Who Killed J.D. Tippit?

[Mitch Todd]

If someone intended to frame Oswald for both the Kennedy murder and the Tippit murder, planting a wallet with both Oswald’s photo ID and an Alec Hidell ID would link Oswald to the Tippit shooting and the purchase of the Carcano rifle.

But maybe that plan had to be altered because the Press was made aware of the accounts that Oswald had his wallet on him when he was arrested at the movie theater?

It’s also curious how there was no mention of the Hidell ID in any Dallas PD accounts of the wallet from November 22. Did they intentionally not mention the Hidell ID? Or did the wallets get swapped at some point?

I figure that if Oswald's wallet had been recovered on 10th with ID inside, then this information would have been broadcast over the radio, and we'd hear it on the DPD radio recordings. 

[Richard Smith]

I figure that if Oswald's wallet had been recovered on 10th with ID inside, then this information would have been broadcast over the radio, and we'd hear it on the DPD radio recordings.

Exactly.  How ironic and even bizarre is it that CTers are desperate for Oswald's wallet to have been found at the crime scene?  If the plan was to plant Oswald's wallet at the scene to frame him, obviously the authorities would have yelled it from the rooftops.  THAT WOULD BE THE ENTIRE POINT OF PLANTING HIS WALLET.  They would have immediately broadcast the name and description of any individual whose wallet was left at the scene.  That didn't happen.  It wasn't a wallet left at the scene.  The weak explanation that they could not have anticipated that Oswald would have his real wallet on him when arrested is laughable.  It would not take Nostradamus to predict that Oswald would have his own wallet.  That wouldn't blow the plan.  It would have easly have been anticipated and accounted for.  And if the authorities are going to suppress one of the wallets, then it would be the one found on Oswald at his arrest because finding his wallet at the Tippit crime scene would have high probative value linking him to that crime.  What CTers are suggesting makes no narrative sense and even cuts against their own arguments.  Like many things "it is just so" because there is no way to conclusively prove what the item is after all these years.

[Martin Weidmann]

I figure that if Oswald's wallet had been recovered on 10th with ID inside, then this information would have been broadcast over the radio, and we'd hear it on the DPD radio recordings.

Exactly.  How ironic and even bizarre is it that CTers are desperate for Oswald's wallet to have been found at the crime scene?  If the plan was to plant Oswald's wallet at the scene to frame him, obviously the authorities would have yelled it from the rooftops.  THAT WOULD BE THE ENTIRE POINT OF PLANTING HIS WALLET.  They would have immediately broadcast the name and description of any individual whose wallet was left at the scene.  That didn't happen. It wasn't a wallet left at the scene.  The weak explanation that they could not have anticipated that Oswald would have his real wallet on him when arrested is laughable.   It would not take Nostradamus to predict that Oswald would have his own wallet.  That wouldn't blow the plan.  It would have easly have been anticipated and accounted for.  And if the authorities are going to suppress one of the wallets, then it would be the one found on Oswald at his arrest because finding his wallet at the Tippit crime scene would have high probative value linking him to that crime.  What CTers are suggesting makes no narrative sense and even cuts against their own arguments.  Like many things "it is just so" because there is no way to conclusively prove what the item is after all these years.

Did you two clowns go to the same "dumb and dumber" school?

If the plan was to plant Oswald's wallet at the scene to frame him, obviously the authorities would have yelled it from the rooftops.

And they did. They just couldn't say it was found at the crime scene because it was already known that Oswald had his wallet with him when he was arrested.

They would have immediately broadcast the name and description of any individual whose wallet was left at the scene.  That didn't happen.

That didn't happen because (1) police never give names of potential suspects on the radio and (2) it's not up to a cop to determine that the wallet's owner had anything to do with the crime. He could just as easily have been a bystander who simply lost his wallet.

It wasn't a wallet left at the scene.

A bold false claim from somebody who wasn't there and is contradicted by FBI agent Barrett who actually was there.

The weak explanation that they could not have anticipated that Oswald would have his real wallet on him when arrested is laughable.   It would not take Nostradamus to predict that Oswald would have his own wallet.  That wouldn't blow the plan.

No it wouldn't, fool. The wallet Bentley took from Oswald contained only an Oswald ID (there is not one report about a Hidell ID being in there), a driver's license and a credit card.
The wallet that Detective Gus Rose was given by an unidentified officer contained a Hidell ID. How can this be? Simple; they switched the wallet taken from Oswald with the one found at the Tippit scene.

It would have easly have been anticipated and accounted for.  And if the authorities are going to suppress one of the wallets, then it would be the one found on Oswald at his arrest because finding his wallet at the Tippit crime scene would have high probative value linking him to that crime.

Indeed. Except they could hardly say the wallet was found at the Tippit scene, when Paul Bentley is telling everybody on television that he took the wallet from Oswald in the car, after his arrest. So, they did the next best thing; switch the wallets and pretend the Tippit scene wallet was taken from Oswald in the car.

What CTers are suggesting makes no narrative sense and even cuts against their own arguments.

Actually, it's your own BS that doesn't make sense.

Like many things "it is just so" because there is no way to conclusively prove what the item is after all these years.

FBI agent Bob Barrett saying it was wallet that Westbrook was holding is not conclusive enough for you? Or are you another one of those clowns who, for the purpose of saving their own flawed narrative, simply claim that Barrett was lying?

[Richard Smith]

Did you two clowns go to the same "dumb and dumber" school?

If the plan was to plant Oswald's wallet at the scene to frame him, obviously the authorities would have yelled it from the rooftops.

And they did. They just couldn't say it was found at the crime scene because it was already known that Oswald had his wallet with him when he was arrested.

They would have immediately broadcast the name and description of any individual whose wallet was left at the scene.  That didn't happen.

That didn't happen because (1) police never give names of potential suspects on the radio and (2) it's not up to a cop to determine that the wallet's owner had anything to do with the crime. He could just as easily have been a bystander who simply lost his wallet.

It wasn't a wallet left at the scene.

A bold false claim from somebody who wasn't there and is contradicted by FBI agent Barrett who actually was there.

The weak explanation that they could not have anticipated that Oswald would have his real wallet on him when arrested is laughable.   It would not take Nostradamus to predict that Oswald would have his own wallet.  That wouldn't blow the plan.

No it wouldn't, fool. The wallet Bentley took from Oswald contained only an Oswald ID (there is not one report about a Hidell ID being in there), a driver's license and a credit card.
The wallet that Detective Gus Rose was given by an unidentified officer contained a Hidell ID. How can this be? Simple; they switched the wallet taken from Oswald with the one found at the Tippit scene.

It would have easly have been anticipated and accounted for.  And if the authorities are going to suppress one of the wallets, then it would be the one found on Oswald at his arrest because finding his wallet at the Tippit crime scene would have high probative value linking him to that crime.

Indeed. Except they could hardly say the wallet was found at the Tippit scene, when Paul Bentley is telling everybody on television that he took the wallet from Oswald in the car, after his arrest. So, they did the next best thing; switch the wallets and pretend the Tippit scene wallet was taken from Oswald in the car.

What CTers are suggesting makes no narrative sense and even cuts against their own arguments.

Actually, it's your own BS that doesn't make sense.

Like many things "it is just so" because there is no way to conclusively prove what the item is after all these years.

FBI agent Bob Barrett saying it was wallet that Westbrook was holding is not conclusive enough for you? Or are you another one of those clowns who, for the purpose of saving their own flawed narrative, simply claim that Barrett was lying?

So hostile.  It is unfortunate that posters are allowed to engage in this type of constant tirade and insults.   And, of course, this rant is full of false premises and "assumptions."  In which we learn that the police will not broadcast the name of a murder suspect over their police radio or even his description for other officers!  LOL.  And it's not up to the cops to determine if the wallet's owner had anything to do with the crime! Wow.  I'm left speechless by that one. They certainly broadcast a description of the JFK assassin over the radio but in Martin's fantasy world that doesn't happen.  And again, the discovery of a second wallet on Oswald would fully have been anticipated by anyone planting a wallet at the Tippit scene.  It wouldn't have blown the deal.  And they certainly would not have stood out in the open looking at it and being filmed if they intended to suppress that wallet. 

[Jon Banks]

So hostile.  It is unfortunate that posters are allowed to engage in this type of constant tirade and insults.   And, of course, this rant is full of false premises and "assumptions."  In which we learn that the police will not broadcast the name of a murder suspect over their police radio or even his description for other officers!  LOL.  And it's not up to the cops to determine if the wallet's owner had anything to do with the crime! Wow.  I'm left speechless by that one. They certainly broadcast a description of the JFK assassin over the radio but in Martin's fantasy world that doesn't happen.  And again, the discovery of a second wallet on Oswald would fully have been anticipated by anyone planting a wallet at the Tippit scene.  It wouldn't have blown the deal.  And they certainly would not have stood out in the open looking at it and being filmed if they intended to suppress that wallet.

It only takes one or two people to manipulate evidence. Not everyone on the Dallas PD had to know or be aware of what was going on. The person on the Dallas PD who I think potentially was a conspirator or part of the coverup was Captain Westbrook. I can't prove it but his involvement in all three crime scenes that day put him in a position to manipulate the evidence and the investigations as needed.

There's enough corroboration to conclude that the Dallas police found a wallet at the Tippit scene. The contents of the wallet and whether it was a "second Oswald wallet" remain up for historical debate. There's good reason to believe Barrett told the truth as he remembers it but his memory could be inaccurate.

As I noted previously, the lack of references by the Dallas PD to the Hidell ID on November 22 looks suspicious as well but we can't rule out that they intentionally avoided talking about it before they knew more. 

So, the two wallet thing is not easily dismissed. It remains one of the many unsolved mysteries of the Kennedy and Tippit murders...

[Richard Smith]

It only takes one or two people to manipulate evidence. Not everyone on the Dallas PD had to know or be aware of what was going on. The person on the Dallas PD who I think potentially was a conspirator or part of the coverup was Captain Westbrook. I can't prove it but his involvement in all three crime scenes that day put him in a position to manipulate the evidence and the investigations as needed.

There's enough corroboration to conclude that the Dallas police found a wallet at the Tippit scene. The contents of the wallet and whether it was a "second Oswald wallet" remain up for historical debate. There's good reason to believe Barrett told the truth as he remembers it but his memory could be inaccurate.

As I noted previously, the lack of references by the Dallas PD to the Hidell ID on November 22 looks suspicious as well but we can't rule out that they intentionally avoided talking about it before they knew more. 

So, the two wallet thing is not easily dismissed. It remains one of the many unsolved mysteries of the Kennedy and Tippit murders...

If the police had found a wallet at the murder scene of a police officer knowing that the murderer was still on the loose in the vicinity, don't you think someone would have radioed that person's name and/or description to the police dispatcher?  Just as they did after the JFK assassination based on a witness description of the shooter.  It would be logical to assume that a wallet left at that scene was related to the crime and the person whose ID was found in the wallet would likely be involved.  Certainly, enough of a circumstance for the police to pursue that clue.  And that would be the entire motivation of anyone who planted the wallet.  We know that didn't happen, however.  I doubt we can ever proof exactly what it is with certainty.  But the circumstances lend themselves toward this being an item belonging to Tippit. 

[Martin Weidmann]

So hostile.  It is unfortunate that posters are allowed to engage in this type of constant tirade and insults.   And, of course, this rant is full of false premises and "assumptions."  In which we learn that the police will not broadcast the name of a murder suspect over their police radio or even his description for other officers!  LOL.  And it's not up to the cops to determine if the wallet's owner had anything to do with the crime! Wow.  I'm left speechless by that one. They certainly broadcast a description of the JFK assassin over the radio but in Martin's fantasy world that doesn't happen.  And again, the discovery of a second wallet on Oswald would fully have been anticipated by anyone planting a wallet at the Tippit scene.  It wouldn't have blown the deal.  And they certainly would not have stood out in the open looking at it and being filmed if they intended to suppress that wallet.

In which we learn that the police will not broadcast the name of a murder suspect over their police radio or even his description for other officers!  LOL. 

Who said anything about transmitting a description? Your idiotic claim is that the police would have broadcast the name of a murder suspect. They don't broadcast names of suspects, but why don't you prove me wrong and show me where in the DPD transcripts a name of a suspect or even a witness is broadcast.

And it's not up to the cops to determine if the wallet's owner had anything to do with the crime! Wow.  I'm left speechless by that one.

It would have been much better for you to have remained speechless, instead of displaying your massive level of ignorance. How in the world would they even know that the wallet they found belonged to the suspect, when it could just as easily be lost by a bystander? And what if they broadcast the name of a murder suspect and the media or (even worse) a bounty hunter gets hold of it with all sorts of possible consequences? And what if it later turns out the person they named had nothing to do with the crime after all?

They certainly broadcast a description of the JFK assassin over the radio but in Martin's fantasy world that doesn't happen.

That's just another one of your bold lies. I never said anything of the kind nor did I ever deny that descriptions are being broadcast. You do know the difference between a description and a name, do you?

And again, the discovery of a second wallet on Oswald would fully have been anticipated by anyone planting a wallet at the Tippit scene. It wouldn't have blown the deal.

Repeating the same BS again doesn't make it true. It's just another one of those wacky "they would have done this or that" arguments that go nowhere. You have already been told how they could have solved (and probably did) the two wallets scenario, but you seem to lack the capacity to understand what is written.

And they certainly would not have stood out in the open looking at it and being filmed if they intended to suppress that wallet.

Again, what makes you think that was the wallet they suppressed?