Dave if you spent years researching this case you would be aware

Comment on John F. Kennedy Assassination Conspiracy Theories by pio.

dave if you spent years researching this case you would be aware that the official report states only two people witnessed tippit being shot (not several).helen markham being the only one who witnessed the entire event (or so we are told )but what was her description of the man who killed tippit “short kinda chunky with bush hair ” this is clearly not oswald . when asked by the warren commission if she recognised any of the four men she was shown in a line up (which included oswald) she replied no ,no one of the four i didnt know any of them . read her warren commision testimony all of the above is in it ,the second person who witnessed a man kill tippit was domingo benavides who did not and could not identify oswald as the the man who killed tippit .

helen markham maintained that tippit stopped the man (who was walking in front of tippit with his back to tippit )the man then put his hands on the police car and leaned in the window to speak to tippit ,the window of the police car was closed (so the killer could not have leaned in to it ) check it out on youtube etc ,also the police dusted the car for prints (some thing we hear little about )strangly not one print belonging to oswald was found on the car ,again this can be checked online to prove its accurate .

further to this there were to other witnesses acquilla clemmons and frank wright ,miss clemmons said there were two men (one of them was short heavy with bushy hair ,now where did we hear that description before ? ah yes i remember from helen markham see above )frank wright saw officer tippit being shot and fall to the floor and the man who shot him wore a black coat (now what colour was the coat the police found that they saw was oswalds ? it was a light tan not black) again all these are facts and can be checked online to show they are accurate .

frank whalley the cab driver who says his passenger was oswald said oswald wore a faded blue coat while in his cab ,a few minutes later oswald walks into his rooming house and earlene roberts (his landlady ) says he wore only a shirt and let wearing a coat (but that the coat the warren commision showed her the light tan coat is not the coat oswald wore as it was darker) what did the witness at the tippit murder scene say the killer wore (helen markham said he wore a white coat) frank wright said a long black coat (the davis girls said the killer wore a dark or black coat )and some people say the man they saw running wore a light coloured coat .
it has never been proven that the tan coat that was found was oswalds .

oswald had two coats a tan or cream coat and a blue coat (whalley said he wore a faded blue coat in his cab )but this coat is found still in the book depository days later . marina verified that oswald had only two coats (and that she washed all his clothes) yet the coat found had a laundry tag on it ,this tag was never traced and so the coat was never linked to oswald in anyway .

oswalds own marine colleagues said he was a lousy shot (the term they used is maggies drawers )no expert shooter has ever managed to replicate the the shooting job they say oswald did .people say it was easy dealley plaza is a small place (thats not why they failed ) the zapruder film established a time line for the shots and a tree was in the way for part of this time thats why they couldnt replicate it .

also oswald wasnt the only employee to leave the book depository that day (to say otherwise is patently false )but yes he did not return .mr trully the building supervisor while with officer baker vouched for oswald and he was allowed to leave the building ,employees were being stopped going out the front door (including oswald ) but again he is vouched for and left leave ,other employees complained about this .

when it comes to this case a lot of people can be mistaken with there information (for various reasons such as not properly researching it ,or just because they are new to the case and are still learning ) others know the case very well and intentionally misquote/misrepresent the evidence or what witnesses said and saw ,and they omit certain vital evidence .now one has to ask themselves why would a person want to do that ? ,all i will say is check out the word disinformation .