In which Sgt. Hill shoots himself in the foot with an automatic

[donald willis]

In which Sgt. Hill shoots himself in the foot with an automatic

Witness Domingo Benavides, DPD Patrolman Joe M. Poe, and DPD Sgt. Gerald
Hill were in perfect agreement at the Warren Commission hearings.

Benavides: "[The suspect] had just got back to the sidewalk when he threw
he first [shell], and when he threw the second one, he had already cut
back into the yard." (v6p450)

Poe: "[Benavides] told me [the suspect] was running out across this lawn.
He was unloading his pistol as he ran." (v7p68)

Hill: "Poe showed me a Winston cigarette package that contained three
spent jackets from shells that he said a citizen had pointed out to him
where the suspect had reloaded his gun and dropped these in he grass."
(v7p48-49) So it would seem that the gunman was carrying a revolver: The
shells were manually discarded.

And yet, at 1:41, Hill radioed that the "shells at the scene indicate that
the suspect is armed with an automatic 38, rather than a pistol." (DPD
radio logs)

First desperate move: Hill denied, at the Commission hearings, that he was
the one who had sent the transmission: "That probably is R.D. Stringer".
(v7p57) (Stringer was not called to testify.) Second desperate move: And
DPD transcriber Sgt. G.D. Henslee attributed the transmission to
"Westbrook-Batchelor". (v21p397) (Neither officer testified re the
transmission.) Much later, Hill finally took responsibility for it: "In a
1986 interview, Hill admitted being the cop behind the strange
broadcast...." (With Malice, p260)

But as far back as 1964, the groundwork was being laid in case future
investigators looked at future transcriptions of the DPD radio logs--for
instance, the August 11, 1964 FBI transcription, which properly appended
"Sergeant G. Hill" to the transmission. Benavides also testified that "One
of [the shells] went down inside of a bush, and the other one was by the
bush"--they were, he says, pretty close together, as shells automatically
ejected would have been. The fact that there were shells on the ground, in
the first place, and, in the second, that they were found near each other,
would indicate, for any future investigation, that they were from an
automatic, and explained the "automatic" on the radio.

Third desperate move: Supporting this version of the story was also the
fact that Hill supposedly saw, as he testified, only the cigarette
package, and not the shells inside it. Thus the only possible explanation
of that "automatic" seemed to be that the shells were found (a) on the
ground and (b) close together. The shells themselves, supposedly, then,
did not figure in the 1:41 transmission. Hill hadn't seen them.

Hill and his transmission were insulated by Benavides' testimony, by
Henslee's false transcription, and by the ingenious employment of the
cigarette package. How could he possibly be undone? How? Well, he done
undid himself.

"Asked how he determined that the shells were 38 caliber, Hill replied,
'You can tell that from the shell. Thirty-eight's stamped on the bottom of
it. I looked on the bottom'." (With Malice p261, author's 1986 interview
of Hill) All that insulation, up in smoke. All three layers of separation
between Hill and the shells--poof!

But why was such care taken to separate Hill from shells? Dale Myers goes
on to explain: "Hill's explanation compounds the problem. For if true,
Hill would have seen additional stamp impressions. Thirty-eight automatic
cartridges are traditionally marked, '38 AUTO'...." (p261)

Myers then goes on to distract his readers from the "38" issue by
returning to the relatively simple "automatic" issue: "There is no
indication that Hill ever studied the shells to the degree that his later
claims suggest. Hill's explanation that the radio transmission describing
the shells as "automatics" was based on an incorrect assumption is
probably very close to the truth." (p261)

In other words, Myers has no explanation, other than Hill's, for the "38".
He does not even attempt one. His only recourse is to distract, distract.
So, as of now, Hill's explanation--the only one we have, so far, in some
57 yea= rs--stands: He saw "38" "on the bottom" of the shells. His three
layers of separation couldn't keep him from "38 AUTO"....

dcw

[John Corbett]

Post by donald willis
In which Sgt. Hill shoots himself in the foot with an automatic
Witness Domingo Benavides, DPD Patrolman Joe M. Poe, and DPD Sgt. Gerald
Hill were in perfect agreement at the Warren Commission hearings.
Benavides: "[The suspect] had just got back to the sidewalk when he threw
he first [shell], and when he threw the second one, he had already cut
back into the yard." (v6p450)
Poe: "[Benavides] told me [the suspect] was running out across this lawn.
He was unloading his pistol as he ran." (v7p68)
Hill: "Poe showed me a Winston cigarette package that contained three
spent jackets from shells that he said a citizen had pointed out to him
where the suspect had reloaded his gun and dropped these in he grass."
(v7p48-49) So it would seem that the gunman was carrying a revolver: The
shells were manually discarded.
And yet, at 1:41, Hill radioed that the "shells at the scene indicate that
the suspect is armed with an automatic 38, rather than a pistol." (DPD
radio logs)
First desperate move: Hill denied, at the Commission hearings, that he was
the one who had sent the transmission: "That probably is R.D. Stringer".
(v7p57) (Stringer was not called to testify.) Second desperate move: And
DPD transcriber Sgt. G.D. Henslee attributed the transmission to
"Westbrook-Batchelor". (v21p397) (Neither officer testified re the
transmission.) Much later, Hill finally took responsibility for it: "In a
1986 interview, Hill admitted being the cop behind the strange
broadcast...." (With Malice, p260)
But as far back as 1964, the groundwork was being laid in case future
investigators looked at future transcriptions of the DPD radio logs--for
instance, the August 11, 1964 FBI transcription, which properly appended
"Sergeant G. Hill" to the transmission. Benavides also testified that "One
of [the shells] went down inside of a bush, and the other one was by the
bush"--they were, he says, pretty close together, as shells automatically
ejected would have been. The fact that there were shells on the ground, in
the first place, and, in the second, that they were found near each other,
would indicate, for any future investigation, that they were from an
automatic, and explained the "automatic" on the radio.
Third desperate move: Supporting this version of the story was also the
fact that Hill supposedly saw, as he testified, only the cigarette
package, and not the shells inside it. Thus the only possible explanation
of that "automatic" seemed to be that the shells were found (a) on the
ground and (b) close together. The shells themselves, supposedly, then,
did not figure in the 1:41 transmission. Hill hadn't seen them.
Hill and his transmission were insulated by Benavides' testimony, by
Henslee's false transcription, and by the ingenious employment of the
cigarette package. How could he possibly be undone? How? Well, he done
undid himself.
"Asked how he determined that the shells were 38 caliber, Hill replied,
'You can tell that from the shell. Thirty-eight's stamped on the bottom of
it. I looked on the bottom'." (With Malice p261, author's 1986 interview
of Hill) All that insulation, up in smoke. All three layers of separation
between Hill and the shells--poof!
But why was such care taken to separate Hill from shells? Dale Myers goes
on to explain: "Hill's explanation compounds the problem. For if true,
Hill would have seen additional stamp impressions. Thirty-eight automatic
cartridges are traditionally marked, '38 AUTO'...." (p261)
Myers then goes on to distract his readers from the "38" issue by
returning to the relatively simple "automatic" issue: "There is no
indication that Hill ever studied the shells to the degree that his later
claims suggest. Hill's explanation that the radio transmission describing
the shells as "automatics" was based on an incorrect assumption is
probably very close to the truth." (p261)
In other words, Myers has no explanation, other than Hill's, for the "38".
He does not even attempt one. His only recourse is to distract, distract.
So, as of now, Hill's explanation--the only one we have, so far, in some
57 yea rs--stands: He saw "38" "on the bottom" of the shells. His three
layers of separation couldn't keep him from "38 AUTO"....

All you have demonstrated is that Hill made a mistake in assuming the
gunman had fired an automatic and then tried to cover up his mistake.
People do that all the time. The fact that every witness who observed the
gunman as he passed from the front yard to the side yard said he was
unloading the shells as he went indicates the gun wasn't an automatic. He
wouldn't have to unload shells from an automatic. They eject themselves
and they do that at the location the gun is fired. They would not have
landed at the location whether the shells were found. ALL the eyewitnesses
indicated the gunman had a revolver and all the recovered shells were
fired by Oswald's revolver yet you choose to discard all of that and
fixate instead on an erroneous radio transmission by Hill. Once again, you
focus on all the wrong things.

[donald willis]

Post by John Corbett

Post by donald willis
In which Sgt. Hill shoots himself in the foot with an automatic
Witness Domingo Benavides, DPD Patrolman Joe M. Poe, and DPD Sgt. Gerald
Hill were in perfect agreement at the Warren Commission hearings.
Benavides: "[The suspect] had just got back to the sidewalk when he threw
he first [shell], and when he threw the second one, he had already cut
back into the yard." (v6p450)
Poe: "[Benavides] told me [the suspect] was running out across this lawn.
He was unloading his pistol as he ran." (v7p68)
Hill: "Poe showed me a Winston cigarette package that contained three
spent jackets from shells that he said a citizen had pointed out to him
where the suspect had reloaded his gun and dropped these in he grass."
(v7p48-49) So it would seem that the gunman was carrying a revolver: The
shells were manually discarded.
And yet, at 1:41, Hill radioed that the "shells at the scene indicate that
the suspect is armed with an automatic 38, rather than a pistol." (DPD
radio logs)
First desperate move: Hill denied, at the Commission hearings, that he was
the one who had sent the transmission: "That probably is R.D. Stringer".
(v7p57) (Stringer was not called to testify.) Second desperate move: And
DPD transcriber Sgt. G.D. Henslee attributed the transmission to
"Westbrook-Batchelor". (v21p397) (Neither officer testified re the
transmission.) Much later, Hill finally took responsibility for it: "In a
1986 interview, Hill admitted being the cop behind the strange
broadcast...." (With Malice, p260)
But as far back as 1964, the groundwork was being laid in case future
investigators looked at future transcriptions of the DPD radio logs--for
instance, the August 11, 1964 FBI transcription, which properly appended
"Sergeant G. Hill" to the transmission. Benavides also testified that "One
of [the shells] went down inside of a bush, and the other one was by the
bush"--they were, he says, pretty close together, as shells automatically
ejected would have been. The fact that there were shells on the ground, in
the first place, and, in the second, that they were found near each other,
would indicate, for any future investigation, that they were from an
automatic, and explained the "automatic" on the radio.
Third desperate move: Supporting this version of the story was also the
fact that Hill supposedly saw, as he testified, only the cigarette
package, and not the shells inside it. Thus the only possible explanation
of that "automatic" seemed to be that the shells were found (a) on the
ground and (b) close together. The shells themselves, supposedly, then,
did not figure in the 1:41 transmission. Hill hadn't seen them.
Hill and his transmission were insulated by Benavides' testimony, by
Henslee's false transcription, and by the ingenious employment of the
cigarette package. How could he possibly be undone? How? Well, he done
undid himself.
"Asked how he determined that the shells were 38 caliber, Hill replied,
'You can tell that from the shell. Thirty-eight's stamped on the bottom of
it. I looked on the bottom'." (With Malice p261, author's 1986 interview
of Hill) All that insulation, up in smoke. All three layers of separation
between Hill and the shells--poof!
But why was such care taken to separate Hill from shells? Dale Myers goes
on to explain: "Hill's explanation compounds the problem. For if true,
Hill would have seen additional stamp impressions. Thirty-eight automatic
cartridges are traditionally marked, '38 AUTO'...." (p261)
Myers then goes on to distract his readers from the "38" issue by
returning to the relatively simple "automatic" issue: "There is no
indication that Hill ever studied the shells to the degree that his later
claims suggest. Hill's explanation that the radio transmission describing
the shells as "automatics" was based on an incorrect assumption is
probably very close to the truth." (p261)
In other words, Myers has no explanation, other than Hill's, for the "38".
He does not even attempt one. His only recourse is to distract, distract.
So, as of now, Hill's explanation--the only one we have, so far, in some
57 yea rs--stands: He saw "38" "on the bottom" of the shells. His three
layers of separation couldn't keep him from "38 AUTO"....

All you have demonstrated is that Hill made a mistake in assuming the
gunman had fired an automatic and then tried to cover up his mistake.
People do that all the time. The fact that every witness who observed the
gunman as he passed from the front yard to the side yard said he was
unloading the shells as he went indicates the gun wasn't an automatic. He
wouldn't have to unload shells from an automatic. They eject themselves
and they do that at the location the gun is fired. They would not have
landed at the location whether the shells were found. ALL the eyewitnesses
indicated the gunman had a revolver and all the recovered shells were
fired by Oswald's revolver yet you choose to discard all of that and
fixate instead on an erroneous radio transmission by Hill. Once again, you
focus on all the wrong things.

And once again you completely ignore what I actually wrote. In fact,
nothing you say indicates that you even read the post. Just brought out
the old rubber stamp again....

dcw

[John Corbett]

Post by John Corbett

Post by donald willis
In which Sgt. Hill shoots himself in the foot with an automatic
Witness Domingo Benavides, DPD Patrolman Joe M. Poe, and DPD Sgt. Gerald
Hill were in perfect agreement at the Warren Commission hearings.
Benavides: "[The suspect] had just got back to the sidewalk when he threw
he first [shell], and when he threw the second one, he had already cut
back into the yard." (v6p450)
Poe: "[Benavides] told me [the suspect] was running out across this lawn.
He was unloading his pistol as he ran." (v7p68)
Hill: "Poe showed me a Winston cigarette package that contained three
spent jackets from shells that he said a citizen had pointed out to him
where the suspect had reloaded his gun and dropped these in he grass."
(v7p48-49) So it would seem that the gunman was carrying a revolver: The
shells were manually discarded.
And yet, at 1:41, Hill radioed that the "shells at the scene indicate that
the suspect is armed with an automatic 38, rather than a pistol." (DPD
radio logs)
First desperate move: Hill denied, at the Commission hearings, that he was
the one who had sent the transmission: "That probably is R.D. Stringer".
(v7p57) (Stringer was not called to testify.) Second desperate move: And
DPD transcriber Sgt. G.D. Henslee attributed the transmission to
"Westbrook-Batchelor". (v21p397) (Neither officer testified re the
transmission.) Much later, Hill finally took responsibility for it: "In a
1986 interview, Hill admitted being the cop behind the strange
broadcast...." (With Malice, p260)
But as far back as 1964, the groundwork was being laid in case future
investigators looked at future transcriptions of the DPD radio logs--for
instance, the August 11, 1964 FBI transcription, which properly appended
"Sergeant G. Hill" to the transmission. Benavides also testified that "One
of [the shells] went down inside of a bush, and the other one was by the
bush"--they were, he says, pretty close together, as shells automatically
ejected would have been. The fact that there were shells on the ground, in
the first place, and, in the second, that they were found near each other,
would indicate, for any future investigation, that they were from an
automatic, and explained the "automatic" on the radio.
Third desperate move: Supporting this version of the story was also the
fact that Hill supposedly saw, as he testified, only the cigarette
package, and not the shells inside it. Thus the only possible explanation
of that "automatic" seemed to be that the shells were found (a) on the
ground and (b) close together. The shells themselves, supposedly, then,
did not figure in the 1:41 transmission. Hill hadn't seen them.
Hill and his transmission were insulated by Benavides' testimony, by
Henslee's false transcription, and by the ingenious employment of the
cigarette package. How could he possibly be undone? How? Well, he done
undid himself.
"Asked how he determined that the shells were 38 caliber, Hill replied,
'You can tell that from the shell. Thirty-eight's stamped on the bottom of
it. I looked on the bottom'." (With Malice p261, author's 1986 interview
of Hill) All that insulation, up in smoke. All three layers of separation
between Hill and the shells--poof!
But why was such care taken to separate Hill from shells? Dale Myers goes
on to explain: "Hill's explanation compounds the problem. For if true,
Hill would have seen additional stamp impressions. Thirty-eight automatic
cartridges are traditionally marked, '38 AUTO'...." (p261)
Myers then goes on to distract his readers from the "38" issue by
returning to the relatively simple "automatic" issue: "There is no
indication that Hill ever studied the shells to the degree that his later
claims suggest. Hill's explanation that the radio transmission describing
the shells as "automatics" was based on an incorrect assumption is
probably very close to the truth." (p261)
In other words, Myers has no explanation, other than Hill's, for the "38".
He does not even attempt one. His only recourse is to distract, distract.
So, as of now, Hill's explanation--the only one we have, so far, in some
57 yea rs--stands: He saw "38" "on the bottom" of the shells. His three
layers of separation couldn't keep him from "38 AUTO"....

All you have demonstrated is that Hill made a mistake in assuming the
gunman had fired an automatic and then tried to cover up his mistake.
People do that all the time. The fact that every witness who observed the
gunman as he passed from the front yard to the side yard said he was
unloading the shells as he went indicates the gun wasn't an automatic. He
wouldn't have to unload shells from an automatic. They eject themselves
and they do that at the location the gun is fired. They would not have
landed at the location whether the shells were found. ALL the eyewitnesses
indicated the gunman had a revolver and all the recovered shells were
fired by Oswald's revolver yet you choose to discard all of that and
fixate instead on an erroneous radio transmission by Hill. Once again, you
focus on all the wrong things.

And once again you completely ignore what I actually wrote. In fact,
nothing you say indicates that you even read the post. Just brought out
the old rubber stamp again....

I have no idea where you are trying to go with this. You have identified
an anomaly, Hill's erroneous report that Tippit's shooter used an
automatic. You have identified a few minor discrepancies among the
witnesses who saw Oswald fleeing the scene. You have offered no cogent
explanation for how all of this fits into a framing of Oswald for Tippit's
murder. You think the existence of these discrepancies alone is evidence
of a frame up without every explaining the hows and whys that indicate
Oswald was framed.

Why don't you spell out why you think these anomalies indicate Oswald was
frame. Let's see if you can put it all together into a scenario that makes
some sense.

[donald willis]

Post by John Corbett

Post by John Corbett

Post by donald willis
In which Sgt. Hill shoots himself in the foot with an automatic
Witness Domingo Benavides, DPD Patrolman Joe M. Poe, and DPD Sgt. Gerald
Hill were in perfect agreement at the Warren Commission hearings.
Benavides: "[The suspect] had just got back to the sidewalk when he threw
he first [shell], and when he threw the second one, he had already cut
back into the yard." (v6p450)
Poe: "[Benavides] told me [the suspect] was running out across this lawn.
He was unloading his pistol as he ran." (v7p68)
Hill: "Poe showed me a Winston cigarette package that contained three
spent jackets from shells that he said a citizen had pointed out to him
where the suspect had reloaded his gun and dropped these in he grass."
(v7p48-49) So it would seem that the gunman was carrying a revolver: The
shells were manually discarded.
And yet, at 1:41, Hill radioed that the "shells at the scene indicate that
the suspect is armed with an automatic 38, rather than a pistol." (DPD
radio logs)
First desperate move: Hill denied, at the Commission hearings, that he was
the one who had sent the transmission: "That probably is R.D. Stringer".
(v7p57) (Stringer was not called to testify.) Second desperate move: And
DPD transcriber Sgt. G.D. Henslee attributed the transmission to
"Westbrook-Batchelor". (v21p397) (Neither officer testified re the
transmission.) Much later, Hill finally took responsibility for it: "In a
1986 interview, Hill admitted being the cop behind the strange
broadcast...." (With Malice, p260)
But as far back as 1964, the groundwork was being laid in case future
investigators looked at future transcriptions of the DPD radio logs--for
instance, the August 11, 1964 FBI transcription, which properly appended
"Sergeant G. Hill" to the transmission. Benavides also testified that "One
of [the shells] went down inside of a bush, and the other one was by the
bush"--they were, he says, pretty close together, as shells automatically
ejected would have been. The fact that there were shells on the ground, in
the first place, and, in the second, that they were found near each other,
would indicate, for any future investigation, that they were from an
automatic, and explained the "automatic" on the radio.
Third desperate move: Supporting this version of the story was also the
fact that Hill supposedly saw, as he testified, only the cigarette
package, and not the shells inside it. Thus the only possible explanation
of that "automatic" seemed to be that the shells were found (a) on the
ground and (b) close together. The shells themselves, supposedly, then,
did not figure in the 1:41 transmission. Hill hadn't seen them.
Hill and his transmission were insulated by Benavides' testimony, by
Henslee's false transcription, and by the ingenious employment of the
cigarette package. How could he possibly be undone? How? Well, he done
undid himself.
"Asked how he determined that the shells were 38 caliber, Hill replied,
'You can tell that from the shell. Thirty-eight's stamped on the bottom of
it. I looked on the bottom'." (With Malice p261, author's 1986 interview
of Hill) All that insulation, up in smoke. All three layers of separation
between Hill and the shells--poof!
But why was such care taken to separate Hill from shells? Dale Myers goes
on to explain: "Hill's explanation compounds the problem. For if true,
Hill would have seen additional stamp impressions. Thirty-eight automatic
cartridges are traditionally marked, '38 AUTO'...." (p261)
Myers then goes on to distract his readers from the "38" issue by
returning to the relatively simple "automatic" issue: "There is no
indication that Hill ever studied the shells to the degree that his later
claims suggest. Hill's explanation that the radio transmission describing
the shells as "automatics" was based on an incorrect assumption is
probably very close to the truth." (p261)
In other words, Myers has no explanation, other than Hill's, for the "38".
He does not even attempt one. His only recourse is to distract, distract.
So, as of now, Hill's explanation--the only one we have, so far, in some
57 yea rs--stands: He saw "38" "on the bottom" of the shells. His three
layers of separation couldn't keep him from "38 AUTO"....

All you have demonstrated is that Hill made a mistake in assuming the
gunman had fired an automatic and then tried to cover up his mistake.
People do that all the time. The fact that every witness who observed the
gunman as he passed from the front yard to the side yard said he was
unloading the shells as he went indicates the gun wasn't an automatic. He
wouldn't have to unload shells from an automatic. They eject themselves
and they do that at the location the gun is fired. They would not have
landed at the location whether the shells were found. ALL the eyewitnesses
indicated the gunman had a revolver and all the recovered shells were
fired by Oswald's revolver yet you choose to discard all of that and
fixate instead on an erroneous radio transmission by Hill. Once again, you
focus on all the wrong things.

And once again you completely ignore what I actually wrote. In fact,
nothing you say indicates that you even read the post. Just brought out
the old rubber stamp again....

I have no idea where you are trying to go with this. You have identified
an anomaly, Hill's erroneous report that Tippit's shooter used an
automatic.

I've done more than that. Wriggle out of the only explanation ever given
re that "38" in the transmission. Hank tries to do that at the Nuthouse,
but in order to so do he has to make one big assumption....

You have identified a few minor discrepancies among the

Post by John Corbett
witnesses who saw Oswald fleeing the scene. You have offered no cogent
explanation for how all of this fits into a framing of Oswald for Tippit's
murder. You think the existence of these discrepancies alone is evidence
of a frame up without every explaining the hows and whys that indicate
Oswald was framed.
Why don't you spell out why you think these anomalies indicate Oswald was
frame. Let's see if you can put it all together into a scenario that makes
some sense.

Funny! Then you can ignore that, too!

dcw

[John Corbett]

Post by John Corbett

Post by John Corbett

Post by donald willis
In which Sgt. Hill shoots himself in the foot with an automatic
Witness Domingo Benavides, DPD Patrolman Joe M. Poe, and DPD Sgt. Gerald
Hill were in perfect agreement at the Warren Commission hearings.
Benavides: "[The suspect] had just got back to the sidewalk when he threw
he first [shell], and when he threw the second one, he had already cut
back into the yard." (v6p450)
Poe: "[Benavides] told me [the suspect] was running out across this lawn.
He was unloading his pistol as he ran." (v7p68)
Hill: "Poe showed me a Winston cigarette package that contained three
spent jackets from shells that he said a citizen had pointed out to him
where the suspect had reloaded his gun and dropped these in he grass."
(v7p48-49) So it would seem that the gunman was carrying a revolver: The
shells were manually discarded.
And yet, at 1:41, Hill radioed that the "shells at the scene indicate that
the suspect is armed with an automatic 38, rather than a pistol." (DPD
radio logs)
First desperate move: Hill denied, at the Commission hearings, that he was
the one who had sent the transmission: "That probably is R.D. Stringer".
(v7p57) (Stringer was not called to testify.) Second desperate move: And
DPD transcriber Sgt. G.D. Henslee attributed the transmission to
"Westbrook-Batchelor". (v21p397) (Neither officer testified re the
transmission.) Much later, Hill finally took responsibility for it: "In a
1986 interview, Hill admitted being the cop behind the strange
broadcast...." (With Malice, p260)
But as far back as 1964, the groundwork was being laid in case future
investigators looked at future transcriptions of the DPD radio logs--for
instance, the August 11, 1964 FBI transcription, which properly appended
"Sergeant G. Hill" to the transmission. Benavides also testified that "One
of [the shells] went down inside of a bush, and the other one was by the
bush"--they were, he says, pretty close together, as shells automatically
ejected would have been. The fact that there were shells on the ground, in
the first place, and, in the second, that they were found near each other,
would indicate, for any future investigation, that they were from an
automatic, and explained the "automatic" on the radio.
Third desperate move: Supporting this version of the story was also the
fact that Hill supposedly saw, as he testified, only the cigarette
package, and not the shells inside it. Thus the only possible explanation
of that "automatic" seemed to be that the shells were found (a) on the
ground and (b) close together. The shells themselves, supposedly, then,
did not figure in the 1:41 transmission. Hill hadn't seen them.
Hill and his transmission were insulated by Benavides' testimony, by
Henslee's false transcription, and by the ingenious employment of the
cigarette package. How could he possibly be undone? How? Well, he done
undid himself.
"Asked how he determined that the shells were 38 caliber, Hill replied,
'You can tell that from the shell. Thirty-eight's stamped on the bottom of
it. I looked on the bottom'." (With Malice p261, author's 1986 interview
of Hill) All that insulation, up in smoke. All three layers of separation
between Hill and the shells--poof!
But why was such care taken to separate Hill from shells? Dale Myers goes
on to explain: "Hill's explanation compounds the problem. For if true,
Hill would have seen additional stamp impressions. Thirty-eight automatic
cartridges are traditionally marked, '38 AUTO'...." (p261)
Myers then goes on to distract his readers from the "38" issue by
returning to the relatively simple "automatic" issue: "There is no
indication that Hill ever studied the shells to the degree that his later
claims suggest. Hill's explanation that the radio transmission describing
the shells as "automatics" was based on an incorrect assumption is
probably very close to the truth." (p261)
In other words, Myers has no explanation, other than Hill's, for the "38".
He does not even attempt one. His only recourse is to distract, distract.
So, as of now, Hill's explanation--the only one we have, so far, in some
57 yea rs--stands: He saw "38" "on the bottom" of the shells. His three
layers of separation couldn't keep him from "38 AUTO"....

All you have demonstrated is that Hill made a mistake in assuming the
gunman had fired an automatic and then tried to cover up his mistake.
People do that all the time. The fact that every witness who observed the
gunman as he passed from the front yard to the side yard said he was
unloading the shells as he went indicates the gun wasn't an automatic. He
wouldn't have to unload shells from an automatic. They eject themselves
and they do that at the location the gun is fired. They would not have
landed at the location whether the shells were found. ALL the eyewitnesses
indicated the gunman had a revolver and all the recovered shells were
fired by Oswald's revolver yet you choose to discard all of that and
fixate instead on an erroneous radio transmission by Hill. Once again, you
focus on all the wrong things.

And once again you completely ignore what I actually wrote. In fact,
nothing you say indicates that you even read the post. Just brought out
the old rubber stamp again....

I have no idea where you are trying to go with this. You have identified
an anomaly, Hill's erroneous report that Tippit's shooter used an
automatic.

I've done more than that. Wriggle out of the only explanation ever given
re that "38" in the transmission. Hank tries to do that at the Nuthouse,
but in order to so do he has to make one big assumption....

What you are doing can't even be described as making a mountain out of a
mole hill. It's more like making mole hill out of an ant hill. Even that
is being generous. Mole hills and ant hills have a purpose.

You have identified a few minor discrepancies among the

Post by John Corbett
witnesses who saw Oswald fleeing the scene. You have offered no cogent
explanation for how all of this fits into a framing of Oswald for Tippit's
murder. You think the existence of these discrepancies alone is evidence
of a frame up without every explaining the hows and whys that indicate
Oswald was framed.
Why don't you spell out why you think these anomalies indicate Oswald was
frame. Let's see if you can put it all together into a scenario that makes
some sense.

Funny! Then you can ignore that, too!

So you have no explanation. It's easy to ignore something that doesn't
exist.

[Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon)]

Post by John Corbett

Post by John Corbett

Post by donald willis
In which Sgt. Hill shoots himself in the foot with an automatic
Witness Domingo Benavides, DPD Patrolman Joe M. Poe, and DPD Sgt. Gerald
Hill were in perfect agreement at the Warren Commission hearings.
Benavides: "[The suspect] had just got back to the sidewalk when he threw
he first [shell], and when he threw the second one, he had already cut
back into the yard." (v6p450)
Poe: "[Benavides] told me [the suspect] was running out across this lawn.
He was unloading his pistol as he ran." (v7p68)
Hill: "Poe showed me a Winston cigarette package that contained three
spent jackets from shells that he said a citizen had pointed out to him
where the suspect had reloaded his gun and dropped these in he grass."
(v7p48-49) So it would seem that the gunman was carrying a revolver: The
shells were manually discarded.
And yet, at 1:41, Hill radioed that the "shells at the scene indicate that
the suspect is armed with an automatic 38, rather than a pistol." (DPD
radio logs)
First desperate move: Hill denied, at the Commission hearings, that he was
the one who had sent the transmission: "That probably is R.D. Stringer".
(v7p57) (Stringer was not called to testify.) Second desperate move: And
DPD transcriber Sgt. G.D. Henslee attributed the transmission to
"Westbrook-Batchelor". (v21p397) (Neither officer testified re the
transmission.) Much later, Hill finally took responsibility for it: "In a
1986 interview, Hill admitted being the cop behind the strange
broadcast...." (With Malice, p260)
But as far back as 1964, the groundwork was being laid in case future
investigators looked at future transcriptions of the DPD radio logs--for
instance, the August 11, 1964 FBI transcription, which properly appended
"Sergeant G. Hill" to the transmission. Benavides also testified that "One
of [the shells] went down inside of a bush, and the other one was by the
bush"--they were, he says, pretty close together, as shells automatically
ejected would have been. The fact that there were shells on the ground, in
the first place, and, in the second, that they were found near each other,
would indicate, for any future investigation, that they were from an
automatic, and explained the "automatic" on the radio.
Third desperate move: Supporting this version of the story was also the
fact that Hill supposedly saw, as he testified, only the cigarette
package, and not the shells inside it. Thus the only possible explanation
of that "automatic" seemed to be that the shells were found (a) on the
ground and (b) close together. The shells themselves, supposedly, then,
did not figure in the 1:41 transmission. Hill hadn't seen them.
Hill and his transmission were insulated by Benavides' testimony, by
Henslee's false transcription, and by the ingenious employment of the
cigarette package. How could he possibly be undone? How? Well, he done
undid himself.
"Asked how he determined that the shells were 38 caliber, Hill replied,
'You can tell that from the shell. Thirty-eight's stamped on the bottom of
it. I looked on the bottom'." (With Malice p261, author's 1986 interview
of Hill) All that insulation, up in smoke. All three layers of separation
between Hill and the shells--poof!
But why was such care taken to separate Hill from shells? Dale Myers goes
on to explain: "Hill's explanation compounds the problem. For if true,
Hill would have seen additional stamp impressions. Thirty-eight automatic
cartridges are traditionally marked, '38 AUTO'...." (p261)
Myers then goes on to distract his readers from the "38" issue by
returning to the relatively simple "automatic" issue: "There is no
indication that Hill ever studied the shells to the degree that his later
claims suggest. Hill's explanation that the radio transmission describing
the shells as "automatics" was based on an incorrect assumption is
probably very close to the truth." (p261)
In other words, Myers has no explanation, other than Hill's, for the "38".
He does not even attempt one. His only recourse is to distract, distract.
So, as of now, Hill's explanation--the only one we have, so far, in some
57 yea rs--stands: He saw "38" "on the bottom" of the shells. His three
layers of separation couldn't keep him from "38 AUTO"....

All you have demonstrated is that Hill made a mistake in assuming the
gunman had fired an automatic and then tried to cover up his mistake.
People do that all the time. The fact that every witness who observed the
gunman as he passed from the front yard to the side yard said he was
unloading the shells as he went indicates the gun wasn't an automatic. He
wouldn't have to unload shells from an automatic. They eject themselves
and they do that at the location the gun is fired. They would not have
landed at the location whether the shells were found. ALL the eyewitnesses
indicated the gunman had a revolver and all the recovered shells were
fired by Oswald's revolver yet you choose to discard all of that and
fixate instead on an erroneous radio transmission by Hill. Once again, you
focus on all the wrong things.

And once again you completely ignore what I actually wrote. In fact,
nothing you say indicates that you even read the post. Just brought out
the old rubber stamp again....

I have no idea where you are trying to go with this. You have identified
an anomaly, Hill's erroneous report that Tippit's shooter used an
automatic.

I've done more than that. Wriggle out of the only explanation ever given
re that "38" in the transmission. Hank tries to do that at the Nuthouse,
but in order to so do he has to make one big assumption....

What assumption is that, Don? That the shells aren't swapped? No, that's
the default position.

You're the one making the big assumption they were swapped. Your
assumption is the unproven and assumed one. The shells are part of the
hard evidence and you don't get to just assume any evidence pointing to
Oswald was planted to frame him, but that's exactly what you're doing by
concentrating on the discrepancies between the eyewitness statements and
ignoring where they agree and additionally what the hard evidence tells
us.

Numerous witnesses agree a revolver was used and emptied by the gunman as
he left the scene. The hard evidence tells us the shooter was Oswald, as
the shells in evidence match the revolver taken off Oswald in the theatre.

Numerous witnesses agree Oswald was the shooter, as they picked Oswald out
of a lineup.

Keep pretending exactly where the shells were discarded/recovered is
important.

It's not.

You have identified a few minor discrepancies among the

Post by John Corbett
witnesses who saw Oswald fleeing the scene. You have offered no cogent
explanation for how all of this fits into a framing of Oswald for Tippit's
murder. You think the existence of these discrepancies alone is evidence
of a frame up without every explaining the hows and whys that indicate
Oswald was framed.
Why don't you spell out why you think these anomalies indicate Oswald was
frame. Let's see if you can put it all together into a scenario that makes
some sense.

Funny! Then you can ignore that, too!
dcw

[Bud]

Post by Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon)

Post by John Corbett

Post by John Corbett

Post by donald willis
In which Sgt. Hill shoots himself in the foot with an automatic
Witness Domingo Benavides, DPD Patrolman Joe M. Poe, and DPD Sgt. Gerald
Hill were in perfect agreement at the Warren Commission hearings.
Benavides: "[The suspect] had just got back to the sidewalk when he threw
he first [shell], and when he threw the second one, he had already cut
back into the yard." (v6p450)
Poe: "[Benavides] told me [the suspect] was running out across this lawn.
He was unloading his pistol as he ran." (v7p68)
Hill: "Poe showed me a Winston cigarette package that contained three
spent jackets from shells that he said a citizen had pointed out to him
where the suspect had reloaded his gun and dropped these in he grass."
(v7p48-49) So it would seem that the gunman was carrying a revolver: The
shells were manually discarded.
And yet, at 1:41, Hill radioed that the "shells at the scene indicate that
the suspect is armed with an automatic 38, rather than a pistol." (DPD
radio logs)
First desperate move: Hill denied, at the Commission hearings, that he was
the one who had sent the transmission: "That probably is R.D. Stringer".
(v7p57) (Stringer was not called to testify.) Second desperate move: And
DPD transcriber Sgt. G.D. Henslee attributed the transmission to
"Westbrook-Batchelor". (v21p397) (Neither officer testified re the
transmission.) Much later, Hill finally took responsibility for it: "In a
1986 interview, Hill admitted being the cop behind the strange
broadcast...." (With Malice, p260)
But as far back as 1964, the groundwork was being laid in case future
investigators looked at future transcriptions of the DPD radio logs--for
instance, the August 11, 1964 FBI transcription, which properly appended
"Sergeant G. Hill" to the transmission. Benavides also testified that "One
of [the shells] went down inside of a bush, and the other one was by the
bush"--they were, he says, pretty close together, as shells automatically
ejected would have been. The fact that there were shells on the ground, in
the first place, and, in the second, that they were found near each other,
would indicate, for any future investigation, that they were from an
automatic, and explained the "automatic" on the radio.
Third desperate move: Supporting this version of the story was also the
fact that Hill supposedly saw, as he testified, only the cigarette
package, and not the shells inside it. Thus the only possible explanation
of that "automatic" seemed to be that the shells were found (a) on the
ground and (b) close together. The shells themselves, supposedly, then,
did not figure in the 1:41 transmission. Hill hadn't seen them.
Hill and his transmission were insulated by Benavides' testimony, by
Henslee's false transcription, and by the ingenious employment of the
cigarette package. How could he possibly be undone? How? Well, he done
undid himself.
"Asked how he determined that the shells were 38 caliber, Hill replied,
'You can tell that from the shell. Thirty-eight's stamped on the bottom of
it. I looked on the bottom'." (With Malice p261, author's 1986 interview
of Hill) All that insulation, up in smoke. All three layers of separation
between Hill and the shells--poof!
But why was such care taken to separate Hill from shells? Dale Myers goes
on to explain: "Hill's explanation compounds the problem. For if true,
Hill would have seen additional stamp impressions. Thirty-eight automatic
cartridges are traditionally marked, '38 AUTO'...." (p261)
Myers then goes on to distract his readers from the "38" issue by
returning to the relatively simple "automatic" issue: "There is no
indication that Hill ever studied the shells to the degree that his later
claims suggest. Hill's explanation that the radio transmission describing
the shells as "automatics" was based on an incorrect assumption is
probably very close to the truth." (p261)
In other words, Myers has no explanation, other than Hill's, for the "38".
He does not even attempt one. His only recourse is to distract, distract.
So, as of now, Hill's explanation--the only one we have, so far, in some
57 yea rs--stands: He saw "38" "on the bottom" of the shells. His three
layers of separation couldn't keep him from "38 AUTO"....

All you have demonstrated is that Hill made a mistake in assuming the
gunman had fired an automatic and then tried to cover up his mistake.
People do that all the time. The fact that every witness who observed the
gunman as he passed from the front yard to the side yard said he was
unloading the shells as he went indicates the gun wasn't an automatic. He
wouldn't have to unload shells from an automatic. They eject themselves
and they do that at the location the gun is fired. They would not have
landed at the location whether the shells were found. ALL the eyewitnesses
indicated the gunman had a revolver and all the recovered shells were
fired by Oswald's revolver yet you choose to discard all of that and
fixate instead on an erroneous radio transmission by Hill. Once again, you
focus on all the wrong things.

And once again you completely ignore what I actually wrote. In fact,
nothing you say indicates that you even read the post. Just brought out
the old rubber stamp again....

I have no idea where you are trying to go with this. You have identified
an anomaly, Hill's erroneous report that Tippit's shooter used an
automatic.

I've done more than that. Wriggle out of the only explanation ever given
re that "38" in the transmission. Hank tries to do that at the Nuthouse,
but in order to so do he has to make one big assumption....

What assumption is that, Don?

Hank: Sgt. Hill "heard about .38 shells left at the scene and assumed the
automatic part because they were at the scene."
dcw: "Conveniently, you're forgetting the testimony of Hill, Poe, and
Benavides. All three testified that they had either seen or heard that the
suspect was throwing down shells as he left the scene. Throwing them down,
MANUALLY. Tell me how you "assume the automatic part" from that!"
In 1964, that was all we had, from the Hearings. How do you get from the
Hill/Poe/Benavides tale to "automatic 38"? According to that testimony,
shells were not just seen at the scene, but the gunman was seen THROWING
them down.

This alone makes it impossible that an automatic was used.

You assume that Hill "heard about .38 shells left at the scene". He
testified only that he heard about shells THROWN DOWN at the scene...

Did he hear about the throwing down before or after he went on the
radio?

That the shells aren't swapped? No, that's

Post by Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon)
the default position.
You're the one making the big assumption they were swapped. Your
assumption is the unproven and assumed one. The shells are part of the
hard evidence and you don't get to just assume any evidence pointing to
Oswald was planted to frame him, but that's exactly what you're doing by
concentrating on the discrepancies between the eyewitness statements and
ignoring where they agree and additionally what the hard evidence tells
us.
Numerous witnesses agree a revolver was used and emptied by the gunman as
he left the scene.

Yes, and one was Benavides, but his tale, told to Poe, who told it to
Hill, fails the DPD radio "auto 38" test. So scratch at least one of your
"numerous witnesses"....
The hard evidence tells us the shooter was Oswald, as

Post by Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon)
the shells in evidence match the revolver taken off Oswald in the theatre.
Numerous witnesses agree Oswald was the shooter, as they picked Oswald out
of a lineup.
Keep pretending exactly where the shells were discarded/recovered is
important.
It's not.

Certainly not if you think that facts are malleable....
dcw

[Bud]

Post by Bud

On Wednesday, April 7, 2021 CUT ene."

dcw: "Conveniently, you're forgetting the testimony of Hill, Poe, and
Benavides. All three testified that they had either seen or heard that the
suspect was throwing down shells as he left the scene. Throwing them down,
MANUALLY. Tell me how you "assume the automatic part" from that!"
In 1964, that was all we had, from the Hearings. How do you get from the
Hill/Poe/Benavides tale to "automatic 38"? According to that testimony,
shells were not just seen at the scene, but the gunman was seen THROWING
them down.

This alone makes it impossible that an automatic was used.

That "automatic 38" nullifies the testimony.

Wrong. The evidence nullifies the idea that an automatic was used.

Post by Bud

You assume that Hill "heard about .38 shells left at the scene". He
testified only that he heard about shells THROWN DOWN at the scene...

Did he hear about the throwing down before or after he went on the
radio?

Myers in "With Malice" quotes Benavides, "I guess [the cops] were going to
walk off & leave them, not knowing [the shells] were there." Myers
himself continues, "There is only one time period Benavides could be
referring to. At about 1:36pm, a posse of Dallas police officers left the
murder scene & drove to the Oak Cliff library...." (pp259, 260) So, yes,
according to Benavides & Myers, the former had several minutes to pass
that information on to officers. And it had to have been before 1:41, the
time of the Hill transmission, since Hill got the information from Poe,
who got it from Benavides.

So Hill could have heard that from witnesses that Oswald threw the
shells down after he made the "automatic" transmission.

dcw

[donald willis]

Post by Bud

Post by Bud

On Wednesday, April 7, 2021 CUT ene."

dcw: "Conveniently, you're forgetting the testimony of Hill, Poe, and
Benavides. All three testified that they had either seen or heard that the
suspect was throwing down shells as he left the scene. Throwing them down,
MANUALLY. Tell me how you "assume the automatic part" from that!"
In 1964, that was all we had, from the Hearings. How do you get from the
Hill/Poe/Benavides tale to "automatic 38"? According to that testimony,
shells were not just seen at the scene, but the gunman was seen THROWING
them down.

This alone makes it impossible that an automatic was used.

That "automatic 38" nullifies the testimony.

Wrong. The evidence nullifies the idea that an automatic was used.

Post by Bud

You assume that Hill "heard about .38 shells left at the scene". He
testified only that he heard about shells THROWN DOWN at the scene...

Did he hear about the throwing down before or after he went on the
radio?

Myers in "With Malice" quotes Benavides, "I guess [the cops] were going to
walk off & leave them, not knowing [the shells] were there." Myers
himself continues, "There is only one time period Benavides could be
referring to. At about 1:36pm, a posse of Dallas police officers left the
murder scene & drove to the Oak Cliff library...." (pp259, 260) So, yes,
according to Benavides & Myers, the former had several minutes to pass
that information on to officers. And it had to have been before 1:41, the
time of the Hill transmission, since Hill got the information from Poe,
who got it from Benavides.

So Hill could have heard that from witnesses that Oswald threw the
shells down after he made the "automatic" transmission.

dcw

No, Mr. Desperate. You forget that Hill lied to the Commission--he said
that someone else sent that transmission. It was only in the vacuum left
by that lie that the Benavides/Poe/Hill testimony could flourish. If it
had occurred the way you say that it "could have" Hill would have
testified to that effect. Instead, he lied.

dcw

[John Corbett]

Post by Bud

On Wednesday, April 7, 2021 CUT ene."

dcw: "Conveniently, you're forgetting the testimony of Hill, Poe, and
Benavides. All three testified that they had either seen or heard that the
suspect was throwing down shells as he left the scene. Throwing them down,
MANUALLY. Tell me how you "assume the automatic part" from that!"
In 1964, that was all we had, from the Hearings. How do you get from the
Hill/Poe/Benavides tale to "automatic 38"? According to that testimony,
shells were not just seen at the scene, but the gunman was seen THROWING
them down.

This alone makes it impossible that an automatic was used.

That "automatic 38" nullifies the testimony.

Wrong. The testimony nullifies the .38 automatic transmission. So does the
physical evidence and the location that evidence was found.