Who Killed J.D. Tippit?

[Richard Smith]

There is this video on the youtube. It says that the wallet found wallet was found at the Tippit murder scene and Westbrook and Bob Barret had an exchange about it. I am not sure how such a strong evidence can be discarded. It's there on the video

Someone put a video on Youtube?  I guess that solves the mystery.  Again, there is no confirmation that this is even a wallet.  The quality of the film does not allow us to reach that conclusion.
And there are many reasons for it not to have been a wallet left at the crime scene.  Not the least of which is that we know the police did not radio the name and description of whomever left any such wallet.  That person would have been a murder suspect.  The police would have certainly informed fellow officers of the name and description of a cop killing murderer on the loose in the vicinity.  Not to do so would have been grossly negligent.  It is either Tippit's citation book or the wallet of some bystander.  If some conspirator had left the wallet to frame Oswald or Oswald actually left the wallet, the police would certainly have reported that fact.  There is no coherent explanation for the DPD - whom many CTers allege were framing Oswald - to have suppressed one of the most incriminatory pieces of evidence in the case to link Oswald to the Tippit murder beyond any doubt. 

[Martin Weidmann]

Someone put a video on Youtube?  I guess that solves the mystery.  Again, there is no confirmation that this is even a wallet.  The quality of the film does not allow us to reach that conclusion.
And there are many reasons for it not to have been a wallet left at the crime scene.  Not the least of which is that we know the police did not radio the name and description of whomever left any such wallet.  That person would have been a murder suspect.  The police would have certainly informed fellow officers of the name and description of a cop killing murderer on the loose in the vicinity.  Not to do so would have been grossly negligent.  It is either Tippit's citation book or the wallet of some bystander.  If some conspirator had left the wallet to frame Oswald or Oswald actually left the wallet, the police would certainly have reported that fact.  There is no coherent explanation for the DPD - whom many CTers allege were framing Oswald - to have suppressed one of the most incriminatory pieces of evidence in the case to link Oswald to the Tippit murder beyond any doubt.

True to form, the head clown replies exactly as expected.

Again, there is no confirmation that this is even a wallet.  The quality of the film does not allow us to reach that conclusion.

Oh yes, there is confirmation. FBI agent Bob Barrett said it was a wallet. The fact that you don't like that doesn't negate what he said.

And there are many reasons for it not to have been a wallet left at the crime scene.  Not the least of which is that we know the police did not radio the name and description of whomever left any such wallet.  That person would have been a murder suspect.

First of all, there is a difference between transmitting a name and putting a description on the air. There was no way for Westbrook to be certain that the wallet did belong to the shooter, so putting out a name would be risky as it might color an innocent bystander as a potential cop killer. There were, however, plenty of eye-witnesses at the scene to obtain a description of the killer and put that on the air. But that didn't happen either. So, Westbrook may well have been grossly negligent, as you say. But that doesn't begin to prove that there wasn't a wallet at the scene.

It is either Tippit's citation book or the wallet of some bystander. 

Utter speculation for which you have not a shred of evidence. For years LNs claimed it was Tippit's wallet, until Marie Tippit proved them wrong by confirming that she has her husband's wallet, which was given to her at the hospital. So, now it's the next best thing; "it's Tippit's citation book or some bystander's wallet. In other words, I'm just guessing what it could be!

You can keep repeating your guesses a thousand more times. It will never change the fact that you, unlike Bob Barrett, wasn't there and haven't got a clue what is was. Barret had no reason to lie to Hosty. You on the other hand have every reason to lie and you do it frequently. I'll take Bob Barrett's word over yours every day.

If some conspirator had left the wallet to frame Oswald or Oswald actually left the wallet, the police would certainly have reported that fact. 

Really? And you know this, how? The fact is that Bentley took a wallet from Oswald in the car and that wasn't reported on the radio either.

There is no coherent explanation for the DPD - whom many CTers allege were framing Oswald - to have suppressed one of the most incriminatory pieces of evidence in the case to link Oswald to the Tippit murder beyond any doubt.

Just because you don't or want to understand it, doesn't mean it didn't happen. You keep on ignoring the strong circumstantial case that clearly points at a switching of the wallets at the DPD HQ. The wallet that was actually surpressed was more than likely the wallet Bentley took from Oswald in the car. You know, the one that did not have a fake Hidell ID in it.

[John Iacoletti]

It’s hilarious that “Richard” is worrying about something being “grossly negligent” when just about everything the DPD did that weekend was grossly negligent.

[Richard Smith]

True to form, the head clown replies exactly as expected.

Again, there is no confirmation that this is even a wallet.  The quality of the film does not allow us to reach that conclusion.

Oh yes, there is confirmation. FBI agent Bob Barrett said it was a wallet. The fact that you don't like that doesn't negate what he said.

And there are many reasons for it not to have been a wallet left at the crime scene.  Not the least of which is that we know the police did not radio the name and description of whomever left any such wallet.  That person would have been a murder suspect.

First of all, there is a difference between transmitting a name and putting a description on the air. There was no way for Westbrook to be certain that the wallet did belong to the shooter, so putting out a name would be risky as it might color an innocent bystander as a potential cop killer. There were, however, plenty of eye-witnesses at the scene to obtain a description of the killer and put that on the air. But that didn't happen either. So, Westbrook may well have been grossly negligent, as you say. But that doesn't begin to prove that there wasn't a wallet at the scene.

It is either Tippit's citation book or the wallet of some bystander. 

Utter speculation for which you have not a shred of evidence. For years LNs claimed it was Tippit's wallet, until Marie Tippit proved them wrong by confirming that she has her husband's wallet, which was given to her at the hospital. So, now it's the next best thing; "it's Tippit's citation book or some bystander's wallet. In other words, I'm just guessing what it could be!

You can keep repeating your guesses a thousand more times. It will never change the fact that you, unlike Bob Barrett, wasn't there and haven't got a clue what is was. Barret had no reason to lie to Hosty. You on the other hand have every reason to lie and you do it frequently. I'll take Bob Barrett's word over yours every day.

If some conspirator had left the wallet to frame Oswald or Oswald actually left the wallet, the police would certainly have reported that fact. 

Really? And you know this, how? The fact is that Bentley took a wallet from Oswald in the car and that wasn't reported on the radio either.

There is no coherent explanation for the DPD - whom many CTers allege were framing Oswald - to have suppressed one of the most incriminatory pieces of evidence in the case to link Oswald to the Tippit murder beyond any doubt.

Just because you don't or want to understand it, doesn't mean it didn't happen. You keep on ignoring the strong circumstantial case that clearly points at a switching of the wallets at the DPD HQ. The wallet that was actually surpressed was more than likely the wallet Bentley took from Oswald in the car. You know, the one that did not have a fake Hidell ID in it.

So many false premises and kooky logic.  Not the least of which is that Martin suggests that the narrative here is that the conspirators (presumably the DPD since they possessed the wallet) decided to suppress the fact that they found Oswald's wallet AT THE TIPPIT MURDER scene for his arrest wallet.  Good grief.  Finding Oswald's wallet at the murder scene - whether left by Oswald himself or planted there to frame - would have been one of the most highly incriminating pieces of evidence in the case.  Instead, for some inexplicable reason, we learn the fantasy conspirators who are framing him left and right decide to cover up the fact of discovering the wallet at the murder scene.  HA HA HA.  Incredible.  It's breathtaking in its lack of logic and common sense.  If the conspirators are going to suppress a wallet, it would be Oswald's arrest wallet.  They control the evidence is this fantasy.  But we are supposed to believe they are caught off guard by the fact that Oswald had his wallet when arrested.  Something any child could have anticipated.  So they suppress the wallet at the crime scene - which they conveniently stand around looking at in front of the cameras!  Wow.  Truly unreal.  If only Roger Collins were here to cite us to something like another You Tube video.

[Martin Weidmann]

So many false premises and kooky logic.  Not the least of which is that Martin suggests that the narrative here is that the conspirators (presumably the DPD since they possessed the wallet) decided to suppress the fact that they found Oswald's wallet AT THE TIPPIT MURDER scene for his arrest wallet.  Good grief.  Finding Oswald's wallet at the murder scene - whether left by Oswald himself or planted there to frame - would have been one of the most highly incriminating pieces of evidence in the case.  Instead, for some inexplicable reason, we learn the fantasy conspirators who are framing him left and right decide to cover up the fact of discovering the wallet at the murder scene.  HA HA HA.  Incredible.  It's breathtaking in its lack of logic and common sense.  If the conspirators are going to suppress a wallet, it would be Oswald's arrest wallet.  They control the evidence is this fantasy.  But we are supposed to believe they are caught off guard by the fact that Oswald had his wallet when arrested.  Something any child could have anticipated.  So they suppress the wallet at the crime scene - which they conveniently stand around looking at in front of the cameras!  Wow.  Truly unreal.  If only Roger Collins were here to cite us to something like another You Tube video.

I have already stated previously that you don't understand or simply don't want to. So, nothing new here!

Finding Oswald's wallet at the murder scene - whether left by Oswald himself or planted there to frame - would have been one of the most highly incriminating pieces of evidence in the case.

Fool. The mere fact that Bentley took a wallet from Oswald in the car would be a red flag. It would raise questions.

Instead, for some inexplicable reason, we learn the fantasy conspirators who are framing him left and right decide to cover up the fact of discovering the wallet at the murder scene.

You really don't understand the most basic stuff, don't you? How would they explain finding Oswald's wallet (which happened to have a fake Hidell ID in it) at the murder scene, when it was already known that Bentley had taken a wallet from Oswald after his arrest. Are you really so stupid that you don't understand that the only explanation they could give is that (A) Oswald was carrying two wallets and (B) rather conveniently lost or dropped the most incriminating one at the murder scene. It would strain credulity.

Much easier to just switch the two wallets and make the one Bentley had disappear.

It's breathtaking in its lack of logic and common sense.

How would you know? You don't even know the meaning of those words.

If the conspirators are going to suppress a wallet, it would be Oswald's arrest wallet.

Which is most likely exactly what they did. They just couldn't undo the problem that it was already known that Bentley had taken a wallet from Oswald in the car. The guy even confirmed it on television. So, how do you claim that the wallet was "really found at the crime scene" without calling four DPD officers liars?

So they suppress the wallet at the crime scene - which they conveniently stand around looking at in front of the cameras!  Wow.

Yeah, that was pretty stupid. But that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

So many false premises and kooky logic.

I fully understand that I will not get an answer from you (because you constantly say stuff you can not reasonably mean), but I'm going to ask it anyway; what premises were false?

Do you have the guts to answer a question for once or will I get another pathetic word salad?

Having said that, what is really kooky logic is that you have already admitted it could be a wallet and you have accepted that the video shows police officers looking at that wallet.

the wallet at the crime scene - which they conveniently stand around looking at in front of the cameras!  Wow. 

Yet, you ignore completely that FBI agent Bob Barrett, who was there at scene, confirmed that it was a wallet, Despite all that you still argue (and hilariously call it "logic") that it could be Tippit's citation book or the wallet of some bystander. You haven't got a shred of evidence for either possibility, you can't even certain which of the two it is, and you most certainly can't explain why it could a bystander's wallet but not Oswald. Now that's kooky!

[Bill Brown]

"The witness" let it slip that Tippit resided on East Tenth... A DNA test of Tippit's alleged love child would confirm motive of her
mother's husband to shoot Tippit...
https://www.jdtippit.com/v-davis_nov.htm

"Mrs. DAVIS. No, sir; we just saw a police car sitting on the side of the road.
    Mr. BELIN. Where was the police car parked?
    Mrs. DAVIS. It was parked between the hedge that marks the apartment house where he lives in and the house next door.
    Mr. BELIN. Was it on your side of East 10th or the other side of the street?
    Mrs. DAVIS. It was on our side, the same side that we lived on.
    Mr. BELIN. Was it headed as you looked to the police car, towards your right or towards your left?
    Mrs. DAVIS. Right.
    Mr. BELIN. Did you see any police officer in a police car when you first saw him?
    Mrs. DAVIS. No, sir..."

http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/W%20Disk/Witherspoon%20Johnnie%20Maxie/Item%2001.pdf

"...General Johnnie Maxie - Stephen Thompson, Jr. material including marriage license, divorce decrees,
employment and children.
HSCA synopsis of interviews with:
Johnnie Maxie Witherspoon
Austin Cook
Maebert Cook
As you wade through this stuff, you may come to the same conclusion I did, that Jack Moriarity did
a poor job not only of interviewing but following up on clues,
....
Coupling all this with the testimony of Virginia Davis and William Scoggins it would seem Johnnie
was living at the residence occupied by Ann McRaven on Tenth.
My sheet on Susan Marie Thompson might help explain the "frantic" phone call made by Tippit from
the Top Ten record store. Susan was born June 17, 1964 which would mean she was conceived
around September 17, 1963. Therefore, questions related to Johnnie's pregnancy would have been
resolve around November 17, 1963, five days prior to the assassination. Tippit could have called her
asking if she was pregnant and when she answered in the affirmative he raced over to the house.
I also have the Tippit autopsy photographs. They are negatives in 2 1/4" X 2 1/4" format. Once I
scrape up the money to have them converted into 8 X 10 glossy prints I will forward you a set.
Dave
p.s. Harold - Don't worry about the book. I will try to pick one up locally. We you have the
opportunity sending me an index would be fine.

But Witherspoon did not live on Tenth Street.  In fact, she lived nowhere near the vicinity of Tenth and Patton.  Not even close.

According to the 1964 Polk's Dallas City Directory, Witherspoon lived in the 2500 block of South Tyler, over thirty blocks from Tenth and Patton.  Also, Witherspoon confirmed this in a 1983 interview with author Dale Myers.

[Bill Brown]

a wallet which is excellent supportive evidence of Oswald being at the crime scene and then covered up is absolutely bonkers.

Who said it was covered up? It was already known that Bentley took a uninteresting wallet from Oswald in the car. The easist way to solve the problem is just switch wallets and make the Bentley one dissappear. It's isn't difficult to understand, yet you seem to be struggling. What else is new?


the original video clip shows exactly what happened, The Police Officer has no worries that his gun is pointed towards the detective but when the civilian reaches for his wallet

What makes you think it was a civilian reaching for the wallet and who says that it was that civilian's wallet? If you want to make up stuff, you need to do far better than this, John.

What would interest me is who is the officer in uniform holding the wallet? Could that be Croy?

What would interest me is who is the officer in uniform holding the wallet? Could that be Croy?

Bud Owens.

[Martin Weidmann]

Bud Owens.

Thanks.

Do you know if Owens was ever asked about the wallet?