CIA Wallets at Tenth and Patton

[Martin Weidmann]

I do not follow where are you getting that Baker maintained possession of the wallet on his person in a way contradicting others having access to it, after he received it from Bentley. Based on Walker and maybe Rose's account too, it seems like there were multiple officers browsing through it after Baker received it. Also, there is a phenomenon in which multiple persons present at an event will all claim to have personally done the same thing. e.g. there are at least four officers who claimed personally to be the first to have discovered the rifle on the 6th floor TSBD! There are several officers who claim they were the one personally who told Fritz that the man he was looking for, Oswald, had just been brought in under arrest. Several of the officers present at Oswald's arrest claimed they personally were the ones who put the handcuffs on Oswald, etc. It isn't evidence of multiple rifles on the 6th floor, multiple Oswalds handcuffed in the Texas Theatre, or multiple wallets with Oswald ID at the police station. Its messiness of hearsay and witness accounts.

I'm not sure what to make of this word salad, but I'll give it a try.

I do not follow where are you getting that Baker maintained possession of the wallet on his person in a way contradicting others having access to it, after he received it from Bentley.

I haven't got a clue what you are talking about. According to Bentley (and Hill) Baker received the wallet that Bentley took from Oswald some two hours after Oswald arrived at City Hall. By then Guy Rose had already talked to Oswald and a wallet had been submitted to the evidence room.

Based on Walker and maybe Rose's account too, it seems like there were multiple officers browsing through it after Baker received it.

It seems?... No, Bentley said he had the wallet he took from Oswald until he gave it to lt Baker at around 4:00 PM.... that's at least two hours later than Guy Rose talked to Oswald.

Also, there is a phenomenon in which multiple persons present at an event will all claim to have personally done the same thing.

And it doesn't concern you that the investigators did not want to find out what the actual story is? Besides, when you are a police officer, you either have or don't have evidence. Are you now claiming that Walker just made up that he had a wallet?

e.g. there are at least four officers who claimed personally to be the first to have discovered the rifle on the 6th floor TSBD!

And you don't care that they never investigated those claim to preserve the chain of custody?

There are several officers who claim they were the one personally who told Fritz that the man he was looking for, Oswald, had just been brought in under arrest. Several of the officers present at Oswald's arrest claimed they personally were the ones who put the handcuffs on Oswald, etc. It isn't evidence of multiple rifles on the 6th floor, multiple Oswalds handcuffed in the Texas Theatre, or multiple wallets with Oswald ID at the police station. Its messiness of hearsay and witness accounts.

No, it's evidence of police incompetence

[Mitch Todd]

Thank you for confirming that there is no LN explanation for how Bentley and Walker could both have a wallet, when in reality there was only one. 

LN's don't need an explanation as to how Walker and Bentley both said they had Oswald's wallet: Walker didn't claim he had the wallet, just the Hidell ID.  , indeed!

Here's his testimony to the WC:

https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/walker_c.htm

and here's his report to Curry regarding his activity that day:

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339196/?q=report%20walker

[John Corbett]

This focus on wallets is another fine example of CTs focusing on all the wrong things. The right thing to focus on are these.

1. When arrested, Oswald had in his possession the only revolver in the world which could have fired the shells that the shooter emptied from his revolver as he fled the scene.
2. Oswald had the same two makes of bullets, Remingtons and Winchesters, that were removed from Tippit's body.
3. Oswald's jacket was found on the route the shooter had fled after shooting Tippit.
4. When he was arrested, Oswald tried to shoot the arresting officer.
5. Numerous witnesses IDed Oswald either as the shooter or the man they saw fleeing the scene with a gun in his hand. I don't normally place much faith in UNCORROBORATED witness accounts. These witnesses are corroborated by the fact the person they IDed had the murder weapon in his possession when arrested.

Knowing all this, do we really need to focus on wallets to figure out who shot JDT?

[Martin Weidmann]

LN's don't need an explanation as to how Walker and Bentley both said they had Oswald's wallet: Walker didn't claim he had the wallet, just the Hidell ID.  , indeed!

Here's his testimony to the WC:

https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/walker_c.htm

and here's his report to Curry regarding his activity that day:

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339196/?q=report%20walker

Semantics.

What would Walker be doing with only a Hidell ID? Where did he get it?

[Martin Weidmann]

This focus on wallets is another fine example of CTs focusing on all the wrong things. The right thing to focus on are these.

1. When arrested, Oswald had in his possession the only revolver in the world which could have fired the shells that the shooter emptied from his revolver as he fled the scene.
2. Oswald had the same two makes of bullets, Remingtons and Winchesters, that were removed from Tippit's body.
3. Oswald's jacket was found on the route the shooter had fled after shooting Tippit.
4. When he was arrested, Oswald tried to shoot the arresting officer.
5. Numerous witnesses IDed Oswald either as the shooter or the man they saw fleeing the scene with a gun in his hand. I don't normally place much faith in UNCORROBORATED witness accounts. These witnesses are corroborated by the fact the person they IDed had the murder weapon in his possession when arrested.

Knowing all this, do we really need to focus on wallets to figure out who shot JDT?

When somebody tells me I have to focus on particular pieces of evidence, it only tells me that they don't want me to look beyond what they want me to believe.

None of the 5 items you have listed, we actually know. There are all sorts of problems which you are unwilling to see or discuss.

Knowing all this, do we really need to focus on wallets to figure out who shot JDT?

Yes, when two police officers tell a different story about a crucial piece of evidence, it needs to be investigated. The fact that it wasn't is telling a story by itself.

[John Corbett]

When somebody tells me I have to focus on particular pieces of evidence, it only tells me that they don't want me beyond what they want me to believe.

I really don't give a shit what you focus on. I just find it silly.

None of the 5 items you have listed, we actually know. There are all sorts of problems which you are unwilling to see or discuss.

Problems. What problems would that be? Are you denying the shells recovered at the scene could only have been fired by the revolver had in his possession when he tried to shoot the arresting officer?
Are you denying Oswald had the same two makes of bullets that were recovered from Tippit's body? Are you denying Oswald's jacket was found on his escape route? Are you denying Oswald tried to shoot the arresting officer? Are you denying that numerous witnesses IDed Oswald? Just which of the items that I listed do you have problems with?

Knowing all this, do we really need to focus on wallets to figure out who shot JDT?

Yes, when two police officers tell a different story about a crucial piece of evidence, it needs to be investigated. The fact that it wasn't is telling a story by itself.

OK, you go ahead and investigate it and report back to us what you find.