Oswald killed Tippit -- Helen Markham confirms her ID on CBS 1964

[Walt Cakebread]

On the flip side there is the bandwagon effect.

It introduces bias.  Particularly when asked by an authority figure.

It introduces bias.  Particularly when asked by an authority figure.

Would a young black man (in Dallas , 63)  be more,... or less, inclined to say what he believedthat  a DPD detective, or an FBI man wanted him to say......

How about a a frightened woman whose teenage son had been in trouble with the law......Would she want to antagonize the DA by refusing to support his position?

[Ross Lidell]

It introduces bias.  Particularly when asked by an authority figure.

Would a young black man (in Dallas , 63)  be more,... or less, inclined to say what he believedthat  a DPD detective, or an FBI man wanted him to say......

How about a a frightened woman whose teenage son had been in trouble with the law......Would she want to antagonize the DA by refusing to support his position?

That's a non sequitur, Walt.

[Ross Lidell]

How can you be sure that the revolver now in evidence is in fact the same one as was taken from Oswald at the Texas Theater?


If you truly believe Oswald could not have been at Tenth and Patton when Officer Tippit was murdered, you need to answer these questions:

-- Who used Lee Oswald's Smith & Wesson revolver to shoot Officer Tippit?

-- When did the real shooter of Officer Tippit return Oswald's revolver to him?

-- Where was Oswald at the time of the Tippit shooting?

I don't need to answer any of these questions. It's just a variation of the same game you play every time;

"Oswald is the killer unless you can give me the name, address and date of birth of the actual killer"

What you fail to notice or understand is that your questions are all based upon the false premise that the revolver that killed Tippit was indeed Oswald's revolver. The problem with that is that you simply have no evidence for that premise.

Btw, I noticed you failed to answer my question about why Oswald would be in such a hurry to get to 10%/Patton.... Is that because you can't find a logical explanation for that?

I'll have to delay my response, Martin.

Business is more important than answering immaterial questions.

[John Iacoletti]

A ridiculous exaggeration. Even though this forum is not a court of law: An intellectual "burden of proof" rests with you to provide an alternate explanation of the Tippit murder...

Nope.  Your claim, your burden.

[Ross Lidell]

Nope.  Your claim, your burden.

No... it's the responsibility of someone making a "contrary" claim.

You guys (you and your cohorts) insist that various events in the historical record "did not happen".

You refuse to provide coherent, logical alternative explanations. That's why (by definition) you are game-playing contrarians.

[Martin Weidmann]

I'll have to delay my response, Martin.

Business is more important than answering immaterial questions.

My questions are only "immaterial" to you because you can't answer them. I wouldn't be surprised if you couldn't even explain what is "immaterial" about them.

But, by all means, take all the time you need to try and figure it out.... I'll wait. No problem.

[Martin Weidmann]

No... it's the responsibility of someone making a "contrary" claim.

You guys (you and your cohorts) insist that various events in the historical record "did not happen".

You refuse to provide coherent, logical alternative explanations. That's why (by definition) you are game-playing contrarians.

No... it's the responsibility of someone making a "contrary" claim.

So, it's guilty unless proven innocent? Please let me know when you prosecute your first case. I would love to be there and see the look on the judge's face when you take that position.... Should be good for a laugh or two....

It is of course total BS.... The claims are being made by you (and the WC).... So provide the evidence for them already!

You guys (you and your cohorts) insist that various events in the historical record "did not happen".

Another strawman.... Nobody is insisting anything of the kind. We are actually asking you to prove that they did happen!

You refuse to provide coherent, logical alternative explanations. That's why (by definition) you are game-playing contrarians.

Oh boy, more whining.... This is getting so tiresome. Oh well, it's an admission of defeat... at least that's something.

[Rick Plant]

On the day The Warren Report was released to the public (27 September 1964), the CBS Television Network broadcast the program: "November 22nd The Warren Report".

Key witnesses had been interviewed by Eddie Barker of CBS affiliate in Dallas - KRLD Television.

Helen Markham confirmed her positive identification of Lee Harvey Oswald as the man who shot and killed Officer J.D. Tippit on the day of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

This is your slam dunk evidence?