Gerald Hill and 1026 North Beckley

[Please note: The following was originally intended to be published as part of this writer’s essay on Gerald Hill, which can be read (here) on the CTKA.net website].

As stated previously in the essay, if Hill left the TSBD at approximately 12:58 pm, and travelled to the rooming house at 1026 North Beckley via Commerce Street; by this writer’s calculation, at an average speed of 50 mph, Hill could have arrived there at approximately 1:01 pm. During a discussion on whether or not DPD squad car 207 was seen outside the rooming house by the housekeeper, Earlene Roberts, at approximately 1:01 pm, Richard Gilbride told this writer that “…local TV coverage of the assassination first aired at 12:58 pm…” (See the thread entitled Gerald Hill and the murder of J.D Tippit, on Greg Parker’s research forum). During her interview with KLIF radio on the afternoon of the assassination, Roberts claimed that she received a telephone call from a friend who told her that the President had been shot (click here). Roberts went on to explain that her friend told her to turn on the TV, and that after doing so, she saw the man she thought was Oswald enter the rooming house. As far as this writer is concerned, Roberts’ friend was never interviewed by the authorities.

Roberts also indicated that Oswald came into the rooming house after she turned on the TV when she was interviewed by the FBI on the day of the assassination, and on November 27 and 29, 1963 (WCD 5, pages 353 to 356). She also repeated this claim in her affidavit to the USSS on December 5, 1963, and when she testified before the Warren Commission on April 8, 1964 (WC Volume VI, page 438), (WC Volume VII, page 439). During her aforementioned interview with the FBI on November 29, 1963, Roberts explained that she recalled hearing the TV announcer state that the president had been shot and that he was at Parkland hospital. Although some researchers may believe that this places Oswald inside the rooming house at 12:58 pm, such a belief assumes that Roberts’ friend called her almost immediately upon learning that the President had been shot. However, for all we know, given the shock of learning that the President had been shot, Roberts’ friend may have been transfixed in front of the television for a couple of minutes prior to calling her. Secondly, such a belief also assumes that Roberts’ friend was watching the TV just as the news that the President had been shot was aired. However, she may have turned on the TV a couple of minutes after the first announcement was aired.

Furthermore, we should keep in mind that during her aforementioned interviews with KLIF radio, the FBI (and in her affidavit to the USSS and during her testimony before the Warren Commission), Roberts failed to mention how much time had elapsed from the time she turned on the TV to the time she saw the man she thought was Oswald enter the rooming house. Although the overwhelming majority of JFK assassination researchers believe that Oswald did in fact live at the rooming house at 1026 North Beckley, researcher Lee Farley has made the case that Oswald did not live there, and that it was in fact Larry Crafard who was living there at the time of the assassination. Crafard was an employee of Jack Ruby’s, who not only bore a resemblance to Oswald and was mistaken for him by a number of witnesses, but who also mysteriously left Dallas on the day following the assassination (WCE 2250), (Thread entitled: A House of Cards? on Greg Parker’s research forum). As stated previously in the essay, it is this writer’s belief that Crafard was Tippit’s killer. It is also this writer’s belief that Crafard was picked up by DPD squad car 207, and was then dropped off somewhere to the East of the Tippit murder scene.

The reader should keep in mind that Earlene Roberts told the FBI during her interview with them on November 29, 1963, that one of the officers inside the DPD squad car which she observed outside the rooming house blew the horn of the car, after “Oswald” had returned there at about 1 pm (WCD 5, page 356). The obvious implication is that the car was waiting for “Oswald” after he entered the rooming house. Although Roberts told the Warren Commission that “Oswald” stayed in his room at the rooming house for “about 3 or 4 minutes”, she also claimed that “Oswald” stayed in his room “…just long enough, I guess, to go in there and get a jacket and put it on and he went out zipping it” (WC Volume VI, pages 438 and 440). Roberts’ latter claim implies that “Oswald” didn’t stay in his room for about three or four minutes, but left sooner. In fact, during her aforementioned interview with KLIF radio just a few hours after the assassination, she claimed that after “Oswald” came into the rooming house he; “…got a short gray coat and went on back out in a hurry…”

We should also bear in mind that Roberts made no mention of “Oswald” staying in his room for any length of time; implying instead that he stayed only for a short period of time after he returned. Besides, if the man Roberts thought was Oswald was actually Larry Crafard, and if Crafard was in fact Tippit’s killer; and with Gerald Hill waiting outside to pick him up in DPD squad car 207, it makes little sense that he would stay at the rooming house for over a minute. As for why he (Crafard) returned there just prior to killing Tippit, this writer can only speculate that it was to pick up the revolver (WCE 143) used to kill Tippit (see here for why this writer believes that WCE 143 was the gun used to kill Tippit). Many researchers have challenged Roberts’ credibility; claiming in so many words that her story about seeing a DPD squad car outside the rooming house (as “Oswald” was allegedly inside) lacks merit. However, as this writer explains below, the arguments against Roberts’ credibility are rather narrow minded. This writer should point out that Roberts told the Warren Commission “…I can’t see too good how to read. I’m completely blind in my right eye” (WC Volume VI, page 444). However, there’s no reason to believe that Roberts couldn’t have identified the number of the squad car with her left eye.

In the 2013 (kindle) edition of his book With Malice, disinformation shill Dale Myers cites the reports by DPD captain William R. Westbrook and Captain Orville A. Jones, in which Westbrook and Jones wrote that Officer Jim Valentine handed the keys to squad car 207 over to Sgt. James A. Putnam upon his arrival at Dealey Plaza, and that the keys to the car (including other DPD cars parked in the immediate vicinity) were then released to the third platoon commander at approximately 3:30 pm (Dallas Municipal archives, Box 7, Folder 7, Item 6). Although Valentine allegedly typed a statement in which he claimed that he had handed the keys over to Sgt. Putnam, his signature is missing from the statement (ibid). Whilst the alleged statement by Valentine is not the only typed statement amongst the DPD files which is not signed, it’s important to keep in mind that Valentine made absolutely no mention of handing the keys to squad car 207 over to Sgt. Putnam when he was interviewed by the FBI on May 28, 1964.

During his interview with the FBI, Valentine merely claimed that squad car 207 was “…definitely not in use at 1:00 p.m., and, further, that he [Valentine] did not drive to the Oak Cliff area…” (WCE 2645). Now if Valentine told the FBI that he handed the keys to squad car 207 over to Sgt. Putnam, why would the FBI omit this bit of information? It makes no sense to this writer. Myers doesn’t mention this fact to his readers. It is also curious that in the aforementioned statement (and during his interview with the FBI), Valentine allegedly wrote that he was in the Juvenile Bureau of the DPD when he learned that the President had been shot; and made no mention of Hill and Jim Ewell being in the car with him. However, Hill told the Warren Commission that after Captain Westbrook allegedly told him to go down to the TSBD, he “…got on the elevator on the third floor [of the Dallas Municipal building] and went to the basement and saw a uniformed Officer named Jim. M. Valentine, and I asked Jim what he was doing, and he said, ‘Nothing in particular’” (WC Volume VII, page 45).

Although this writer is of the firm belief that Hill lied when he claimed he went to the Tippit murder scene with Sgt. Calvin “Bud” Owens and assistant Dallas attorney, William F. Alexander, this writer can think of no reason why Hill would lie about the above. If Hill’s claim that Valentine told him “Nothing in particular” is accurate after he asked him what he was doing, then it would seem that Valentine didn’t learn about the President’s assassination when he was allegedly in the juvenile Bureau of the DPD. Readers should keep in mind that according to Chief Curry, the Juvenile bureau was located on the third floor of the Dallas Municipal building (WC Volume IV, page 152). Given these facts, the distinct possibility exists that Valentine’s statement was actually typed by someone pretending to be him (such as Captain Westbrook), and that he was coerced into not telling the FBI that Hill was in the car with him when he went to the TSBD. It is also entirely possible that he was coerced into informing the FBI that he had handed the keys to car 207 over to Sgt. Putnam, but simply forgot to mention it.

This writer should also point out that Valentine was never called to testify before the Warren Commission; even though he should have been. Myers also writes in his book that “[Sgt.] Putnam stated that [squad car 207] was never moved until late in the afternoon” (With Malice, chapter 3).In his endnotes. Myers sources this claim to an interview of Captain Orville Jones (WCD 205, page 532). But what Myers doesn’t tell his readers is that there is absolutely no confirmation from Putnam himself that he was given the keys to Squad car 207; and the keys to the other squad cars in the vicinity of the TSBD following the assassination for that matter. In fact, during his testimony before the Warren Commission, Putnam was asked what the nature of his involvement was with the investigation of the assassination of President Kennedy. Putnam claimed; “Just to assist in covering of the Book Depository Building and aiding in searching the building,” and made no mention of being given the keys to the squad cars parked in the vicinity of the TSBD (WC Volume VII, page 75).

Now if Putnam’s duty really was to be given the keys to the squad cars which arrived at the TSBD, then it makes little sense that he would be involved in searching the building, rather than being stationed outside where he could collect the keys just as the various Officers arrived and parked their squad cars. We should also keep in mind that Charles Batchelor, the assistant Chief of the DPD, informed the FBI that “…his records further indicate that patrolman J.M. Valentine was the sole occupant of car number 207 on November 22, 1963” (WCE 2645). Whilst this writer doesn’t dispute the notion that Valentine was the only Officer assigned to car 207 on the day of the assassination, the fact is that he was not the sole “occupant” of the car, as both Hill and Jim Ewell went to the TSBD with him. We should also keep in mind that neither Batchelor nor Captain C.E. Talbert (who was the commander of the second platoon) told the FBI that the keys to the parked squad cars were handed over to Sgt. Putnam (ibid). On a final note, as far as this writer is aware, there is no confirmation from Captain James M. Souter (who was the commander of the third platoon) that the keys to the squad cars were handed over to him at approximately 3:30 pm.

Whilst this writer doesn’t dispute the notion that Valentine was the only Officer assigned to car 207 on the day of the assassination, the fact is that he was not the sole “occupant” of the car, as both Hill and Jim Ewell went to the TSBD with him. As stated previously, the obvious implication is that the squad car seen outside the rooming house by Earlene Roberts was waiting for “Oswald” after he entered the rooming house. Since the DPD arrested Oswald for the murder of Tippit, Roberts’ claim would have by all likelihood led to speculation by the news media that the DPD were involved with Oswald in the murder of one of their own officers. With that in mind, are we to honestly believe that the DPD wouldn’t do everything in their power to discredit Roberts’ as a witness? Of course they would, not that those with an agenda of their own to discredit Roberts; such as Dale Myers, would ever admit to this. In his book, Myers writes that; “In assessing Mrs. Roberts’ credibility, it is worth noting that she didn’t mention the police car until five days after the assassination” (With Malice, Chapter 3).

In his endnotes, Myers sources this claim to Roberts’ interview with the FBI on November 29, 1963. Therefore, he is wrong in stating that she didn’t mention the car until fives after the assassination. But in his zeal to discredit Roberts, Myers discounts the possibility that Roberts did tell the DPD officers who arrived at 1026 North Beckley following the assassination that she had seen the squad car outside the rooming house, and that she heard one of the officers inside the car blow the horn. If she did, then for the reasons stated above, she surely would have been told to keep quiet about it. As a matter of fact, it is this writers’ belief that Roberts may have seen “Oswald” getting into the squad car, and may have even have mentioned this to the DPD officers who arrived at the rooming house following Oswald’s arrest. With the knowledge that Oswald was arrested for the murder of Tippit, one can only imagine the looks on the faces of those officers if Roberts did in fact tell them about it.

There can be little doubt that if Roberts did tell them that she had seen “Oswald” getting into the squad car, she would have been pressured into keeping quiet about it. This writer should also point out that during her interview with the FBI on November 29, 1963, Roberts claimed that after one of the Officers honked the horn of the car it “…drove slowly on Beckley [Avenue] towards Zangs Boulevard” (WCD 5, page 356). When she testified before the Warren Commission, Roberts explained that the car drove around the corner of Beckley to Zangs, onto Zangs, heading north towards town (WC Volume VI, page 443). During her aforementioned interview with KLIF radio on the afternoon of the assassination, Roberts stated that she observed “Oswald” standing at a bus stop near the rooming house (but didn’t see him board a bus). If this claim is true, then perhaps this is where the squad car picked up Crafard. As for Roberts’ claim that see observed the squad car heading towards town, it is entirely feasible that the car turned right onto North Crawford Street, and started heading south towards the Tippit murder scene (be sure to check Google Maps).

The reader should keep in mind that something which Myers and others with an agenda to discredit Roberts evidently want to ignore is that Roberts told the Warren Commission that Captain Fritz’s men, Sheriff Decker’s men, the FBI, and the USSS put her through “the third degree” (WC Volume VI, page 436). Readers should keep in mind that the reason Roberts may not have mentioned seeing the squad car outside the rooming house to the DPD was because she may have thought that they were already aware of it. Think about it. If Roberts really did see a DPD squad car outside the rooming house, it is entirely feasible that she had assumed that the DPD Officers who were at the rooming house following the assassination already knew about. But to those with an agenda to discredit Roberts, none of these explanations matter.

In his book, Myers uses Amy Gladys Johnson; the owner of the rooming house at 1026 North Beckley, to discredit Roberts’ claim of seeing the DPD squad car. As Myers writes, Mrs. Johnson told the Warren Commission that Roberts was someone who would make up tales (With Malice, Chapter 3). This writer should point out that Mrs Johnson told the FBI when they interviewed her on June 8, 1964, that Roberts was 59 years old, had a “low mentality,” and that she (Roberts) was a diabetic (WCE 2996). When Roberts testified before the Warren Commission, she claimed that she was indeed a diabetic (WC Volume VI, page 435). But despite Johnson’s claim that Roberts was someone who would make up tales and had a “low mentality,” consider that if the DPD had intimidated Roberts into keeping quiet about seeing the DPD squad car outside the rooming house, it is only perfectly reasonable to assume that they would coerce Johnson (and others) into discrediting Roberts.

Readers should also bear in mind that as researcher Lee Farley has explained, Johnson was quite likely involved in covering up the fact that it was Larry Crafard and not Oswald who had been living at the rooming house on 1026 North Beckley (see the thread entitled A House of Cards? on Greg Parker’s research forum). As stated previously, Roberts claimed that she was a diabetic. The significance of this claim is that research has shown that diabetics tend to experience memory problems; due to the high amount of blood glucose (see here for example). Therefore, this (along with the fact that at the time of the assassination, Roberts was close to the age of 60) could explain why after being coerced into keeping quiet about seeing the DPD squad car outside the rooming house, Roberts told the FBI on November 29, 1963, that she had seen it. But if Roberts simply forgot that she was to keep quiet about seeing the squad car, and if she had seen “Oswald” getting into it, why didn’t she inform the FBI of this? Consider that for the aforementioned reasons, Roberts may have forgotten about certain details of what she had witnessed. It is also worth bearing in mind that research has shown that diabetics may be “cognitively impaired” (see here).

In his book, Myers also uses former Dallas assistant district attorney William F. Alexander and former Dallas Morning News reporter Hugh Aynesworth, to discredit Roberts’ claim of seeing the DPD squad car outside the rooming house. When Myers interviewed Alexander and Aynesworth, both of them claimed that Roberts didn’t mention anything about the squad car to either one of them when they were both (allegedly) at the rooming house in the afternoon of the assassination (With Malice, Chapter 3). But as this writer will explain in an upcoming essay, by all likelihood, Alexander was lying when he claimed that Hill went with him and Sgt. Owens’ (in Owens’ car) to the Tippit murder scene, in order to cover-up for Hill’s presence outside the rooming house inside squad car 207. According to Myers, Aynesworth told him that he was at the rooming house on the afternoon of the assassination after the DPD officers who had gone there left (ibid).

Most researchers who are aware of him know that Aynesworth is a die in the wool defender of the Warren Commission’s conclusion that Oswald killed both Tippit and President Kennedy (see here for example). So even if Aynesworth spoke with Roberts on the afternoon of the assassination, and if she told him about seeing the squad car, Aynesworth’s claim that she didn’t mention this to him should be taken with a grain of salt. In fact, as this writer will explain in an upcoming essay, there is good reason to believe that Aynesworth was also covering up for Hill’s presence outside the rooming house inside squad car 207. Suffice it to say, contrary to what an agenda driven shill such as Dale Myers wants us to believe, neither Johnson, Alexander, nor Aynesworth are to be considered credible witnesses when it comes to Earlene Roberts credibility.

Several researchers have also argued that Roberts’ claim of seeing the squad car is not credibility, since she told the Warren Commission that the number of the car was not 207. When Counsel Joseph Ball asked Roberts if she remembered what the number of the squad car was, she claimed “I think it was –106, it seems to me like it was 106…” (WC Volume VI, page 443). But after Ball reminded her that she told the FBI on November 29, 1963, that the number of the car was 207, she now claimed that the number was 107, and remarked that “I don’t know where I got that 106 –207” (ibid, page 444). On the day of the assassination, squad car 106 was assigned to two officers named B.L. Jones and M.D. Hall (WCE 2645). According to the transcripts of channel one of the DPD radio communications, at approximately 12:45 pm, Jones and Hall report that they are at the location of the TSBD (WCE 1974). A photograph taken by Dallas Times Herald staff photographer, William Allen (which can be viewed here), shows that car 106 was in the vicinity of the TSBD following the assassination.

As for squad car 107, assistant DPD chief Charles Batchelor informed Norman Redlich of the Warren Commission staff that squad car 107 was not in use on the day of the assassination (WCE 2045). According to Batchelor, car 107 had been sold on April 17, 1963, and that the DPD didn’t resume using the number 107 until February, 1964 (ibid). It is this writer’s belief that the DPD coerced Roberts into claiming that the number of the squad car she had seen was 107 in order to discredit her prior claim to the FBI that she had seen squad car 207. Think about it. By coercing her into testifying that she had seen a squad car with a number which wasn’t in use on the day of the assassination, the DPD probably thought that they would succeed in discrediting her as a credible witness.

It is also this writers’ opinion that the DPD coerced her into claiming that the number of the car was 107, due to its similarity to the number 207. They may have thought that they could convince the Warren Commission that Roberts had meant to tell the FBI when they interviewed her that she had seen car 107; but that due to the similarity of the two numbers, she “mistakenly” told them that the number of the car was 207. As pointed out above, Roberts first told the Warren Commission that the number of the car she had seen was 106. Given Roberts’ age, and the fact that she was a diabetic, it is entirely possible that she misremembered that she was supposed to say 107; only to then remember and “correct” herself. Whilst some might argue that this is an absurd explanation, consider that due to the similarity of the numbers 106 and 107, she could easily have confused the two numbers.

Although the reader might be wondering why the DPD didn’t simply allow Roberts to maintain that the number of the car she observed was 207, and to then tell the Warren Commission that car 207 was not in use on the day of the assassination, the simple fact of the matter is that they couldn’t. The DPD would surely have known from their records that car 207 on the day of the assassination, it was assigned to Officer Jim Valentine, and that since Valentine had driven it to the scene of the assassination; it was by all likelihood filmed and/or photographed by the news media. As a matter of fact, as this writer has stated previously in the essay, it was filmed outside the TSBD (click here and go to the 14 minute 50 second mark). With that in mind, it is with little doubt that the DPD realised that by claiming squad car 207 was not in use on the day of the assassination, photographs and film footage could have exposed this as being a lie.

One alternative would have been for the DPD to somehow seize every photograph and film footage taken outside the TSBD without a subpoena, in order to try and conceal the existence of car 207. In this writer’s opinion, this notion is so patently absurd, that it is unimaginable that any intellectually honest researcher would seriously advocate it. The reader may also be wondering why the DPD didn’t simply coerce Roberts into telling the Warren Commission that she didn’t actually see any squad car, instead of coercing her into claiming that the number of the squad car she observed was 107. In this writer’s opinion, the DPD probably thought that it would be obvious to the Warren Commission that they (the DPD) had harassed Roberts into making this claim. However, by coercing her into claiming that she had seen a DPD squad car with a number which was not in use on the day of the assassination, the DPD may have thought that the Warren Commission would believe that Roberts was a delusional old lady who had imagined seeing the squad car.

This writer should also point out that Roberts told the Warren Commission that the car she had seen was black, and that “It wasn’t an accident squad car at all” (WC Volume VI, page 444). However, Roberts may have misremembered what the color of the car was, or she may have been coerced by the DPD into making this claim to discredit her (bear in mind that the aforementioned film footage of squad car 207 reveals that it was not black). What’s particularly intriguing to this writer, is that in her discussion of what the number of the squad car was, Roberts remarked; “I want you to understand that I have been put through the third degree and it’s hard to remember” (ibid). It’s almost as if Roberts was claiming that the DPD had harassed her into changing the number of the car. Although it is certainly not this writer’s contention that Roberts deliberately said this during her testimony, this writer should point out that she probably inadvertently said this due to the stress she was feeling from lying under oath.

Before concluding the discussion of Earlene Roberts’ credibility, there is one other issue to be discussed. When Roberts was interviewed by the FBI on November 29, 1963, she told them that the reason she recalled the number of the squad car was because she had “…worked for two Policemen who drove squad car 170, and she looked to see if these were the two officers she knew parked in front of the residence” (WCD 5, page 356). Although she didn’t name the two officers she worked for, when Roberts testified before the Warren Commission, she claimed that the two officers were named Charles Burnely and Alexander, but didn’t specify whether Alexander was the officer’s first or last name (WC Volume VI, page 443). According to the personnel assignments booklet of the DPD, there was a Charles T. Burnley who worked for the Burglary and Theft Bureau in November, 1963 (WC Volume XIX, Batchelor exhibit No. 5002). Although there doesn’t appear to be a listing for an officer with the name Alexander in the booklet, there was an officer named Floyd T. Alexander; a ballistics expert who worked for the Dallas City-Council Criminal Investigation Laboratory from 1957 to 1969 (With Malice, Chapter 3).

When Roberts testified before the Warren Commission, she explained that “I had worked for some Policemen and sometimes they come by and tell me something that maybe their wives would want me to know, and I thought it was them, and I just glanced out and saw the number, and I said, ‘Oh that’s not their car,’ for I knew their car” (WC Volume VI, page 443). Roberts also claimed that one of the officers inside the DPD car honked the horn in the same way in which officers Burnely and Alexander would (ibid). In the year 1997, Dale Myers interviewed Charles Burnley, who happened to be the only officer with the surname Burnley working for the DPD at the time of the assassination (With Malice, Chapter 3). According to Myers, Burnley told him that he didn’t hear about Roberts’ allegation until about four or five years before Myers interviewed him (ibid). Burnley went on to explain that; “I joined the [DPD] in 1955 and as far as I know, I was the only Burnley that ever worked there. The only Alexander I knew of was a Lieutenant in charge of the crime lab out at Parkland hospital [Floyd T. Alexander] in the mid 1950’s. But, I never met him.

Burnley then remarked; “My impression was that Roberts claimed that she worked as a maid or something for us, but at that time, I was living with my mother and dad. I didn’t have any need for her services and certainly didn’t know her” (ibid). Myers then explains that it isn’t known whether Roberts knew Floyd T. Alexander, but writes that there was a Floyd J. Alexander who allegedly worked for the DPD from 1947 to 1957 and knew Roberts (ibid). Myers writes that Alexander “remembered” that Roberts “wasn’t very bright, had a limited number of friends, and would do almost anything to get attention” (ibid). In his endnotes, Myers references this claim to a letter (apparently) by Alexander dated September 7, 1993, in the Dennis Ford collection. He then adds that unlike Roberts’ story, Alexander didn’t have a steady partner, and didn’t “recall” Charles Burnley (ibid).

Whilst Myers and his ilk use the statements by Burnley and Alexander to discredit Roberts, let’s consider the reasons why their statements should not be used as reliable evidence against her. First of all, as stated previously (and which Myers never actually mentions to his readers) is that Roberts did not name Burnley and Alexander as the two officers who were assigned to squad car 170 when she was interviewed by the FBI on November 29, 1963. It is therefore entirely conceivable that in order to discredit Roberts’ claim of seeing a DPD squad car outside the rooming house that the DPD coerced her into stating that Charles Burnley was one of the officers who was assigned to squad car 170; when in actual fact he wasn’t. This would have made Roberts look like a liar.

Now even if Burnley was one of the officers who was assigned to squad car 170, his denial of knowing Roberts may have been due to the fact that Roberts told the Warren Commission that one of the officers in the squad car she observed outside the rooming house, honked the horn of the car like Burnley and officer Alexander allegedly would. Perhaps after learning about Roberts’ allegation, Burnley thought that people would suspect that he was one of the two officers outside the rooming house on the day of the assassination; and perhaps fearing that people would suspect him of playing a role in a conspiracy with Oswald to kill Tippit, he denied knowing Roberts. As stated previously, Roberts did not indicate whether Alexander was the first or last name of the officer she claimed she knew. In this writers’ opinion, the DPD may have coerced her into claiming she knew an officer named Alexander who was assigned to squad car 170, when in actual fact no officer named Alexander was assigned to that squad car, with the purpose of making her look like a liar.

Readers should also keep in mind that according to assistant DPD chief, Charles Batchelor, squad car 170 was sold in April, 1963, and the number 170 was not reassigned to another squad car until February, 1964 (WCE 2645). As mentioned previously, Batchelor also claimed that squad car 107 was sold on April 17, 1963, and that the number 107 was not reassigned to another squad car until February, 1964 (WCE 2045). But what are the odds that both of these squad cars were sold in the exact same month, and that both the number 170 and 107 were not reassigned to another squad car until the following February? Although this writer believes that there probably wasn’t a squad car with the number 107 in use on the day of the assassination, Batchelor’s claim that squad car 170 was sold in April, 1963, appears to be nothing but a lie to discredit Roberts’ claim of working for the two officers who were assigned to that car.

Although Roberts told both the FBI and the Warren Commission that the two officers inside the squad car were wearing uniforms (whereas Gerald Hill was dressed in plain clothes on the day of the assassination), this may have merely been an assumption on her part, as it is commonly known that officers who are assigned to squad cars wear uniforms. Whilst the reader may not agree with all of the arguments above concerning Earlene Roberts, the fact remains that she told the FBI on November 29, 1963, that the number of the squad car she observed outside the rooming house was 207. As this writer explained previously in the essay on Hill; by all likelihood, Hill was lying when he claimed that he was on the sixth floor of the TSBD when Dallas deputy Sheriff Luke Mooney discovered the spent shell casings. Furthermore, as this writer explains here, assistant Dallas district attorney William Alexander was (by all likelihood) lying when he claimed that Hill went with him and Sgt. Owens’ (in Owens’ car) to the Tippit murder scene.