(PART 1242)



The bus schedules indicate the bus stopped at [Helen Markham's] stop
around 1:26:



Vincent Bugliosi, following Helen Markham's testimony, puts the bus at 1:15.

Bugliosi even argues that he knows of the 1:12 time, and DOESN'T BELIEVE that Helen Markham would say 1:15 for a 1:12 bus. (Of course, honest readers can easily disagree with such a silly assertion.)

Vincent Bugliosi would dismiss **even more strongly** a 1:26 bus time... if Bugliosi thought three minutes was enough to dismiss the 1:12 time, HE'D BE TELLING YOU THAT YOU'RE A FOOL FOR ACCEPTING AN 11-MINUTE DIFFERENCE.

(Which, by the way, most folks would refer to as a 1:25 time...)

So who's telling the lie?

Clearly - Bugliosi must be lying if "Bud" is telling the truth.

So tell us "Bud," why do you think Bugliosi was lying?


Let's see what Mr. Bugliosi actually said about the "bus schedule" topic.....

--- Quote On: ---

"Although an FBI report (CD 630[h]) says that Helen Markham’s bus, per the Dallas Transit System, came by each day “at about 1:12 p.m.,” not 1:15 p.m., I tend to doubt the 1:12 time for two reasons. Number one, the FBI never nailed down which of two separate buses Markham could have taken at Jefferson and Patton, not asking her what corner at the intersection she got on her bus.

Apparently, only one of the buses was scheduled to come by at 1:12, and the FBI never even alluded to the existence of another bus that stopped at a different corner of the intersection and would also have taken Markham downtown by a more indirect route (Myers, 'With Malice', p.597 footnote 154; CD 1128, p.3). Much more importantly, Markham, when asked by Warren Commission counsel, “You know what time you usually get your bus, don’t you?” she answered “1:15” (3 H 306).

And in an earlier FBI interview she said the bus came by at 1:15 p.m. (CD 630[c], p.1). Why in the world would she say 1:15 if it was 1:12? We know that Markham was not a bright woman, but she was smart enough to hold down a job as a waitress, where one has to deal with numbers on a customer’s bill, and smart enough to get to work every day.

It requires NO intelligence to read a watch or clock, and though the Dallas Transit System advised the FBI that the bus was scheduled to come at 1:12, I find it very hard to believe it routinely came by at that time. If it did, with Markham thinking it came by at 1:15, I wonder how she didn’t miss the bus a lot and was able to keep her job."
-- Vincent Bugliosi; Page 44 of "Reclaiming History" (Endnotes)


So clearly, you agree that "Bud" has labeled Vincent Bugliosi a liar.

"Bud" is desperately arguing that the bus came at 1:26.

Either "Bud" or Bugliosi is lying...

Who is it, David?

Who's lying?


Perhaps he [Vince Bugliosi] wasn't aware of the bus schedule.


Where on any of these bus schedules does it say "1:26", Bud? I can't seem to find that time shown anywhere.


It doesn't say, it indicates. This post provides the support.


Ten-Four. Thanks.


Yep... one liar covering up for another.

Tell us David, why do you believe that "Bud" can label Bugliosi a liar and get away with it?


I have no idea why you, Ben Holmes, think anyone has to label Bugliosi a "liar" in this "bus schedule" regard. It seems to me that Vince pretty much AGREES with Bud's analysis on this thing --- i.e., both Bud and Vince B. agree that Helen Markham must not have actually been trying to catch a "1:12" bus. Both Bud and Vince think she caught her usual bus LATER than 1:12.

Why are you so anxious to hang a "liar" label on Vincent Bugliosi at every turn in the road? He didn't "LIE" at all about this bus schedule thing. He was giving his OPINION about Markham's testimony and FBI statements. And those opinions make a lot of sense to me. Why doesn't this VB logic make sense to you, Ben?....

"It requires NO intelligence to read a watch or clock, and though the Dallas Transit System advised the FBI that the bus was scheduled to come at 1:12, I find it very hard to believe it routinely came by at that time. If it did, with Markham thinking it came by at 1:15, I wonder how she didn’t miss the bus a lot and was able to keep her job." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi


You're a GUTLESS liar...

If Bugliosi doesn't agree with Helen Markham on a THREE MINUTE DIFFERENCE, there's no possible way that he'd agree with a difference almost FOUR TIMES LARGER.

Tell us David - why would you pretend that Bugliosi would accept an Eleven minute difference when he refused to accept a three minute difference?


If presented with the analysis that Bud provided HERE, Vince Bugliosi would very likely have been able to accept the "1:26" timing for Markham's bus arrival.

The reason why Bugliosi had trouble accepting the 1:12 time is because if that time were ACTUALLY CORRECT, it would mean that Mrs. Markham would have missed her bus most of the time (if we're to also accept as fact that she caught her bus at 1:15 PM each day). And how likely is it that she was constantly missing the 1:12 bus because she just refused to get there in time? Not very likely, is it?

So, of course, Vince could very easily accept a wider differential in time, because it would mean Markham wouldn't be missing her bus every single day.

Makes sense, doesn't it Holmes? Or would you rather continue your daily habit of being an obnoxious prick by calling me a "GUTLESS liar" one or two more times before this day is done?


Yep... liars are capable of justifying ANYTHING.

Bugliosi made it quite clear what his reasoning was...

You're simply too dishonest to acknowledge it.

Bugliosi would be ashamed of you...


You're nuts. Bugliosi's reasoning in rejecting the 1:12 time is just as he stated in his book....

"I find it very hard to believe it routinely came by at that [1:12 PM] time. If it did, with Markham thinking it came by at 1:15, I wonder how she didn’t miss the bus a lot and was able to keep her job." -- VB

Now, who would routinely get to a bus stop at 1:15 to try and catch a 1:12 bus? That's why Bugliosi had doubts about the "1:12" time.

My guess is that Helen Markham very likely timed it so that she would be at the Jefferson & Patton bus stop at approximately 1:15 every day, and she would (of course) then catch the next bus to come by that was going downtown (whenever that was, at 1:22, or 1:26, whenever). That way, she would be a little early to catch the next bus. Makes sense to me anyway. And the FBI report in CD630 clearly indicates that "the bus is scheduled to pass this point [at Patton and Jefferson] at about 1:12 PM and every ten minutes thereafter".

So it's fairly clear that if Mrs. Markham didn't catch the 1:12 bus, she could have caught another bus at about 1:22 or 1:32. And since she didn't have to be at work until 2:30 PM, there was plenty of time to spare, even if she had to take one of those later busses.

But it makes no sense for her to regularly get to the bus stop at 1:15 if she was really trying to catch a 1:12 bus. That's crazy.


David, I think you are making a mistake relying on that "a bus every 10 minutes" information. Nowhere will you find buses running every 10 minutes during non-peak service. Here in Philly the buses run about 20-25 minutes during peak morning and evening service, and 40-45 minutes during non-peak times.

Think about it, that would be 4 buses running northbound into downtown Dallas and 4 buses running southbound during non-peak service. 8 drivers and eight buses in transit during non-peak service on a single route, the system would be bankrupt.

The Lancaster 55 bus schedule showing a bus every hour off-peak is much more reasonable, and it explains why Markham left so early. The next bus came around an hour later, and would likely drop her off near her work after 2:30.


Yes, Bud, I've got to admit that what you just said makes a lot of sense. But if you are correct, then somebody needs to go and yell at the FBI or the Dallas Transit System, because one or the other got something very fouled up in Commission Document No. 630, which clearly indicates that FBI agent Robert M. Barrett, on March 16, 1964, was informed by the Dallas Transit System that a bus could be boarded at Patton & Jefferson "about every ten minutes...during the afternoon hours of every weekday".

Should we ask for Bob Barrett's resignation? :-)


The evidence *against* the theory that Oswald shot Tippit is quite extensive.


In actuality, the "EVIDENCE" to show that Oswald was innocent of shooting Officer Tippit is NON-EXISTENT.

The actual "evidence" (as opposed to the "evidence" that only exists in a CTer's imagination) is providing the conclusive PROOF that Lee Oswald--and only Lee Oswald--was the killer of J.D. Tippit.

Only a freakish conspiracy theorist bent on mangling the true facts could possibly even begin to believe otherwise.

~Mark VII~
~Hammer stroke~


You knew that the time [for the Tippit murder] specified by the Warren Commission was 1:16.

They could easily have stated 1:14, or 1:15... but they didn't. They had reasons for their decision to select 1:16.

And you know that reason, don't you?


Yes. The Warren Commission incorrectly thought that it was Domingo Benavides who had made the citizen's call at 1:17 or 1:18 on Tippit's police radio. [See Warren Report, Page 166.] But it was really T.F. Bowley, of course, who made that radio call, which was done only AFTER Benavides had been pumping the mike for about 90 seconds. And that mike-pumping began at 1:16 PM.

The Warren Commission was apparently relying only on the truncated transcript of the Dallas Police radio tapes that appears on Page 52 of CE1974, which is a transcript that has several radio transmissions omitted, as well as having a "long pause" of 15 seconds omitted (as we can see when comparing CE1974 with this more complete version of the DPD radio tapes).

The Commission, therefore, failed to take into account the extra 90 seconds of microphone clicking and pumping that was done by Benavides, which I don't think was even discovered until the 1990s when Dale Myers talked about it in his 1998 book.

Ergo, the actual shooting time had to be sometime BEFORE 1:16, because Benavides' "pumping" begins at exactly 1:16. But the WC wasn't accounting for the extra time required for Benavides' mike pumping (because the Commission wasn't even aware of it in 1964).

Dale Myers Quote On:

"Beginning at 1:16 p.m., a microphone is keyed a number of times on channel one of the Dallas police tapes, as if someone were 'pumping' the microphone button of a police radio. This continues for a little over 90 seconds, right up until the time passing motorist T.F. Bowley successfully contacts the dispatcher. .... Considering the timing of the sounds heard in the Dallas police radio recordings, and the corroborating accounts of three witnesses, the murder of Tippit probably occurred about 90 seconds prior to Benavides' bungled attempt to notify the dispatcher. Therefore, there is good reason to believe that J.D. Tippit was shot at approximately 1:14:30 p.m." -- Dale K. Myers; Pages 86-87 of "With Malice: Lee Harvey Oswald And The Murder Of Officer J.D. Tippit"




I put it a minute or so later. I think the time was a lot closer to 1:18 than 1:16.


I don't think that's possible, Bud. Domingo Benavides was already inside Tippit's patrol car "clicking" the mike on the radio by 1:16. And Bowley's radio call was at approximately 1:17:45 to 1:18, so Bowley TOO was using the radio by 1:18 (and only AFTER Benavides' bungled attempt to use that same radio).

So the murder had to have occurred prior to 1:16. Exactly how long before 1:16 is the hard thing to figure out. Benavides wasn't timing his every move that day, so we can never know for sure exactly how long it took him to get inside Tippit's car after the murder occurred, but Benavides did tell the Warren Commission that he stayed in his truck for "a few minutes" after the shooting took place....

"I set [sic] there for just a few minutes to kind of, I thought he went in back of the house or something. At the time, I thought maybe he might have lived in there and I didn't want to get out and rush right up. He might start shooting again." -- Domingo Benavides; April 2, 1964

There is also Benavides' 1967 interview with CBS News [below], in which he says about the same thing that he told the Warren Commission three years earlier. In the 1967 interview, Domingo said he remained in his truck long enough for Oswald "to get around the house" on the corner of Tenth & Patton, and then Domingo said he sat in his truck "for maybe a second or two" after he saw the gunman (Oswald) go around the corner....

And there is the Dallas Police radio log, which indicates that Benavides started pumping (or clicking) the microphone on Tippit's radio at "1:16 p.m." (according to Dale Myers' extensive research on this topic [see the quote from Myers I cited earlier]; and I respect Dale's research abilities very much). So, if that is indeed the case, then J.D. Tippit was most certainly shot PRIOR to 1:16 PM.

I would, however, be very interested, Bud, to hear your account of the precise timing of J.D. Tippit's murder. How did you arrive at this conclusion, Bud?....

"I think the time was a lot closer to 1:18 than 1:16."

Over the years, I have grown to value your opinion, Bud, every bit as much as I value the opinions of some of my other favorite "LNers" (such as Mr. Myers, Vince Bugliosi, and Jean Davison, among others). So I'd be very interested in your "Tippit Timing" theory. Thank you.


You could be right, I was going by the dialog. I was unaware of the clicking, I was going by the transcripts only. Sounds reasonable [to say that Tippit was shot prior to 1:16 PM].

These kinds of statements show why you should be distrustful of witness time estimates. Oswald moved quick, not quite running across the Davis's lawn, probably only took less than 30 seconds to cut across and out of sight.

Like I said, I was going by the transcripts of when the first contact with the police dispatcher was made. The time given earlier was 1:16, but that doesn't mean that the time didn't change to 1:17 one second after the 1:16 time was given. As far as I know there are no tones or anything to establish passing minutes, only the dispatcher updates, which could [be] at the beginning, middle or end of the minute. I was using this source....and you can see where the 1:16 time is given. Then there are quite a lot of exchanges. Then it says there is a 15-second pause before the call comes in from the Tippit scene.

But like I said, I was unaware of the clicking on the radio, I was going by when the transcript had the call come in.

I was looking at [William] Scoggins' testimony and he said he called in the shooting to the cab driver dispatcher as soon as it occurred. They probably keep pretty good time, that was a missed opportunity to get information. Of course I wish they would have interviewed the bus driver of Markham's bus so he could say when his bus reached Markham's stop also.


Thanks for providing your explanation, Bud.

And, yes, it would have been nice to have some additional testimony (or affidavits) from some of the bus drivers in Dallas who drove the Jefferson/Patton bus route. Any one of those drivers could likely have confirmed or refuted the FBI report by Bob Barrett in which he claims that a bus would stop at Jefferson & Patton every ten minutes.

But, then too, there's always going to be something that slips between the cracks and doesn't get done in a large-scale massive case like the JFK/Tippit/Oswald murder investigations.

Another really big "missed opportunity", IMO, was when the Warren Commission had Jackie Kennedy on the witness stand in June of 1964. She could have provided so much detailed information about the precise LOCATION of President Kennedy's head wounds (since she was literally "trying to hold his head on" during the frantic drive to Parkland Hospital). But, unfortunately, such a golden opportunity went down the drain.

Hindsight is always perfect, though, isn't it?


FYI / FWIW / BTW....

I was just now looking at bus driver Cecil McWatters' Warren Commission testimony, and I took note of a funny thing that occurs over and over again (it's actually meaningless, but humorous)....

During the course of McWatters' testimony, the term "in other words" is spoken an incredible total of 189 times! (And mostly by McWatters himself.)

Holy cow! I'll bet the WC members who were there probably felt like slapping Cecil silly after the first 99 times he said "in other words"! (LOL)

It's kind of like those people who constantly have to say "ya know" every five seconds while they're talking. Annoying as heck.

McWatters also was able to work in two useless "in other words" comments during his very short 1964 interview with CBS News [below]....


PROVEN FACT --- Lee Harvey Oswald Murdered J.D. Tippit.


You're lying again, David.

No such thing has *EVER* been "proven."

The fact that you and the Warren Commission consistently lie about the time of the murder shows that you realize just how weak your case actually is.

Indeed, there's a number of inconsistencies that show that your theory just doesn't fit.


Allow me to restate the obvious once again....

"Even with some anomalies and discrepancies in the timelines and the "Remington" vs. "Winchester" bullet shells, the totality of evidence hangs Oswald for Tippit's murder and always has. And anyone saying otherwise just flat-out does not want to face the reality that exists within that "totality" of evidence."
-- DVP; June 2013


Allow me to restate the obvious for *anyone* reading...


There was never a trial for the Tippit murder, there was *NEVER* any cross examination of the evidence, there's MASSIVE problems in both the evidence and the chain of custody for the evidence.


The fact that you're lying is also demonstrated by your unwillingness to engage in debate on this topic.

Such AMAZING cowardice!!!

And anyone claiming that it's a "proven fact" that Oswald murdered Tippit is lying so blatantly that it's amazing that you aren't struck by lightning.

Tell us David, how do you hope to convince anyone with blatant lies?


You really shouldn't be looking into the Kennedy and Tippit cases, Ben. You're totally incapable of properly assessing the evidence in either case. That couldn't be more obvious to everyone.

I hear toy boats make a nice hobby.

David Von Pein
April 14, 2017
April 15-16, 2017
April 17, 2017
April 17, 2017




Your logic goes something like this:

We know Oswald shot Tippit because he was caught with the revolver in his hand at the Theater, and if we know he shot Tippit then we know he shot him between 1:14-1:15 because any sooner and he wouldn't have been humanly able to get there, and we know he got there because we know he shot him, and if we know he shot him then we know that Helen Markham's regular bus didn't take her to work every day at 1:12pm.


You are full of crap, Davey.


You are the one who is "full of crap", Lee Farley.

Mrs. Helen Markham wasn't due at work at her job at the "Eat Well Restaurant" until 2:30 PM on 11/22/63.

2:30 PM, Lee. That gave her plenty of time to get to work on time even if she missed the bus at 1:12. The busses left every ten minutes along that route on Jefferson Boulevard. So she could have easily gotten on the 1:22 bus and had ample time to get to her job before 2:30 (even if she normally did want to make the 1:12 bus each day).

And I'd be willing to bet you my next disinfo check that Mrs. Markham didn't always make the 1:12 bus every day.

Why do I say that?

Because the fact is -- She simply didn't NEED to make the specific 1:12 bus in order to get to work by 2:30.

I'd wager that there were many days when she had to settle for the 1:22 bus, or the 1:32....which would still give her plenty of time to get to work by 2:30 (even if the bus was practically crawling every step of the way).


HELEN MARKHAM -- "Eat Well Restaurant, 1404 Main Street, Dallas, Tex."

JOE BALL -- "Were you working there on November 22, 1963?"

MARKHAM -- "I was."

BALL -- "What hours did you work?"

MARKHAM -- "I was due at work from 2:30 in the evening until 10:30 at night."

* Mrs. Markham really meant to say "2:30 in the afternoon", of course, since 2:30 PM is far from being "in the evening". But I would imagine that some conspiracy theorists want to bite her head off for making that simple error.



Let me say this reeeeeeeeal sloooooow for you.

Markham had a regular bus. The regular bus was 1:12. She said (UNDER OATH) that she left at her regular time so she could catch her regular bus. Got that? What is it that you fail to grasp on this point?

I don't give a flying rat's ass what you believe about whether she could have gotten a later bus. Keep what you believe to yourself.


It'd be nice if you would follow that same advice. Because the things you believe should, indeed, be kept to yourself (due to their built-in silliness).


How do you know she [Markham] didn't mean to say she was due at work at 1:30 in the afternoon? Do you have the Dobb's timekeeping records under your pillow? But don't worry. It's irrelevant. She told us what time she left for work. A little after 1:00pm.


And "a little after 1:00" perfectly fits with Markham witnessing Oswald killing Tippit at 1:14-1:15.

And if she really meant "1:30", then her "in the evening" comment is even more absurd, because 1:30 is even further away from "evening" than is 2:30. (Maybe Farley didn't think of that angle, though.)

It's interesting that it doesn't bother CTers like Lee Farley that Markham's positive IDing of LHO is corroborated by the PHYSICAL EVIDENCE (the bullet shells from LHO's gun, which are shells that prove LHO was the killer, since he still had that same gun on him 35 minutes later).

So, what do the conspiracy clowns do (as always) -- they'll blame the DPD, and say they switched the shells. And they'll even go so far down Patsy Avenue as to pretend that the cops PLANTED Revolver V510210 on Oswald (or just entered that gun into the evidence chain later on).

That's how far off the rails a person needs to go in order to buy into the notion that Lee Oswald was innocent of killing Dallas Police Officer J.D. Tippit.

But Lee Farley is perfectly willing to go that far off the rails. And he has. (What a surprise.)


You'll always be haunted by the fact that Helen Markham left her house between 1:04-1:07pm and T.F. Bowley's watch will, for the rest of time, be at 1:10pm when he looked at it.

Which means Tippit was killed between 1:07pm and 1:09pm. And that being the case, Oswald didn't do it and your stinking and so-called best evidence is shown up for what it truly is -- fraudulent.


It doesn't mean anything of the sort, Lee.

Since ALL of the times associated with Oswald's movements after he fled the Book Depository are merely ESTIMATES (and, undeniably, they ARE only estimates and approximations), we cannot say with 100% certainty that Earlene Roberts' timing of how long Oswald stayed inside his Beckley Avenue room is spot-on perfect.

In fact, common sense, coupled with some of Mrs. Roberts' own testimony, would indicate that Oswald was only in his room for a very few seconds--one minute at most. Here's why I say that.

So, even if Tippit was killed at 1:07 or 1:09 (or whatever time close to 1:00 you want to come up with), we're really only talking about a very few minutes in real time here. Oswald might very well have left his roominghouse BEFORE 1:00 PM, which would have placed him at Tenth and Patton earlier than 1:14-1:15.

My own opinion (coupled with the excellent and detailed research done on the Tippit murder by author Dale K. Myers) is that Tippit was probably killed at 1:14 to 1:15 PM. But it could conceivably have been earlier, because (as noted) the timing of Lee Harvey Oswald's movements after 12:30 PM is not firmly fixed in stone. And it never was. We can only guess as to the EXACT times.

But, in the final analysis of J.D. Tippit's murder, the hard physical evidence simply HAS to trump all other evidence.

And just because conspiracy theorists like Jim DiEugenio and Lee Farley want to believe that the physical evidence in the Tippit case is "fraudulent" (to use Farley's own term), that doesn't mean that everybody is required to accept such far-fetched notions.

And it's a particularly far-fetched notion in the Tippit case, due to the fact that a DPD officer had been slain. Therefore, according to the theories of people like DiEugenio and Farley, apparently a bunch of cops in charge of investigating the murder of their fellow officer, decided to just IGNORE the real evidence at the scene and, instead, they decided they were going to frame an innocent schnook named Lee Oswald.

Do you realize how silly that proposition is?

I wonder if James DiEugenio or Lee Farley (or any other conspiracist) really do realize how silly that theory truly is. And it certainly is just a "theory". Because no CTer on the planet has proven that ANY evidence that exists against Lee Harvey Oswald in either the JFK or Tippit murder cases is "fraudulent".


Come now, David. What you propose is contrary to the official version of events. The Warren Commission had to use every trick in the book to get Oswald to Beckley by 1:00 p.m. To the point of getting William Whaley to make a liar out of himself on his second appearance. I don't care how long he was in his room.


But it could be very important, because the Warren Commission's estimated times were being based on Earlene Roberts being RIGHT when she said that Oswald was in his room for "3 or 4 minutes".

But just look at what ELSE Earlene Roberts said:

JOSEPH BALL -- "How long did he [Oswald] stay in the room?"

EARLENE ROBERTS -- "Oh, maybe not over 3 or 4 minutes. Just long enough, I guess, to go in there and get a jacket and put it on and he went out zipping it." (Emphasis added by DVP.)


So, from Mrs. Roberts' OWN MOUTH, we have her saying that Lee Oswald likely wasn't in his room any longer than it would take "to go in there and get a jacket and put it on".

Also take note of the words "maybe" and "I guess" in Roberts' Warren Commission testimony there.

In other words, she was GUESSING. That's all. She wasn't timing Oswald with a stopwatch.

And I kinda doubt that it would take 3-4 minutes to just get a jacket. In fact, via the re-enactment done in the 1978 television movie "Ruby & Oswald" (see video below, at the 1:55 mark), it took the actor playing Oswald a mere 22 seconds to do all the things that we're fairly certain Oswald did while he was in his room on 11/22/63 -- e.g., grab his gun and put his jacket on.

But even if the Warren Commission's estimates are correct (with LHO leaving 1026 Beckley at precisely 1:03), there was still time enough for Oswald to get to the Tippit murder site by 1:14 or 1:15 (which is the best estimate for when Tippit's murder took place, being based primarily on the Dallas Police radio tapes, which indicate that T.F. Bowley's call to the DPD occurred at 1:18, which followed about 90 seconds of microphone "pumping" by Domingo Benavides prior to Bowley taking the mike).

We know that the trip from 1026 Beckley to 10th & Patton can be done in about 11 minutes. Several people have done it in just that amount of time. (Plus, we can't possibly know how fast Oswald was walking, or exactly what route he took to get there.)

Let me ask you this, Lee:

Do you think it's reasonable to believe that Benavides waited for NINE MINUTES to grab Tippit's radio and start pumping the mike?

And via the most commonly believed scenario among CTers of Tippit being killed at 1:06, you've got Benavides waiting for about TEN FULL MINUTES to get on that radio.

Frankly, Lee, that's goofy. Benavides didn't wait any nine or ten minutes before grabbing that microphone. And you know he didn't.

Hence, via the DPD tapes (and common sense, plus Domingo Benavides' testimony), Tippit was likely shot at about 1:14 or 1:15.


You said you can still get him [Oswald] there for 1:06-1:09. Show me.



Earlene Roberts was very likely wrong about her "3 or 4 minutes" estimate. Oswald, just like Frederic Forrest in the 1978 movie scene I linked to, probably was in his cubbyhole of a room for about 30 seconds, and not anywhere near three or four minutes.

David Belin & Co. walked the distance from Neely & Beckley to 1026 Beckley in 5 minutes & 45 seconds.

If Oswald had moved considerably faster than Belin's "walking" pace, he could have shaved some time off of Belin's re-creation time and could have likely been inside his room by about 12:57.

He's in his room for 30 seconds, then heads for Tenth Street.

He can positively get to Tenth & Patton in about 11 minutes (that's been done by Dave Perry and others in past reconstructions).

That puts him beside Tippit's patrol car at precisely 1:09. Which, as mentioned, would also have to mean that Domingo Benavides stood beside Tippit's police car picking lint out of his belly button for SEVEN MINUTES before using the police radio. And that is not a reasonable thing to believe, IMO.


Why did Ted Callaway have to ask Domingo Benavides which way the killer went if he saw him and spoke to him?


That's an easy one, Lee:

Since Callaway didn't actually SEE THE MURDER take place, Callaway was merely confirming that the person he saw with a gun on Patton Avenue was, indeed, the ONE AND ONLY KILLER of Officer Tippit.

Callaway, at the time, had no way of knowing if there were one, two, or more killers. So it doesn't seem strange that he would want to confirm (in his own mind) that "THE KILLER" escaped down Patton. And he did confirm that via Benavides.

I achieved my goal though -- Because I just knew beyond all doubt that one or more of you conspiracy theorists here at the "Education Forum" would try to paint Ted Callaway as a bald-faced liar. And I was 100% correct. You actually think Callaway DIDN'T see anyone run past him on Patton on 11/22/63. Beautiful.

And I see that DiEugenio decided to wait until Farley posted his inane remarks about Callaway before he chimed in with his confirmation that he, too, disbelieves Callaway.

Two conspiracy mongers for the price of one. Not a bad day's work.

Now, let's move on to William Scoggins (another witness who verifies the presence of Lee Harvey Oswald on Tenth Street during the Tippit murder):

Just exactly how are you guys going to attempt to discredit Mr. Scoggins in order to pretend that your #1 Patsy for all Nov. 22 murders was totally innocent?

I can't wait to hear the CT brilliance.


Do [CTers] think both Ted Callaway and Sam Guinyard were liars? They really WEREN'T together when Oswald passed by?

And actually, come to think of it, Guinyard is a good witness for the proposition that Oswald was still, indeed, "kicking out shells" out of his gun all the way down Patton, which means that a FIFTH shell might very well have been ejected farther down the street from the corner of 10th & Patton, which would be consistent with Oswald firing five shots (as Callaway always maintained), with one of the shells never being recovered.

I've never heard of anybody hunting for shells far down Patton Avenue. Have you? It's quite possible that a shell was dropped there by Oswald and never found.


Even if – and it is a HUGE "if" – any shells and/or bullets can be conclusively tied to that revolver, which they cannot, the ONLY reason to suppose that the gun "was obviously in perfect working order at approx. 1:14-1:15 PM" is because Oswald can't have gotten to 10th & Patton much sooner than that.

The fact of the matter is that the shooting took place several minutes earlier than that, at approximately 1:08. If you work your way backwards from the 1:16 citizen radio call (unquestionably – and now officially – by Temple F. "Tom" Bowley), including that by the time Bowley got there, a "crowd" had already formed after the shooting, it cannot have happened as late as some would like to believe it did.


There's so much proof that Oswald murdered Tippit, it's mind-boggling. And it's the BEST kind of evidence too -- ballistics (and yes, the bullet shells are irrevocably tied to LHO's gun, and why you're saying otherwise is a huge mystery; but you couldn't be more wrong on that point, as confirmed by Nicol, Frazier, Killion, and Cunningham....and others from the HSCA too) .... plus the fact that Oswald still had the murder weapon in his OWN HANDS just 35 minutes after the murder .... plus MULTIPLE eyewitnesses who said it was OSWALD, not somebody else, who either killed Tippit or fled the scene immediately afterward.

Just stay in fantasy land on this, Duke. That's where you apparently feel most comfortable.




All of that stuff you just mentioned is merely the normal (and expected) smoke and mirrors that a defense lawyer would naturally try to use at a trial in which they absolutely have to know the defendant is guilty. (Just like at the O.J. Simpson trial.)

The defense team would have to convince a jury that this portion of your above scenario actually happened:

"The only pistol at the TT [Texas Theater] was one that the police were trying to force upon him."

Tell me, Greg, just exactly WHY would a reasonable jury even BEGIN to believe such a thing occurred?


Would a reasonable jury truly believe that the Dallas Police (within MINUTES of Tippit's murder) would have had a desire to "force" a pistol into the hands of a man who was in no way involved in J.D. Tippit's murder?

Which would mean, of course, if the jury did buy into the above preposterous notion, that the jury would also have to believe that the DPD would have deliberately allowed the killer of their fellow officer to just get off scot-free, while they framed the innocent man who was arrested in the Texas Theater.

Hogwash. All of it.


BOTH the Warren Commission AND the HSCA were satisfied that Oswald ordered, paid for, and took possession of Revolver V510210 and Rifle C2766.

Do [conspiracy theorists] really want to think that BOTH the WC and the HSCA (14 years apart, with a different group of investigators and committee members and lawyers) didn't know what the hell they were talking about when they concluded that Lee Oswald bought and possessed both of those weapons?

Do conspiracy theorists REALLY believe that?

Amazing if they do.


As I have often said, the sale of the handgun and the rifle were things that were pretty much accepted by the first generation of critics. They should not have been. They are simply too full of holes for any rational person to accept at face value.


But you, Jimbo, as a "Patsy" believer, really should be accepting the undeniable fact that Oswald ordered and took possession of both the rifle and the revolver (and it is a conclusive fact that those two items were ordered and possessed by LHO, despite the weird protestations of the conspiracists like Jim DiEugenio).

Why should you believe that?

Because, as I mentioned to you previously (and this is only garden-variety common sense of the first order) -- It makes much more logical sense in a frame-up (or "Patsy") theory to have your make-believe conspirators running around attempting to frame Oswald with HIS OWN GUNS, versus the incredibly complicated and laughable cloak-and-dagger version of events surrounding the gun purchases that you want to believe is true.

Don't you agree, James?

So why don't you stop pretending Oswald never even had C2766 or V510210 in his hands at all in the year 1963....because there's ample proof you are dead wrong, including photos showing him holding the Carcano (yes, I know you want to pretend those pics are frauds too), and the little fact that Oswald was caught with the revolver in his hands in the theater.

Seems to me you'd be wise to go back to siding with those first-generation critics and just admit what is obviously the truth -- Oswald owned the two guns.

And then your make-believe Patsy plot is easier to swallow too.

Of course, there are still many bumps in the Patsy road even if you accept the guns as being Oswald's -- e.g.: You'd still have to totally ignore all the lies told by your patsy on Nov. 21 and 22. And you'd still have to totally ignore Oswald's own incriminating actions on Nov. 22.

But I'm sure you're up to that easy task of ignoring (or mangling) all of that unimportant stuff, right Jimmy?

David Von Pein
November 25—December 16, 2011