Who Killed J.D. Tippit?

[John Iacoletti]

Why did Mr. Callaway need to ask Mr. Benavides which way the shooter had gone?

Right? Just like Brewer asking Postal if she sold that man a ticket. You can’t get a straight story out of anyone.

[Zeon Mason]

I’d like to believe the reason for some of these people seemingly embellishing their story was that they were so distraught about the event that they rationalized that Oswald MIGHT be the man or were convinced he was PROBABLY the man and they wanted immediate  retribution and a resolution.

It’s a kind of reaction that is understandable, the people feeling helpless and  horrified by the alternative, which is a conspiracy, which is MUCH MORE disconcerting and difficult to deal with.

[Walt Cakebread]

I’d like to believe the reason for some of these people seemingly embellishing their story was that they were so distraught about the event that they rationalized that Oswald MIGHT be the man or were convinced he was PROBABLY the man and they wanted immediate  retribution and a resolution.

It’s a kind of reaction that is understandable, the people feeling helpless and  horrified by the alternative, which is a conspiracy, which is MUCH MORE disconcerting and difficult to deal with.

BINGO!!.... Give that man a cigar!      You're Hammering the nail squarely on the head Mr. Mason.

[Zeon Mason]

Thanks Walt. All we are trying to do here is figure out what the truth is because what has been presented as evidence is definitively flawed and a lot of it really would not be allowed as evidence because of chain of custody problems.

So we are still trying to answer Mr Myttons question how did the MC rifle get to the 6th floor?

That’s a question we just do not have enough evidence to answer definitively. 

All we have basically is that Oswald most likely could NOT have planted that rifle AFTER the shooting as even if he could just toss the rifle into the gap between the 2 rows of boxes, it takes too long and he can never get to the second floor landing by 75 sec post shots or even 85 secs post shots.

But there IS the fact that there was NO evidence presented by the WC that definitely PROVES that that MC was actually fired THAT day of Nov 22/63.

Expended Shells found and picked up by Fritz and tossed back down again , do not prove much at all and introduce immediate reasonable doubt from the very start.

If they had documented having noticed the odor of gunpowder and found gunpowder residue in the rifle groove, breech and magazine well , THEN MAYBE there could be made a conclusion that the rifle had been recently fired.

I’m STILL uncertain  if any layer of fine oxidation was found in the barrel grooves because they focused on the use of the word “corrosion” and then directed attention to the pitting found in the barrel which is of course one TYPE of corrosion which would not be removed by recently fired projectiles.

I’m not sure if here’s any actual statement declaring they did NOT find a layer of fine oxidation in the barrel grooves, however, which if such fine layer was there, would definitely prove the 3 shells at the SN widow could not have been fired thru that rifle, since fine layers of oxidation ARE removed when just ONE bullet is fired thru the barrel.

[Richard Smith]

I’d like to believe the reason for some of these people seemingly embellishing their story was that they were so distraught about the event that they rationalized that Oswald MIGHT be the man or were convinced he was PROBABLY the man and they wanted immediate  retribution and a resolution.

It’s a kind of reaction that is understandable, the people feeling helpless and  horrified by the alternative, which is a conspiracy, which is MUCH MORE disconcerting and difficult to deal with.

Or the man they saw was Oswald.  Don't you think these people would be concerned with identifying the wrong person and sending him to prison or the electric chair?  That seems like the bigger concern than just wanting to convict anyone for the crime because they were distraught and wanted resolution.

[Martin Weidmann]

Or the man they saw was Oswald.  Don't you think these people would be concerned with identifying the wrong person and sending him to prison or the electric chair?  That seems like the bigger concern than just wanting to convict anyone for the crime because they were distraught and wanted resolution.

Don't you think these people would be concerned with identifying the wrong person and sending him to prison or the electric chair?

Nope. It happened (and still does happen) all the time.

How else do you explain the large number of people who were later exonerated because of the ongoing work of the innocence project and others?

[Michael Capasse]

Or the man they saw was Oswald.  Don't you think these people would be concerned with identifying the wrong person and sending him to prison or the electric chair?  That seems like the bigger concern than just wanting to convict anyone for the crime because they were distraught and wanted resolution.

Mr. CALLAWAY.  And he said, "We want to be sure, we want to try to wrap him up real tight on killing this officer. We think he is the same one that shot the President. But if we can wrap him up tight on killing this officer, we have got him."

Ever wonder why Helen Markharm was crying hysterically as the cops were screaming at her to make her choice at the 1st line up
A blonde guy in a sport coat, another guy in a suit vest and a third in a button down sweater. Oh yea, Lee in a ragged t-shirt, w/ bruises on his face.

Who will she not choose?

[Richard Smith]

Don't you think these people would be concerned with identifying the wrong person and sending him to prison or the electric chair?

Nope. It happened (and still does happen) all the time.

How else do you explain the large number of people who were later exonerated because of the ongoing work of the innocence project and others?

Can eyewitness testimony ever be wrong says the contrarian!  Yes.  What are the odds, however, that multiple witnesses are wrong?  That Oswald would have a gun in his possession at the movie theatre?  That he would have the same two brands of ammo used to kill Tippit?  That he would draw his gun and engage in a fight with the police before even learning what they wanted? That he would be acting so suspiciously as to draw the attention of random citizens?  Verdict = Guilty.  Here is where the contrarian tells me all this evidence is an "assumption" but that he is not suggesting a conspiracy.  Just that everyone was lying to implicate Oswald for no apparent reason.