The Tippit Shooting At 1:15-1:16, FACT

[John Corbett]

Official time of death is not always stated precisely as evidenced by JFK's official time of death as 1:00pm CST. The priests who entered the ER to administer the last rights before that time said he was already covered with a sheet when the last rights were administered to the body.

The only reason that I know of why a precise time of death might be important is the provisions of some wills. As executor of my father's will, I know there was a provision that excluded the named heirs in the event they preceded him in death. It also stated that if the order of their deaths could not be determined, it was to be presumed they preceded him in death. I think it would be highly unusual that such a provision would come into play. Perhaps if the people question were both killed in a car or plane crash and both were declared dead at the scene. Hard to say from just a few examples but it looks to me like it might be a common practice to round off the time of death to the nearest 15 minute time frame.

[Lance Payette]

I found on Facebook this snip of the supposed HSCA interview or testimony of Methodist Hospital nurse Thompson (Lotti or Lottie). I'm mystified as to why I can't seem to locate the document itself.

[Martin Weidmann]

Official time of death is not always stated precisely as evidenced by JFK's official time of death as 1:00pm CST. The priests who entered the ER to administer the last rights before that time said he was already covered with a sheet when the last rights were administered to the body.

The only reason that I know of why a precise time of death might be important is the provisions of some wills. As executor of my father's will, I know there was a provision that excluded the named heirs in the event they preceded him in death. It also stated that if the order of their deaths could not be determined, it was to be presumed they preceded him in death. I think it would be highly unusual that such a provision would come into play. Perhaps if the people question were both killed in a car or plane crash and both were declared dead at the scene. Hard to say from just a few examples but it looks to me like it might be a common practice to round off the time of death to the nearest 15 minute time frame.

Official time of death is not always stated precisely

That's probably true, but it doesn't mean that the official time is always wrong.

[Lance Payette]

Say what you will about Harvey and Lee, the John Armstrong Collection at Baylor is a goldmine. The snippet I posted above is actually a transcript of an interview with Methodist Hospital ER nurse Lottie Thompson conducted by Earl Holz of the Dallas Morning News. The full transcript is here:

https://digitalcollections-baylor.quartexcollections.com/Documents/Detail/tippitt-shooting-nov.-22-1963-d.o.a.-at-methodist-hospital/690058?item=690059

[Lance Payette]

Official time of death is not always stated precisely as evidenced by JFK's official time of death as 1:00pm CST. The priests who entered the ER to administer the last rights before that time said he was already covered with a sheet when the last rights were administered to the body.

The only reason that I know of why a precise time of death might be important is the provisions of some wills. As executor of my father's will, I know there was a provision that excluded the named heirs in the event they preceded him in death. It also stated that if the order of their deaths could not be determined, it was to be presumed they preceded him in death. I think it would be highly unusual that such a provision would come into play. Perhaps if the people question were both killed in a car or plane crash and both were declared dead at the scene. Hard to say from just a few examples but it looks to me like it might be a common practice to round off the time of death to the nearest 15 minute time frame.

Typically in wills we say "If my beloved but ne'er-do-well son Filbert does not survive me by 120 hours, then his share shall pass to my lovely but morally bankrupt daughter Gwendolyn" or something to that effect, which makes the exact time of death less critical. Some wills specify much longer periods - even up to a year. Almost all states have the Uniform Simultaneous Death Act whereby "if the devolution of property or donative provision in a governing instrument depends on one individual surviving another, and it cannot be established by clear and convincing evidence that the individual survived by 120 hours, such individual will be considered predeceased." It would be rare that the 120 hours would come down to the exact minute, but I suppose it could happen. That will be $342, please.

[John Corbett]

Typically in wills we say "If my beloved but ne'er-do-well son Filbert does not survive me by 120 hours, then his share shall pass to my lovely but morally bankrupt daughter Gwendolyn" or something to that effect, which makes the exact time of death less critical. Some wills specify much longer periods - even up to a year. Almost all states have the Uniform Simultaneous Death Act whereby "if the devolution of property or donative provision in a governing instrument depends on one individual surviving another, and it cannot be established by clear and convincing evidence that the individual survived by 120 hours, such individual will be considered predeceased." It would be rare that the 120 hours would come down to the exact minute, but I suppose it could happen. That will be $342, please.

I can only go by what was said in my father's will. I was also more recently the executor for my sister's estate. I would have to dig it up to verify but I believe hers stated the heirs had to survive her by 30 days. The only reason I noted that was because it differed from my father's will. I guess different lawyers have a different way of dealing with such a situation. I clearly remember the provision of my father's will that said it was to be presumed the heir preceded him in death if the order of their deaths could not be determined. He died in 1998. In fact it was the Wednesday after Father's Day so  we are close to the anniversary.

[Zeon Mason]

Buell W.Frazier saw Oswald wearing a GRAY jacket that Friday morning when Oswald was riding in the car. NOT a BLUE jacket.

If Oswald left the TSBD wearing only his brown shirt , such that Bledsoe saw that shirt on Oswald when he was on McWatters bus, then the GRAY jacket must be the one that was left at the TSBD.

Oswald entered his boarding house and Earlene Roberts described him as wearing a shirt with sleeves and she didn’t remember the color. So Oswald was NOT wearing a jacket when he entered the house.

Earlene Roberts saw Oswald leave the house wearing a zip up jacket which she thought was DARKER than the light GRAY jacket.

Oswald’s light GRAY jacket was left at the TSBD. He went home wearing a brown shirt. Oswald only had 2 jackets. He therefore could  only have been wearing the  BLUE zip up jacket when he left the boarding house.

So how does Oswald’s GRAY jacket that was left in the TSBD find its way to a parking lot  under a car if Oswald left the TSBD wearing only the brown shirt with the hole in the sleeve?

How does Oswald BLUE jacket which he was wearing when he left the boarding house, wind up being lost for a month and then
Found in the Domino room a month after the JFKA?

Do LNs give more weight to the accounts of An unknown man  pointing out a light GRAY jacket ( originally reported as “white), under a car and an unknown person finding  a BLUE jacket in the Domino room than they do to the accounts of  Buell W. Frazier and Earlene Roberts?

How do to solve this BLUE vs GRAY jacket anomaly? Shall we just say that Frazier and Roberts were just not paying much attention, therefore Oswald was really wearing the BLUE jacket that Friday morning?

We will have discount McWatters and Whaley as well as they both see a jacket, albeit McWatters isn’t sure it was Oswald and Whaley waffles a if it was blue if it was gray.

They must be discounted if Bledsoe saw Oswald wearing just his brown shirt with a hole in the sleeve.

Okay, so we will just stick with Roberts seeing  Oswald  zipping up a jacket and Brewer seeing  Oswald not wearing any jacket Then add witnesses that saw Oswald’s face looking thru their fingers or thru their screen door or as he ran away. And the wallet with the fake ID found at the scene… er.. wait that was another wallet. Oh well .. THE SHELLS … THATs the key.. Oswald kept some in his pants pockets or shirt pocket for several hours along with his wallet and his fake ID. THAT is was what really seals the deal don’t you think?