Who Killed J.D. Tippit?

[Martin Weidmann]

The same can be said for Westbrook, who is the person who supposedly saw the identifications inside the wallet and asked Barrett if he was familiar with the two names.  To this day, there has never been anything from Westbrook surface which mentions such a thing took place at the scene.

Yes, I agree. Westbrook is a highly dubious individual, IMO. He was not only involved in the wallet issue, but also the white/gray jacket farce.

We'll have to agree to disagree, re: whether or not Barrett should have mentioned in his report that a wallet at the scene contained identifications for both Oswald and Hidell.  I think you're dismissing the point that Barrett would have mentioned such an important item in his report.  It was more than being asked only "a simple question".

So, you believe that Barrett was part of the investigation, despite the fact that the FBI had no jurisdiction? I'm not dismissing anything. You expect that Barrett wrote a report and it should have included the question being asked? Really? Have you read Barrett's report on what happened at the Tippit crime scene?

It was more than being asked only "a simple question".

Asking somebody if he knows a couple of names is not "a simple question"? Why?

I think you're dismissing the point that Barrett would have mentioned such an important item in his report.

So, in your opinion, Barrett, an observer, should have been so much aware it was an important item that he would have put it in his report? But the same doesn't apply to Bentley, Hill, Carroll and Westbrook, who were actually involved in the investigation?

Picture it like this...

Once the day is concluding, Barrett writes his report (which he did do).  Obviously, the alleged assassin is in custody and by now everyone knows his name.  A wallet was found at the scene which contained identifications inside for both Oswald and Hidell.  If such a thing happened, Barrett mentions it in the report.  He didn't.

Nice assumptions. First you assume that Barrett had reason to report about what happened at the Tippit scene and secondly you assume that Barrett knew about Oswald's name and that he was aware of the fact that Hidell was a fake alias used by Oswald. Thirdly, you assume that Barrett could have stated what the content of the wallet was, when in fact he never held it or examined it.

All he really knew was (1) there was a wallet and (2) Westbrook asked him if he knew a guy named Oswald or a guy named Hidell. And you expect him to write this in a report?

Barrett writes his report (which he did do)

I have actually never seen Barrett's report for 11/22/63. Can you point me to where I can find it?

[Charles Collins]

Mr. BALL. Were you given an assignment as soon as you got down there?
Mr. STOVALL. No, sir; I wasn't--as soon as I got there. I got there and one of my partners, G. F. Rose, got there about the same time. We were talking to a witness that had seen all the people standing out there--he didn't actually see anything, so we didn't even take an affidavit from him because he didn't see anything. While talking to him, the officers brought Lee Harvey Oswald into the Homicide Bureau and put him into an interrogation room we have there at the bureau. After we finished talking to this witness, we went back there and talked to him briefly.
Mr. BALL. Do you remember what was said to him and what he said to you?
Mr. STOVALL. I don't recall exactly--I went in and asked him for his identification, asked him who he was and he said his name was Lee Oswald, as well as I remember. Rose and I were both in there at the time. He had his billfold and in it he had the identification of "A. Hidell," which was on a selective service card, as well as I remember.
Mr. BALL. That's [spelling] H-i-d-e-l-l, isn't it?.
Mr. STOVALL. I'm not positive on that--I believe it was [spelling] H-i-d-e-l-l, I'm not sure. And he also had identification of Lee Harvey Oswald, and I believe that was on a Social Security card and at that time Captain Fritz opened the door to the office there and sent Rose and I to go out to this address in Irving at 2515 West Fifth Street in Irving. That was--I don't know where the Captain got the address, but it was an address where he was supposed to be staying part of the time.

[Martin Weidmann]

Mr. BALL. Were you given an assignment as soon as you got down there?
Mr. STOVALL. No, sir; I wasn't--as soon as I got there. I got there and one of my partners, G. F. Rose, got there about the same time. We were talking to a witness that had seen all the people standing out there--he didn't actually see anything, so we didn't even take an affidavit from him because he didn't see anything. While talking to him, the officers brought Lee Harvey Oswald into the Homicide Bureau and put him into an interrogation room we have there at the bureau. After we finished talking to this witness, we went back there and talked to him briefly.
Mr. BALL. Do you remember what was said to him and what he said to you?
Mr. STOVALL. I don't recall exactly--I went in and asked him for his identification, asked him who he was and he said his name was Lee Oswald, as well as I remember. Rose and I were both in there at the time. He had his billfold and in it he had the identification of "A. Hidell," which was on a selective service card, as well as I remember.
Mr. BALL. That's [spelling] H-i-d-e-l-l, isn't it?.
Mr. STOVALL. I'm not positive on that--I believe it was [spelling] H-i-d-e-l-l, I'm not sure. And he also had identification of Lee Harvey Oswald, and I believe that was on a Social Security card and at that time Captain Fritz opened the door to the office there and sent Rose and I to go out to this address in Irving at 2515 West Fifth Street in Irving. That was--I don't know where the Captain got the address, but it was an address where he was supposed to be staying part of the time.

These quotes are going nowhere fast;

Stovall is contradicting Rose;

Mr. STOVALL. I don't recall exactly--I went in and asked him for his identification, asked him who he was and he said his name was Lee Oswald

Mr. ROSE. Well, the first thing I asked him was what his name was and he told me it was Hidell.
Mr. BALL. Did he tell you it was Hidell?
Mr. ROSE. Yes; he did.

And he does it again;

Mr. STOVALL. [ ] Rose and I were both in there at the time. He had his billfold and in it he had the identification of "A. Hidell," which was on a selective service card, as well as I remember.

Mr. BALL. Did you search him?
Mr. ROSE. He had already been searched and someone had his billfold. I don't know whether it was the patrolman who brought him in that had it or not.

So who is this "he" that Stovall said had his billfold?

These guys are all over the place....

[John Mytton]

I agree 100%. I actually like Doudna.  He twists the known evidence into something it isn't but you're right, he seems to be a class act.  He and I exchange the occasional private message and are civil to each other.  I've told him more than once that I admire his passion.

It's good that he's passionate about his beliefs but doesn't get hysterical when someone doesn't agree with his opinions, some CT's could learn a thing or two from the way he conducts himself.
Another CT who is clearly a logical thinker is Jonathon Cohen who argues against the "everything is faked" mentality, for example it's obvious that there was no hole in the back of Kennedy's head and cites the Zapruder film and the autopsy photos to support his scientific analysis, very refreshing.

JohnM

[John Mytton]

The same can be said for Westbrook, who is the person who supposedly saw the identifications inside the wallet and asked Barrett if he was familiar with the two names.  To this day, there has never been anything from Westbrook surface which mentions such a thing took place at the scene.


We'll have to agree to disagree, re: whether or not Barrett should have mentioned in his report that a wallet at the scene contained identifications for both Oswald and Hidell.  I think you're dismissing the point that Barrett would have mentioned such an important item in his report.  It was more than being asked only "a simple question".

Picture it like this...

Once the day is concluding, Barrett writes his report (which he did do).  Obviously, the alleged assassin is in custody and by now everyone knows his name.  A wallet was found at the scene which contained identifications inside for both Oswald and Hidell.  If such a thing happened, Barrett mentions it in the report.  He didn't.

That sums it up perfectly, if the Hidell wallet was at the Tippit crime scene Barrett and/or Westbrook would have put it in their reports but neither did simply because the Hidell wallet was never there.
And as has been pointed out numerous times, why supress the Wallet that links Oswald with the Tippit murder, I have yet to see a reasonable explanation that explains why.
If indeed there was a provable Hidell wallet at the Tippit crime scene, I would be all over it because I don't find it odd that Oswald would have two wallets for two identifications.
A decoy wallet, muggers wallet or a drop wallet isn't exactly a new concept.
Anyway I've wasted too much time with this silly theory that doesn't even pass the most basic sniff test, so unless someone comes up with something new I'm outta here!

JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

That sums it up perfectly, if the Hidell wallet was at the Tippit crime scene Barrett and/or Westbrook would have put it in their reports but neither did simply because the Hidell wallet was never there.
And as has been pointed out numerous times, why supress the Wallet that links Oswald with the Tippit murder, I have yet to see a reasonable explanation that explains why.
If indeed there was a provable Hidell wallet at the Tippit crime scene, I would be all over it because I don't find it odd that Oswald would have two wallets for two identifications.
A decoy wallet, muggers wallet or a drop wallet isn't exactly a new concept.
Anyway I've wasted too much time with this silly theory that doesn't even pass the most basic sniff test, so unless someone comes up with something new I'm outta here!

JohnM

if the Hidell wallet was at the Tippit crime scene Barrett and/or Westbrook would have put it in their reports but neither did simply because the Hidell wallet was never there.

if the Hidell ID was in the wallet Bentley took from Oswald in the car, Bentley, Hill and Carroll would have put it in their reports by none of them did because the Hidell ID was not in the wallet Bentley took from Oswald.

And as has been pointed out numerous times, why supress the Wallet that links Oswald with the Tippit murder, I have yet to see a reasonable explanation that explains why.

A reasonable explanation that you would accept simply doesn't exist.

Anyway I've wasted too much time with this silly theory that doesn't even pass the most basic sniff test, so unless someone comes up with something new I'm outta here!

Does this mean you are unable to answer my question?

Anyway, close the door behind you.... Bye.   

[Richard Smith]

That sums it up perfectly, if the Hidell wallet was at the Tippit crime scene Barrett and/or Westbrook would have put it in their reports but neither did simply because the Hidell wallet was never there.
And as has been pointed out numerous times, why supress the Wallet that links Oswald with the Tippit murder, I have yet to see a reasonable explanation that explains why.
If indeed there was a provable Hidell wallet at the Tippit crime scene, I would be all over it because I don't find it odd that Oswald would have two wallets for two identifications.
A decoy wallet, muggers wallet or a drop wallet isn't exactly a new concept.
Anyway I've wasted too much time with this silly theory that doesn't even pass the most basic sniff test, so unless someone comes up with something new I'm outta here!

JohnM

Yes, and a wallet found at the crime scene would have significantly more incriminatory value than a wallet taken from a suspect.  The recovery of the wallet from the crime scene would have significant evidentiary value in itself.  That would have been a fact that they would have reported and broadcast to the world.

[Martin Weidmann]

Yes, and a wallet found at the crime scene would have significantly more incriminatory value than a wallet taken from a suspect.  The recovery of the wallet from the crime scene would have significant evidentiary value in itself.  That would have been a fact that they would have reported and broadcast to the world.

a wallet found at the crime scene would have significantly more incriminatory value than a wallet taken from a suspect.

Why? Does such a wallet somehow prove that the owner of that wallet shot Tippit or was even at the scene himself?

The real purpose of a wallet being dropped at the Tippit scene (if that's what happened) is to provide a link between Oswald and Hidell and the ordering of the revolver and the rifle. It doesn't matter where the Hidell ID was found, as long as it was indeed found.