Putting the Gun in Oswald’s Hand

This is a companion piece to the earlier entitled Oswald’s Revolver.

Let’s talk about Captain Westbrook. Many researchers have implicated Captain Westbrook, so it makes sense to look at him.

Suppose that the gun was not handed to Oswald by TK or his accomplice, but was instead put into the melee by Captain Westbrook (or Gerald Hill). To accomplish this, TK or his accomplice would have had to give either of these two individuals the gun.

That is a weak link in the theory implicating Westbrook or Hill. Not only might they question who this individual was in giving them the gun, they would in a way implicate themselves as accessories to the murder of a fellow police officer, something I do not think they would do. Westbrook and Hill were Dallas natives, and they were police officers of long-standing in the Dallas community. I don’t think there’s a snowball’s chance in hell they would be connected to the murder of a local and fellow police officer. It makes much more sense if you are the architect of these two murders (JFK and JDT) to not involve either Hill or Westbrook in your grand plan. No, you would instead take advantage of their natural desire and inclination to catch Tippit’s killer.

Thus the following scenario makes more sense to me.

The Tippit killing occurs; the police officers naturally go to 10th and Patton and the surrounding milieu. The search begins. Meanwhile, TK and his accomplice drive down to the Texas Theater; the accomplice buys a ticket and walks up the the balcony and lays the gun down on the floor behind a seat. Or he walks into the bathroom and stashes it in a trashcan in the bathroom. Then he waits.

Around 1:40 to 1:50 PM, the cops show up. They make the arrest on Oswald (sans gun) then haul him down to the police station. While the police are making their arrest, the accomplice says to an officer, “Hey, I saw that guy (Oswald) stuff something in that trashcan while I was in the bathroom.” The gun is found and taken with Oswald down to the station.

When Oswald is brought before Fritz, he story of the two killing becomes more clear. The story starts to gel. Will Fritz (and I’m sure Henry Wade can’t be far behind) begins to think. He has a problem: the DPD and the City of Dallas look bad. He needs a life preserver. Sitting before him is this potential life preserver.

The only problem he has is that the gun that might match up with the shells isn’t in Oswald’s hand. He needs to get that gun in Oswald’s hand. Putting that gun in Oswald’s hand not only clinches the Tippit killing, it solves the JFK killing. Will Fritz begins to cinch the case. It works like this.

Oswald was at the TSBD.

Oswald’s rifle is found at the TSBD.

Oswald leaves the TSBD after the assassination.

Oswald lives in Oak Cliff.

Oswald was walking around Oak Cliff.

Tippit spots a man resembling the killer of JFK.

Oswald kills Tippit.

Oswald has the gun.

Oswald runs down to the Texas Theater.

Oswald is arrested.

The gun is retrieved.

It is shown that Oswald ordered the gun that killed Tippit and the rifle that killed JFK.

Case closed.

The problem is that the gun was not discovered in Oswald’s hand. What to do?

Fritz gets together with his officers and lays out the case. He tells them that they need to get that gun in Oswald’s hand at the time of arrest. And they need to do it PDQ. They don’t have the time to wait for ballistics and finding out who bought the gun. Why would this be? What’s the rush? What pressure is Will Fritz feeling? The pressure is coming from the politicians who want answers. They want the killer to JFK. They don’t give a damn about JD Tippit. Dallas is looking bad. They need JFK’s killer quick.

Will Fritz may be corrupt, but he isn’t stupid. He can string things together. Tippit was stopping someone who resembled the killer of JFK. That person killed Tippit with a gun. The shells from that gun are on the scene. That gun must be linked back to Lee Oswald now and not just in an ownership way. It must be found on his person. Of course, Will Fritz doesn’t know yet that Oswald is the owner and purchaser of the gun, and he doesn’t care. Nor does he know anything about the ballistic evidence. If he had known he wouldn’t have had to change the story. But he didn’t know.

And so the story was changed and now in order to save face for the city of Dallas and the DPD. A story was invented and rehearsed. A narrative was agreed upon. Testimony was suborned not only from the officers but from bystanders like George Applin.

Oswald threw a punch at Nick McDonald. Oswald had a gun. There was a struggle for the gun. The gun misfired (thus implicating Oswald even more). The gun was retrieved. Oswald was handcuffed. During this melee no officer ever mishandled Oswald.

Did it happen this way?

First, is the story plausible? Why not? Of course it could have happened. But did it happen. Let me try and show that this story is much more likely than the Warren Commission fable gifted to us.

One. Let’s begin with the hearing of a gun’s misfire.

George Applin says in his testimony that he heard the click of a gun. So did other officers. Did they? How loud can a misfire possibly be? George Applin was close enough to the arrest of Oswald (four feet?), but the movie, War is Hell, was still running even though the house lights were up. Movies have quite of bit of sound; war movies even more. Plus officers must be talking over each other as they attempt to arrest Oswald. Who can be sure that a clicking sound came from a gun or another source. How many times have you watched a movie in which a cell phone went off and you looked down at your own cell phone?

George Applin states that he saw Oswald’s gun? Really? How was this possible with a bevy of police officers surrounding Oswald from all sides. Maybe George Applin’s testimony was heavily coached. Maybe it was suborned with a little inducement. Read this?

Do you think it’s possible that the Dallas Police Department helped George Applin out with a legal problem. Maybe they told him his probation wouldn’t be revoked if he went along with the program.

Two: Oswald was reported as the aggressor in the initial encounter with Nick McDonald. Reportedly he either hit Nick McDonald with either his right or left hand; it’s not clear. Well, if Oswald struck Nick McDonald first and apparently with such force so as to knock his cap, then why does Nick McDonald not stagger backwards. And why do we not see sufficient evidence of swelling or bruising either on Nick McDonald’s forehead or Oswald’s hands. A forehead/nose is a hard thing to hit. It’s like a wall stud. People who punch walls regularly suffer a boxer’s fracture or at least some swelling. Here there is none. By the way, did anyone see any evidence of blood in Nick McDonald’s nose. He said it was bleeding.

Three: How does LHO suffer the mouse over his left eye? If no officer struck LHO, how does he get hit especially in light of LHO’s statement that a police officer hit him? What seems most likely is that Nick McDonald hit Oswald with a punch from his right fist to Oswald’s left eye. This would be consistent with Nick McDonald’s reenactment of him falling on top of Oswald with both leaning and falling to Oswald’s left. As people usually respond to a punch by raising the hands, LHO’s hands would be in the up position, not down by his side.

Four: Why are the officers approaching LHO with guns holstered? If they are searching for a man who just killed a cop, who they have been told has just killed the President, and who is presumed to be armed and dangerous, why are there guns holstered? Would you approach such a man in this way? Why not tell him to raise his hands with your gun out? Maybe you already knew that he didn’t have a gun? Maybe the gun had already been found?

Five: Why does one officer say: “Shoot the President, will you?” Hold on a second, I thought you guys were arresting someone who had just killed a police officer. How could you possibly have known that this individual had shot the President? This comment suggests to me that you officers had been coached or given knowledge that the suspect, LHO, had killed the President. It certainly wouldn’t be logical for you to conclude that on your own. You didn’t know that Oswald lived in Oak Cliff. You didn’t know that Oswald supposedly took a cab to his boarding house. Why would you suspect a citizen in Oak Cliff? And why this one? It’s not like Oswald’s description is that of the Jolly Green Giant. Anyone can walk down the street and find three or four guys who look like Oswald. How would you know that this person had anything to do with what transpired at the TSBD? You haven’t identified the individual. You are in the process of arresting him. How do you even know that he fits the description of the person who shot John Kennedy? The theater lights are dim. You can’t possibly get a good view of him. What seems likely is that someone told you that this person shot John Kennedy.

Six: The cut on Nick McDonald’s face is more consistent with a cut from Oswald’s bracelet, not the sight on a gun. The edge of a bracelet might cut Nick McDonald’s cheek like it did; a gun sight (not sharp enough) would be unlikely to do so. If a gunsight could cut that easily you would hear complaints from shooters all the time about the sight cutting them. Furthermore, In Nick McDonald’s own recreation of the episode with Oswald, he left cheek is to the left of Oswald’s head. It would be unlikely for the gun to cut him like that. What manufacturer would sell such a gun?

Seven. Both Nick McDonald and Paul Bentley claim that they got their hand stuck between the hammer and the firing pin thus causing the misfire. Paul Bentley claimed he got a bruise form doing so. Well, this sure seems unlikely, right? There is only a limited amount of space there.

Eight: The police officers’ reports and testimony, as well that of George Applin, are remarkably consistent, maybe too consistent. Normally, in such a stressful situation, you would expect some significant variation. Why? Tachypsychia alters how we perceive events. Plus we always see the world from different vantage points. The world always comes to us at different angles. In this event though, the arrest of Oswald, we read a fairly consistent story. Maybe the stories are consistent because they were told what the story was going to be? It’s not hard to coach people’s memory to believe anything as long as they are motivated to believe such.

Nine: If Oswald did kill Tippit, and Oswald had the gun on his body as the police were converging, why does he not ditch the gun under the seats by sliding it forward three or four rows? Can Oswald not see the police approaching? Has he no peripheral vision? Can he not turn his head? How hard would it be to lift the gun out of his waistband, wipe it with his shirt, and slide it forward? There were very few people in the theater. All he had to do then was stand up and comply. If the police should find the gun, he would be no worse off than he would be if he were caught with it. Does Lee Oswald have no ability to think?

*

Why is it so difficult to believe that the police would change the narrative? Police have done this in the past. Generally this is done at the behest of politicians who desire a certain outcome for any number of reasons. Only eight years prior, Henry Wade and Will Fritz under political pressure railroaded Tommy Lee Walker to the electric chair in order to solve a vicious murder in the city of Dallas. They did it before, they would do it again.

It seems possible that after TK killed Tippit, he ditched the coat and the gun behind the Texaco Station off Crawford Avenue. Perhaps the gun was turned over to Jerry Hill or Captain Westbrook. Subsequently both officers went down to the Texas Theater where Oswald was arrested uneventfully. It certainly is possible that Oswald did not resist arrest. When the officers returned to the DPD Headquarters, they showed their catch to Captain Fritz, and they showed him the gun they found at the Texaco Station.

Will Fritz wasn’t a dummy, and neither were the other officers. Did anyone need to lay out a roadmap on this one. It would be far better to have Oswald have the gun in his hand at the Texas theater. And so a narrative was constructed. Of course it was. Will Fritz and the officers were under tremendous pressure to solve the Kennedy assassination. They were under tremendous pressure to catch a killer. Dallas was being embarrassed. Necessity is the mother of invention. And let’s not forget that wherever Will Fritz is, Henry Wade and his political friends can’t be far behind. Politicians don’t care about an absolute truth; in their minds they are the truth.

I’m sure that after the narrative was laid out, the officers truly believed their narrative happened. The mind is a powerful thing. When your destiny is on the line, your mind will do marvelous things.

Copyright 2022 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: