|
Post by Michael Capasse on Jun 1, 2019 11:43:11 GMT -5
I gonna take a side step here to talk about Mr. Brennan's description of the man he saw. If the WC based his description on that of Lee Harvey Oswald, Brennan was anything but an "accurate observer."
Here's is Mr. Brennan's description:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
When I was looking over my notes regarding the station wagon, I came upon James Worrell. He saw a man running from the building with a very similar description as Mr. Brennan.
James Worrell
Mr. WORRELL - Well a better view of it is here in CE 360. I ran down Houston Street alongside the building and then crossed over the street, I ran alongside the building and crossed over, and in CE 359, I was standing over here, and I saw this man come bustling out of this door.
Mr. SPECTER - Across Houston Street as you have drawn the red line there? Mr. WORRELL - Yes, and I rested there, I was out of breath, I smoke too much, short winded.
Mr. SPECTER - Will you mark that "Y" where you stopped and rested and tell us how long you stopped there? (Witness marking.) Mr. WORRELL - How long?
Mr. SPECTER - Yes, sir. Mr. WORRELL - I was there approximately 3 minutes before I saw this man come out the back door here.
Mr. SPECTER - All right. Now will you put a "Z" where you first saw the man whom you have just described or mentioned? Mr. WORRELL - It is here I am pretty sure, I am not positive. (Witness marking.)
I do NOT see any "Z" marking on CE 360 ~Spector gets in the record "but you can't be positive" Mr. SPECTER - You are pretty sure - but you can't be positive - but you are pretty sure? Mr. WORRELL - Yes.
Mr. SPECTER - What is your best estimate as to his weight? Mr. WORRELL - 155 to 165.
Mr. SPECTER - What is your best estimate as to his height? Mr. WORRELL - 5-7, 5-10.
Mr. SPECTER - Pardon me, your best estimate as to his age.
Mr. WORRELL - Well, the way he was running, I would say he was in his late twenties or middle - I mean early thirties. Because he was fast moving on.
Mr. SPECTER - Did not have on matching coat and trousers? Mr. WORRELL - No.
Mr. SPECTER - Was it dark in color or light?
Mr. WORRELL - It was dark in color. I don't know whether it was blue, black, or brown, but it was dark, and he had light pants. And that is all I can say on his clothes, except his coat was open and kind of flapping back in the breeze when he was running.
Worrell describes the man with a dark gray jacket, Brennan does not. It is the age, height, weight and clothing that should have prompted authorities to look into this further. Although Brennan describes a shirt darker than the trouser, Worrell doesn't describe a shirt and this person may have taken the jacket off.
Worrell is not called to the lineups, his testimony and statements regarding this matter is dismissed. Investigation regarding this matter is avoided.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Jun 3, 2019 15:09:23 GMT -5
Cecil J McWatters Dallas Bus Driver
"At about 6:30 p.m. on the day of the assassination, McWatters viewed four men in a police lineup. He picked Oswald from the lineup as the man who had boarded the bus at the "lower end of town on Elm around Houston," and who, during the ride south on Marsalis, had an argument with a woman passenger. In his Commission testimony, McWatters said he had been in error and that a teenager named Milton Jones was the passenger he had in mind.
In a later interview, Jones confirmed that he had exchanged words with a woman passenger on the bus during the ride south on Marsalis. McWatters also remembered that a man received a transfer at Lamar and Elm Streets and that a man in the lineup was about the size of this man. However, McWatters' recollection alone was too vague to be a basis for placing Oswald on the bus." (WCR page 159)
12:40 pm November 22, 1963 / Photographer Stuart L. Reed
Mr. BALL - Let's get back to that lineup. Did you pick out one man or two men that night as people you had seen, as a person you had seen before?
Mr. McWATTERS - Well, I picked out, the only one that I told them it was the short man that I picked out up there.
Mr. BALL - And you thought he was the teenager whom you described? Mr. McWATTERS - Yes, first that is what I thought he was.
Mr. BALL - Now you have named him Milton Jones. Mr. McWATTERS - Yes, he was--
Mr. BALL - Now you realize you were mistaken in your identification that night? Mr. McWATTERS - That is right.
Mr. BALL - As I understand it, neither then nor now are you able to identify or say that you have again seen the man that got off your bus to whom you gave a transfer?
Mr. McWATTERS - No, sir; I couldn't. I could not identify him.
----------------------------------------------------------------------- The bus driver could not name Lee Oswald at the line ups as the passenger he gave a bus transfer - "neither then or now are you able to identify."
I remind the reader once again of 4 witnesses that all saw a man get into a car, 2 of which identified the man as the suspect.
This would prompt an investigation into conspiracy. This brings suspicion to the DPD in the in relation to other evidence such as B Y Photographs, Tippit bullets, or chain of custody issues.
Lee Oswald never got on that bus, and the DPD knew it.
The bus transfer is a prop. Questions remain how it was found, who it was given to and the condition of the paper. Cecil J. McWatters could not identify Lee Oswald in the Dallas Police lineups.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Jun 9, 2019 7:49:54 GMT -5
William Whaley Cab Driver
As I said in a previous post, William Whaley was not a witness to the Tippit murder. He was supposed to be the transportation for Lee Oswald from Dealey Plaza (DP) to his boarding room at Berkley Ave. From there, the WC contends, Lee walked to 10th and Patton then shot JDT
Mr. Whaley attended a lineup on Sat. afternoon, at about 2:30p, well after the suspect had been identified on television and in newspapers all over the world.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ He has a lot to say, starting with the confusion of which number he chose, to the affidavit he signed before the show up.
To witnessing Lee making it plain to everyone he was being railroaded, denied an attorney or a fair line-up
"Oswald did not complain about his treatment to any of the numerous police officers and other persons who had much to do with him during the 2 days of his detention." (WCR page 200) There are other witnesses that spoke about of this treatment.
William Whaley Cab Driver "He showed no respect for the policemen, he told them what he thought about them. They knew what they were doing and they were trying to railroad him and he wanted his lawyer. At that time he had on a pair of black pants and white T-shirt, that is all he had on.
But you could have picked him out without identifying him by just listening to him because he was bawling out the policeman, telling them it wasn't right to put him in line with these teenagers and all of that and they asked me which one and I told them. It was him all right, the same man."
Dallas Police Officer Walter Potts, saw the same thing.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Walter E. Potts Dallas Police Dept.
Mr. BALL. Did Oswald speak up or not?
Mr. POTTS. Well, he was complaining all during the showup. He had on a T-shirt and the rest of them didn't have on T- shirts, and he was complaining, "Well, everybody's got on a shirt and everything, and I've got a T-shirt on"-- he was very belligerent about the showup. He wouldn't cooperate in any way. He was just making all kinds of commotion out there and he was doing more of the talking than anybody.
Mr. BALL. What kind of commotion was he making?
Mr. POTTS. Well, he was doing a lot of talking about him being in a T-shirt, and "nobody else has got on a T-shirt and I've got on a T-shirt, this is unfair," and all that--just generally talking and after the showup was over, we just accompanied them back from the stage out to the anteroom door and just walked along with them and the elevator--took them on the elevator, and that's all we had to do with the show.
Mr. BALL. That's all you had to do with it? Mr. POTTS. Yes.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Bookout Interrogation Report WCR Appendix XI | Page 625
"OSWALD complained of a lineup wherein he had not been granted a request to put on a jacket similar to those worn by some of the other individuals in the lineup."
DO NOT Use lineup "fillers" who did not resemble the suspect, thus making the suspect stand out. By 2:30p the following day, they have denied him a collared shirt (since the first lineup) and he is clearly standing out from the others.
He is aware of this and is loudly protesting against it.
Lies from the WCR become distortions of truth to substantiate a preconceived and false solution to the crime..
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Jun 9, 2019 7:50:26 GMT -5
Third Man Out Was Number 2
This was the only time in Lee's four lineups that he was in the number 3 position. All the others he was number 2. Whaley told the Warren Commission the man he gave a ride to was in the number 2 position, yet his signed affidavit states Lee was in the number 3 position.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Here's Officer Potts to clarify the 4 men were brought out from left to right. Number 4 walks in first.
Mr. POTTS. Well, there is an anteroom before you get to the showup stage. Now, the witnesses were out front behind this transparent black nylon screen. There's a light set at an angle on the stage where the person on the stage can't see the people out in the audience. They brought them out handcuffed together and this John Thurman Horne went in first--no, that's wrong--Lujan went on first, because he would be No. 4. You see, they've got numbers above the--above them higher up there
Belin tries to clarify the record. He needs Whaley to confirm his affidavit. He won't do it.
Mr. BELIN. Do you remember now whether the man that you saw there was the No. 2 or the No. 3 man? Mr. WHALEY. I will admit he was No. 2.
Mr. BELIN. No. 2 from your left, or from your right? Mr. WHALEY. He was the third man out in the line of four as they walked out in a line.
They put the first man out on the right, and the last one on my left, and as near as I can remember, he was No. 2, but it was the man I hauled. He is very clear the number 2 man was the man he hauled. Belin does his best to put number 3 back in the record:
Mr. BELIN. Just one more minute, if you would, please? Mr. Whaley, earlier in your testimony here you said that Lee Harvey Oswald was No. 3. Do you remember saying that?
Mr. WHALEY. Yes, sir; but I meant that he was the third one out when they walked out with him. I said from my right.
Representative FORD. Did you point him out with your hand? Mr. WHALEY. No, sir; I did not. They asked me which number he was standing under and he was standing under No. 2.
Then Belin brings out the affidavit: Mr. BELIN. All right. Now in here it says, "The No. 3 man who I now know is Lee Harvey Oswald was the man who I carried from the Greyhound Bus Station"
Was this the No. 3 or the No. 2 man?
texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth340509/m1/1/
And then Mr. Whaley says this: Mr. WHALEY. I signed that statement before they carried me down to see the lineup.
I signed this statement, and then they carried me down to the lineup at 2:30 in the afternoon. ....and without even going off the record...Belin does his best to remain calm, keep his head on, but never quite confirms what it is signed, that was not typed.
Mr. BELIN. Now, when you signed it-- what I want to know is, before you went down, had they already put on there a statement that the man you saw was the No. 3 man in the lineup?
Mr. WHALEY. I don't remember that. I don't remember whether it said three or two, or what. Mr. BELIN. Did they have any statements on there before you went down to the lineup?
Mr. WHALEY. I never saw what they had in there. It was all written out by hand. The statement I saw, I think, was this one, and that could be writing.
I might not even seen this one yet. I signed my name because they said that is what I said.
Mr. Whaley goes on to explain that he was confused. That there was a hand written statement and a typed statement. And he does say he also signed a hand written one. - or a blank one. It is unclear. But this question will come again with another witness to the lineups.
Mr. Whaley had a passenger in his car. I don't doubt that. But there are too many inconsistencies in his testimony to prove it was Lee Oswald. Particularly in his description testimony, and that can be covered in another thread.
The WCR reads: "Whaley said that Oswald was the man under No. 2. Actually Oswald was under No. 3."(WC Report page 161) Once again this is a lie from the mouthpiece that is expected to be the authority of the facts in this case.
Whaley didn't say Oswald was #2, He said he chose #2. [he didn't write the affidavit] David Knapp was the #2 man in that lineup. If the typed statement said number 3, Whaley never read it. He chose number 2.
--------------------------------------------------------- Mr. POTTS. --Lujan went on first, because he would be No. 4. You see, they've got numbers above the--above them higher up there.
Mr. BALL. What is his full name? Mr. POTTS. Daniel Lujan, and then Oswald was No. 3, Knapp No. 2.
Mr. BALL. What is Knapp's full name? Mr. POTTS. David Knapp and John Thurman Horne was No. 1.
Mr. BALL. And what about David Knapp, what was he in for? Mr. POTTS. He was in for investigation of theft and he lived at 2922 Alabama. That's in Oak Cliff.
It becomes unclear as to whom Mr. Whaley gave a ride on Nov. 22, 1963. He signed a statement he did not prepare, and apparently never read.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Jun 16, 2019 10:49:05 GMT -5
This is a good checkpoint, we can re group.
There is a whole other set of witnesses at the Tippit scene that appeared at a lineup. Below is a map from John Armstrong that is an excellent way to get familiar with who and where they are:
Tippit Scene Witnesses
Not all are involved in lineups, right now we are interested in: Domingo Benavides Helen Markham William Scoggins
These people were in the immediate vicinity when the shooting occurred. All were asked to go to a lineup.
Virginia Davies
Barbara Davies [these 2 not on the map] Ted Callaway Sam Guinyard
These people were in different positions along Patton St and saw the man run away. All were asked to go to a lineup.
William A Smith Jimmy Burt
Warren Reynolds These people were given a photo line up.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ These are the lineups and witnesses: 4:35 PM Friday: This was done for Helen Markham
6:30 PM Friday: Callaway, Guinyard, McWatters
7:55 PM Friday: Virginia and Barbara Davis
2:15 PM Saturday: Whaley and Scoggins
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Whaley confirms FBI involvement at this early stage of the Tippit investigation (11/23)
Mr. BALL. Did the Dallas police come out to see you? Mr. WHALEY. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Or FBI agents? Mr. WHALEY. The Dallas police came down and took me down and the FBI was waiting there.
They are using fill-ins very different from the suspect in age and dress. They are preparing statements for the witnesses to sign BEFORE the show ups. The FBI has an involvement in the Tippit investigation without jurisdiction. They have taken over evidence in the case from the DPD some time after 3p on the 22nd. Whaley confirms they [FBI] are there at time he is there for the show up. If they are not directing the procedures, they are certainly aware of the proper protocol.
Dealey Plaza Witnesses so far neither of these witnesses can positively identify Lee Oswald in the Dallas Police lineups.
Howard Brennan
William Whaley
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Jun 17, 2019 9:49:33 GMT -5
Domingo BenavidesAuto Mechanic
This picture gives a good approximation where the 2 vehicles were.
Domingo Benavides was a 27 year old auto-mechanic/delivery driver, helping someone with a broken down truck on Patton St. On his way out of the area, he came upon the shooting as it occured, he pulled over and ducked under the dashboard. In his testimony he never claimed to be sure it was Oswald that he saw, he said it in a way not of his own.Mr. BELIN - What did you see then? Mr. BENAVIDES - I then pulled on up and I seen this officer standing by the door. The door was open to the car, and I was pretty close to him, and I seen Oswald, or the man that shot him,
standing on the other side of the car. Mr. BENAVIDES - The other man was standing to the right side of the car, riders side of the car, and was standing right in front of the windshield on the right front fender. And then I heard the shot. Actually I wasn't looking for anything like that, so I heard the shot, and I just turned into the curb. Looked around to miss a car, I think. And then I pulled up to the curb, hitting the curb, and I ducked down, and then I heard two more shots.
Benavides is the hesitant witness, uncertain.- and this is the one and only time he says the name Oswald in his narrative.
Belin needs to make sure he puts in the record, this witness calls the man Oswald. Mr. BELIN - You used the name Oswald. How did you know this man was Oswald?Mr. BENAVIDES - From the pictures I had seen. It looked like a guy, resembled the guy. That was the reason I figured it was Oswald.
Benevides went as far as it looked like the guy; "resembled the guy."
Yet, he described a man 5' 11" - medium build - and at that height and build, would probably be about 175lbs. Weight was not given. He recounted a man looking like Attorney Belin.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Lee Oswald's face hit the televisions about 3p 11/22, Benavides was asked to go to the lineup at about 4p, first by the DPD, then later on by Callaway.
By 4pm Benavides must have seen Lee's face on television but could not be sure it was the same man he had seen earlier.
Mr. BENAVIDES - Not offhand, except later on, I don't know if I seen it on television but I believe I seen it on television where they was arresting him,
the policeman from the theater. But it didn't seem like he had a jacket on there.
He said he got a real good look at the man but specifically remembered a square back hair cut, different than Lee's.
Mr. BENAVIDES - I remember the back of his head seemed like his hairline was sort of--looked like his hairline sort of went square instead of tapered off,
and he looked like he needed a haircut for about 2 weeks, but his hair didn't taper off, it kind of went down and squared off and made his head look fiat in back. Mr. BENAVIDES - As I saw him, I really---I mean really got a good view of the man after the bullets were fired, he had just tuned.
He was just turning away.In other words, he was pointing toward the officer, and he had just turned away to his left, and then he started. This testimony was directly contradicted 5 days later by Leavelle. There was a mention of a Benavides statement but that has never appeared anywhere. It is curious the weight is left out of DB's description to the WC, and one must ask what else may have have been left out of the published testimony. Even more curious is the lack of any description statement to DPD or FBI from this key witness at the time. Leavelle has dismissed this witness as having no value.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
James R. Leavelle Dallas Police Dept.
Mr. BALL. You also talked to Domingo Benavides? Mr. LEAVELLE. yes. Mr. BALL. D-o-m-i-n-g-o B-e-n-a-v-i-d-e-s [spelling]. I would think it would be spelled differently. Mr. LEAVELLE. He was supposed to be Mexican descent but that Benavides is actually an Italian name, I believe. Mr. BALL. Well, did you talk to him also? Mr. LEAVELLE. I talked with him but I do not believe we ever took an affidavit off him that I recall --may have. Mr. BALL. Do you know why Domingo Benavides was never brought down for the showup? Mr. LEAVELLE. I think he said he never saw the man actually. I believe he said later on he did not see the man.
Mr. BALL. He testified here he saw the man running. Mr. LEAVELLE. But he---either that or he told me he could not recognize him, one or the other. Domingo Benavides would not identify Lee Oswald in the Dallas Police lineups. The description he gave, matched Attorney Belin, it does NOT match Lee Harvey Oswald.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Jun 22, 2019 8:43:16 GMT -5
Helen Markhamwaitress
Follow the Footnotes Follow the Footnotes is a process researchers can use to look for holes throughout Appendix 12 of the Warren Report.
One by one, follow the footnotes through the WC findings and look for inconsistencies in the facts
By August 1964 there were still many open items so a chapter for "Rumors and Speculation" was created as a placeholder for these concerns. One by one they are listed as "Speculation" and answered as a "Commission Finding." They are never resolved.
The finding has footnote references that are often times circular or an sometimes a direct contradiction or an outright lie.
Looking at this one for Helen Markham, (there are others) notice the speculation says something about a man wearing a white coat, not jacket. I do not recall HM ever saying anything about a white coat, she told Off Poe "white jacket."
Notice also they are backing into the stated conclusion, it can only be Oswald. Any other description she may given is her mistake.
Speculation.--Mrs. Markham said that the man she saw shooting Tippit was about 30, short, with bushy hair, and wearing a white coat.
Since Oswald does not fit this description he could not be the killer.
Commission finding.--In evaluating Helen Markham's testimony the Commission is aware of allegations that she described the killer of
Patrolman Tippit as short, stocky, and with bushy hair, which would not be a correct description of Oswald. It has also been alleged that
Mrs. Markham identified Oswald in the lineup because of his clothing rather than his appearance. When Oswald appeared in the lineup at which
Mrs. Markham was present, he was not wearing the jacket which he wore at the time of the shooting, and Mrs. Markham has testified that her
identification was based "mostly from his face." 58 Moreover, Mrs. Markham has denied that she ever described the man who killed Tippit as short,
stocky, and with bushy hair. The Commission reviewed the transcript of a telephone conversation in which Mrs. Markham was alleged to have made
such a description. In the transcription Mrs. Markham reaffirmed her positive identification of Oswald and denied having described the killer
Additional footnotes on pages 167-168 lead the reader thru a jungle of testimony, without any specific page numbers,
but mentioning only one description Mrs. Markham may have given. Ball is asking about what she may have told FBI SA Odem.
He appears to be referencing a document, but never submits it for the record.
FBI Special Agent Bartwell Odum had so much on the inside of the investigation of this case.
Yet he was never called by the WC. No explanation is given.
Markham DE 1 is the transcript of the phone call between Mark Lane and Helen Markham re: a bushy haired man.
The WC presented this tape to HM on the stand to embarrassing results that deserves a thread of it's own.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The report directs you to a page from the summary, that takes you to testimony from the 26 volumes, and that is somehow
support for the Warren Report summary.This is a real a simple FtF right, it only goes back to the report itself. It's circular.
no need to post pages 166-167 that is silly, but here is a link that the reader can follow. Also notice the wording, the WC is only aware of allegations. HM describes the man as short and stocky with bushy hair,
but that does not match Oswald, so now she must be right. The cart before the horse. Meanwhile Mrs. Markham did in fact, submit
different descriptions to different officers. Herein lies the problem of reliability of what she says she saw, and the fact of the reports
selective editing and the wild goose chase thru the volumes.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Jun 22, 2019 8:43:36 GMT -5
5 Different DescriptionsHelen Markham | Warren Commission Report
"Her description and that of other eyewitnesses led to the police broadcast at 1:22 p.m.
describing the slayer as "about 30, 5'8", black hair, slender."page 167;
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SGT Gerald Hill | Dallas Police Dept. "Tippit had already been removed. The first man that came up to me, he said, "The man that shot him was a
white male about 5'10", weighing 160 to 170 pounds, had on a jacket and a pair of dark trousers, and brown bushy hair." ----------------------------------------------------
Officer Poe | Dallas Police Dept.
Mr. POE: "....and Mrs. Markham, I talked to her first and we got a description of the man that shot Tippit. Mr. BALL. Do you know what the description was? Mr. POE. White male, about 25, about 5 feet 8, brown hair, medium, and I believe she said had on a white jacket at the time.
-----------------------------------------------------
Bartwell Odum | FBI
Nobody said "coat" as speculated in the WCR and then there's this:
To FBI agent Odum the killer was a white male, about 18, black hair, red complexion: Mr. BALL. On the 22d of November, 1963, that is the day of the shooting,
did you talk to an FBI agent named Odum? Do you remember? Mrs. MARKHAM. I talked to some people, men, down at the police station.
Mr. BALL. That is right. He says that you described the man who shot Tippit as a white male, about 18, black hair, red complexion,
wearing black shoes, tan jacket, and dark trousers. Do you remember that? Mrs. MARKHAM. I never said anything about his shoes because I never did look at his feet.
Mr. BALL. Did you say about 18? Mrs. MARKHAM. I said he was young looking.
Mr. BALL. Did you say he had black hair? Mrs. MARKHAM. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. You thought he was black-haired? Mrs. MARKHAM. Yes, that is what I told him. I thought he was black-haired. I remember saying that.
Four different descriptions, 3 were given officers, meanwhile the WC admits taking the best "matching to Oswald" from her and other witnesses. But it is this description overheard by reporter Hugh Aynesworth, that Mark Lane references, reflecting clear evidence of the WC's deceit in this matter.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++Mark Lane vs. Joseph Ball Debate | Dec 1964
Mark Lane: "Mrs Markham said to the Dallas Police in the presence of Hugh Anysworth, a Dallas Morning News reporter,
and carried in a number of newspapers, the man she saw kill Tippit, was short, he was stocky, he had bushy hair."
...and there it is. Gerald Hill says it again in the record, WC ignores it. Twice.
"With the description, as I remember,
...it was a white male, 5'8" 160 pounds, wearing a jacket,a light shirt, dark trousers, and sort of bushy brown hair." ----------------------------------------------------
5' 8" = short @ 160 lbs = stocky. He had bushy brown hair. Not Lee Oswald.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Jun 28, 2019 14:04:57 GMT -5
A Mix, not a Match - Line Ups 1 and 2Did the "fillers" resemble the descriptions of the killer as given by the witnesses?One guideline of a fair line up is to match the "fillers" to the witness descriptions, this not making the suspect standout. They didn't do any of that. Not only did they use fillers that dressed nicer than the suspect,
some fillers had opposite characteristics described by the witnesses.
The WitnessesHelen Markham = about 30 / 5'8" / black hair / slender."Her description and that of other eyewitnesses led to the police broadcast at 1:22 p.m. describing the slayer as "about 30, 5'8", black hair, slender." WC Report page 167Howard Brennan = early 30's / 5'10" / fair complexion / slender. One eyewitness, Howard L. Brennan [...] promptly told a policeman that he had seen a slender man, about five feet ten inches, in his early thirties,
take deliberate aim from the sixth floor corner window and fire a rifle in the direction of the President's car.“ WC Report Page 5 Ted Callaway = 5'10 / fair complexion /dark hair
Mr. BALL. What did you tell them you saw? Mr. CALLAWAY. I told them he had some dark trousers and a light tannish gray windbreaker jacket, and I told him that he was fair complexion, dark hair.
Mr. BALL. Tell them the size? Mr. CALLAWAY. Yes; I told them--I think I told them about 5'10"-The FillersRichard M. Sims
Dallas Police Dept. The testimony of Richard M. Sims was taken at 10:20 a.m., on April 6, 1964
W. E. Perry, he is 34 years of age, 5'10 1/2" and about 170, I believe and that's a guess, now. He has brown hair, blue eyes, and dark complexion.
PO Officer Perry was called in three days later to verify his height and weight. He testified to be about 150 lbs. Sims appears to be reading from some document. Notice Simms stated a couple of time, these weights are only estimates, "these weights could be different now," weights of 165lbs - to 177lbs These certainly are not descriptions of Lee, nor do they match the description of slender, given by Brennan and Markham.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Witnesses were coached throughout this process.
Richard L. Clark is 31, 5'9 3/4", 170, has blond hair, blue eyes, and ruddy complexion. Now, these weights could be different now--I don't know. Richard Clark was also called on April 9th to verify his height and weight at 177 lbs., and with blonde hair he is completely wrong to be used as a filler.
Don Ables is 26, 5'9", 165, and brown hair. Mr. BALL. What kind of complexion does Don Ables have?
Mr. SIMS. I don't have that here--I believe he's just ruddy complexion, I believe.
Don Ables appeared on the same day as the others (Apr 9th). He verified his weight at about 165 lbs, and at 5' 9'' would have
been too heavy to have been Lee Oswald.He was also the smartly dressed filler in a previous post.
Take a look at the above photos again the 3rd man said he's about 165 lbs. the 2nd man is supposed to be 150 lbs.
…really?
If W. E. Perry is 150 lbs. as he says, he is the closest filler to the descriptions of the witnesses,
then again he dressed in a brown sport coat for the showings. Clark is completely wrong by both height, weight and blonde hair,
which should disqualify any filler in any further lineups. It does not. These are the first 2 lineups, they appear to be somewhat
careful in the process of setup for selection.
In other lineups the lack of proper protocol creates an obvious preset for the suspect to be subsequently selected.
|
|
|
Post by Tom Sorensen on Jun 28, 2019 14:54:43 GMT -5
One could argue that if Oswald wasn't at 10th and Patton in the first place it didn't matter who the fillers were!
|
|