Adam Steel, a bright young man from England and a recent new member of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, gave me an interesting idea tonight. We were discussing Oswald and Tippit and whether they knew each other. I informed him that John Armstrong believes that Tippit drove Oswald from his room to the Texas Theater. But, I've long been hung up on the fact that at the Midnight Press Conference, Oswald referred to Tippit as "a policeman." He said, "I know I am accused of murdering a policeman. I know nothing more than that." It seems very odd to me that he would refer to someone that he knew as "a policeman." If he knew him, I would expect him to refer to him by name.
But, Adam pointed out that Oswald may have referred to "a policeman" because that's all he knew. It's possible that his interrogators only brought up that a policeman was killed without stating his name. And as I think about it, I realize that it was commonplace to refer to "the officer." Even Fritz spoke of "the officer" that "we have identified him for killing the Officer." Not Officer Tippit, just the Officer. So, maybe they were doing the same thing with Oswald. Although if it's true, it's another strange thing about the case because they were accusing him of killing Tippit. So, how do you accuse a person of killing someone without naming the person you think he killed?
But, there is so much we don't know because they wouldn't tell us. We have no idea what Oswald told them about how he got to the theater. We have no idea what he told them about where he was at the time of the Tippit murder. We have no idea what he told them about why he went to the theater. Did he tell them who told him to go to the theater? Did he tell them what he expected to do after leaving the theater, had he not been arrested? He underwent 13 hours of interrogation, and if you add up all the things that are know to be said, it comes to only a small portion of that time, less than half, I'd say. So, what was said the rest of the time? Thank you, Adam Steel.