Two Wallets? Nope.

[John Mytton]

Distraction, every one. Could never satisfy your preset bias conclusion - waste of time.
Doesn't mean a thing.

So in other words you don't where your evidence of a decades old memory goes and you can't provide a suitable narrative that fits but you're damn sure it means something, something conspiratorial? Muhahaha!

JohnM

[Michael Capasse]

....suitable narrative....?

JohnM

You've been trying for 60+ years. - how's that going?

[John Mytton]

You've been trying for 60+ years. - how's that going?

Huh?

What are you talking about, you've got it ass backwards, the official narrative has been rock solid for 60+ years, Oswald went to Irving on an unscheduled night got his rifle then took it to work and killed the President, then while in flight from the scene killed Tippit, the second Dallas Policeman killed by gunfire in the line of duty in the previous decade, what are the chances that Oswald was arrested nearby while trying to kill more Policemen with the same revolver linked to the scene of the Tippit crime!
Whereas poor, poor Michael, it's you and your team that are the one's struggling to present an alternate narrative, when will some CT be able to provide evidence of a conspiracy? Waiting...ZZZzzzzzz.....



JohnM

[Michael Capasse]

Huh?

...struggling to present an alternate narrative, when will some CT be able to provide evidence of a conspiracy?
JohnM

I don't do alternate narratives. No need. The broken inconsistencies through out this case are enough direct evidence of conspiracy and coverup.
While nutters like Mytton make up lame excuses on the fly..."Frazier didn't pay attention - no wait, it was, Frasier lied". or the wallet was a citizen's,  that's it, no wait, it's proof that Oswald was there"...just lame excuse after excuse, each one backed into your fairy tale narrative 60 years too late. Whatever it takes.
Then, in here like a minor bird, day after day squawking at the wall. "bawk, bawk...rock solid for 60+ years...bawk bawk"

Meanwhile, a mandate was dictated in the Katzenbach memo on the 25^th....
"The public must be satisfied that Oswald was the assassin...."

[Michael Capasse]

There's a wallet in his pocket: "...Lee H. Oswald. O-S-W-A-L-D..."
There's a wallet at the Tippit scene:  "...‘How about an Alek Hidell?’ "

"FBI agent Jim Hosty, who had responsibility for watching Oswald, wrote that a wallet containing identification for both Oswald and
“Alek Hidell” was found near a pool of blood."

  looks like a setup to me.

[Martin Weidmann]

You clearly don't know how a debate works.
Bill presents his evidence and you in turn present your evidence, and the LNers, CT's and interested others will declare a winner see how easy that is!

YAWN! You keep saying that but every time Bill posts anything re Tippit, you're always replying and voicing your disapproval, just have a proper debate and prove that you know the case better than Bill. Easy Peasy.

JohnM

Bill presents his evidence and you in turn present your evidence, and the LNers, CT's and interested others will declare a winner see how easy that is!

I'm so glad that you understand how a debate works..... pfffffffffffff   

Presenting evidence by itself is easy and can be done in writing on this forum. You don't need a debate for that.
In a real debate the evidence presented by the other side is challenged, questioned and defended. In other words, questions are asked and answered by both sides.
That's the only way it can be determined if the evidence actually holds up under scrutiny or not.

So, how would that work when Brown doesn't answer questions?

YAWN! You keep saying that but every time Bill posts anything re Tippit, you're always replying and voicing your disapproval, just have a proper debate and prove that you know the case better than Bill. Easy Peasy.

So, now asking questions is "voicing my disapproval"? Brown made a claim and I asked him to explain further..... He doesn't answer! Go figure... one could conclude that he lacks the arguments to answer.

just have a proper debate and prove that you know the case better than Bill. Easy Peasy.

I couldn't care less if Brown knows the case better than me. In fact, he probably does. Or at least his preferred version of the case.

Knowing (a version) of the case doesn't automatically mean being right. Ever thought of that, genius?

[Richard Smith]

So it's your belief that Agent Barrett and Officer Croy were mistaken?

They very well may have been mistaken but nevertheless, we're stuck with two conflicting accounts of where the Dallas PD gained custody of Oswald's wallet.

Based on the available information, neither of us can conclusively say they were mistaken or lied.

We can apply common sense and logic.  How about just answering the questions that take us down the yellow brick road. 
1) If the police had found a discarded wallet at the crime scene, wouldn't they have cause to believe that the owner was their suspect who dropped his wallet during a police encounter that went bad?  It would be a bizarre coincidence to find a discarded wallet at the scene of police officer's murder.
2)  If they obtained a name from the wallet, wouldn't they immediately broadcast that name over the radio to be on the lookout for this individual?  We know that they didn't do this.  What does that tell you? 
3) If the police or someone else were involved in the framing of Oswald by planting a fake wallet at the scene, wouldn't they anticipate that Oswald would have his actual wallet on his person when arrested and that is the wallet that they would suppress?

[Jon Banks]

We can apply common sense and logic.

I've applied logic and common sense to this topic. It doesn't resolve the mystery of the discrepancy regarding the differing accounts of when and where Oswald's wallet was obtained.

As of today, we cannot rule out the possibility that Officer Croy and Agent Barrett's accounts were accurate. We can't dismiss their stories simply because it doesn't line up with the official narrative.

It's a mystery.