determination.

Under the circumstances, the very first thing they do is call in the name of the individual linked to the wallet.

That's just your opinion and it's completely wrong.

[Michael Walton]

Somewhere out there is a diagram of the streets showing LHO's alleged walk from the rooming house to where he supposedly encountered JDT. The entire path strains credibility. What in the world was he doing way out there on Patton if his goal was to "run scared" to the Texas Theater?

It makes absolutely no sense. He just performed an astounding feat of shooting, gets into a cab, gives it up to another person, takes the bus, goes to his room to change clothes, then takes this roundabout walk to the theater because he doesn't want to be discovered? He went through all of this so-called meticulous planning to pull off the shooting, yet leaves himself no out for a grand and secretive escape? It sure doesn't sound like he was in any hurry.

LOL

[Jon Banks]

If someone intended to frame Oswald for both the Kennedy murder and the Tippit murder, planting a wallet with both Oswald’s photo ID and an Alec Hidell ID would link Oswald to the Tippit shooting and the purchase of the Carcano rifle.

But maybe that plan had to be altered because the Press was made aware of the accounts that Oswald had his wallet on him when he was arrested at the movie theater?

It’s also curious how there was no mention of the Hidell ID in any Dallas PD accounts of the wallet from November 22. Did they intentionally not mention the Hidell ID? Or did the wallets get swapped at some point?

[Mitch Todd]

If someone intended to frame Oswald for both the Kennedy murder and the Tippit murder, planting a wallet with both Oswald’s photo ID and an Alec Hidell ID would link Oswald to the Tippit shooting and the purchase of the Carcano rifle.

But maybe that plan had to be altered because the Press was made aware of the accounts that Oswald had his wallet on him when he was arrested at the movie theater?

It’s also curious how there was no mention of the Hidell ID in any Dallas PD accounts of the wallet from November 22. Did they intentionally not mention the Hidell ID? Or did the wallets get swapped at some point?

I figure that if Oswald's wallet had been recovered on 10th with ID inside, then this information would have been broadcast over the radio, and we'd hear it on the DPD radio recordings. 

[Richard Smith]

I figure that if Oswald's wallet had been recovered on 10th with ID inside, then this information would have been broadcast over the radio, and we'd hear it on the DPD radio recordings.

Exactly.  How ironic and even bizarre is it that CTers are desperate for Oswald's wallet to have been found at the crime scene?  If the plan was to plant Oswald's wallet at the scene to frame him, obviously the authorities would have yelled it from the rooftops.  THAT WOULD BE THE ENTIRE POINT OF PLANTING HIS WALLET.  They would have immediately broadcast the name and description of any individual whose wallet was left at the scene.  That didn't happen.  It wasn't a wallet left at the scene.  The weak explanation that they could not have anticipated that Oswald would have his real wallet on him when arrested is laughable.  It would not take Nostradamus to predict that Oswald would have his own wallet.  That wouldn't blow the plan.  It would have easly have been anticipated and accounted for.  And if the authorities are going to suppress one of the wallets, then it would be the one found on Oswald at his arrest because finding his wallet at the Tippit crime scene would have high probative value linking him to that crime.  What CTers are suggesting makes no narrative sense and even cuts against their own arguments.  Like many things "it is just so" because there is no way to conclusively prove what the item is after all these years.

[Martin Weidmann]

I figure that if Oswald's wallet had been recovered on 10th with ID inside, then this information would have been broadcast over the radio, and we'd hear it on the DPD radio recordings.

Exactly.  How ironic and even bizarre is it that CTers are desperate for Oswald's wallet to have been found at the crime scene?  If the plan was to plant Oswald's wallet at the scene to frame him, obviously the authorities would have yelled it from the rooftops.  THAT WOULD BE THE ENTIRE POINT OF PLANTING HIS WALLET.  They would have immediately broadcast the name and description of any individual whose wallet was left at the scene.  That didn't happen. It wasn't a wallet left at the scene.  The weak explanation that they could not have anticipated that Oswald would have his real wallet on him when arrested is laughable.   It would not take Nostradamus to predict that Oswald would have his own wallet.  That wouldn't blow the plan.  It would have easly have been anticipated and accounted for.  And if the authorities are going to suppress one of the wallets, then it would be the one found on Oswald at his arrest because finding his wallet at the Tippit crime scene would have high probative value linking him to that crime.  What CTers are suggesting makes no narrative sense and even cuts against their own arguments.  Like many things "it is just so" because there is no way to conclusively prove what the item is after all these years.

Did you two clowns go to the same "dumb and dumber" school?

If the plan was to plant Oswald's wallet at the scene to frame him, obviously the authorities would have yelled it from the rooftops.

And they did. They just couldn't say it was found at the crime scene because it was already known that Oswald had his wallet with him when he was arrested.

They would have immediately broadcast the name and description of any individual whose wallet was left at the scene.  That didn't happen.

That didn't happen because (1) police never give names of potential suspects on the radio and (2) it's not up to a cop to determine that the wallet's owner had anything to do with the crime. He could just as easily have been a bystander who simply lost his wallet.

It wasn't a wallet left at the scene.

A bold false claim from somebody who wasn't there and is contradicted by FBI agent Barrett who actually was there.

The weak explanation that they could not have anticipated that Oswald would have his real wallet on him when arrested is laughable.   It would not take Nostradamus to predict that Oswald would have his own wallet.  That wouldn't blow the plan.

No it wouldn't, fool. The wallet Bentley took from Oswald contained only an Oswald ID (there is not one report about a Hidell ID being in there), a driver's license and a credit card.
The wallet that Detective Gus Rose was given by an unidentified officer contained a Hidell ID. How can this be? Simple; they switched the wallet taken from Oswald with the one found at the Tippit scene.

It would have easly have been anticipated and accounted for.  And if the authorities are going to suppress one of the wallets, then it would be the one found on Oswald at his arrest because finding his wallet at the Tippit crime scene would have high probative value linking him to that crime.

Indeed. Except they could hardly say the wallet was found at the Tippit scene, when Paul Bentley is telling everybody on television that he took the wallet from Oswald in the car, after his arrest. So, they did the next best thing; switch the wallets and pretend the Tippit scene wallet was taken from Oswald in the car.

What CTers are suggesting makes no narrative sense and even cuts against their own arguments.

Actually, it's your own BS that doesn't make sense.

Like many things "it is just so" because there is no way to conclusively prove what the item is after all these years.

FBI agent Bob Barrett saying it was wallet that Westbrook was holding is not conclusive enough for you? Or are you another one of those clowns who, for the purpose of saving their own flawed narrative, simply claim that Barrett was lying?

[Richard Smith]

Did you two clowns go to the same "dumb and dumber" school?

If the plan was to plant Oswald's wallet at the scene to frame him, obviously the authorities would have yelled it from the rooftops.

And they did. They just couldn't say it was found at the crime scene because it was already known that Oswald had his wallet with him when he was arrested.

They would have immediately broadcast the name and description of any individual whose wallet was left at the scene.  That didn't happen.

That didn't happen because (1) police never give names of potential suspects on the radio and (2) it's not up to a cop to determine that the wallet's owner had anything to do with the crime. He could just as easily have been a bystander who simply lost his wallet.

It wasn't a wallet left at the scene.

A bold false claim from somebody who wasn't there and is contradicted by FBI agent Barrett who actually was there.

The weak explanation that they could not have anticipated that Oswald would have his real wallet on him when arrested is laughable.   It would not take Nostradamus to predict that Oswald would have his own wallet.  That wouldn't blow the plan.

No it wouldn't, fool. The wallet Bentley took from Oswald contained only an Oswald ID (there is not one report about a Hidell ID being in there), a driver's license and a credit card.
The wallet that Detective Gus Rose was given by an unidentified officer contained a Hidell ID. How can this be? Simple; they switched the wallet taken from Oswald with the one found at the Tippit scene.

It would have easly have been anticipated and accounted for.  And if the authorities are going to suppress one of the wallets, then it would be the one found on Oswald at his arrest because finding his wallet at the Tippit crime scene would have high probative value linking him to that crime.

Indeed. Except they could hardly say the wallet was found at the Tippit scene, when Paul Bentley is telling everybody on television that he took the wallet from Oswald in the car, after his arrest. So, they did the next best thing; switch the wallets and pretend the Tippit scene wallet was taken from Oswald in the car.

What CTers are suggesting makes no narrative sense and even cuts against their own arguments.

Actually, it's your own BS that doesn't make sense.

Like many things "it is just so" because there is no way to conclusively prove what the item is after all these years.

FBI agent Bob Barrett saying it was wallet that Westbrook was holding is not conclusive enough for you? Or are you another one of those clowns who, for the purpose of saving their own flawed narrative, simply claim that Barrett was lying?

So hostile.  It is unfortunate that posters are allowed to engage in this type of constant tirade and insults.   And, of course, this rant is full of false premises and "assumptions."  In which we learn that the police will not broadcast the name of a murder suspect over their police radio or even his description for other officers!  LOL.  And it's not up to the cops to determine if the wallet's owner had anything to do with the crime! Wow.  I'm left speechless by that one. They certainly broadcast a description of the JFK assassin over the radio but in Martin's fantasy world that doesn't happen.  And again, the discovery of a second wallet on Oswald would fully have been anticipated by anyone planting a wallet at the Tippit scene.  It wouldn't have blown the deal.  And they certainly would not have stood out in the open looking at it and being filmed if they intended to suppress that wallet. 

[Jon Banks]

So hostile.  It is unfortunate that posters are allowed to engage in this type of constant tirade and insults.   And, of course, this rant is full of false premises and "assumptions."  In which we learn that the police will not broadcast the name of a murder suspect over their police radio or even his description for other officers!  LOL.  And it's not up to the cops to determine if the wallet's owner had anything to do with the crime! Wow.  I'm left speechless by that one. They certainly broadcast a description of the JFK assassin over the radio but in Martin's fantasy world that doesn't happen.  And again, the discovery of a second wallet on Oswald would fully have been anticipated by anyone planting a wallet at the Tippit scene.  It wouldn't have blown the deal.  And they certainly would not have stood out in the open looking at it and being filmed if they intended to suppress that wallet.

It only takes one or two people to manipulate evidence. Not everyone on the Dallas PD had to know or be aware of what was going on. The person on the Dallas PD who I think potentially was a conspirator or part of the coverup was Captain Westbrook. I can't prove it but his involvement in all three crime scenes that day put him in a position to manipulate the evidence and the investigations as needed.

There's enough corroboration to conclude that the Dallas police found a wallet at the Tippit scene. The contents of the wallet and whether it was a "second Oswald wallet" remain up for historical debate. There's good reason to believe Barrett told the truth as he remembers it but his memory could be inaccurate.

As I noted previously, the lack of references by the Dallas PD to the Hidell ID on November 22 looks suspicious as well but we can't rule out that they intentionally avoided talking about it before they knew more. 

So, the two wallet thing is not easily dismissed. It remains one of the many unsolved mysteries of the Kennedy and Tippit murders...