JFK Assassination Forum

The way Tippit was shot also leads to unanswered questions. According to the narrative, Tippit got out of his car, clearly not sensing danger and then the killer instantly fired several shots at him. That, to me, is more likely a cold blooded act than a panic reaction. What would have motivated Oswald to kill a cop and actually go back for a final shot to ensure he was dead when the two men just had a conversation and Tippit didn't behave in a way that made it clear he either wanted to arrest or kill Oswald? In what universe does that make sense?

So you believe the gunpowder residue could be smelled all the way to Parkland but the residue could not have drifted down onto Elm St. from the sniper's nest. Strange.

Oswald's repeated association with David Ferrie is one of the Rosetta Stones of the assassination. It is often overlooked that a former INS agent confirmed Oswald's association with Ferrie.

Orest Pena reported that on several occasions he saw Oswald speaking with FBI Cuban specialist Warren de Brueys, with David Smith at the Customs office, and with Wendell Roache at the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) office in New Orleans.

Pena was not always consistent in his accounts, but Roache confirmed Pena’s account about seeing Oswald in the New Orleans INS office when Roache was interviewed by the Church Committee. Roache said that he had “frequently” seen Oswald in the INS office and that Oswald even had an office there.

Roache stated in another Church Committee interview that during INS surveillance, Oswald was seen going into the offices of David Ferrie’s anti-Castro group in New Orleans, and that “Oswald was known to be one of the men in the group.”

I discuss this and other evidence of the Oswald-Ferrie connection at length in A Comforting Lie: The Myth That a Lone Gunman Killed President Kennedy.

Here’s Google AI’s response to why Georgia’s county unit voting system was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court:

Georgia's county unit state-wide voting system was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1963 landmark case Gray v. Sanders (stemming from a 1962 federal district court ruling). The Court ruled the system violated the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause, establishing the historic "one person, one vote" constitutional doctrine.The system was ruled unconstitutional for the following reasons:Massive Vote Dilution: Under the county unit system (governing state-wide primary elections), each county was assigned a set number of "unit votes," and the popular vote winner in each county won all of its unit votes. This meant sparsely populated rural counties had vastly disproportionate political power compared to heavily populated urban counties like Fulton.Control by a Minority of the Population: The imbalance was so extreme that rural counties holding only one-third of the state's population controlled a majority of the unit votes.Violation of Political Equality: The Supreme Court concluded that once a geographical unit is established to elect representatives, all participating voters must be granted an equal voice. The Court found that factors like an individual’s geographic location cannot be constitutionally used to diminish the weight of their ballot.Undemocratic Outcomes: The system allowed a candidate to win the majority of the popular vote state-wide but still lose the election if a rival secured more county unit votes.You can read the full Supreme Court decision in Gray v. Sanders (372 U.S. 368) via Justia, or explore the New Georgia Encyclopedia for a comprehensive breakdown of the case and its historical context.


So this makes me wonder why the U.S. electoral college isn’t subject to a similar ruling. Not that I am against the U.S. electoral college, just curious…

But then we bump up against the Tippit murder, which is presumably why Belin called it the Rosetta Stone of the JFKA. The Tippit murder seemingly flies in the face of any theory that Oswald was an escaping patsy who got his revolver for protection. The two CT gambits here are, of course, either that Oswald didn't kill Tippit at all or that Oswald recognized Tippit as part of the conspiracy that had framed him and shot Tippit before Tippit shot him.

But then we bump up against the Texas Theater. Here, the CT gambit is that what supposedly took place inside the theater is not what actually took place. (I do find Oswald's protests about "I'm not resisting arrest!" kind of odd if he had actually pulled his gun on McDonald.)

No big deal, but you did say "If so, how does that make sense, when, at the same time, you claim that Oswald, at least one day earlier, made a paper bag to conceal a rifle in, which would imply premeditation?"

Yes, that has occurred to me.

I've repeatedly said the same thing. It's not impossible, but it's certainly odd.

In further response to John's complaint that I'm overthinking things, I would again point out that Oswald's behavior is evidence, regardless of what he was thinking. Every lawyer knows you need some "theory of the case" to give context to what you present to the jury. I believe Oswald's behavior would be the foundation of a defense theory of the case and might go a long way toward creating reasonable doubt.

Did he ever say or write anything suggesting animosity toward JFK? No.

In the days leading up to the JFKA, and particularly the night before in Irving, did he act like a man who was planning a Presidential assassination or give any clue that he was? No.

The morning of the JFKA, did he exhibit unusual behavior? No.

Two minutes after the JFKA, did he act like a man who had just shot the President? No.

Was this demeanor consistent with the way Oswald acted in other stressful situations? No.

In that context, the various holes that CTers try to poke in the Dealey Plaza evidence would likely carry more weight toward convincing a jury he was a mere patsy than they would without such context. Even to me, Oswald's behavior is the most troubling aspect of the LN narrative.

But then, alas for Oswald, we bump up against Tippit, the Texas Theater and his behavior in custody - and the innocent patsy argument becomes a tough sell.