Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: Oswald's Light-Colored Jacket  (Read 74565 times)

Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3419
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #430 on: February 09, 2018, 07:56:38 AM »
Not really.  Lee didn't tell his employer where he lived.  He was living on Beckley under an assumed name.  Not even his wife knew where he was living.  Even if he thought they could have suspected him as early as 12:34 PM, why would he think they would know about the Beckley room 20 minutes later?

Why was he living under an assumed name...

Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2472
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #431 on: February 09, 2018, 11:53:37 AM »

You're just jealous that it might not have been you?

What question???, all I see is the Manager of managers getting his knickers in a knot because he's getting his arse kicked! Boo Hoo!

JohnM

So predictable.... When little Johnny gets himself in a jam he turns nasty. Kindergarten stuff!

Just too afraid to admit that he screwed up because he knows full well that nobody ever asked Tim to ignore any part of Westbrook's testimony.

Pathetic!
« Last Edit: February 09, 2018, 01:35:53 PM by Martin Weidmann »

Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2472
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #432 on: February 09, 2018, 01:05:57 PM »

Ok. So, Westbrook's word is good enough after all. That was a quick turnaround. It's nice to see that you've seen the light on that.


You're missing the point, Tim. It's pretty obvious to me that you are doing that on purpose and for a reason, but let's pretend for now that I did not notice that.....

The whole thing comes down to one man; Pinky Westbrook! You either believe him or not, because there is no corroboration for anything he says and the facts are against him.

Let's examine what we know. 

When the jacket was found it was described as white by not one but two officers and DPD radio gave out a description of the suspect of Tippit's killer (likely obtained from an unidentified witness) that had him wearing a white jacket.

All the mumbo jumbo Mytton "science" about different colors under different shades of sunlight do not apply, because the car park was an open area and the jacket was found on the middle of a bright sunny day and, according to the two officers, it was white.

Now, Westbrook's tale begins. As fas as I can tell, Westbrook never wrote a contemporary report about his activities in 11/22/63. Months later, he tells the WC that somebody, possibly a police officer, who he can not identify, found the jacket and pointed it out to him. Westbrook then takes the jacket, not leaving it in situ, so that when W.E. Barnes of the crime lab arrives there is nothing to photograph but a parked car.

Somehow sounds familiar, doesn't it? Evidence being presented that was found by somebody we don't know and was never photographed in situ.

Anyway, by the time Barnes arrives the jacket is apparently already gone because he never sees it. Westbrook tells the WC that he gave the jacket to another officer, who he also can not identify, before leaving the carpark to go to the Texas Theater.

So, we don't know how the jacket came to be under the car (if it ever was), who really found the jacket nor do we know how it got to the police station.

Next we learn that, according to an unsigned or countersigned receipt of the Identification bureau, Westbrook is submitting a gray jacket to the CSSS, which has the initials on it of W.E. Barnes and G.M. Doughty, which at best is odd because neither Barnes or Doughty were involved in the chain of custody for the jacket. In his WC testimony, Barnes confirms that he initialed the jacket at the station at around the same time the revolver was being initialed. Btw the revolver also has intitials on it from officers who were not actually involved in the chain of custody.

In other words, the entire "chain of custody" is just one man, Westbrook, who never really had custody of the jacket.... and low and behold it's the same Westbrook who is at the center of the controversy over the wallet that was found at the Tippit scene. It was Westbrook who, according to FBI agent Bob Barrett, was holding and going through that wallet and asked him if he had ever heard of Lee Harvey Oswald or Alek Hidell.

So we have a gray jacket and a revolver being initialed at the police stations by officers who were not involved in the chain of custody and who had no way of knowing where those items really came from and we have a wallet from the Tippit scene that morphes into a wallet taken from Oswald in the car by Paul Bentley, who in turn claims that wallet contained a credit card and a drivers license.

And in the middle of it all; Captain W.R. Westbrook of the DPD Personnel Office

Now let me ask you again, Tim.... Westbrook's word is good enough for you, right?

« Last Edit: February 09, 2018, 01:37:04 PM by Martin Weidmann »

Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1057
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #433 on: February 09, 2018, 02:25:56 PM »
Westbrook then takes the jacket, not leaving it in situ, so that when W.E. Barnes of the crime lab arrives there is nothing to photograph but a parked car.

Somehow sounds familiar, doesn't it? Evidence being presented that was found by somebody we don't know and was never photographed in situ.

At the time, they were looking for someone who just killed a police officer moments earlier.  They weren't concerned with "photographing the jacket in situ".

What they were worried about is grabbing the jacket to see if there was anything inside which might lead them to the guy who just shot a fellow officer in the head.

Some of you guys lack the ability to place yourself in their shoes and trying to understand what they were going through at the time.

Now, do you have any evidence whatsoever, I mean any little thing at all, which points to anyone other than Lee Oswald in the shooting death of J.D. Tippit?

Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1057
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #434 on: February 09, 2018, 03:04:28 PM »
Flat on your face beside BB.

We're discussing evidence (or lack of ) not why the DPD screwed up crime scenes.

How about you?  Do you have any evidence to show which supports the idea that anyone other than Lee Oswald killed J.D. Tippit?  Maybe you can help Weidmann out.  Can you post evidence which points to someone else not named Lee Oswald?

Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2472
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #435 on: February 09, 2018, 03:07:37 PM »

"Some of you guys lack the ability to place yourself in their shoes and trying to understand what they were going through at the time."

No truer words have ever been typed.

Said one clown to another.....

Pathetic insults and patronizing replies do not alter the facts.

Westbrook belonged to the DPD personnel office, for crying out loud. He was not hunting a killer and had no business handling evidence. He was with FBI agent Barrett following the events as they unfolded.

And even if he wanted to search the jacket, that's still no reason to remove the jacket from the scene before W.E. Barnes of the crime lab got there. Those guys were supposed to be professionals and regardless "what they were going through", they should have acted that way instead of making pathetic excuses afterwards.

Offline Richard Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 967
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #436 on: February 09, 2018, 03:19:29 PM »
Said one clown to another.....

Pathetic insults and patronizing replies do not alter the facts.

Westbrook belonged to the DPD personnel office, for crying out loud. He was not hunting a killer and had no business handling evidence. He was with FBI agent Barrett following the events as they unfolded.

And even if he wanted to search the jacket, that's still no reason to remove the jacket from the scene before W.E. Barnes of the crime lab got there. Those guys were supposed to be professionals and regardless "what they were going through", they should have acted that way instead of making pathetic excuses afterwards.

Martin has watched too many episodes of CSI.  This happened in 1963.  Police investigations were a lot different then.  But that kind of lazy, defense attorney argument creates no doubt of Oswald's guilt.  It's just a way to extend the discussion by distracting from the evidence.

Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2472
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #437 on: February 09, 2018, 03:22:46 PM »

Wow Marty you seem a little puckered up this morning, relax.

So they weren't so professional, ok I agree. Now what? Does that mean we throw the baby out with the bath water?

Does that mean we throw the baby out with the bath water?

What baby would that be? Is there a baby left to throw out?

Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2472
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #438 on: February 09, 2018, 03:32:08 PM »

Martin has watched too many episodes of CSI.  This happened in 1963.  Police investigations were a lot different then.  But that kind of lazy, defense attorney argument creates no doubt of Oswald's guilt.  It's just a way to extend the discussion by distracting from the evidence.


Martin has watched too many episodes of CSI. 

A fool's argument.

This happened in 1963.  Police investigations were a lot different then.

I agree... they were far more a rush to judgment then.... especially in Texas

It's just a way to extend the discussion by distracting from the evidence.

What evidence?..... There is none, stupid! All you've got is Westbrook's scouts honor!

You've got a half blind woman who was concentrating more on getting the TV to work, claiming Oswald (who she only could have seen in the blink of an eye) left the roominghouse wearing a jacket, but when she is shown CE 162 she says the jacket she saw was darker...... as in darker, like perhaps his shirt? Remember officer Baker making the same mistake in the 2nd floor lunchroom?

Then you've got a jacket allegedly found under a car, described by two officers who saw it in broad daylight as being white.

And you've got a gray jacket suddenly showing up at the police station but nobody can tell us where it came from or who brought it in. What we do know is that it is initialed by two officers who did not find or see it at the car park and did not handle it until it got to the station....
« Last Edit: February 13, 2018, 02:13:08 PM by Martin Weidmann »

Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1057
Re: Oswald's Jacket
« Reply #439 on: February 09, 2018, 03:36:14 PM »
Said one clown to another.....

Pathetic insults and patronizing replies do not alter the facts.

Westbrook belonged to the DPD personnel office, for crying out loud. He was not hunting a killer and had no business handling evidence. He was with FBI agent Barrett following the events as they unfolded.

And even if he wanted to search the jacket, that's still no reason to remove the jacket from the scene before W.E. Barnes of the crime lab got there. Those guys were supposed to be professionals and regardless "what they were going through", they should have acted that way instead of making pathetic excuses afterwards.


Quote
Westbrook belonged to the DPD personnel office, for crying out loud. He was not hunting a killer and had no business handling evidence.

You're not making sense.  You've argued that someone other than Westbrook picked up the jacket from underneath the car.

Therefore, once Westbrook "handled" the evidence, it had already been picked up by another and it makes no sense to criticize him for the jacket being picked up off the ground.

By the way, do you have ANY thing at all to post which suggests that someone other than Lee Oswald murdered J.D. Tippit?

 

Mobile View