Lee Oswald The Cop Killer

[Michael T. Griffith]

Here is how the paragraph about Benavides in my book Hasty Judgment now reads:

* The witness who should have had the best view of the shooting, Domingo Benavides, at first said he could not identify the killer. This might be because, as even some lone-gunman theorists admit, Benavides told his boss the day after the shooting that he did not get a good look at the gunman. When Benavides testified before the Warren Commission, he would only say that a picture of Oswald "bore a resemblance" to Tippit's killer, and he seemed to identify a dark jacket as the one the assailant had worn, whereas the Commission claimed the killer wore a light gray jacket. About a year after Benavides’s Warren Commission testimony, his brother Edward was shot and killed. Domingo and his father-in-law both believed Edward was shot in mistake for Domingo, even though all the evidence indicated he was shot accidentally during a bar fight. Later, Benavides finally made a positive identification of Oswald as the gunman.

[Walt Cakebread]

Here is how the paragraph about Benavides in my book Hasty Judgment now reads:

* The witness who should have had the best view of the shooting, Domingo Benavides, at first said he could not identify the killer. This might be because, as even some lone-gunman theorists admit, Benavides told his boss the day after the shooting that he did not get a good look at the gunman. When Benavides testified before the Warren Commission, he would only say that a picture of Oswald "bore a resemblance" to Tippit's killer, and he seemed to identify a dark jacket as the one the assailant had worn, whereas the Commission claimed the killer wore a light gray jacket. About a year after Benavides’s Warren Commission testimony, his brother Edward was shot and killed. Domingo and his father-in-law both believed Edward was shot in mistake for Domingo, even though all the evidence indicated he was shot accidentally during a bar fight. Later, Benavides finally made a positive identification of Oswald as the gunman.

Benavides finally made a positive identification of Oswald as the gunman.

No, Dom Benavides did NOT positively identify Lee as the man who shot JD Tippit......   As a matter of fact Dom DESCRIBED the action of the killer after the shooting and he said the man looked directly at him and they saw each other clearly face to face.   Then the killer turned around and walked away and removed a single spent shell from his gun and tossed it aside ... ONE ...JUST ONE spent shell....

The fact that the shells were found widely dispersed in the area indicates that Dom was accurate in his description of the killer's actions.   And the killer WAS NOT unloading a S&W revolver.    The conspirators have said that Lee Oswald was carrying a S&W revolver when he was arrested in the theater.....  Maybe???   BUT.... the weapon that was used to kill JD Tippit was NOT a Smith & Wesson revolver.

[Michael T. Griffith]

Benavides finally made a positive identification of Oswald as the gunman.

No, Dom Benavides did NOT positively identify Lee as the man who shot JD Tippit......   As a matter of fact Dom DESCRIBED the action of the killer after the shooting and he said the man looked directly at him and they saw each other clearly face to face.   Then the killer turned around and walked away and removed a single spent shell from his gun and tossed it aside ... ONE ...JUST ONE spent shell....

The fact that the shells were found widely dispersed in the area indicates that Dom was accurate in his description of the killer's actions.   And the killer WAS NOT unloading a S&W revolver.    The conspirators have said that Lee Oswald was carrying a S&W revolver when he was arrested in the theater.....  Maybe???   BUT.... the weapon that was used to kill JD Tippit was NOT a Smith & Wesson revolver.

I was referring to the fact that later Benavides claimed he was certain the gunman he had seen was Oswald. I realize that his story is problematic. I'm just noting the fact that years later he finally claimed he was certain the gunman was Oswald.

[Martin Weidmann]

I was referring to the fact that later Benavides claimed he was certain the gunman he had seen was Oswald. I realize that his story is problematic. I'm just noting the fact that years later he finally claimed he was certain the gunman was Oswald.

I'm just noting the fact that years later he finally claimed he was certain the gunman was Oswald

Years later, after the media had been telling everybody Oswald was the lone gunman, a lot of people became "certain" that it was true. It means very little.

[Walt Cakebread]

I was referring to the fact that later Benavides claimed he was certain the gunman he had seen was Oswald. I realize that his story is problematic. I'm just noting the fact that years later he finally claimed he was certain the gunman was Oswald.

Perhap's ? Benavides did say the man was Lee Oswald after years of being badgered .....and he realized that the die was cast, and there was no point in sticking his neck out where a noose could be slipped around it.

PS....I'm unaware of Benavides stating positively that LHO was the killer.

[Denis Pointing]

Here is how the paragraph about Benavides in my book Hasty Judgment now reads:

* The witness who should have had the best view of the shooting, Domingo Benavides, at first said he could not identify the killer. This might be because, as even some lone-gunman theorists admit, Benavides told his boss the day after the shooting that he did not get a good look at the gunman. When Benavides testified before the Warren Commission, he would only say that a picture of Oswald "bore a resemblance" to Tippit's killer, and he seemed to identify a dark jacket as the one the assailant had worn, whereas the Commission claimed the killer wore a light gray jacket. About a year after Benavides’s Warren Commission testimony, his brother Edward was shot and killed. Domingo and his father-in-law both believed Edward was shot in mistake for Domingo, even though all the evidence indicated he was shot accidentally during a bar fight. Later, Benavides finally made a positive identification of Oswald as the gunman.

I believe this to be yet another incorrect 'factoid' caused by bad CT authors copying other bad CT authors shabby work.
The origanal source, as far as I'm able to determine, is Ramparts magazine. A particularly badly written and inacruate publication, which is thankfully, now defunct. As you can see below, from the middle of the seconed paragraph on, the article was completely wrong in just about every detail. The last two and a half paragraphs are pure invention!! I suspect the claim concerning Domingo and his father in-law believing Eddy being shot by mistake for Domingo is also erroneous.

 David Welsh in the November 1966 edition of "Ramparts" magazine:

"Domingo Benevides, a dark, slim auto mechanic, was a witness to the
murder of Officer Tippit who testified that he "really got a good view" of
the slayer. He was not asked to see the police lineup in which Oswald
appeared. Although he later said the killer resembled newspaper pictures
of Oswald, he described the man differently: "I remember the back of his
head seemed like his hairline sort of went square instead of tapered
off...it kind of went down and squared off and made his head look flat in
back." Domingo reports that he has been repeatedly threatened by police,
and advised not to talk about what he saw.

"In mid-February 1964 his brother Eddy, who resembled him, was
fatally shot in the back of the head in a beer joint on Second Avenue in
Dallas. Police said it was a pistol shot, wrote up a cursory report and
marked the case "unsolved."

"Domingo's father-in-law, J.W. Jackson, was so unimpressed with the
police investigation of Eddy's death that he launched a little inquiry of
his own. Two weeks later Jackson was shot at in his home. The assailant
secreted himself in the carport, fired once into the house, and when
Jackson ran outside, fired one more time, just missing his head.

"As the gunman clambered into an automobile in a nearby driveway,
Jackson saw a police car coming down the block. The officer made no
attempt to follow the gunman's speeding car; instead, he stopped at
Jackson's home and spent a long time inquiring what had happened. Later a
police lieutenant advised Jackson, "You'd better lay off of this business.
Don't go around asking question; that's our job." Jackson and Domingo are
both convinced that Eddy's murder was a case of mistaken identity and that
Domingo, the Tippit witness, was the intended victim."

[Walt Cakebread]

I believe this to be yet another incorrect 'factoid' caused by bad CT authors copying other bad CT authors shabby work.
The origanal source, as far as I'm able to determine, is Ramparts magazine. A particularly badly written and inacruate publication, which is thankfully, now defunct. As you can see below, from the middle of the seconed paragraph on, the article was completely wrong in just about every detail. The last two and a half paragraphs are pure invention!! I suspect the claim concerning Domingo and his father in-law believing Eddy being shot by mistake for Domingo is also erroneous.

 David Welsh in the November 1966 edition of "Ramparts" magazine:

"Domingo Benevides, a dark, slim auto mechanic, was a witness to the
murder of Officer Tippit who testified that he "really got a good view" of
the slayer. He was not asked to see the police lineup in which Oswald
appeared. Although he later said the killer resembled newspaper pictures
of Oswald, he described the man differently: "I remember the back of his
head seemed like his hairline sort of went square instead of tapered
off...it kind of went down and squared off and made his head look flat in
back." Domingo reports that he has been repeatedly threatened by police,
and advised not to talk about what he saw.

"In mid-February 1964 his brother Eddy, who resembled him, was
fatally shot in the back of the head in a beer joint on Second Avenue in
Dallas. Police said it was a pistol shot, wrote up a cursory report and
marked the case "unsolved."

"Domingo's father-in-law, J.W. Jackson, was so unimpressed with the
police investigation of Eddy's death that he launched a little inquiry of
his own. Two weeks later Jackson was shot at in his home. The assailant
secreted himself in the carport, fired once into the house, and when
Jackson ran outside, fired one more time, just missing his head.

"As the gunman clambered into an automobile in a nearby driveway,
Jackson saw a police car coming down the block. The officer made no
attempt to follow the gunman's speeding car; instead, he stopped at
Jackson's home and spent a long time inquiring what had happened. Later a
police lieutenant advised Jackson, "You'd better lay off of this business.
Don't go around asking question; that's our job." Jackson and Domingo are
both convinced that Eddy's murder was a case of mistaken identity and that
Domingo, the Tippit witness, was the intended victim."

"Domingo Benevides, a dark, slim auto mechanic, was a witness to the murder of Officer Tippit who testified that he "really got a good view" of the slayer. He was not asked to see the police lineup in which Oswald appeared. Although he later said the killer resembled newspaper pictures of Oswald, he described the man differently: "I remember the back of his head seemed like his hairline sort of went square instead of tapered off...it kind of went down and squared off and made his head look flat in back." Domingo reports that he has been repeatedly threatened by police,and advised not to talk about what he saw."

Domingo Benavides  testified that he "really got a good view" of the slayer, and he said that although the killer resembled newspaper pictures of Oswald,  he didn't believe the man was Lee Oswald, Because,...."I remember the back of his head seemed like his hairline sort of went square instead of tapered off...it kind of went down and squared off and made his head look flat in back."

[Denis Pointing]

"Domingo Benevides, a dark, slim auto mechanic, was a witness to the murder of Officer Tippit who testified that he "really got a good view" of the slayer. He was not asked to see the police lineup in which Oswald appeared. Although he later said the killer resembled newspaper pictures of Oswald, he described the man differently: "I remember the back of his head seemed like his hairline sort of went square instead of tapered off...it kind of went down and squared off and made his head look flat in back." Domingo reports that he has been repeatedly threatened by police,and advised not to talk about what he saw."

Domingo Benavides  testified that he "really got a good view" of the slayer, and he said that although the killer resembled newspaper pictures of Oswald,  he didn't believe the man was Lee Oswald, Because,...."I remember the back of his head seemed like his hairline sort of went square instead of tapered off...it kind of went down and squared off and made his head look flat in back."

I wrote: " from the middle of the seconed paragraph on, the article was completely wrong in just about every detail." So why quote the 1st paragraph? Reading problem or just dumb?