JFK: Why Buell Wesley Frazier was erased from Altgens6

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

JFK: Why Buell Wesley Frazier was erased from Altgens6

Share on facebookShare on twitterShare on emailShare on pinterest_shareMore Sharing Services4

By Larry Rivera (with Jim Fetzer)

“The world is a dangerous place, not because of the people who are evil; but because of the people who don’t do anything about it.”

–Albert Einstein

Guess what, we are not going to talk about curtain rods in this article. The curtain rod story is a red herring, so we will do away with it right from the top.

The Oswald Innocence Campaign (OIC) has already shown that Oswald was Doorman and that Lovelady was “Black Hole Man”, who is holding his arms up to shade his eyes, largely based upon the differences between their shirts. That much has been established by the OIC.

Our next order of business, therefore, is to find out why Buell Wesley Frazier was erased from the famous Altgens photograph.

Buell Wesley Frazier was born June 4, 1944.(1) At 19, he arrived in Irving in early September 1963 from the town of Huntsville 200 miles away to find work and live with his sister Linnie Mae Randle, her husband Bill, and their three children.(2) With his mother also visiting with Linnie in November 1963 (3), he was left with no choice but to sleep on the couch of the Randle’s living room.(4)

There are two versions of how he obtained his employment at the Texas School Book Depository. His Warren Commission testimony states he went through the Massey Employment Agency.(5) They referred him there, and the same day he interviewed with Roy Truly, he was hired. (6) However, his sister stated she was the one who enabled him to land the job at the TSBD.(7) He was making the minimum wage of $1.25 per hour.(8) At any rate, he did end up working there on 9/13/63. He drove Lee Harvey Oswald to work on 11/22/63–and the rest is history.

Frazier got up at 6:30 AM, had breakfast with his mother and family at 7:15.(9) He picked up Lee, who had been waiting for him outside, after walking half a block from the Ruth Paine residence. He took Stemmons Freeway downtown and arrived at the TSBD parking lot in time for work. The image at left shows this was not just any parking lot. It was well removed from the work place. From there they walked the 3 blocks to work.(10) It was cold and foggy and it had been raining that morning.(11) At this point, he supposedly was separated from Oswald, who advanced ahead of him and went into the building. Frazier’s excuse for staying behind was that he wanted to “charge” the car’s battery.(12) After at least a half hour ride, it should be unnecessary, however, because the alternator/generator would have charged the battery by virtue of the time it took to drive from Irving. Frazier worked alongside Lee Oswald on the first floor filling orders until 11:00AM.(13)

Frazier was standing on the TSBD front stairs(14) when the motorcade drove by, heard the shots, stayed for a few minutes at that position, then went back inside to eat his lunch in the basement. The assassination of the President of the United States was not going to spoil his appetite.(15) He left the depository building between 1:00PM and 2:00PM to head home.(16) Frazier, however, did not go home, but supposedly went back to Irving to see his step father David Williams at the Irving Professional Center, who had been convalescing there for a month.(17) The only problem with this is that Frazier left Huntsville to “stay away from an abusive, alcoholic stepfather”(18), so why would he be looking for solace from him on this most tragic day? Between 4:00-5:00PM Linnie Mae approached the officers who were at the Paine’s and advised Det. Adamcik that “her brother was visiting her father at Parkland Hospital, and we could reach him there.”(19) Why was she buying time for Frazier? Would this coincide with the time the Altgens was being altered? Frazier could have been unaccounted for up to 6 hours. Since his car was not enclosed in any way, he could have left anytime and apparently he did.

He was arrested around 6:45PM and taken to the Irving PD to wait for DPD agents Stovall, Rose and Adamcik. They searched his car on the spot with “negative results”.(20) They went to the Randle residence and conducted a thorough search there. They found a .303 caliber British rifle with ammunition which was confiscated.(21) His sister arrived at the house and the urban legend of Lee Oswald carrying a “long package” was born when Linnie Mae supposedly told the police about the long “suspicious” package she “saw” Lee with that morning. She was here to defend her brother at all cost. She even arranged for a Baptist priest to accompany them to City Hall in Dallas.(22)

With all the commotion of the day, Frazier never had a chance to change his clothes. It appears he avoided going home because he knew they were waiting for him there. Then again, he could have gone home to tie up loose ends. Did his sister Linnie Mae tip him off? Was he in direct contact with the Paines? This photograph taken the night of 11/22/63, shows what he was wearing at 12:30PM that day. The official story is that at 9:00PM the DPD finished taking affidavits from both Buell and his sister. They started back to Irving when a radio call came in asking them to turn around and go back to Dallas.(23) Captain Fritz ordered that Frazier take a polygraph test, which he passed “conclusively”.(24) The test lasted until 12:10AM 11/23/63. Many researchers believe the test was rigged. Much more on this will follow.

(continued)

Edited March 8, 2013 by James H. Fetzer

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Frazier gets drafted

What better way to keep tabs on Buell Wesley Frazier? He was drafted into the Army and inducted on August 2, 1965 at the age of 21.(25) He was shipped to Europe as soon as he finished his basic training in Oct 1965, 23 months after the assassination.(26) Seven months later he returned to the continental U.S. and was assigned to Ft. Lewis, Washington.(27) This happened to be close to Seattle, a major embarkation point for Vietnam.(28) They made sure he was exposed to other young men who were on their way to ‘Nam, some never to return alive. Frazier spent more than a year in suspense and limbo at Fort Lewis from June 1966 to August 1967.(29) After two years of service as a cook, in August 1967, Frazier was “released from active duty” and transferred to U.S. Army Reserve.(30) According to Frazier in his HSCA interview, since he was not going to make a career out of the Army, he was given the choice of deferring his active duty service for later on. While the Vietnam War was raging and some of our major cities burning, he quietly went back to civilian life in Irving.(31)

At the age of 23, Buell Wesley Frazier completely missed the Vietnam War as if it never happened (another George W?). Most of his contemporaries were humping in the rice paddies of Vietnam, many coming back in body bags. The implication is pretty obvious. It is mid-1967: “Wesley, my boy, you have seen your buddies flown to ‘Nam, Johnson is escalating big time, and they need another 50,000 troops. Are you going to behave and keep your mouth shut, ignore all of these investigators and researchers, or are we going to have to ship you overseas, hopefully you don’t come back in a body bag yourself? We can have you in Saigon in 18 hours”. (32)

In between Army stints, Frazier testified at the Shaw Trial on 2/13/69, but not without providing stiff resistance via his attorney Hollebeck. One of his conditions for testifying was that he would not be available to the press in New Orleans.(33) In his testimony under oath, he appears to have misstated (or lied about) his, Lovelady’s and Shelley’s positions, stating he was “at the top of the stairs”, and Lovelady and Shelley were “Right down in front of me at the bottom of the steps.”(34)

At 28, Frazier returned to active duty and re-enlisted towards the end of the Vietnam war on 3/26/73 at Ft. Polk LA. He went through Advanced Individual Training at Ft. Sill, OK, on 7/16/73. He returned to Texas 8/9/73 at Ft. Bliss and went through artillery training in September 1973. From there he was transferred to Ft. Hood, TX, on 9/20/73.(35) Frazier was promoted to Administrative Specialist on 10/01/76 with the Headquarters Headquarters Company, 2nd Armed Division, in Ft. Hood.(36) He finished his tour of duty doing security for officers at base headquarters.(37) He was discharged on 3/25/77 at the age of 32, at Ft. Hood with the rank of Sergeant.(38) He earned the following distinctions: National Defense Service Medal, Marksman Badge w/ Rifle Bar, Good Conduct Medal, Army Commendation Medal, and Expert Badge w/ Rifle Bar.(39)

The Assassination Tapes

In 1975 Penthouse Press published George O’Toole’s The Assassination Tapes. Douglas Horne praised this volume as “a delightful gem of a book” and “the evidence he presented is just as relevant–and just as valid–today, as it was in 1975.”(40) Harold Weisberg criticized the book for two reasons: (a) He felt O’Toole had borrowed way too much from Whitewash IV (bordering on plagiarism) without giving him credit, and ( he thought some of his wild speculation was too much for him to handle. Weisberg did not impugn the actual technology and methodology O’Toole had used, however.(41) Mark Lane totally embraced the technology and wished he had it when he was seeing and recording witnesses in Dallas. It would have sent him in other directions of investigation.(42)

Despite the controversy, O’Toole’s investigation, which is based upon voice stress analysis, is full of intrigue. The Psychological Stress Evaluator was invented in 1971 (43) and patented in 1976 by Bell, McQuiston and Ford.(44) Their model PSE 1000 was marketed by the Dektor Counterintelligence and Security Co.(45) According to O’Toole, this device opened up a whole new playing field for investigators. He was now able to use recorded exchanges to chart the degree of stress in voice recordings no matter how old or far away.(46) O’Toole went back and retroactively analyzed voice recordings of Oswald and determined he had been telling the truth about “not shooting anyone.”(47)

Next, O’Toole also analyzed Frazier’s CBS interview (YouTube video below) shortly after the assassination, however, and determined his degree of deception had gone through the roof during the entire 42 second exchange: (48)

“Judging from the PSE charts, when Buell Wesley Frazier made that statement, he was in a condition of sheer terror.”(49)

Now O’Toole was ready to deal with Frazier by interviewing him himself. His first order of business was, of course, to find him. After failing to find him in Dallas he visited Linnie Mae who quickly brushed him off. The only thing he could get out of her was the fact that Frazier was in the Army and could not be contacted.(50)

While in Dallas he called Paul Bentley, senior polygraph examiner at the time (of the assassination). Bentley claimed not to have been on duty that night because of a sprained ankle that was in a cast. (He detected hard stress in his voice.)(51) Next, he decided to talk to R.D. Lewis, who, according to DPD documents, was the technician who administered the polygraph to Frazier. Lewis denied administering any polygraph “connected to Oswald” that night (hard stress).(52) Furthermore, O’Toole established that R.D. Lewis never signed the DPD report, which had Rose and Stovall’s name on it, and “Lewis had not gone on record anywhere to the effect that Frazier had passed the test.”(53) Lewis would not testify before the Warren Commission.

For his next interview, he spoke to Detective Gerald Hill at his home. Hill advised O’Toole that Fritz could not have ordered the polygraph: ” ’cause Fritz didn’t believe in polygraphs. He wouldn’t use ‘em ” (near maximum stress).(54) He returned and spoke to Bentley again, who told him that was not true, he had run “many, many” examinations for Captain Fritz.(55)

He decided to see Detective Richard Stovall, who was with Frazier most of the early evening and night of 11/22 until he dropped him off after midnight.(56) The first thing he found out from Stovall was that he had not been present for Frazier’s polygraph. (Hard stress appeared.)(57) This directly contradicted his WCVIIH192 testimony.(58)

He also spoke to Guy F. Rose, the detective who was with Stovall and Adamcik that day. Rose now contradicted Hill regarding

Fritz’s confidence in the polygraph test.(59)

O’Toole then contacted R.D. Lewis again, armed with information contained in Jim Bishop’s 1967 book, The Day Kennedy was Shot, and Warren Commission references that mentioned the polygraph. He now started to vaguely remember maybe giving Frazier a polygraph test that night. Finally, O’Toole concluded that there was no credibility to Frazier having passed the polygraph test.(60)

It was now time to get serious about finding Frazier. He checked with an Army contact and was told there had never been anyone by that name in the Army.(61) From there, he heard from another contact with “very good FBI connections” that Frazier was working at the Boeing Corporation, in Renton, who was not the only source. Then he went chasing him through most of the bases he had been in the south, sometimes just missing him.(62)

On a visit to Dektor, he happened to meet Tony Pellicano, an expert at finding people.(63) With the help of Pellicano, O’Toole at last located Frazier in December 1973 in Texas, stationed at Fort Hood, only 100 miles south of Dallas. Frazier was living on the base and commuting back and forth to Irving on weekends.(64) When he finally recorded his interview with Frazier, it was no less than stunning. Pellicano caught Frazier repeatedly lying about just about everything. The following questions produced maximum hard stress or good to hard stress:(65)

1. Did he (Oswald) take that package up with him into the building?

2. Did he tell you he was going to go home with you that night?

3. There was nobody else in the (polygraph) room with you?

4. Did he (the examiner) tell you that you passed the test?

5. Do you know Paul Bently?

6. You never knew he (Oswald) had this gun then?

In closing this chapter, O’Toole wrote:

“The midnight polygraph examination of Buel Wesley Frazier lies at the very heart of the mystery of November 22, 1963. Why does it provoke hard stress, false statements, and curious lapses of memory among the Dallas police officers who should be the most familiar with it? …the answer to these questions can only be the darkest speculation.” (66)

(continued)

Edited March 10, 2013 by James H. Fetzer

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Frazier and the HSCA

While he was being discharged from the Army in 1977, the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) was forming to reinvestigate the JFK and MLK assassinations. Again, Frazier offered stiff opposition to testifying. “Frazier continues to procrastinate. Definite resistance.”(67) Frazier was finally interviewed by Investigators Moriarity and Day of the HSCA, but never testified under oath. The reason is pretty obvious when one reads the transcripts. Four audio tapes were made of these interviews, which lingered in oblivion at the National Archives until Greg Parker decided to transcribe them. Tapes one and two were useless because of time deterioration.(68)

Tape number three described how he stayed put on the steps:

“I continued to stay right on the steps where I was. I didn’t move from there, I didn’t talk with someone who was sitting there that, uh, was – was on the stairs, as I said earlier. With the same two people. And the shots came from – apparently now – they came from around in a group of people scrambling.” Later on the same topic, “And I moved to the right. “Cause I was very interested in staying – there is no way to get caught. Standing there in the middle.”(69)

Then Day asked him a very simple, important and relevant question:

DAY: Are you in any pictures?

FRAZIER: No – I don’t remember. What, uh-what I was gonna say is that it sounded – sounded like they were taken in the fall. It was then that was, you know, perfect. But being there at that time I didn’t know.(70)

This tape also contains what seem to be other incoherent statements from Frazier. However, they seem incoherent if you do not know about his induction into the Army. His references to “military” and “Seattle” are not a coincidence. Had this man been mentally tormented, with the spectre of being sent to Vietnam at the whim of the people who were running this operation? It was crucial that they keep a lid on Frazier. This was the star witness who helped to “convict” Lee Oswald in the public eye.

Consider the following exchange from page six:

“And anyways they terminated asking questions and when I answered back I tried to–

I tried to tell them the truth. And that made them very angry.”

(71) The only thing we can think of that could elicit this type of reaction would have been that he told them that perhaps his friend Lee Oswald was right next to him at the front entrance.

On tape four he talked about the advantage the TSBD employees had being on the steps at a higher level and in the sunlight to avoid the crowded curbs, and how he kept going from the doorway to the sunshine and again, confirming his position when the motorcade drove by, next to the “big heavy set lady”.(72) These details are very important because

they refute the argument that he was in the shadows of the doorway

when the motorcade drove by:(73)

“So we stepped back out then down on–out on to the steps. …so we stepped back into the sunlight then where actually we could see better. Because that’s you know its not every day that you can see the President of the United States come by in a motorcade a few feet away.”

FRAZIER: OK, I know some of the girls that worked in the uh offices above and they stepped out into the sunlight with me there and I know the big heavy set woman she was right there.(74)

Take a look at the same area, but from the angle of Dave Weigman, who was traveling in a press cars, the 7th car in the motorcade, 1 or 2 seconds after the last shots. The three people shielding their eyes are still there, right? Now focus on the man sandwiched in between these three.

These images confirm this is a young, tall, slim, long-limbed man with long neck, black hair, triangular shaped combination of head and hair. He is wearing a long sleeved dark colored shirt rolled up right below the elbow. Why is this man not seen in Altgens6? The three people in Altgens6 who are shielding their eyes with their hands are accounted for. Doorman is also accounted for as well as the black man who is at his lower right.

When we flip the 11/22/63 photograph taken of Buell Frazier and compare it to the figure in Weigman, we get a perfect match. He happens to be standing exactly on the stairs where he said he was in his own hand written statement the night of 11/22/63.(75)

His Warren Commission testimony was taken 3/11/64 by Mr. Joseph (“I won’t drop the ball”) Ball. In his testimony, Frazier confirmed his position stating he was “one step down from the top there”, and “Yes sir, standing by the rail.” He was shown CE-362, which is a only a schematic drawing of the first floor as seen from above to establish his position at the time.(76)

(continued)

Edited March 8, 2013 by James H. Fetzer

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Down the road of deception, lies and duress

Here is where things get dicey. We just proved Frazier was standing on the steps, which was documented as early as the night of the assassination. (77) In his Warren Commission testimony, he was asked if he would take a look at CE-369, a version of

Altgens6 that is severely cropped. Quoting from page 242 of his testimony:

BALL. We have got a picture taken the day of the parade and it shows the President’s car going by. Now, take a look at that picture. Can you see your picture any place there?

Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir; I don’t, because I was back up in this more or less black area here.

Mr. BALL. I see.

Mr. FRAZIER. Because Billy, like I say, is two or three steps down in front of me.

Mr. BALL. Do you recognize this fellow?

Mr. FRAZIER. That is Billy, that is Billy Lovelady.

Mr. BALL. Billy?

Mr. FRAZIER. Right

Mr. BALL. Let’s take a marker and make an arrow down that way. That mark is Billy Lovelady?

Mr. FRAZIER. Right.

Mr. BALL. That is where you told us you were standing a moment ago.

Mr. FRAZIER. Right.

Mr. BALL. In front of you to the right over to the wall?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes.

Changes at the Entrance

These images are from the Warren Commission. Below left is a schematic drawing of the first floor of the building, the area where Lee Oswald and Wesley Frazier worked side by side filling orders. According to Frazier’s testimony, the only reason for order fillers to have gone up to the sixth floor would have been to process book returns. This was a very simple procedure which required very little time. That morning it was Frazier who had been to the sixth floor at least once. When asked if he had seen Oswald on the sixth floor of the building at any time that morning, he answered, “No”.(78)

The second image below is the Elm Street main entrance of the building as seen from inside. Notice how restricted the top landing of the entrance was in those days–it could not have been more than 3 feet of horizontal space towards Elm Street, which probably could only accommodate one row of people. Moreover, the radiator against the wall allows us to estimate the space on the other side of the door. The schematic drawing also confirms the door opened both ways and was right in the middle of the landing. This is where Frazier supposedly was, “in the shadows more or less”.

(continued)

Edited March 8, 2013 by James H. Fetzer

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Years later the entire doorway was replaced with thick, ornate wooden frames,

and the door itself pushed further inside the entrance, which greatly increased the area of the landing as we see today above.

In 1986, Frazier testified at Lee Oswald’s mock trial. At 9:57 into his testimony:

SPENCE: You recall these 23 years later that Mr. Lovelady was standing in front of you at that precise moment – about 4 steps in front of you, is that correct?

FRAZIER: Yes sir, that is.

SPENCE: Have you ever said that to anybody in the world prior to today?

FRAZIER: I don’t know whether anyone asked me that or not.

SPENCE: But my question is did you ever tell that to anyone in the world – prior to today?

FRAZIER: Not that I know of, sir.

SPENCE: But you did tell that to Mr. Bugliosi, with the ‘g’ silent, didn’t you.

FRAZIER: Well I asked this question, awhile ago sir. (nervously chewing gum)

There are major problems with this. Again, Frazier was right in the middle of the group that was on the stairs, one or two steps from the top. The deception orchestrated by Joseph Ball in his Warren Commission testimony is pathetic. It is rife with contradictions. Every time Frazier testified about his position at the stairs of the entrance of the TSBD, no matter in which forum, he gave a different story. In his WC testimony, he gave two different positions (as seen above) within the same session! Doorman is obviously above him, not 2, 3 or 4 steps in front of him! Thanks to Gerry Spence, we have videotaped testimony which shows Frazier lying with impunity under oath. By 1986 he had apparently gotten used to the libretto and did not need any more coaching.

The image to the right is from Ralph Cinque’s Altgens6 re-enactment conducted on 11/7/12 and 11/13/12, the first time this was ever done. It is presented here to confirm the position of doorman at the top step of the stairway. Again, this is also confirmed by Altgens6 and Weigman 658. This image only shows the top 3 of the 7 steps that comprise the stairway itself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=604Fr5t198A

YouTube - Veterans Today -

(continued)

Edited March 8, 2013 by James H. Fetzer

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Alterations of our own

Using 21st century technology, when we reverse engineer the alterations of the doorway of Altgens6 we come up with this. Once we match Frazier’s head size, rotate him, blur him up a bit and transfer him back to where he used to be, it is a perfect fit! Even Special Agent Jack Ready returns to his original, correct size, as seen when compared to his partner right next to him and this inset.

After careful analysis of all of the evidence presented here, there is an extremely high probability that Buell Wesley Frazier and possibly Sarah Stanton were both removed from the Altgens6 photograph. Once we come to terms with this concept, we begin to understand the terrible life of duress Buell Wesley Frazier has lived. He may live well and comfortable today, but he will always know in the back of his mind what really happened and how he helped frame an innocent man

Discussion

Why was Frazier removed from Altgens6? That’s a very good question. Until he and his sister Linnie Mae come clean, all we can do is speculate. When Altgens6 was viewed on 11/22 at 1:00PM, there was a group of TSBD employees spilling out from the top landing area down into the seven doorway steps as seen in Weigman 658, including Frazier and possibly Sarah Stanton. Both were in Altgens line of sight. Thanks to the Warren Commission we know the landing area of the doorway was much smaller then than it is today. Despite the difference in distance, and much like we see in this Skaggs image at right, Hughes right below, and very faintly in Weigman 658, part of the glass divider and silver metal frame should have been visible in the background of Altgens6. Today, this area is mostly obscured. Years later the entrance was retrofitted and remodeled to match Frazier’s “back in the shadows” story.

Notice how faint the light fixture and the horizontal frame seem in Altgens6 when compared to this Hughes image.

The fact that Lee Oswald and Buell Wesley Frazier knew each other (albeit for only a couple of months), worked side by side filling orders, and car pooled on weekends was too clear and solid a connection. Once the legend of Oswald as a loner, communist and malcontent was established immediately after the assassination, Oswald being with Frazier at the doorway could not be permitted.

Over the years Frazier has misstated his position on at least five or six different occasions, sometimes under oath. He was caught lying by O’Toole quite a few times and the results of his supposed “midnight polygraph test” have never surfaced.

If Frazier was complicit in setting up Oswald, even in a passive way, his role could have been to deliver the rifle from the Paine’s garage. This could easily have been accomplished by putting the Carcano in the trunk of his car in the early hours of 11/22 or the night before. Being only half a block away either of the Paines could have facilitated this exchange and, with a spare copy of Frazier’s car key, he would not even have had to get out of the couch he slept in. Perhaps the true reason for Frazier lagging behind was to make sure Oswald did not see him bringing a rifle into the TSBD. If he was passively involved, he may have left the rifle in the trunk of his car and allowed others to retrieve it.

They would have had all morning to plant it. Notice on page one how far and isolated from the TSBD his car was parked. Those three blocks seem to be close to half a mile distance to the building as shown in CE-361 below. The distance from his car to the TSBD, according to the scale shown was approximately 2,250 feet. While we are on this topic, another unmentioned possibility, if he was actively involved, could have been used as a chauffeur or a getaway driver for any one of the real participants. His five to six hour absence now starts to look pretty suspicious. By taking McKinney Avenue or Munger Street, he could have left the scene of the crime without being noticed.

(continued)

Edited March 8, 2013 by James H. Fetzer

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

When we consider Frazier’s comment about remaining at the steps, “Cause I was very interested in staying – there is no way to get caught. Standing there in the middle”, this scenario now takes on new meaning. It was imperative that Frazier be erased from his actual location to the shadows of the doorway, where–by insisting he say, “I was back up in this more or less black area here” and the power of suggestion–he could become Black Hole Man. Instead of Tinkers to Evers to Chance, we have Frazier to Lovelady to Oswald.

We now present the entire Altgens6, rendered with the person we believe was removed from the photo the day of the assassination, Buell Wesley Frazier.

Larry Rivera, the son of a career military man who served as CID officer in the Army and a Certified Network Engineer, has made a lifelong study of the JFK assassination. He has given interviews on the assassination to Spanish media and has the most complete dossier on Billy Nolan Lovelady ever done.

References:

1. CE 1381, NPRC report

2. WC2H211

3. Ibid

4. Dallas Morning News 11/16/08 Aynesworth, “Oswald co-worker no longer silent about JFK assassination role”

5. WC2H212

6. Ibid

7. WC2H246 “When you live in a place you know some places that someone with, you know, not much of an education can find work”

8. DMN 11/16/08 Aynesworth, “Oswald co-worker no longer silent about JFK assassination role”

9. DPD handwritten statement pg 1 and affidavit 11/22/63

10. WC2H214

11. WC2H227

12. WC2H228

13. DPD Affidavit 11/22/63 p2 by Mary Rattan

14. DPD handwritten statement and affidavit 11/22/63

15. WC2H235

16. CE 1381 1:00-2:00PM was quite a generous time frame

17. Greg Parker article,9/22/09 “Whose line is it anyhow?” Buell Wesley Frazier, Linnie Mae and Bill Randle

18. DMN 11/16/08 Aynesworth, “Oswald co-worker no longer silent about JFK assassination role”

19. DPD Rose/Stovall/Adamcik

20. Ibid

21. DPD 148-001

22. DPD Rose/Stovall/Adamcik

23. DPD Rose/Stovall/Adamcik Report and Cover-Up, Shaw 90-91

24. DPD Rose/Stovall/Adamcik pg 4

25. HSCA Tape 4 pg, 2 NPRC report

26. NPRC FOIA report pg 2

27. Ibid

28. GI’s Diary http://www.174ahc.org/diary01.htm by SP4 Horace Cassels

29. NPRC report pg 2

30. NPRC, HSCA Tape 4 pg 2

31. HSCA tape 4 pg 2

32. GI’s Diary http://www.174ahc.org/diary01.htm by SP4 Horace Cassels

33. Armstrong Box 16 Notebook 3, Tab 28 pg 7

34. Shaw trial 1969 BWF pg 26

35. NPRC pg 3

36. NPRC pg 4

37. Ibid

38. Ibid pg 1

39. Ibid

40.Horne, Inside the ARRB Vol V, pg 1654

41. Weisberg letter 7/28/75 (Example: Oswald to buy car and meet FBI in Texas Theater to collect the $200.00)

42. Weisberg photocopy “forward” of The Assassination Tapes paperback edition

43. Horne, Inside the ARRB Vol V, pg 1655

44. Copy of patent available.

45. http://vsa-avsa.blogspot.com/ The first supplier of VSA technology was Dektor. Dektor manufactured the PSE 1000, an analogue machine, that was later replaced by the PSE 2000

46. The Assassination Tapes (TAT) pg 83-84

47. Ibid pg 125

48. Ibid 171

49. Ibid 172

50. Ibid

51. Ibid 173

52. Ibid 174

53. Ibid 181

54. Ibid 175

55. Ibid 177

56. Ibid 177-179, DPD Report, and WCVIIH192

57. Ibid 178

58. WCVIIH192

59. TAT pg 183-184

60. Ibid 187

61. Ibid 190

62. Ibid 196

63. Ibid

64. Ibid 197

65. Ibid 201-203

66. Ibid 206

67. Armstrong HSCA RG233 hand written notes

68. Greg Parker’s web site. www.ReopenKennedyCase.com

69. Tape III-2

70. Ibid

71. Tape III-6

72 Ibid

73. Ibid

74. Tape IV-14

75. DPD handwritten statement and affidavit 11/22/63

76. WC2H233

77. Op Cit

78. WC2H232

79. WC2H244, despite Ball trying his best to confuse him.

80. DMN 11/16/08 Aynesworth, “Oswald co-worker no longer silent about JFK assassination role” pg 4

81. “The Trial of Lee Harvey Oswald” Posted by MinM Fri Nov 21st 2008, http://journals.demo...nd.com/MinM/109 “Mark Lane would have been a better choice” Spence allowed Bugliosi to lead witnesses at will.

Edited March 8, 2013 by James H. Fetzer

[Greg Burnham]

You have referred to an area of Altgens 6 repeatedly as, Obfuscated Man. I have refuted that claim with a much less complex

explanation for that portion of the photo. Using inference to the best explanation I concluded that it is a man whose elbow is

pointed directly at the camera, and the attendant glare is from over exposure of the white sleeve on his forearm. I have shown

that he is shielding his eyes from the sun with his right hand. It is a simple explanation that is adequate to the evidence unless

one begs the question thus requiring a more complex, but generally less accurate explanation.

When the issue was first raised months ago, you ridiculed me for even suggesting that an alternate interpretation of the

evidence existed. Earlier this week you finally came around to at least admit that there was some merit to the possibility

that my interpretation might be plausible. But, before that you've been insisting that it was an OBVIOUS alteration of the

photo. You accused me of "perpetrating a fraud" on my own wife when she didn't agree that it was alteration of the photo,

but rather "glare" from the sun.

And now, as pointed out by Robin Unger elsewhere, the person I have dubbed "Elbow Man" -- that you dismissed as idiotic

has been INCLUDED in Ralph Cinque's own so-called re-enactment photo!

[Robin Unger]

I am glad that you have now conceded that the small woman (1) in Altgen's 6

is the same figure as (1) in Wiegman

you do realize that contradicts what Cinque has been saying all along. ?

When i posted this on Duncan's forum some months ago Cinque

vehemently denied they were the same person ?

Edited March 8, 2013 by Robin Unger

[Greg Burnham]

Robin,

Is "Elbow Man" the figure marked "B"?

[Robin Unger]

Yes Greg figure B is elbow man

And the figure they are calling a man, figure C is actually a woman

Edited March 8, 2013 by Robin Unger

[John Navin]

Dr. Fetzer, well done. Just to be clear, I believe it was Pellicano that interviewed Frazier, not O'Toole. Pellicano recorded the call on O'Toole's behalf. Then, O'Toole ran the stress evaluator. Couple of things here: the pse is still in use by law enforcement agencies. Modern updated versions. I don't think it's allowed in court, but a detective told me that it's VERY useful during investigations. And: Pellicano's in prison in California. I definitely think he would be worth talking to about this subject.

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

John,

Thank you. Larry had Pellicano's name as having discovered the contradictions, but I thought it was more appropriate to assign that to O'Toole, since he was the person who had applied the PSE to the tape recording. I will ask Larry again if I should switch it back. I am grateful for your response, a refreshing change from other replies I have been encountering here recently. Nice!

Jim

Dr. Fetzer, well done. Just to be clear, I believe it was Pellicano that interviewed Frazier, not O'Toole. Pellicano recorded the call on O'Toole's behalf. Then, O'Toole ran the stress evaluator. Couple of things here: the pse is still in use by law enforcement agencies. Modern updated versions. I don't think it's allowed in court, but a detective told me that it's VERY useful during investigations. And: Pellicano's in prison in California. I definitely think he would be worth talking to about this subject.

[Robin Unger]

One possible candidate for the woman seen on the steps wearing black.

Wiegman Colorized / Murray Crop

Click on image to view FULL SIZE

Edited March 9, 2013 by Robin Unger

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Gregory Burnham loves to make claims he cannot sustain. He has yet to "refute" any argument I have made

about Doorman on this or other threads. He has offered "rebuttals", but rebuttals only qualify as refutations

when they are successful. None of his has been to date. But this very minute and detailed claim about the

person he calls "Elbow Man" has raised some serious questions in my mind about his methodology. In the

past, when I have repeatedly asked him to concede that Doorman is missing his left shoulder, that Black Tie

Man is both in front of him and behind him at the same time, and that Obfuscated Man has his face obscured,

he has INSISTED THAT THE IMAGES ARE TOO BLURRY AND INDISTINCT TO MAKE ANY DETERMINATION.

Now compare the images he claims are TOO BLURRY AND INDISTINCT WITH WHAT HE PRESENTS NOW.

Since the area in which he is presenting this analysis of "Elbow Man" is overwhelmingly LESS DISTINCT AND

MORE DIFFICULT TO SORT OUT than the relatively obvious points that I have raised in the past, I must ask:

either Greg was putting us on ("bullxxxxting") about being unable to discern the missing shoulder and so forth

in the past or he is putting us on ("bullxxxxting") about being able to discern these obscure features now. So

which is it, Burnham: Both of those positions cannot be true: were you bullxxxxting us then or are you now?

You have referred to an area of Altgens 6 repeatedly as, Obfuscated Man. I have refuted that claim with a much less complex

explanation for that portion of the photo. Using inference to the best explanation I concluded that it is a man whose elbow is

pointed directly at the camera, and the attendant glare is from over exposure of the white sleeve on his forearm. I have shown

that he is shielding his eyes from the sun with his right hand. It is a simple explanation that is adequate to the evidence unless

one begs the question thus requiring a more complex, but generally less accurate explanation.

When the issue was first raised months ago, you ridiculed me for even suggesting that an alternate interpretation of the

evidence existed. Earlier this week you finally came around to at least admit that there was some merit to the possibility

that my interpretation might be plausible. But, before that you've been insisting that it was an OBVIOUS alteration of the

photo. You accused me of "perpetrating a fraud" on my own wife when she didn't agree that it was alteration of the photo,

but rather "glare" from the sun.

And now, as pointed out by Robin Unger elsewhere, the person I have dubbed "Elbow Man" -- that you dismissed as idiotic

has been INCLUDED in Ralph Cinque's own so-called re-enactment photo!