Tippit Shooting 1:15-1:16

[Lance Payette]

At least one witness said he heard five shots, Callaway if I remember correctly. I think that LHO must have eventually managed to pry the split case out and replaced it. This might have happened anytime and anywhere between the Tippit shooting and his arrest. Just because the split case wasn’t found and recovered doesn’t necessarily mean it didn’t happen.

Yes, the five-shot thing had occurred to me as well. I'm not arguing in favor of the CT position by any means, but the entire scenario does have a certain implausibility, with Oswald fumbling to reload his gun as he runs away as though he were prepared to shoot anyone who got in his way, brave used car salesman Callaway confronting him with "What the hell is going on?", Oswald shrugging like a hapless goof instead of pointing the gun at Callaway, and Guinyard noticing an amazing level of detail when one might have expected a lowly lot porter to dive under the nearest $500 Chevy. It may be what occurred, but it does seem somewhat implausible. The "one witness who heard five shots was correct" and "the fifth shot was the split casing that was never found" does sound a bit like the sort of convenient ad hoc speculation in which CTers specialize.

[Tim Nickerson]

Yes, the five-shot thing had occurred to me as well. I'm not arguing in favor of the CT position by any means, but the entire scenario does have a certain implausibility, with Oswald fumbling to reload his gun as he runs away as though he were prepared to shoot anyone who got in his way, brave used car salesman Callaway confronting him with "What the hell is going on?", Oswald shrugging like a hapless goof instead of pointing the gun at Callaway, and Guinyard noticing an amazing level of detail when one might have expected a lowly lot porter to dive under the nearest $500 Chevy. It may be what occurred, but it does seem somewhat implausible. The "one witness who heard five shots was correct" and "the fifth shot was the split casing that was never found" does sound a bit like the sort of convenient ad hoc speculation in which CTers specialize.

Warren Reynolds heard four, five or six shots. William A. Smith heard four or five shots. Jimmy Burt heard a total of six shots. And a Johnny-come-lately named Frank Griffin heard five shots.

The five shots, with one of them missing, is speculation, that's true. But it's not without some foundation. It explains the mismatch of the shells found at the scene with the bullets removed from Tippit.

[Lance Payette]

Warren Reynolds heard four, five or six shots. William A. Smith heard four or five shots. Jimmy Burt heard a total of six shots. And a Johnny-come-lately named Frank Griffin heard five shots.

The five shots, with one of them missing, is speculation, that's true. But it's not without some foundation. It explains the mismatch of the shells found at the scene with the bullets removed from Tippit.

Oswald completely missed Tippit from 5 feet away and the bullet didn't hit a car, house or tree? Scroggins heard 3 or 4 shots, Markham heard 3, and good old Guinyard heard 3! It's not entirely clear to me what the Callaway-Guinyard debate between Bill and Michael was all about, but it does seem to me that the recollections of Callaway and Guinyard are hard to reconcile and that attorney Ball did a pretty poor job of questioning. If Michael's point was simply that Guinyard probably didn't really see what he told the WC he saw, I think I'd probably agree - but without agreeing that this is of any great significance in the context of the virtual certainty that Oswald did in fact kill Tippit and flee the scene. I just enjoy little thought experiments as to what Oswald was actually doing and why at every stage of November 20-22. Even assuming Oswald murdered Tippit, as I do, the events are hard to reconcile with the preternaturally cool Oswald encountered by Truly and Baker and interrogated by Fritz.

[Tim Nickerson]

Oswald completely missed Tippit from 5 feet away and the bullet didn't hit a car, house or tree? Scroggins heard 3 or 4 shots, Markham heard 3, and good old Guinyard heard 3! It's not entirely clear to me what the Callaway-Guinyard debate between Bill and Michael was all about, but it does seem to me that the recollections of Callaway and Guinyard are hard to reconcile and that attorney Ball did a pretty poor job of questioning. If Michael's point was simply that Guinyard probably didn't really see what he told the WC he saw, I think I'd probably agree - but without agreeing that this is of any great significance in the context of the virtual certainty that Oswald did in fact kill Tippit and flee the scene. I just enjoy little thought experiments as to what Oswald was actually doing and why at every stage of November 20-22. Even assuming Oswald murdered Tippit, as I do, the events are hard to reconcile with the preternaturally cool Oswald encountered by Truly and Baker and interrogated by Fritz.

I'm thinking that Oswald missed Tippit from 10 feet or so away. I don't believe that the bullet hit a car. It may have hit a house or tree though. Surely, it hit something.  Bill and Michael are disagreeing on a number of points. Bill is a BigDog on the Tippit case. So, I'm wary of doubting what he says on it. I don't see the importance in reconciling the recollections of Callaway and Guinyard. I think that Callaway was more reliable in his recollections though.

[Michael Capasse]

Bill is a BigDog on the Tippit case. So, I'm wary of doubting what he says on it.

I'm thinking that Oswald missed Tippit from 10 feet or so away. I don't believe that the bullet hit a car. It may have hit a house or tree though. Surely, it hit something. 

  movement toward an ad-hoc excuse.

[Bill Brown]

Oswald completely missed Tippit from 5 feet away and the bullet didn't hit a car, house or tree? Scroggins heard 3 or 4 shots, Markham heard 3, and good old Guinyard heard 3! It's not entirely clear to me what the Callaway-Guinyard debate between Bill and Michael was all about, but it does seem to me that the recollections of Callaway and Guinyard are hard to reconcile and that attorney Ball did a pretty poor job of questioning. If Michael's point was simply that Guinyard probably didn't really see what he told the WC he saw, I think I'd probably agree - but without agreeing that this is of any great significance in the context of the virtual certainty that Oswald did in fact kill Tippit and flee the scene. I just enjoy little thought experiments as to what Oswald was actually doing and why at every stage of November 20-22. Even assuming Oswald murdered Tippit, as I do, the events are hard to reconcile with the preternaturally cool Oswald encountered by Truly and Baker and interrogated by Fritz.

It's not entirely clear to me what the Callaway-Guinyard debate between Bill and Michael was all about, but it does seem to me that the recollections of Callaway and Guinyard are hard to reconcile...

In discussing the locations of Callaway and Guinyard, Capasse stated that "Callaway was ahead of Guinyard", meaning Oswald, as he was making his way south on Patton, would come upon Callaway before Guinyard.

Capasse was wrong, though.

Guinyard was standing on the sidewalk, where the alley began.  This (obviously) is halfway down the block on Patton, as one is making his way from Tenth to Jefferson.

Callaway was standing out on the sidewalk about three-fourths down the block, as one is making his way down Patton from Tenth to Jefferson.

In other words, Both men were standing out on the sidewalk on the east side of Patton and Guinyard was closer to Tenth while Callaway was further down, closer to Jefferson.

Capasse, trying to make a point about these two men and what each could (or could not) see, has the positions of the two wrong.  His point (like almost always) is invalid.

[Michael Capasse]

In discussing the locations of Callaway and Guinyard, Capasse stated that "Callaway was ahead of Guinyard", meaning Oswald, as he was making his way south on Patton, would come upon Callaway before Guinyard.

Capasse was wrong, though.

Guinyard was standing on the sidewalk, where the alley began.  This (obviously) is halfway down the block on Patton, as one is making his way from Tenth to Jefferson.

Callaway was standing out on the sidewalk about three-fourths down the block, as one is making his way down Patton from Tenth to Jefferson.

In other words, Both men were standing out on the sidewalk on the east side of Patton and Guinyard was closer to Tenth while Callaway was further down, closer to Jefferson.

Capasse, trying to make a point about these two men and what each could (or could not) see, has the positions of the two wrong.  His point (like almost always) is invalid.

Once again, Brown is conflating some argument that doesn't exist.
His arrogance overshadows any point he fails to make.

 So yes, Callaway was at the front (closer to Jefferson) and Guinyard was at the back (the alley).