JFK Assassination Forum

Mr. BELIN. Was he asked where he lived?
Mr. HILL. That was the second question that was asked the suspect, and he didn't answer it, either.
About the time I got through with the radio transmission, I asked Paul Bentley, "Why don't you see if he has any identification."
Paul was sitting sort of sideways in the seat, and with his right hand he reached down and felt of the suspect's left hip pocket and said, "Yes, he has a billfold," and took it out.
I never did have the billfold in my possession, but the name Lee Oswald was called out by Bentley from the back seat, and said this identification, I believe, was on the library card.
And he also made the statement that there was some more identification in this other name which I don't remember, but it was the same name that later came in the paper that he bought the gun under.

Mr. BELIN. After you got down there, what did you do with him?
Mr. WALKER. We took him up the homicide and robbery bureau, and we went back there, and one of the detectives said put him In this room. I put him in the room, and he said, "Let the uniform officers stay with him." And I went inside, and Oswald sat down, and he was handcuffed with his hands behind him. I sat down there, and I had his pistol, and he had a card in there with a picture of him and the name A. J. Hidell on it.

Mr. BELIN. After you got down there, what did you do with him?
Mr. WALKER. We took him up the homicide and robbery bureau, and we went back there, and one of the detectives said put him In this room. I put him in the room, and he said, "Let the uniform officers stay with him." And I went inside, and Oswald sat down, and he was handcuffed with his hands behind him. I sat down there, and I had his pistol, and he had a card in there with a picture of him and the name A. J. Hidell on it.

Mr. BALL. Alek Hidell?
Mr. LEAVELLE. Yes; and he asked him if he knew Alek Hidell; said he didn't know if he ever heard of the name. He never heard of that and asked him several questions along that line and then after he had denied all knowledge of Alek Hidell, Mr. Kelley asked him, said "Well, isn't it a fact when you were arrested you had an identification card with his name on it in your possession."
He kind of grunted, said "Yes, that's right" and he said "How do you explain that?" And, as best my knowledge. he said "I don't explain it."

Mr. BALL. Another thing, that day, at sometime during the 22d when you questioned Oswald, didn't you ask him about this card he had in his pocket with the name Alek Hidell?
Mr. FRITZ. I did; yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. What did you ask him about that?
Mr. FRITZ. I believe he had three of those cards if I remember correctly, and he told me that was the name that he picked up in New Orleans that he had used sometimes. One of the cards looked like it might have been altered a little bit and one of them I believe was the Fair Play for Cuba and one looked like a social security card or something.

Mr. STERN - What were they, and what were the responses, if you recall?
Mr. BOOKHOUT - One specific question was with regard to the selective service card in the possession of Oswald bearing a photograph of Oswald and the name Alek James Hidell. Oswald admitted he carried this selective service card, but declined to state that he wrote the signature of Alek J. Hidell appearing on same. Further declined to state the purpose of carrying same, and---or any use he made of same.

Mr. HOLMES....
Then Captain Fritz interrupted and said, "Well, what about this card we got out of your billfold? This draft registration card, he called it, where it showed A. J. Hidell."
"Well, that is the only time that I recall he kind of flared up and he said, "Now, I have told you all I am going to tell you about that card in my billfold." He said, "You have the card yourself, and you know as much about it as I do." And he showed a little anger. Really the only time that he flared up.

Mr. ROSE. Well, the first thing I asked him was what his name was and he told me it was Hidell.
Mr. BALL. Did he tell you it was Hidell?
Mr. ROSE. Yes; he did.
Mr. BALL. He didn't tell you it was Oswald?
Mr. ROSE. No; he didn't, not right then--he did later. In a minute--I found two cards--I found a card that said "A. Hidell." And I found another card that said "Lee Oswald" on it, and I asked him which of the two was his correct name. He wouldn't tell me at the time, he just said, "You find out." And then in just a few minutes Captain Fritz came in and he told me to get two men and go to Irving and search his house.
Mr. BALL. Now, when he first came in there--you said that he said his name was "Hidell"?
Mr. ROSE. Yes.
Mr. BALL. Was that before you saw the two cards?
Mr. ROSE. Yes; it was.
Mr. BALL. Did he give you his first name?
Mr. ROSE. He just said "Hidell"; I remember he just gave me the last name of "Hidell".
Mr. BALL. And then you found two or three cards on him?
Mr. ROSE. Yes; we did.
Mr. BALL. Did you search him?
Mr. ROSE. He had already been searched and someone had his billfold. I don't know whether it was the patrolman who brought him in that had it or not.

JohnM

BLAH! BLAH! BLAH! - Same old regurgitation.  Not one thing that addresses Barrett.
“They said they took the wallet out of his pocket in the car? That’s so much hogwash. That wallet was in (Captain) Westbrook’s hand.”

You’re right. It wasn’t just “former” KGB counterintelligence officer Vladimir Putin. It was also his predecessors going all the way back to 1959 when the Kremlin, having decided to get us to defeat ourselves, set up top-secret Department D in the First Chief Directorate (today’s SVR) and top-secret Department 14 in the Second Chief Directorate (today’s FSB) to wage disinformation, “active measures,” and mole-based strategic deception counterintelligence operations against us and our NATO allies.

But speaking just of Lt. Col. Putin:

Why did he have his SVR and FSB, his GRU, his professional St. Petersburg trolls, and his Oligarchs work so hard to get Trump "elected" in 2016, and how do you know they weren’t instrumental in his carrying the critical swing states of Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania by less than 80,000 votes combined?

Answers:

1) Not to ensure "better Russia-U.S. relations," but because he knew Trump would do an excellent job of tearing us apart.

2) You don’t.

And I give you January 6, stolen top-secret documents, rising inflation, ICE murders, Project 2025, concentration camps, Presidential corruption like we’ve never seen before, a stronger Iran, a hardened six-story subterranean fortress, and an algae-filled reflecting pool.

If Putin had the power to determine the winners of our presidential elections, why did he let Biden win in 2020?

Did Putin install Obama in 2008?

Did Putin install Bush in 2000?

Just how long have the Russians been picking out presidents?

Interesting top up to this thread:

https://themobmuseum.org/blog/assassination-expert-says-cubans-encouraged-oswald-to-kill-jfk/

LP--

There is no general, or even sparse, dislike of Jews or Israelis in Thailand, where I have lived for 14 years. There are Jewish temples in Bangkok entirely unmolested by Thai nationals.

Many Thai nationals work on Israeli farms (sadly, 34 Thai nationals were massacred on Oct. 7) and in general they appreciate the money and results. Some end up marrying Israelis.

Just as sadly, there are Muslim-Buddhist hostilities due to Islamist separatist-terrorists in Thailand's south.

The Government of Canada advises travelers to exercise a high degree of caution in Thailand, and specifically warns against all travel to the southernmost provinces of Narathiwat, Pattani, Yala, and Songkhla due to unpredictable security situations and ongoing separatist insurgent violence. The Canadians are too PC to say "Muslims."

Here is brief description of the situation in Thailand's south:

While earlier attacks were typified by drive-by shootings in which patrolling policemen were shot by gunmen on passing motorcycles, after 2001 they have escalated to well-coordinated attacks on police establishments, with police stations and outposts ambushed by well-armed groups subsequently fleeing with stolen arms and ammunition. Other tactics used to gain publicity from shock and horror are slashing to death Buddhist monks, bombing temples, beheadings, intimidating pork vendors and their customers, as well as arson attacks on schools, killing the teachers —mostly female— and burning their bodies.[63] In rare cases, Pattani guerrilla groups had also threatened Thai Christians.[64] --Wikipedia

---30---

Muslim terrorist attacks in Thailand are primarily driven by a localized, ethnonationalist and separatist insurgency in the country's southernmost region. Concentrated in the Deep South provinces of Pattani, Yala, Narathiwat, and parts of Songkhla, the conflict has resulted in over 7,000 casualties since it reignited in 2004.---Asia Foundation

---30---

Thailand is a nation of 60 million. The 7,000 casualties would be about equal to 40,000 casualties from terror attacks in the US.  Yes, Thais have bigger things to worry about than a few misbehaving Israeli tourists.

Even so, despite decades of Muslim terror, most Thais seem to regard Muslims evenly anywhere outside of the south, and I have never seen an incident of anti-Muslim behavior.

Israelis are frequent visitors to Thailand, and are regarded little differently from other European or Middle East visitors.

The key fact that stands out to me about Barrett's claim--which is where it started--is that he never mentioned it until the mid-1990s. No one did. No one mentioned or breathed a word of having seen an Oswald wallet at the scene for over thirty years! That does not pass the smell test of it being Oswald's wallet, which would have been extremely memorable and the wallet logged into evidence with the Crime Scene personnel (Doughty and Barnes) right there at the scene. But it wasn't, and nobody ever heard of that being Oswald's wallet for another thirty years, because it wasn't. Croy's signature saying he found Oswald's wallet turned up posthumously and he never mentioned anything of the kind in his lifetime. If he did come to believe that at the time he wrote that photo inscription--and was not writing it as a joke--he may have become convinced it was but nothing in his reported memories of that wallet confirmed or supported that it was Oswald's.

The wallet is in the hand of an officer holding Tippit's revolver, and there is a report of Callaway being divested of Tippit's revolver at gunpoint in a confrontation, following which that revolver and Callaway and Scoggins returned to the crime scene. It is very reasonable that the two men who took the Tippit revolver from Callaway demanded his wallet, or Scoggins', one of those two, as "security" before allowing them to drive separately back to the crime scene. The wallet was then given to police at the scene with the Tippit revolver, police checked it, realized Callaway and Scoggins were innocent, and the wallet was returned as of no further relevance or interest in the crime case, which is why it was not logged in as evidence. If Callaway didn't volunteer that detail in later years it would be because he is known to have been sore and sensitive about the embarrassment of that confrontation, which would be the background on that. The similarity in appearance to Oswald's wallet would be attributed to coincidence as being a common type of man's wallet sold.

Barrett thirty years later may have confused his memory in when and where Westbrook asked him that day about the names of Oswald and Hidell. Myers makes a good case for that as the explanation. But another possibility is the case against Oswald on Tippit was actually weaker than it has been popularly supposed, and for all we know Barrett could have planted that Oswald wallet story as intent to shore it up by introducing a new smoking-gun incrimination of Oswald that would remove any doubt (if there was any). (He told fellow FBI agent Hosty who believed Barrett and published it in Hosty's book, is how Barrett launched it.)

Barrett is the same FBI agent who was a witness of Oswald's arrest and later told Myers with a straight face that the way Oswald got his bruised black eye was Oswald had swung his face into the hand of an officer, giving himself a black eye by assaulting the officer's hand with his eye, lol. That's an aside, sorry. The relevant point is one cannot take seriously incriminating evidence newly introduced from memory for the first time 30 years later, that nobody at the crime scene at the time ever heard of (referring to Oswald ID). This is how urban legends start, which is what this one is.

If there were earlier or contemporary credible witness reports of Oswald ID in that wallet, that would be a different matter. But this story starts for the first time 30 years later. And the wallet wasn't handed in as evidence at the crime scene on the day of the crime, and it is seen in the WFAA-TV film in the same officer's hand as the Tippit revolver which associates it with the hostile at-gunpoint confrontation with Callaway in the obtaining of that gun (and probably Callaways's wallet too).