(PART 1168)


Is the evidence and new witness statements in the book ["Into The Nightmare" by Joseph McBride] strong enough to reopen the Tippit case?


That might be worth doing. As you know, Dallas County now has an excellent DA, Craig Watkins, who is rectifying many of Henry Wade's injustices. It would be up to Mr. Watkins whether to reopen the case if he feels there is sufficient reason to do so. A grand jury could be convened. It is hard getting convictions on cold cases going so far back, but perhaps not impossible.


Why on Earth would any sensible and rational District Attorney (or other court/law official) in Dallas County have any desire--or reason--to reopen the Tippit murder case when such overwhelming evidence exists that Lee Harvey Oswald--and only Oswald--was responsible for the death of Officer J.D. Tippit?

A D.A. would have to be totally off his rocker to just totally toss aside all the evidence brought forth by the DPD, the Warren Commission, and the HSCA that indicates beyond all possible doubt that the murder of Tippit was solved by 7:10 PM CST on the very day that murder occurred.

Just the suggestion of reopening the Tippit murder case (of all cases) is beyond laughable. It's farcical.


Oswald was never convicted in a court of law.


But the evidence against him is still there on the table for any District Attorney to thoroughly examine prior to deciding to reopen the case -- regardless of whether or not Oswald ever went to trial.

And the evidence against ONLY Oswald is multi-faceted too -- the best combination possible -- hard physical evidence (LHO's gun on him in the theater linked to the bullet shells at the scene of the crime, plus the many eyewitnesses who fingered Oswald as the killer or running from the scene with a gun in his hand). That combination of corroborative types of evidence is a prosecutor's dream.


Should new evidence emerge, or surface with the publication of [Joseph McBride's] book, a re-examination should follow.


Hooey. Conspiracy theorists have been saying they've got "new evidence" to prove a conspiracy in the JFK and Tippit cases all the time. How many times have you read a blurb attached to a new conspiracy book claiming that "This is the book to read! The conspiracy is proven between these covers!"?

But nothing is going to make the solid evidence against Lee Harvey Oswald (along with Oswald's own incriminating actions) disappear into a pile of dust, regardless of the number of conspiracists who have claimed they have unearthed "new groundbreaking evidence".

Oswald practically confessed to J.D. Tippit's murder, as discussed here.


Even if Walker quoted Oswald correctly, David, there is nothing in the statement to suggest Oswald killed Tippit.


Well, Oswald didn't come right out and admit to Officer C.T. Walker that he had just gunned down a policeman, that's true enough.

But at the same time, I'm trying to imagine an INNOCENT person, who didn't shoot anybody, making the following statement to a police officer right after being arrested in a violent struggle, during which he is waving a gun around trying to shoot some cops and screaming "It's all over now" and/or "This is it"....

"Well, they say it just takes a second to die."


The officer gave Oswald some attitude ("you might find out") and Oswald gave it right back. That's what men (particularly Marines) do. Guilty or not.


Maybe some people would be so cocky and sure of themselves. But since we all know that Oswald positively murdered Officer Tippit (that's not even a debatable point after evaluating all the evidence), we can therefore KNOW that Oswald's cockiness was most certainly not born out of INNOCENCE. He killed Tippit and he started playing around with the cops almost immediately--even on the way to City Hall in the police car.


When one looks at the sum total of Oswald's behavior after the shooting, in fact, one finds that Oswald was way cooler and calmer than everyone around him.


Which is, IMO, something that leads toward his guilt much more so than his innocence. Either that, or Lee Harvey Oswald was one heck of an actor and should have probably won the Oscar instead of Gregory Peck.

And, btw, that "sum total of Oswald's behavior after the shooting" needs to include more than just Oswald's actions and statements AFTER being arrested. We need to look at his bahavior and actions BETWEEN the time JFK and Tippit were shot and the time of his arrest in the theater.

And during that "in between" time, Oswald did things that reek with a guilty state of mind:

1.) He leaves the TSBD within approx. three minutes of JFK getting shot. (And JFK just happened to get shot with OSWALD'S own gun. But maybe that was just some more of Lee Oswald's severe "bad luck" that he was experiencing on 11/22/63.)

2.) He takes a taxi to his room....which is extremely out of character for the miserly Mr. Oswald. (What was his hurry anyway, if he was only intending to go to the movies after work?)

3.) He grabs a gun.

4.) He's seen acting "funny" and "scared" outside Johnny Brewer's store.

5.) He pulls a gun on policemen inside the Texas Theater.

6.) He shouts one or two things in the theater that can only be looked upon as being quite incriminating in nature. (I mean, how do CTers reconcile a statement like "It's all over now" within a theory that has Oswald INNOCENT of any wrong-doing on Nov. 22? WHAT is "all over now"? Do conspiracy theorists ever say?)

In summary -- Oswald's actions after 12:30 PM on November 22 are practically a blueprint or a road map to his guilt (and conviction).

How can anyone examine Oswald's post-assassination actions, movements, and statements and still think he was an "innocent patsy"? How is that even possible to do?


It seems just as likely, however, that he KNEW he was innocent of killing Kennedy, and knew either 1) how to prove it, or 2) who was responsible, and was waiting for the right time and right person with whom to share this info.


That's a cop-out, Pat. Oswald never uttered a word about anyone else being involved. But CTers like to use the excuse of "Oh, he was just waiting until the right time to spill his guts."

The CTers are, of course, free to believe that if they want to. But it doesn't have the ring of truth, in my view. What was he "waiting" for? If he's innocent of shooting anybody, why not spill the beans BEFORE he's actually officially charged with the President's murder? Or Tippit's murder?

Oswald was guilty of both of those murders, Pat. And I think you're way too smart to believe otherwise.

David Von Pein
July 26-30, 2013