Who Killed J.D. Tippit?

[Bill Brown]

If Earlene Roberts saw a dark blue jacket being “zipped” on Oswald as he exited then unless Oswald was wearing the light gray jacket too , underneath of that blue jacket, then Oswald could not have shot  Tippit.

But if Oswald was wearing both the dark blue jacket and the light gray jacket then would not the blue jacket have been found discarded somewhere also along the alleged route  Oswald took from leaving 10th and Patton to the Texas theater , ( or even the theater itself) thus the blue jacket would never have been found  the Domino room?

Since it’s seems a rather low probability that such a light gray  jacket could ever appear so dark as the dark blue jacket to Earlene Roberts, and since there’s not a suitable explanation for how the Blue jacket would wind up in the Domino room if Oswald was wearing both jackets, then there seems left only  4 options:

1. Earlene Roberts saw Oswald zipping up a dark blue jacket and Oswald was not wearing the light gray jacket underneath.
2. Roberts  saw Oswald in his darker brown shirt on as he went out and mistook him buttoning it up as “zipping”
3. Roberts was colorblind , the lights were off inside the house and there wasn’t enough sunlight streaming so the light gray jacket appeared as dark blue to Roberts.
4. Roberts was looney and prone to exaggeration and outright fabrication of false narratives.

Imo no.1 is more probable than the other options.

Regardless of the color, Oswald left the rooming house in a jacket.  Right?

Why did Oswald ditch this jacket between the rooming house on Beckley and the shoe store on Jefferson?

[Martin Weidmann]

Regardless of the color, Oswald left the rooming house in a jacket.  Right?

Why did Oswald ditch this jacket between the rooming house on Beckley and the shoe store on Jefferson?

Regardless of the color, Oswald left the rooming house in a jacket.  Right?

Did he? What evidence do you have for this, beyond "Roberts said so" and how can you be sure that what she said is actually correct?

Roberts was paying attention to the television, had her back turned to the room and only saw Oswald for a couple of seconds as he left the building.
In addition, Robert was not able to correctly describe any other piece of clothing Oswald was wearing as he entered and/or left.

[John Iacoletti]

And even if Roberts and Brewer were both correct, that still doesn’t mean that the jacket was “ditched”.

[Zeon Mason]

@Bill Brown:
Yes it’s basically a choice if Roberts saw a dark blue jacket being zipped  or did Roberts see a dark brown shirt being buttoned up.

Since the Dark blue jacket was found in the Domino room then Oswald cannot have been wearing it when he was seen by Whaley and Oswald cannot have been wearing it when he entered the boarding house either.

Unless there is a 3rd unaccounted for jacket that’s kind of light gray and wool/flannel, then what BW Frazier saw Oswald  wearing on Nov 22/63 must be the light gray jacket.

And Whaley therefore must have seen only the light gray jacket and was a bit too over anxious to lhelp that he decided he saw 2 jackets.

And when Oswald entered the boarding house, he perhaps had on the light gray jacket unzipped and open which Earlene Roberts mistook as a light colored long sleeve shirt.

And when Oswald left his room again, he must have taken off his light gray jacket leaving it in the room and went out the house just wearing his dark brown shirt, since it’s difficult to understand how Roberts would have seen that a light gray almost white jacket as a dark blue jacket.

So as weird as it may seem, the probability may be greater that Roberts  DID mistake the action of buttoned up the brown shirt as “zipping up “
a dark blue shirt.

 It would be interesting to know if in fact Roberts was color blind because colorblind people often mistake brown and dark blue.

So to answer Mr.Brown, I’d have to say it’s not exactly a slam dunk that Roberts saw EITHER jacket being zipped up.

[Zeon Mason]

If Oswald left the boarding room wearing only his brown  shirt , and thus there was no discarding a jacket, the question remaining is if Brewer saw Oswald as late as 1:30 or could Brewer have seen Oswald earlier at about 1:16-1:17 pm?

Burroughs has another statement in which he has  1:15 pm the time seeing Oswald in the theater.

That’s still not quite enough time for Oswald to walk to Brewers store first , take a look at some shoes and then be in the theater by 1:15  if Oswald left the house at 1:04pm

So the alternative is Oswald walking to theater first and entering by 1:15 which is an 11 minutes walk from the house, which  is more probable.

Entering the theater after paying for a ticket  maybe Oswald saw the movie hadn’t started yet so he went back out and across the street to look at some shoes in Brewers store for a few minutes.

Oswald was seen by Brewer in just his brown shirt. Maybe Brewer misinterpreted Oswald leaving the store only after a police car went by as Oswald acting suspiciously.

Watching Oswald go back into the theater bypassing the ticket booth was misinterpreted by Brewer as Oswald not paying and trying to “hide” in the theatre.

Oswald having already paid earlier and having a ticket stub, did not have to stop at the ticket booth.

Oswald returns by 1:19 and for the the next minute is seen by Jack Davis moving around to various seats at 1:20 pm.

[Alan Ford]

If Oswald left the boarding room wearing only his brown  shirt , and thus there was no discarding a jacket, the question remaining is if Brewer saw Oswald as late as 1:30 or could Brewer have seen Oswald earlier at about 1:16-1:17 pm?

Burroughs has another statement in which he has  1:15 pm the time seeing Oswald in the theater.

That’s still not quite enough time for Oswald to walk to Brewers store first , take a look at some shoes and then be in the theater by 1:15  if Oswald left the house at 1:04pm

So the alternative is Oswald walking to theater first and entering by 1:15 which is an 11 minutes walk from the house, which  is more probable.

Entering the theater after paying for a ticket  maybe Oswald saw the movie hadn’t started yet so he went back out and across the street to look at some shoes in Brewers store for a few minutes.

Oswald was seen by Brewer in just his brown shirt. Maybe Brewer misinterpreted Oswald leaving the store only after a police car went by as Oswald acting suspiciously.

Watching Oswald go back into the theater bypassing the ticket booth was misinterpreted by Brewer as Oswald not paying and trying to “hide” in the theatre.

Oswald having already paid earlier and having a ticket stub, did not have to stop at the ticket booth.

Oswald returns by 1:19 and for the the next minute is seen by Jack Davis moving around to various seats at 1:20 pm.

Is there any way of making this kind of scenario work if we simply push the time of the Brewer shoe store sighting back to the original ~1:35 pm?

Thus: Mr. Oswald goes to TT (purchasing a ticket) quite a ways before that time. He tries to find his contact. No success. His anxiety rising, he exits the cinema (perhaps to look for a phone?). Cop-car activity alarms him--so he ducks into the shoe store lobby and slips back into the TT. He's only been gone a minute or so. When he's arrested, Mrs. Postal recognizes him as someone who bought a ticket well before the Brewer sighting: she is mystified.

Given the early timestamps which Messrs. Burroughs & Davis put on Mr. Oswald's presence in the cinema, there seems no other way of making Mr. Oswald the man seen by Mr. Brewer

[Alan Ford]

Friends, researcher Mr. Michael Kalin has been drawing attention to an interesting thing about Mr. Bill Brown's guru, Mr. Dale Myers.

In With Malice, Mr. Myers gives us the following:

[QUOTE ON]
In 1983, Jack Tatum provided this account of the final moments of Tippit’s death:

“The man acted as if he was going to leave, and hesitated, and went back around behind the squad car, back up toward the front, where the officer was laying. He didn’t walk back, he hurried back, and cautiously approached him, and then shot him again — in the head. I’d say it was six seconds — not more than ten seconds, I don’t think, between the initial gunshots and when he shot him the second time. After shooting the officer in the head, the man hesitated — he stopped, and looked around briefly, looked toward the lady up there on the corner, Mrs. Markham — and looked up in my direction. And I was right there, right past the intersection, and it was only about a half a block — and he started a slow trot, or kind of a hurried run, in my direction. I thought he was coming after me, so I put my car in gear and moved forward, away from the gunman.”
[QUOTE OFF]

In 2018 Mr. Myers offered an eyebrow-raising 'clarification' on his blog (italics & underscore added by me):

'The paraphrased quote attributed to Tatum in my book, "With Malice" [page 71 (1998 Edition) and page 123 (2013 Edition)] is inaccurate, having survived an early draft of the book in which John Moriarty's speculation about the Tippit head wound influenced my rendering of Tatum's comments about the same. The phrase " - in the head" should have been in brackets or outside the quotation, as it was a qualifier to what Tatum actually said. Same for the phrase: "After shooting the officer in the head..."'

So-------------------the quotation should have read as follows:

“The man acted as if he was going to leave, and hesitated, and went back around behind the squad car, back up toward the front, where the officer was laying. He didn’t walk back, he hurried back, and cautiously approached him, and then shot him again — in the head. I’d say it was six seconds — not more than ten seconds, I don’t think, between the initial gunshots and when he shot him the second time. After shooting the officer in the head, the man hesitated — he stopped, and looked around briefly, looked toward the lady up there on the corner, Mrs. Markham — and looked up in my direction. And I was right there, right past the intersection, and it was only about a half a block — and he started a slow trot, or kind of a hurried run, in my direction. I thought he was coming after me, so I put my car in gear and moved forward, away from the gunman.”

So let's get this straight. Mr. Myers saw fit to offer his own 'rendering' (i.e. CHANGED VERSION) of a direct quotation from a witness in order to insert his own latest belief into the witness' mouth. And now he's taking this alien element out because it no longer suits his propagandistic Warren Gullible agenda.

Friendly advice: be VERY careful in handling any report from Mr. Myers of his interview with a witness, unless and until he releases audio of that interview. By his own confession, he has form in the department of improving on what they say. And the lord alone knows how many times he has applied this system in the other direction: NOT including inconvenient things they HAVE told him. There's never not an agenda here.

Like I say, this guy is guru to our own Mr. Bill Brown!