Podcast On Tippit

[John Mytton]

Sure Oswald was a Gorilla, Hilarious!

No he wasn't. That's why it is likely or possible that the white jacket found at the car park wasn't his.

Wow, in 2026, you claim to own two of that type of jacket, please take a photo of the two jackets and show us the two elastic gathered sections on the back and I hope they're a light grey/beige shade! Then post them in this thread. Waiting....Zzzzzz...

Hilarious. Who do you think you are?

You make one idiotic claim after another and never present a shred of evidence.

I'm not going to do a damned thing until you have explained how Oswald could have picked up CE 162 (the light grey jacket) at the rooming house, when he, as you claimed was wearing that same jacket to the TSBD on Friday morning and left the TSBD without wearing a jacket.

I'm not going to do a damned thing...

Say it's not true, yet another Weidmann personal anecdote that he uses as proof, can't be another one of his lies?



JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

Obviously, not that well.

Oswald put it there.

You can't be this thick?? Oswald clearly wore the dark jacket but Frazier didn't even notice, yet as I said "your star witness with the photographic memory had never seen CE163 ever before", even though he sat right next to him for the half hour trip from Irving, but you expect him to remember some insignificant action with precise detail. Did your Mother drop you on your head when you were a baby?



Mr. BALL - I have here Commission's 163, a gray blue jacket. Do you recognize this jacket?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I don't.
Mr. BALL - Did you ever see Lee Oswald wear this jacket?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I don't believe I have.

 

Before you go balls to the walls, take a second or two to read and comprehend what's written, so you can be less of an embarrasment, otherwise you'll fall into another one of my traps. Muhahaha.

BTW, how are those jacket photos coming along?
Because I believe you I really do, Oswald's jacket was clearly mass produced and there must be at least hundreds out there, but there was also millions and millions of jackets produced and the problem here is a simple case of probability, for your killer to possess and discard a virtually identical jacket in a carpark that a jacketed Oswald was also seen entering, is pretty far fetched.

Oswald arrested without his jacket. Where did it go?


JohnM

The fool looks at two photographs in which the elastics on one jacket are clearly further apart than on the other one and he declares the jackets to be the same based on his biased self-serving opinion. Even worse, based up what he pathetically calls "research" he concludes that these jackets are the only two in the entire world that are the same. And then he wants to be taken seriously.

But at least you've ran away from your previous bogus claim that Oswald was wearing CE 162 to the TSBD on Friday morning. Of course he didn't. He was wearning CE 162 to Irving on Thursday afternoon and left the next morning with CE 163.

[Martin Weidmann]

Say it's not true, yet another Weidmann personal anecdote that he uses as proof, can't be another one of his lies?



JohnM

I have seldom seen you so desperate to back away from your own pathetic claims.

[John Mytton]

The fool looks at two photographs in which the elastics on one jacket are clearly further apart than on the other one and he declares the jackets to be the same based on his biased self-serving opinion. Even worse, based up what he pathetically calls "research" he concludes that these jackets are the only two in the entire world that are the same. And then he wants to be taken seriously.

But at least you've ran away from your previous bogus claim that Oswald was wearing CE 162 to the TSBD on Friday morning. Of course he didn't. He was wearning CE 162 to Irving on Thrusday afternoon and left the next morning with CE 163.

I've got you really rattled as you are resorting to making the most absurd claims and making up things I never even remotely said? Your World is falling down all around you and it's Hilarious.

in which the elastics on one jacket are clearly further apart than on the other one

Well Weidmann, let's put that to the test, on the jacket on the left we can easily see the elastic and the subsequent gathering of the material above and on the jacket on the right we can clearly see the gathered fabric above and therefore we can determine where the elastic would be.
The end of the sleave is a relative constant size, which I've called "W" and in both images the distance between the elastic sections is Wx2.
Thanks for making this proof even stronger and your demise even sweeter.



JohnM

[Michael Capasse]

JohnM

  you added a mark to the white jacket over the portion in doubt.
double jackets, double wallets, uh oh oswald doubles too..?

[Martin Weidmann]

I've got you really rattled as you are resorting to making the most absurd claims and making up things I never even remotely said? Your World is falling down all around you and it's Hilarious.

Well Weidmann, let's put that to the test, on the jacket on the left we can easily see the elastic and the subsequent gathering of the material above and on the jacket on the right we can clearly see the gathered fabric above and therefore we can determine where the elastic would be.
The end of the sleave is a relative constant size, which I've called "W" and in both images the distance between the elastic sections is Wx2.
Thanks for making this proof even stronger and your demise even sweeter.



JohnM

I've got you really rattled as you are resorting to making the most absurd claims and making up things I never even remotely said?

So, you didn't say this;

OMG WOW!
After going through my collection of images I found a photo of the rear of Oswald's jacket and the similarity to the carpark photo is even more striking, at both ends across the back of Oswald's jacket we see a small elastic section where the fabric is gathered and allowed to stretch so as to provide a snug fit around the mid-section, this design is seen in both photos!!
To confirm the uniqueness of this find,........

Well Weidmann, let's put that to the test, on the jacket on the left we can easily see the elastic and the subsequent gathering of the material above and on the jacket on the right we can clearly see the gathered fabric above and therefore we can determine where the elastic would be.
The end of the sleave is a relative constant size, which I've called "W" and in both images the distance between the elastic sections is Wx2.
Thanks for making this proof even stronger and your demise even sweeter.

So now you figure that the two photos actually show exactly the same size of the jackets?

You're looking at two photo and are desperately trying to make a point but failing miserably. But, what else is new?

You really need to get that desperation of yours under control.

[John Mytton]

You really need to get that desperation of yours under control.

Get a grip.

I'm not the one inventing fantasyland delusions.
I'm not the one saying Oswald's only accessible jacket at the time was a perfect match for what the killer was wearing.
I'm not creating scenarios where jackets are secretly stolen.
I'm not the one who's saying stolen jackets are being clandestinely swapped into evidence.
I'm not the one saying that your Oswald doppelganger entered a carpark and dropped a perfectly matched jacket under a car.
I'm not the one cruelly saying Roberts was yet another mistaken eyewitness.
I'm not the one making up fairy tales that I have two identical Jackets in my clothing collection.
I'm not the one that's twisting my comments and lying about what I wrote.

The problem for you is that the Warren Commission did such a thorough job in finding Oswald guilty that you now have to keep inventing a string of impossible, illogical narratives to cover each piece of incriminating evidence.
Instead of just accepting a single individual assassinated Kennedy and Tippit, you dementedly have teams of unrelated conspirators in every branch of law enforcement and men in positions of power, organizing teams of assassins and doing all sorts of undetected tampering.

And you call me desperate?? -sigh-

JohnM

[Bill Brown]

Thanks for helping John Mytton out. He was struggling, so now he can relax a bit.

Helen Markham, standing at the northwest corner of Tenth and Patton, testified to the Warren Commission that the cop-killer (who she positively identified as Lee Oswald) had on a short jacket that was open in the front and was grayish-tan in color.

As you mention Markham, there's something I have wanted to ask you ever since you did that video interview. Let me establish the context first. Markham testified that she took her usual bus to work from Jefferson at 1.15. You made a big deal about the time table showing there was a bus at 1.12 an 1.22 and I agreed it could have been either bus; a delayed 1.12 or indeed 1.22. The point is that if you take the same bus to work, you normally would try to get to the bus stop a few minutes earlier than the scheduled departure time. I know I did in my late teens when I caught the bus to my first, very modest, job. So, let's say for argument's sake that Markham would have at least tried to have gotten to the bus stop some three minutes earlier, at around 1.12 perhaps 1.13. Would that be fair?

Now we know from the FBI that Markham had to walk two blocks, from 9th street to Jefferson and that walking each block would have taken her 2,5 to 3 minutes. So, in order to get to the bus stop at a fairly safe time she would have had to leave 9th street at around 1.06 or 1.07, right?

Here's the problem I can't solve, so perhaps you can help me. Dale Myers has Markham standing on the corner of 10th and Patton when Tippit drives by. There's anything unusual to see a police cruiser pass by, she you would expect that after the car had passed, she would just cross the street and carry on walking to get to the bus stop on time. Right? But according to Myers, Markham didn't do that and I have never been able to understand that. Perhaps it would have been more understandable if Markham had a bit more spare time before she had to be at the bus stop, but why in the world would she risk missing her bus to observe for two minutes or so a police car? Can you explain that to me?

Now, let's just get back to the FBI timing of the walking distance. If we assume that Markham would have tried to be at least two minutes earlier at the bus stop to catch her bus at 1.15, and she did leave 9th street at 1.06 or 1.07, that would have gotten her to 10th and Patton at 1.10, perhaps 1.11. But according to Myers, and you argree with him, Tippit was shot at around 1.14.30. So what am I missing here? Did Markham get to 10th and Patton at 1.11 and stayed there for several minutes, or did she leave 9th street several minutes later at the risk of not getting to the bus stop on time. Can you make sense of this?

As you mention Markham, there's something I have wanted to ask you ever since you did that video interview. Let me establish the context first. Markham testified that she took her usual bus to work from Jefferson at 1.15. You made a big deal about the time table showing there was a bus at 1.12 an 1.22 and I agreed it could have been either bus; a delayed 1.12 or indeed 1.22. The point is that if you take the same bus to work, you normally would try to get to the bus stop a few minutes earlier than the scheduled departure time. I know I did in my late teens when I caught the bus to my first, very modest, job. So, let's say for argument's sake that Markham would have at least tried to have gotten to the bus stop some three minutes earlier, at around 1.12 perhaps 1.13. Would that be fair?

No.

To get to her bus stop "some three minutes earlier" than the time the bus was due by would mean she would get to the bus stop at around 1:09 (for the 1:12 bus) or 1:19 (for the 1:22 bus).

The mistake you're making above is that you're assuming that she said the bus arrived at 1:15.  When she gave the time of 1:15 (which is the ONLY time she ever gave, re: her bus), we really can't know if she's saying she caught the bus at 1:15 (she'd be wrong if this is what she was saying) or that she usually got to the bus stop at 1:15.

The police radio report by Bowley at 1:17 (combined with what Bowley tells us he did upon arriving at the scene before taking the mic from Benavides) tells me that Markham was approaching the corner of Tenth & Patton around 1:15.

Now we know from the FBI that Markham had to walk two blocks, from 9th street to Jefferson and that walking each block would have taken her 2,5 to 3 minutes. So, in order to get to the bus stop at a fairly safe time she would have had to leave 9th street at around 1.06 or 1.07, right?

I guess it depends on what you mean by "a fairly safe time".  I mean, was she saying that she tries to get to the bus stop at 1:15?  If that's what she was saying and she was on what she'd consider her perfect schedule, then yes, she'd be at Tenth & Patton around 1:12 or a half minute after.

I don't rely on Markham's time estimate for one simple reason.  The police tapes, combined with the actions of T.F. Bowley (reporting the shooting on the squad car radio at 1:17), Mary Wright, Barbara Davis and L.J. Lewis (calling the police on the phone almost immediately after the shots rang out and the dispatcher Murray Jackson being unaware of any of their phone calls by the time he received the radio call from Bowley) tells me that Markham was at the corner at roughly 1:15/1:16.  In other words, the police tapes (combined with the self-described actions of the four I just mentioned) tell me that Markham's time estimate of when it was that she was at the corner was flat-out wrong.

It happens.

Here's the problem I can't solve, so perhaps you can help me. Dale Myers has Markham standing on the corner of 10th and Patton when Tippit drives by. There's anything unusual to see a police cruiser pass by, she you would expect that after the car had passed, she would just cross the street and carry on walking to get to the bus stop on time. Right? But according to Myers, Markham didn't do that and I have never been able to understand that. Perhaps it would have been more understandable if Markham had a bit more spare time before she had to be at the bus stop, but why in the world would she risk missing her bus to observe for two minutes or so a police car? Can you explain that to me?

Here's how I've always seen it play out...

Markham is not actually at the corner when Tippit cruises slowly through the intersection.  I can imagine it like this... she's approaching the corner, perhaps forty or fifty feet still from the corner when she sees Tippit cruise along Tenth and crossing Patton.  By the time she actually gets to the corner, Tippit is pulling over or has just pulled over.  She sees the guy who was walking then walk over to the passenger side of the car and watched as the conversation between the two takes place.  Because of this, instead of continuing to walk on her merry way, she stands there at the corner wondering why a police officer in his squad car has pulled alongside a guy who was walking on the sidewalk.

In short, she has not arrived at the corner yet when Tippit drove through the intersection.

Now, let's just get back to the FBI timing of the walking distance. If we assume that Markham would have tried to be at least two minutes earlier at the bus stop to catch her bus at 1.15, and she did leave 9th street at 1.06 or 1.07, that would have gotten her to 10th and Patton at 1.10, perhaps 1.11. But according to Myers, and you argree with him, Tippit was shot at around 1.14.30. So what am I missing here? Did Markham get to 10th and Patton at 1.11 and stayed there for several minutes, or did she leave 9th street several minutes later at the risk of not getting to the bus stop on time. Can you make sense of this?

We can't assume that Markham was trying to catch a bus at 1:15.  There's no reason to assume that, especially since we know there was no 1:15 bus.

By the way, my opinion is that the shooting occurred around 1:15:30(ish).

Domingo Benavides told Eddie Barker (The Warren Report, part 3, CBS-TV, 1967) that he watched the killer go around the corner and then sat there in his truck "for a second or two" before getting out and going over to Tippit and, realizing there was nothing he could do for Tippit, grabs the police radio.  My opinion is that Benavides begins keying the mic shortly after 1:16 and was on the mic 30 to 45 seconds after the shots (based on getting out of his truck "a second or two" after the killer went around the corner).