|
|
Post by Herbert Blenner on Jan 15, 2019 15:08:55 GMT -5
Hello, Police Operatorby Herbert Blenner | Posted March 19, 2010 The transcripts of radio traffic on Channel-I and an audio file reportedly originating from the dictabelt show that the DPD radio dispatcher diverted ambulances and patrol units from the address of the shooting of Officer Tippit
Part One - Activity on the Primary Police Channel-I
When police initially arrived at the scene of the Tippit shooting, the dictabelt had recorded six addresses for the location of the crime scene. This situation is particularly difficult to dismiss since a citizen reported the shooting to the police over the two-way radio of Tippit's patrol car. They reported the location as Tenth Street, between Marsalis and Beckley at 404 Tenth Street. On December 2, 1963, T. F. Bowley filed an affidavit that asserts he radioed the report of a shot officer to the police. However, he quoted himself as having said, "A police officer has been shot here." These words differed from the dictabelt that recorded the words, "We’ve had a shooting out here." So I decline to identify Bowley as the citizen who reported the first address of 404 Tenth Street. Two dispatchers worked Channel-I. Murray James Jackson dispatched calls that come over the radio while C. E. Hulse handled calls that come through the police telephone lines. Each dispatcher heard over a loudspeaker all activity recorded by the Dictaphone excepting their own words. So a dispatcher could have missed a message broadcast simultaneously with their own words. However, the other dispatcher would have heard the simultaneous broadcasts and could have used the conveyor belt to send a written message to their counterpart. A dispatcher began speaking while the citizen said, "Hello police operator did you get that?" After the citizen stopped speaking, he heard "a police officer 510 East Jefferson." The citizen waited for the completion of the message then instead of repeating his request for confirmation, he replied "thank you" as if there were no communications gap. At this point the police had two addresses for the shooting. Nevertheless A. R. Brock of unit 69 announced "Vince and I are going out there." Shortly afterwards Ray Hawkins and E. R. Baggett of unit 211 informed the dispatcher, "We’re clear at Industrial and Stemmons. We’ll go out there." Neither unit asked whether they were going to 404 Tenth Street or 510 East Jefferson. The first mention of 501 East Tenth Street occurred when the dispatcher responded to a station that asked "What's that address on Jefferson?" The station had cause to ask because 510 East Jefferson was mentioned earlier in relation to a police officer. By contrast, the dispatcher who conversed with the citizen had no cause to send the station to the address of Frank and Mary Wright. Sergeant Calvin Bud Owens gave the dispatcher another opportunity to acknowledge the address of 404 Tenth Street. Owens said, "Give me the correct address on the shooting." The dispatcher failed to acknowledge the earlier addresses of 404 Tenth Street or 510 East Jefferson and reaffirmed the third address of the shooting as 501 East Tenth Street. A dispatcher introduced a fourth address by stating, "We have two locations 501 East Jefferson and 501 East Ten." This former address belonged to the Harris Motor Company that employed Ted Callaway and Sam Guinyard. A second citizen used the police radio and reported that the shot officer was on the 500 block of Tenth Street. Spectators who gave the earlier citizen the number of the police car and the street address of the shooting did not correct this error. In fact background voices were not heard during this report. The dispatcher accepted this fifth address and told the second citizen we have that information. In his Warren Commission testimony, Ted Callaway reported using the police radio and gave sufficient details to identify himself as the second citizen. A question by Captain Cecil E. Talbert confirmed that at least one citizen radioed a report of the shooting. The dispatcher asked, "Did you receive the information on the police officer shot?" Talbert said, "But didn’t that citizen say first he was on Jefferson, then on Tenth and then Chesepeak?" The spelling of the last named location is questionable. A locally prepared transcript of Sawyer Exhibit A spelled the last named location as Chesepeak. CE-705, prepared by the FBI, spelled the location as Chesapeak while the CE-1974 also prepared by the FBI spelled the name as Chesapeake. A dispatcher announced the indirect report of the shooting by Barbara Jeanette Davis approximately three and a quarter minutes after receiving the address as 404 Tenth Street. He said " . . . have a signal 19 involving a police officer 400 East Ten."
|
|
|
|
Post by Herbert Blenner on Jan 15, 2019 15:09:37 GMT -5
Part Two - Activity on Channel-II
by Herbert Blenner | Posted March 19, 2010
Although the primary police channel was clogged with six addresses concerning the shooting, the transcripts of Channel-II reported two addresses. Sawyer Exhibit B of December 5, 1963 described two messages about a shot officer. The first message informed all squads of an officer involved in a shooting in the 400 block of East Tenth. The second message requested informing Chief Curry of an officer involved in a shooting of unknown seriousness at Tenth and Patton. CE 705 and CE 1974 included a disjointed message. The dispatcher, Gerald Dalton Henslee, told Sergeant Owens, "It’s in the 400 or 500 block of E. 10th, I believe." Owens responded but neither transcript reported him asking for the correct address on Channel-II.
During the afternoon of November 22, 1963, Henslee played a dual role in the dispatcher’s office. He supervised incoming radio calls on Channel-I and was the sole dispatcher for Channel-II. These duties exposed him to the radioed messages from the two citizens who reported the 400 block and the 500 block of East Tenth Street as the location of the shot officer. So the sources of the information that Henslee relayed to Owens were not necessarily the telephonic messages from 400 East Tenth or 501 East Tenth. The failures of Henslee to mention the 501 East Jefferson address of the Harris Motor Company or the 510 East Jefferson address of the Reynolds Motor Company suggest that the reports radioed by citizens were the sources of the information relayed to Owens.
|
|
|
|
Post by Herbert Blenner on Jan 15, 2019 15:10:18 GMT -5
Part Three - Knowledge of the Callers
by Herbert Blenner | Posted March 19, 2010
The affidavit of Barbara Jeanette Davis dated November 22, 1963 states that she heard shots, went to the door, saw a man unloading a gun while walking across her yard and heard a woman screaming that "he shot him, he killed him." She ran into the house and reported this information to the telephone operator. Mrs. Charlie Virginia Davis, corroborated this call to the authorities in her affidavit of November 22, 1963. These documents justify the dispatcher’s broadcast, "signal 19 involving a police officer 400 East Ten."
According to the affidavits of Ted Callaway and Sam Guinyard dated November 22, 1963 neither witness called the police before going to the scene of the shooting. Although not mentioned in his affidavit, it appears that Callaway radioed the police. This radio report shows that police had not yet arrived at the crime scene. So an undocumented conversion with the police could not have been the source of the dispatcher’s knowledge of the 501 East Jefferson business address of Callaway. Although these circumstances allow an unidentified person of the Harris Motor Company to have telephoned the police, the expected contents of a call that reported gun shots and a running man carrying a weapon cannot justify the dispatcher placing as much weight upon the 501 East Jefferson address as the address of the shot officer reported from Tippit’s patrol car.
Frank and Mary Wright of 501 East Tenth Street were among the ghost witnesses at the Tippit crime scene. The Dallas Municipal Archives that inherited the voluminous holdings of the Dallas Police Department contains no affidavits from these witnesses. A search of the FBI files uncovered no interviews of the Wrights. Apparently the authorities found the knowledge of Frank or Mary Wright was unworthy of a report.
The address of 510 East Jefferson belonged to the business office of the Reynolds Motor Company. From this location and the adjacent used car lot at 500 East Jefferson four troublesome witnesses raised a timing problem that the authorities needed to conceal. In particular the FBI interview of L. J. Lewis on January 21, 1964 discloses that he learned of the shot officer after calling the police to report hearing gun shots and seeing a running man carrying an automatic pistol or a revolver.
Harold Russell in his FBI interview of January 21, 1964 corroborated Lewis on this timing issue. This interview stated, Russell advised that he and Pat Patterson went to the vicinity of Tenth and Patton while L. J. Lewis went into the business office and called the police. Upon arriving at the scene of the shooting, Russell observed an apparently dead police officer.
The FBI interview of B. M. Patterson on January 22, 1964 states that he heard shots at approximately 1:30 p.m. A minute or so later he observed a running man carrying a revolver. Being unaware that the observed man had shot a police officer, Warren Reynolds suggested that they follow the individual and later notify the police.
Warren Reynolds in the FBI interview of January 21, 1964 stated that he heard shots during the afternoon then observed a running individual with a pistol or an automatic. He followed from a safe distance and last observed the man by the Ballew Texaco Service Station. Reynolds advised approximately five or ten minutes later someone told him that the man he had been "tailing" had shot and apparently killed an officer. Reynolds hesitated to definitely identify the person that he followed on the afternoon of November 22, 1963 as the same person in a photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald.
Although the FBI interviews of January 1964 reported that B. M. Patterson and Harold Russell positively identified the running man carrying a gun as Lee Harvey Oswald the Dallas authorities produced no records of interviews or affidavits from these pivotal witnesses. The Warren Commission foregone corroborated testimonies that positively placed Lee Harvey Oswald fleeing the scene of the Tippit shooting in favor of affidavits that affirmed the FBI interviews of January 1964. Warren Reynolds filed a belated affidavit on March 16, 1964. Reynolds stated that shortly after noon he heard one shot followed by four or five other shots. He looked out the window and saw a running man waving a pistol whom he now knows as Lee Harvey Oswald. Reynolds followed Oswald until losing sight of him at the Texaco station.
During August the Warren Commission renewed their interest in the witnesses associated with the Reynolds Motor Company. On August 10, 1964, an affidavit of Harold Russell affirmed the FBI report of his interview during the previous January. By request of the Warren Commission, the FBI contacted L. J. Lewis and B. M. Patterson to determine the accuracy of their interviews of last January. On August 26, 1964, L. J. Lewis executed an affidavit that placed his call to the police after hearing the shots and a few minutes before seeing the running man. He stated that there was so much confusion at the Police Department that they having trouble making out what I was telling them. The affidavit of B. M. Patterson on August 26, 1964 revised the FBI report of his interview during January of the same year. Patterson doubted having been shown a photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald in January. On September 7, 1964, B. M. Patterson executed an affidavit that affirmed the written reports on his interviews of August 25 and 26, 1964 by Special Agent Richard J. Burnett of the FBI.
The testimonies and interviews of Patterson, Reynolds and Russell corroborated Lewis on his claimed ignorance of a shot officer when he phoned the police from 510 East Jefferson.
|
|
|
|
Post by Herbert Blenner on Jan 15, 2019 15:10:53 GMT -5
Part Four - Mutations of the Channel-I Radio Transcripts
by Herbert Blenner | Posted March 19, 2010
The Warren Commission published three versions of the words that followed the citizen’s question, "Did you get that?" Sawyer Exhibit A of December 3, 1963, reported that the dispatcher who conversed with the citizen broadcast the words, "Signal 19 involving a police officer, 510 E. Jefferson." A transcript produced three months later and became CE 705 attributed the evolving message to an unknown voice who said "a police officer, 510 E. Jefferson." During August of 1964 the third version attempted to reconcile the contradictory reports of the previous two transcripts. They attributed the statement, "a police officer, 510 East Jefferson" to the citizen that was repeated by the Dispatcher as "Signal 19, involving a police officer, 510 East Jefferson." The Warren Commission published this transcript within CE 1974.
The citizen said seven words, "Hello police operator did you get that?" during the interval that CE 1974 claimed the dispatcher said the three words, "Signal 19, involving." However, both messages began simultaneously so the claim of CE 1974 strongly suggests that they transcribed a mutated record of the dictabelt.
|
|
|
|
Post by Herbert Blenner on Jan 15, 2019 15:11:34 GMT -5
Part Five - Signal Analyzes of Noise Bursts Immediately Followed by Heterodynes
by Herbert Blenner | Posted March 19, 2010
A FM receiver produces a tonal heterodyne while two stations of nearly equal radio signal strengths make silent transmissions. This tone continues until a station stops transmitting. The receiver would remain silent until the other station stopped transmitting. At this time the receiver would produce a loud noise burst.
Our audio record reports an extremely unexpected event on trackone0075. A noise burst from the receiver followed the cessation of a 937-Hz heterodyne without a detectable delay. The heterodyne began at 1.10 second as a nearly horizontal line that ended at 1.29 second. The noise burst began without a detectable delay and ended at 1.40 second. This 0.11-second interval of the noise burst shows termination by another silent transmission.
Practical Simultaneity of Independent Events
This event was highly unexpected since it required that the times at which these two stations stopped transmitting differed by less than 100 microsecond.
Trackone0115 reports another highly unexpected behavior of a 989-Hz heterodyne and its associated noise burst. This heterodyne started at 1.10 second and had a duration of 0.22 second. A noise burst began without delay and ended at 1.42 second.
Spectrograph of Rare Twins
In both cases the durations of the heterodynes were less than 0.25 second and indicate that silent stations resumed transmissions and abbreviated the noise bursts.
Individually each instance of a noise burst following a heterodyne without a measurable delay was an extremely unlikely event. The recurrence of these extremely unlikely events provide reasonable proof of alterations of these acoustic records.
|
|
|
|
Post by Herbert Blenner on Jan 15, 2019 15:12:05 GMT -5
Part Six - The Warren Commission Report
by Herbert Blenner | Posted March 19, 2010
Although the Warren Commission recognized problems with the radio transcripts of Channel-I pertaining to the shooting of officer Tippit, they did not call either dispatcher, C. E. Hulse or Jackson, to testify. The testimony of Hulse pertaining to the shooting of Oswald disclosed his role on November 24, 1963 as the dispatcher of all calls that came through the telephone lines. Without doubt, the testimony of the dispatcher who broadcast the addresses of people who telephoned the police pertaining to shooting on the afternoon of November 22 would have the potential to untangle a complicated mess. Instead of taking this possible path toward enlightenment, the Warren Commission did what committees do best; they worsened a complicated mess.
The Warren Commission Report wrote, "It was Benavides, using Tippit’s car radio, who first reported the killing of Patrolman Tippit at about 1:16 p.m.: 'We’ve had a shooting out here.'" The quoted sentence matches verbatim the contents of my audio file of the dictabelt and the transcripts published in CE 705 and CE 1974 while the Sawyer Exhibit B missed one word.
In his testimony Domingo Benavides told the Warren Commission that he reported an officer had been shot, a guy asked the whereabouts, he said Tenth Street and then said 410 East Tenth Street. At this point Benavides became aware of another guy standing by the police car. This guy then called the police, reported the shooting and was told something like keep the line clear, we already know about it.
The address of 410 East Tenth Street is not heard on the dictabelt. More important the audio record documents a two-minute interval between the radioed reports by the citizens. These considerations dispute the credibility of Benavides’s testimony on his use of the police radio.
|
|
|
|
Post by Herbert Blenner on Jan 15, 2019 15:12:42 GMT -5
Part Seven - Reports by Dallas Police Officers
by Herbert Blenner | Posted March 19, 2010
Reserve Sergeant Kenneth Hudson Croy testified that he was at the intersection of Zangs and Colorado when he heard the call on Tippit. He thinks location was the 400 block of East Tenth.
At approximately 1:18 pm, officer J. M. Poe heard of a police officer involved in a shooting at the 400 block of East Tenth Street. During his testimony to the Warren Commission, Poe was less accurate. He attributed the call to a citizen who used improper radio procedure, gave the wrong address and came back and changed it to the 400 block of East Ninth.
On December 2, 1963, E. R. Baggett and Ray Harkins submitted reports to the Chief of Police that gave the location of shooting as the 400 block of East Tenth Street. The Warren Commission testimony of Ray Hawkins relates a differing sequence of events. He heard a citizen on the radio state that an officer was shot and it looked like he was dead. Although this testimony describes the radio report by Callaway that had not occurred at the time that Bagget and Hawkins responded to the call, it does in a sense corroborate the earlier report by the citizen as well as the later report by Callaway. Hawkins just confused one report with the other. However, a report dated December 12, 1963 casts doubts upon this rationalization. In particular Ray Hawkins was a card-carrying member of the Carousel Club whose owner, Jack Ruby, is rumored to have formerly employed T. F. Bowley.
During his Warren Commission testimony of April 9, 1964 Calvin Bud Owens said that the call came out as 400 East Ten or 400 East Jefferson and there was confusion as to where the situation was.
The Warren Commission testimony of M. N. McDonald corroborates the radio report of the shooting by the citizen.
Sergeant Gerald Hill during his testimony reported hearing a strange voice on the radio that said an officer had been shot and the stranger thought the officer was dead. This last detail corroborates the radio report by Callaway.
Thomas Alexander Hutson heard the dispatcher broadcast a Signal 19 for a shooting involving a police officer in the 500 block of East Jefferson then advise checking of 500 East Jefferson and East Tenth. Hutson concluded that they were unsure of the location of the shooting.
|
|
