On Tuesday, December 25, 2007 at 8:14:05 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:

"HOLIDAY RE-POST SPECIAL" #5 (From October 2006):

==================================================

Let's Talk About The Killing Of Dallas Police Officer J.D. Tippit (Lee
Harvey Oswald's Second Murder Victim On November 22nd, 1963)...... -----------------------------------------------------
A double-murderer by the name of Lee Harvey Oswald (alias Alek James
Hidell) shot and killed President John Kennedy and Dallas policeman
J.D. Tippit in the year 1963. The evidence of Oswald's guilt in these
crimes is wide and far-reaching.
But many people refuse to buy into the official version of these
killings as declared by the Warren Commission in late 1964. The
naysayers think that the evidence against Mr. Oswald has been
manipulated to falsely implicate only LHO in these heinous acts of
violence.
With respect to the murder of Officer Tippit specifically, many
conspiracy theorists feel that the 39-year-old Dallas patrolman was
killed by a gunman (not Oswald, naturally) who was using an
"automatic"
weapon, instead of a "revolver". (Oswald was arrested a short distance
from the Tippit crime scene with a .38 revolver on him as he attempted
to use it on officers in the theater itself.)
But the "automatic" vs. "revolver" controversy has been thoroughly
explained many times since 1963, including by one of the Dallas
policemen who was directly involved in this controversy on the day of
the Tippit murder (11/22/63), Gerald L. Hill.
Sergeant Hill had originally put out a broadcast over the DPD police
radio stating that the killer was probably carrying an "automatic"
type
of weapon. But in 1986, Hill tried to clear up the confusion about the
gun with these comments:
"I assumed that it was an automatic simply because we had found all
the
hulls in one little general area. .... If you find a cluster of
shells,
you have to assume that they were fired from an automatic." -- Gerald
Hill quote (Via Dale K. Myers' book, "With Malice: Lee Harvey Oswald
And The Murder Of Officer J.D. Tippit"; Pp. 260-261)
Also -- As pointed out in Mr. Myers' first-rate book which probes
every
last nook and cranny of the Tippit murder (and thoroughly verifies
Oswald's guilt in the crime from every angle), the very first
indication that Tippit's killer might have had an automatic weapon
actually came not from a policeman, but from used-car salesman (and eyewitness) Ted Callaway.
Page 258 of "With Malice":
"All things considered, it appears the initial reference to an
'automatic' weapon stemmed from Callaway's mistaken impression that
the
gunman was pushing a fresh magazine into the handle of an automatic
weapon. The Davis women {witnesses Barbara Davis and Virginia Davis}
had a close-up view of the reality of the situation; the gunman had
both arms up, his right hand shaking shells from an open revolver into
his left {hand}."
Another thing that makes no sense whatsoever (if a person wants to
believe that an automatic gun was used to kill Tippit) is the fact
that
the 3rd and 4th bullet shells that were recovered that day (the ones
found by the two Davis ladies) were found in the Davis' SIDE YARD on
Patton Avenue; i.e., in a location where a gunman firing an automatic
at J.D. Tippit couldn't possibly have even SEEN Officer Tippit (who
was
located around the corner and many yards up 10th Street). The Davis
apartment building was blocking the view of any such gunman who would
have dropped shells from a gun WHILE FIRING from that location.*
* = See Page 266 of "With Malice" for a good photographic example of
how silly the "Automatic" theory is when looking at where these two
shells were found. Do CTers think the gunman kicked the automatic
shells into the Davis' side yard?
Or, in a "They Were Planted/Switched By The Police" theory -- why
would
the police plant the two shells in the Davis' yard and just leave them
for the Davis women to find? Why wouldn't the crooked cops pick up the
shells themselves after conveniently planting them?
Or, the crooked shell-switching cops could merely SAY they found two
more Oswald shells in the Davis' yard, instead of allowing one or more non-conspirators (like the two Davis women) to pick them up and do
anything they wanted to with them...even keep them, as is purported in
Myers' book with regard to a possible fifth bullet shell.
It's rumored that the Davis' father-in-law might have, indeed, picked
up a 5th shell in the Davis yard and kept it for a souvenir. That
sounds kind of crazy, I guess. But it would explain some loose ends
quite nicely, including the mis-match of the bullets and shells at the
Tippit scene, and the "5 pistol shots" that Ted Callaway always
adamantly maintained he heard on 11/22/63 from his nearby car lot.
It burns me up greatly when conspiracy kooks have the nerve to imply
that Oswald wasn't even at the Tippit murder scene, when virtually
every single piece of physical and circumstantial evidence surrounding
this particular murder indicates just the opposite.
The "All The Evidence Is Worthless" dodge is nothing but a big cop-
out,
plain and simple. If the evidence is really tainted, CTers need to
provide some semblance of solid proof of that sinister allegation.
Tell
the world WHO exactly it was who faked the evidence (with a dose of verifiable proof too, which would be a refreshing change-of-pace). And
tell the world if there was even one person on the planet who
witnessed
any "switching" of bullet shells at the murder scene (or elsewhere).
Alas, nobody can do that, because nothing shady like that occurred at
all, except in a CTer's theory-laden mind. We're about as likely to
get
some verifiable proof of a police "cover-up" with respect to the JFK
and J.D. Tippit murders as we are to witness the sun crashing into the
Earth a week from Thursday.
Just having Lee Oswald in the general area of the crime, with a gun,
and acting "funny" and obviously avoiding the police is a good hunk of circumstantial evidence leading to his guilt right there.
Where does the road of common sense take a reasonable person when JUST
the above after-the-shooting activity of Lee Harvey Oswald is examined objectively? It sure doesn't lead to total innocence, I'll tell ya
that
right now. (Especially when the stuff that went on inside the movie
theater is factored in as well.) ---------------------------------------------
MORE ON THE TIPPIT MURDER (AND A REVIEW OF DALE MYERS' BOOK)...... http://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/discussions/start-thread.html/ref=cm_rdp_dp/103-9597227-6764635?ie=UTF8&ASIN=0966270975&store=yourstore&reviewID=RX09PCPWL9RCH&iid=0966270975&displayType=ReviewDetail
----------------------------------------------
In a nutshell, this murder boils to down the following concrete fact
(based on the overall weight of the evidence that surrounds the
crime)......
If Lee Harvey Oswald didn't kill J.D. Tippit -- then J.D. Tippit
wasn't
killed at all. Maybe it was all some kind of "Bobby Was In The Shower"
type of dream or something instead.
David Von Pein
October 2006

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/4zUQnJO8Zso

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)