From: 19efppp@mail.com   
      
   On Saturday, December 23, 2023 at 5:19:34 PM UTC-5, Donald Willis wrote:   
   > The 1:22pm DPD radio message translates as The jacket was planted and the   
   witness transplanted (revision)    
   >    
   > It seems that all I'm doing these days is correcting myself.  James   
   DiEugenio caught me in a blatant error on the ed forum.  I caught myself re   
   another error on the first version of this thread.  I trusted a DPD   
   transcription of their own radio logs (   
   CE 705).  But, digging out my old tape recording of said logs (provided about   
   25 years ago by Dave Dix, from I believe, the Minnesota Public Library), I   
   found that the 1:22 transmission did NOT say just "300 E. Jefferson", but "300   
   block of E. Jefferson".   
     I have incorporated the new (old) information accordingly and made the   
   necessary changes...    
   >    
   It's more fun when you correct yourself, isn't it! I'd ask you to digitize   
   your DPD radio tape, but that probably wouldn't work.   
   > 1:22pm DPD radio message translates as The jacket was planted and the   
   witness transplanted (revision)    
   >    
   > First faint clue:  DPD Sgt. G.D. Henslee transcribes the first line of the   
   transmission thusly:  "Have a description of the suspect on Jefferson."    
   Actually, the transmission runs, "We have a description on this suspect over   
   here on Jefferson."  The    
   omitted "over here" makes it sound like the sender, Officer Roy Walker, is   
   actually on Jefferson. Is there a problem with that?  Oh, yes.    
   >    
   They do like to omit little things which provide interesting context. Another   
   is, "19 will be en route (shortly)." Without the "shortly," you can imagine   
   that 19 might already be on his way. Sometimes people will talk like that. But   
   with "shortly," you    
   can be sure that 19 has not yet left. 19, Sgt. Owens, was still at the TSBD   
   well after Gerry Hill had already said, "19 is en route."  Gerry did not leave   
   the TSBD with Sgt. Owens as he pretended to do.    
      
   > Second faint clue:  But, first, continuing the text of the 1:22   
   transmission:  "Last seen about 300 block of E. Jefferson.  He's a white male,   
   about 30, 5'8", black hair, slender, wearing a white jacket, white shirt, and   
   dark slacks". (DPD radio-logs    
   tape)  And note that the dispatcher, at 1:26, has the suspect "going west on   
   Jefferson from the 300 block". (CE 705 p22)    
   >    
   > Third faint clue:  At 1:19:05, the dispatcher tells Walker to check out 501   
   E. 10th at Denver (WMp105).  Then, at 1:19:59, he tells Walker "The suspect's   
   running west on Jefferson from the location" (DPD radio logs/WMp109).  When,   
   at 1:21:37, Walker    
   radios "I haven't seen anything on Jefferson yet" (DPD radio logs), the   
   dispatcher again directs him to "501 E. 10th at Denver" (CE 705p20/WM p113).    
   Finally, at 1:22:36, Walker radios his "over here" description.  From his   
   1:21:37 transmission, we know    
   that Walker was, at the time, on Jefferson.  But we don't know, from his radio   
   transmissions, whether he was ever at 10th & Patton.  He doesn't correct or   
   follow-up the dispatcher's "10th at Denver", after either of the latter's   
   advisories.    
   >    
   This is all very confusing. I'm sure you know that some of the Dispatcher's   
   addresses are the result of telephone calls.   
      
   > Fourth (getting somewhere) clue:  Dale Myers insists that Walker met and   
   talked to Warren Reynolds at the murder scene:  "Reynolds returned to 10th &   
   Patton at about [1:20], despite Reynolds' testimony to the contrary" (p112).    
   True, in 1983, Walker    
   told Myers that he did meet Reynolds, about 1:22.  However, he adds, "One of   
   the used car lot operators saw the incident... Warren Reynolds" (p114).  The   
   latter never said that he saw the shooting--Walker's memory fails him here.    
   >    
   > And Reynolds would hardly have been the one to tell Walker, "Last seen about   
   300 block of E. Jefferson".  Ruinously for him, Walker told Myers that it was   
   "Reynolds [who] gave me the description of the gunman" (p114).  Walker was   
   apparently unaware    
   that TV film footage has turned up showing Reynolds telling police at the   
   scene that he last saw a suspicious man going into the back of an old house   
   near the Texaco station (WM p131).  Reynolds, then, could not have been   
   Walker's "300 block of E.    
   Jefferson" witness.  (Reynolds' suspicious man may not have been the gunman at   
   all, but a vigilante trailing the gunman.)  Myers, then, with one hand, was   
   simply extending Walker's witness-identity deception, despite his own text and   
   frame grabs which,    
   with the other hand, expose said deception!  Myers giveth and Myers taketh   
   away.    
   >    
   > Fifth (gathering steam) clue:  Myers then "buttresses" the invented   
   Walker/Reynolds confab with yet another out-of-thin-air incident, based on the   
   word of... no one at all:  "Warren Reynolds, who had come with [Sgt. Bud Owens   
   & Assistant DA Bill    
   Alexander] from 10th & Patton, pointed to an old house near the Texaco   
   station..." (p120)  Alexander did not testify to the Warren Commission, and   
   Owens, in his Commission testimony, did not mention bringing along a witness   
   to the Texaco area.  None of    
   the principals, then--Reynolds, Walker, Alexander, Owens--can support Myers'   
   two little vignettes re Reynolds going to and leaving the scene of the crime   
   circa 1:20 and 1:22.  Thin air.    
   >    
   > Sixth (Eureka!) clue:  Relocation, relocation, relocation.  Why would Walker   
   and Myers go to so much trouble to falsely identify and relocate a witness?    
   Well, what other witness or witnesses were "over here on Jefferson"?  (Pat   
   Patterson was with    
   Reynolds, so he was most probably an old-house witness, too.)    
   >    
   > Robert and Mary Brock were, in effect the gatekeepers of the parking-lot   
   suspect.  Mary Brock was the only witness who clearly stated that she "last   
   observed [the suspect] in the parking lot directly behind" the service   
   station. (WM p551)  They may    
   have seen the suspect, but not in the parking lot, and certainly not doffing   
   his jacket.  Because at 1:22, he was reported "seen about 300 block of E.   
   Jefferson", still wearing his "white jacket".  Certainly worth Walker's false   
   identification of his    
   witness, and Myers' subsequent, false relocation of him elsewhere.  Two wrongs   
   and no right.    
   >    
   Also, timing the location announcements can be treacherous unless you have a   
   cop calling in. The Dispatcher, and even cops calling in, might be repeating   
   something that had been said 10 minutes prior.   
         
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)