Oswald Leaving TSBD?

[Sandy Larsen]

6 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

(1) LHO never said he was on the steps at that time.  It was only Captain Will Fritz who claimed that LHO said that.  We have no other source for this belief.  But the DPD ranking officers are all on my #1 suspect list.

Michael Clark,

Did Oswald say he was out with Bill Shelley?

Paul Trejo says we have only claims that he did. Well of course we have only claims... how else would we know anything Oswald said except through interrogation reports?

There are two sources, probably from the same interrogation session, for the "out with Bill Shelley" comment:

1. Captain Fritz's handwritten notes.

2. Brookhout's FBI Report.

If you leave in the malarkey about the 2nd floor Baker/Oswald encounter, it sound like the "out with Bill Shelley" occurs after the assassination. If you delete that malarkey, it tells a whole different story.

[Alistair Briggs]

11 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

If you leave in the malarkey about the 2nd floor Baker/Oswald encounter, it sound like the "out with Bill Shelley" occurs after the assassination. If you delete that malarkey, it tells a whole different story.

lol if you take out the 'malarkey' about the 2nd floor encounter, then you have to take out the 'out with Shelley' part too as they were both claimed to be said by Oswald - same source, if one is taken out because of its source then surely they both should. lol Seriously though, somewhat ironically, you can leave the 'malarkey' about the 2nd floor in and Oswald still could be out front with Shelley at the time. The 2nd floor encounter doesn't rule out Oswald as Prayer Man. Just saying...

 

Sandy, just a couple of things I would like to address from your previous comment.

In reference to 'Baker looking down the street as he runs'. Clarification, looking left.

6 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I did not know that. But if anything, Baker would have been looking to his right, because that is the direction he takes.
 

It's quite hard to spot, and it may just be my reading of it really, but in this clip just about when Bakers head hits the top blue line it seems to me that he looks left, maybe even if it's just a 'quick glance'... no biggy though.

14 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Yes, he moves more to the right. But not in order to pass Truly. Baker was never even close to Truly. We know that because Truly was standing in front of the west end of the stairway (as indicated by his shadow). Yet Baker's initial path was far to the east of that.

I know that a lot of people believe that Baker and Truly nearly collide as Baker passes him, but it's an illusion. If you single step through the video it looks like the Baker and Truly characters merge into one,and then split up into two again. It's really strange looking.

BTW, I can't see any person/obstacle that forces Baker to veer to the right.

 

Slight point, I did say 'as he passes' which isn't the same as 'in order to pass', again no biggy though. I don't think that Baker and Truly nearly collide. The more I watch the clip below it's like Truly is looking in the general direction of where Baker is running from and then as Baker passes him Truly turns round, but turns round in the 'opposite' direction (which seems a bit odd to me. lol)

I too don't see any person/obstacle that forces Baker to veer to the right, but also, looking at the blue line it isn't straight, it bends to the right (on the back of White Suit Man), again no real biggy to be honest.

20 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I disagree. Nothing made him divert to the right.

(see above re blue line on back of WSM)

22 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Well, yes. It could stand and it does stand!

I think we might end up debating the last part for a while yet. lol If only that big suit man didn't walk in to view at the most inconvenient of times we would have seen a wee bit more of Baker's run and it would have gone a long way to truly (pardon the pun) nailing the issue down.I reckon that we are all but in agreement up to the point of Baker's last seen step, and you have put forward your case very well. And I haven't ruled it out (and I hope that has come across).

I think a good way for us to progress from this point, would be to set aside the 'analysing' of the clip for now, and instead look at what else is on offer to back things up.

I think a fair starting point is to say there are only two options! Yours of Baker running elsewhere first and not entering the TSBD until 3 minutes later. Mine of Baker does run in to the TSBD just after being seen in this clip.

What do you think, Sandy? For purposes of progressing things along are you happy to be indulged and vice versa.

[Sandy Larsen]

30 minutes ago, Alistair Briggs said:

lol if you take out the 'malarkey' about the 2nd floor encounter, then you have to take out the 'out with Shelley' part too as they were both claimed to be said by Oswald - same source, if one is taken out because of its source then surely they both should. lol Seriously though, somewhat ironically, you can leave the 'malarkey' about the 2nd floor in and Oswald still could be out front with Shelley at the time. The 2nd floor encounter doesn't rule out Oswald as Prayer Man. Just saying...

 

Sandy, just a couple of things I would like to address from your previous comment.

In reference to 'Baker looking down the street as he runs'. Clarification, looking left.

It's quite hard to spot, and it may just be my reading of it really, but in this clip just about when Bakers head hits the top blue line it seems to me that he looks left, maybe even if it's just a 'quick glance'... no biggy though.

 

Slight point, I did say 'as he passes' which isn't the same as 'in order to pass', again no biggy though. I don't think that Baker and Truly nearly collide. The more I watch the clip below it's like Truly is looking in the general direction of where Baker is running from and then as Baker passes him Truly turns round, but turns round in the 'opposite' direction (which seems a bit odd to me. lol)

I too don't see any person/obstacle that forces Baker to veer to the right, but also, looking at the blue line it isn't straight, it bends to the right (on the back of White Suit Man), again no real biggy to be honest.

(see above re blue line on back of WSM)

I think we might end up debating the last part for a while yet. lol If only that big suit man didn't walk in to view at the most inconvenient of times we would have seen a wee bit more of Baker's run and it would have gone a long way to truly (pardon the pun) nailing the issue down.I reckon that we are all but in agreement up to the point of Baker's last seen step, and you have put forward your case very well. And I haven't ruled it out (and I hope that has come across).

I think a good way for us to progress from this point, would be to set aside the 'analysing' of the clip for now, and instead look at what else is on offer to back things up.

I think a fair starting point is to say there are only two options! Yours of Baker running elsewhere first and not entering the TSBD until 3 minutes later. Mine of Baker does run in to the TSBD just after being seen in this clip.

What do you think, Sandy? For purposes of progressing things along are you happy to be indulged and vice versa.

 

Alistair,

As I said earlier, I really do appreciate the time you've spent on studying my Baker presentation. Not many people would do that.

Also I appreciate your invitation to delve deeper into the question as to when Baker actually entered the TSBD.

However, to be honest I think I just want to sit back and be a spectator for a while. (Which means I can post any time I want, and not post if I don't want.) The reason being that my health isn't so good right now. (Hasn't been for a while.) Nothing major, just limited energy. In fact, that is the reason I haven't visited my "maybe Shelley & Lovelady didn't lie after all " thread for quite some time. Just watching you and Trejo go at it wears me out. LOL

But maybe later on we can do it. Let's play it by ear. How's that sound?

[Sandy Larsen]

46 minutes ago, Alistair Briggs said:

1 hour ago, Sandy Larsen said:

If you leave in the malarkey about the 2nd floor Baker/Oswald encounter, it sound like the "out with Bill Shelley" occurs after the assassination. If you delete that malarkey, it tells a whole different story.

lol if you take out the 'malarkey' about the 2nd floor encounter, then you have to take out the 'out with Shelley' part too as they were both claimed to be said by Oswald - same source, if one is taken out because of its source then surely they both should. lol Seriously though, somewhat ironically, you can leave the 'malarkey' about the 2nd floor in and Oswald still could be out front with Shelley at the time. The 2nd floor encounter doesn't rule out Oswald as Prayer Man. Just saying...

Michael Clark,

If you read the Brookhout Report or Captain Fritz's handwritten interrogation notes, the part about Oswald being outside with Bill Shelley, you will see just before that the info about Oswald buying coke on the 2nd floor and Officer Baker's encounter with Oswald there. Read it carefully and you will see that the timing makes no sense. Because it has Oswald eating lunch after the assassination. (It's been a while, but I believe that that is the part that makes no sense.) Oswald had lunch before the shooting, not after.

Now, assume for a moment that the 2nd floor encounter stuff was added later by the FBI, for the purposes of the WCR. Remove the references to the Baker/Oswald 2nd floor encounter, but leave everything else intact.. Then read it again. You will see that now the timing makes sense.

Just so you know, this is not just a Sandy Larsen theory. There is a group of researcher who have worked on this for years now. And there are many followers, including myself. There is a ton of evidence to support it, for any interested person to study.

If it means anything to you, esteemed Jim DiEugenio is a believer. (I read that in one of his comments a day or two ago.)

This is a part of the Prayer Man movement or theory. Though the "Prayer Man" part of the theory is optional. that is, It isn't necessary to prove that Prayer Man is Oswald.

 

[Alistair Briggs]

5 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

But maybe later on we can do it. Let's play it by ear. How's that sound?

No worries. No rush.

5 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Michael Clark,

If you read the Brookhout Report or Captain Fritz's handwritten interrogation notes, the part about Oswald being outside with Bill Shelley, you will see just before that the info about Oswald buying coke on the 2nd floor and Officer Baker's encounter with Oswald there. Read it carefully and you will see that the timing makes no sense. Because it has Oswald eating lunch after the assassination. (It's been a while, but I believe that that is the part that makes no sense.) Oswald had lunch before the shooting, not after.

Now, assume for a moment that the 2nd floor encounter stuff was added later by the FBI, for the purposes of the WCR. Remove the references to the Baker/Oswald 2nd floor encounter, but leave everything else intact.. Then read it again. You will see that now the timing makes sense.

Just so you know, this is not just a Sandy Larsen theory. There is a group of researcher who have worked on this for years now. And there are many followers, including myself. There is a ton of evidence to support it, for any interested person to study.

If it means anything to you, esteemed Jim DiEugenio is a believer. (I read that in one of his comments a day or two ago.)

This is a part of the Prayer Man movement or theory. Though the "Prayer Man" part of the theory is optional. that is, It isn't necessary to prove that Prayer Man is Oswald.

 

In furtherance to that only, and in no way as a 'refutation',

Just as a point, there are 2 different times in Fritz's notes about Oswald 'buying a coke', the first one (chronologically) is that Oswald was on the 1st floor having lunch and then went up to get a coke (which to me doesn't make sense to be honest because why would he have his lunch without a drink) and the second one (chronologically) is that Oswald bought the coke on his way down to have his lunch. Neither say that Oswald had his lunch 'after' the assassination. The eating of the lunch was either before or not at all.

*Personally I reckon Oswald had lunch before the shooting (wow I am in agreement with Sandy lol) (as noted, the going up to get a coke after lunch makes no sense to me...)

The theory that the 2nd floor encounter didn't happen is fascinating, no doubt about it, and many of the researchers who have worked on it for years have done a sterling job and there is 'a ton' of evidence to support it...

...it has to be noted that not all of those who support the 2nd floor encounter not happening agree on everything else related (one example, the 'Prayer Man' part of the theory/movement is optional). As Sandy rightly says, it isn't necessary to prove that Prayer Man is Oswald for the 2nd floor encounter NOT happening to be correct.

Once upon a time the 2nd floor encounter happening was used as evidence of Oswald's innocene, nowadays it not happening is used as evidence, by inference, of Oswald's innocence. lol All that's needed to prove Oswald's innocence is to prove he was elsewhere at the time

(NB: the longer it takes for Baker to enter the building to have an encounter with Oswald at the steps or in the vestibule or in the Domino room or anywhere lower than the 2nd floor lunchroom the longer Oswald has to get there... )

 

 

 

 

[Sandy Larsen]

13 hours ago, Alistair Briggs said:

Just as a point, there are 2 different times in Fritz's notes about Oswald 'buying a coke', the first one (chronologically) is that Oswald was on the 1st floor having lunch and then went up to get a coke (which to me doesn't make sense to be honest because why would he have his lunch without a drink) and the second one (chronologically) is that Oswald bought the coke on his way down to have his lunch. Neither say that Oswald had his lunch 'after' the assassination. The eating of the lunch was either before or not at all.

Alistair,

Ive started a new thread titled "Bizarre timing reveals the fraudulent addition of the 2nd floor encounter to Oswald interrogation reports."

In the first post I examine one of Fritz's accounts of Oswald having lunch. And it does indeed indicate that Oswald had lunch after the assassination.

[Alistair Briggs]

6 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Alistair,

Ive started a new thread titled "Bizarre timing reveals the fraudulent addition of the 2nd floor encounter to Oswald interrogation reports."

In the first post I examine one of Fritz's accounts of Oswald having lunch. And it does indeed indicate that Oswald had lunch after the assassination.

I've not yet read your new thread yet, Sandy, but genuinely I do look forward to it. Although it may not be apparrent, I am actually quite a fan of 'conspiracy theories' (some of the thoughts I've had on potential theories about the JFK assassination are extremely wild and even more extreme than some of the most extreme ones others have put forward. lol)

Anyroads, just before I look at your new thread, my thoughts about Oswald having lunch... looking at it somewhat pragmatically, Oswald either had his lunch before, during, after or not at all... to extend that though, seen as eating lunch takes time, the options become started and finished lunch before, started before and finished during, started before and finished after, started during and finished after, started after and finished after, or skipped lunch entirely... the way my mind works is I would consider each of those and then follow the consequence through right to the end (and the end would be the time 'Oswald' was arrested at the theatre) (nb: I have put Oswald in single quotation marks to denote that I understand the school of thought that the 'Oswald' arrested wasn't the 'real' Oswald), and then I would consider the consequences back from that point...

Anyroads, I will go have a look at your other thread now.

Regards

[Paul Trejo]

On 1/27/2017 at 9:31 PM, Alistair Briggs said:

...Your claim - "What's in the package, Lee?"
Cited source - "What's in the package, Lee?"
(Completely accurate)

Your claim - "Curtain rods."
Cited source - "Curtain rods."
(Completely accurate)

Your claim - OK
Cited source - "Oh, yes, you told me you was going to bring some today."
(No match)

Anyway, fine, that conversation happened that morning, but the point still stands, Oswald did not turn up that morning blindly with a package, Frazier knew about it the day before.

Cutting somewhat to the chase, a simple and direct question for you Paul, why do you need Frazier to be 'suspicious' of the package and then have him being secretly in love with Oswald as the reason why he 'ignores' that 'suspicion'?  ...

Alistair,

OK, we were both half-wrong and half-right.   Even score.

As for the chase: my reasoning goes back to Michael Clark's observation that Wesley Buell Frazier's behavior was suspicious enough to make Michael think of a JFK conspiracy.  What behavior?  Simply that Frazier wasn't suspicious enough about this wrapped package in the back seat of his car.

I had to think about that for a minute.  Michael suggested that if he had agreed to give free rides to a pal, and then that pal brought a covered package inside his car, and if Michael had asked about it -- it would be abnormal for the conversation to be so short -- the same conversation that you quoted above.

The length of the conversation seems abnormally short to me, as well.

So -- I tried to think of alternative explanations, rather than a JFK conspiracy.  The most obvious explanation, in the light of Frazier's "bathroom remark" when the WC attorney asked him about the first time he met LHO -- is that Frazier's critical faculties were turned to low radar.  Frazier wasn't being critical of LHO -- Frazier was being super-accommodating to LHO -- because Frazier had secret designs on LHO.

That would explain it.  As I say -- I would never have raised the possibility unless Frazier had used that "bathroom remark."

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited January 29, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

On 1/27/2017 at 9:51 PM, Alistair Briggs said:

...Paul I need to ask,

(1)  What leads you to believe that Shelly/Lovelady don't appear in the Prayer Man footage as they were already on the Grassy Knoll

(2)  That little old island... (wait, surely those two aren't the same thing!)

(3)  And what makes you think that Frazier, Molina and Williams don't appear in the Prayer Man footage?

Alistair,

(1) I don't recall seeing Shelly/Lovelady in the Prayer Man footage.  I think that's important.  If I'm missing them, I respectfully request somebody to point them out for me.

(2) Yes -- I am saying that that "little old island" is ultimately the same as the Grassy Knoll, when measured from the railroad tracks on the west, to Houston Street on the east.  

(2.1)  I've been to the TSBD and the Grassy Knoll, personally.  IMHO, it's a lot smaller in person than it looks in film. When you walk directly south from the TSBD steps, the first thing you encounter is an alley way that leads to the parking lot behind the picket fence of the Grassy Knoll.  The second thing you encounter is a "little old island" just immediately north of Elm street,   That "little old island" is the tip of a triangle that expands as it goes westward, as Elm Street dips southwest toward the triple underpass.   The "little old island" expands to include a Grassy Knoll (or Grassy Mall) with a concrete monument, which is bounded on the south by Elm Street, and bounded on the north by that same alley way leading to the parking lot behind the picket fence of the Grassy Knoll.  As one walks further westward from the tip of that "little old island" one comes to the concrete steps of the monument, and if one climbs northward on those steps, one passes the picket fence on one's left, and one sees the massive parking lot on the left, while on the right is the concrete monument and on the far right is "that little old island."  So, IMHO, the "Grassy Knoll" extends all the way from the triple underpass railroad tracks, through the parking lot (bounded on the south by the picket fence and trees) through the concrete monument area with its large grass lawn, to "that little old island" which begins at the east with that triangle corner directly south of the alley in front of the TSBD front steps.  

(2.2)  BTW, that parking lot in 1963 was locked off by a single gate -- for both entry and exit.  It had a big padlock, and only people who rented spaces in that lot had a key.  These were mainly County workers who parked there -- and mainly workers in the County Jail, like Sheriff Deputies Buddy Walthers, Eugene Boone; Luke Mooney; Roger Craig and Seymour Weitzman, as well as Sheriff Bill Decker himself -- all of whom testified for the WC.  

(3) I don't recall seeing Frazier, Molina or Williams in the Prayer Man footage, either.  I think that's important.  If I'm missing them, I respectfully request somebody to point them out for me.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited January 29, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[Alistair Briggs]

16 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

As for the chase: my reasoning goes back to Michael Clark's observation that Wesley Buell Frazier's behavior was suspicious enough to make Michael think of a conspiracy.  What behavior?  Simply that Frazier wasn't suspicious enough about this wrapped package in the back seat of his car.

I had to think about that for a minute.  Michael suggested that if he had agreed to give free rides to a pal, and then that pal brought a covered package inside his car, and if Michael had asked about it -- it would be abnormal for the conversation to be so short -- the same conversation that you quoted above.

The length of the conversation seems abnormally short to me, as well.

Personally I think Frazier was 'suspicious' enough. He regularly gave Oswald a lift on set days, Oswald asked for that to be 'deviated' and that made Frazier suspicious enough to ask why, Oswald told him it was to bring curtain rods. Frazier accepted that. The next morning (Friday) when Frazier saw the package he was suspicious enough to ask what it was, and when told it was curtain rods, he again accepted that by saying ' Oh, yes, you told me you was going to bring some today"

Now, of course, from our looking back at things we know that the story is that it wasn't curtain rods and it was a rifle and that rifle was used to kill Kennedy. We know how it turned out. Frazier at the time, obviously didn't know that, and would the thought even have crossed his mind? Nowadays, if we were in Frazier's position giving a lift to a co-worker who brought a package in on the same day that the President was due past our place of work, then we would probably be more suspicious but only because our interest/knowledge of the Kennedy assassination would make us more 'suspicious'. Frazier at the time is highly unlikely to even have had such a though and would have taken Oswald at face value when he told him 'curtain rods'.

Yeah I can see why you would think the conversation seems abnormally short, but then again some people just aren't chatty as others.

*I regularly have to give lifts to people and some hardly say a word, others I can't get to shut up. lol

42 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

So -- I tried to think of alternative explanations, rather than a JFK conspiracy.  The most obvious explanation, in the light of Frazier's "bathroom remark" when the WC attorney asked him about the first time he met LHO -- is that Frazier's critical faculties were turned to low radar.  Frazier wasn't being critical of LHO -- Frazier was being super-accommodating to LHO -- because Frazier had secret designs on LHO.

That would explain it.  As I say -- I would' t have raised the possibility unless Frazier had used that "bathroom remark."

The thing about the 'bathroom remark'... just to repeat what I said earlier;
"

Quote

... don't get me wrong the phrase 'mess around' could have sexual connotations, in much the same way 'fool around' could have sexual connotations, and indeed 'play around' could have sexual connotations,  but that isn't the only meaning any of them have...

...'play around', 'mess around', 'fool around', 'kid around' 'muck around' all could just mean 'to not be serious about/with something'.

Two kids sitting in a sandbox throwing sand at each other could be said to be 'messing around' (or said to be any of the other ones too)...

... I think that makes that point quite clear.

 

it doesn't have to be a 'sexual' thing.

Also of note is that Frazier didn't say he liked to 'mess around', he said some of the guys like to mess around.

I do think you are making the proverbial 'mountains out of molehills' with regards to the comment 'mess around'.

It's not an problem though, because ultimately whether you are right or wrong (about Frazier's feelings towards Oswald) it doesn't really matter because it can be explained another way anyway,

Two secs, and I will respond to your next comment.

Regards

[Michael Clark]

47 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Alistair,

OK, we were both half-wrong and half-right.   Even score.

As for the chase: my reasoning goes back to Michael Clark's observation that Wesley Buell Frazier's behavior was suspicious enough to make Michael think of a JFK conspiracy.  What behavior?  Simply that Frazier wasn't suspicious enough about this wrapped package in the back seat of his car.

I had to think about that for a minute.  Michael suggested that if he had agreed to give free rides to a pal, and then that pal brought a covered package inside his car, and if Michael had asked about it -- it would be abnormal for the conversation to be so short -- the same conversation that you quoted above.

The length of the conversation seems abnormally short to me, as well.

So -- I tried to think of alternative explanations, rather than a JFK conspiracy.  The most obvious explanation, in the light of Frazier's "bathroom remark" when the WC attorney asked him about the first time he met LHO -- is that Frazier's critical faculties were turned to low radar.  Frazier wasn't being critical of LHO -- Frazier was being super-accommodating to LHO -- because Frazier had secret designs on LHO.

That would explain it.  As I say -- I would never have raised the possibility unless Frazier had used that "bathroom remark."

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

 

"Buell would later tell the Warren Commission, set up to investigate the shooting, that he didn't think the brown paper package was long enough to be a rifle.

To this day he doesn't believe Oswald was carrying a gun.

 

Members of the panel, who included Gerald Ford, later to become 38th President, insisted he must have been mistaken about the brown package carried by Oswald.

'I told them it wasn't big enough to be a rifle, but they said I must have been mistaken,' he said.

'They asked if I was traumatized by the events, but I wasn't. I know what I saw and the package was about two foot in length. I know how long a rifle is and it is not two feet.

'I came under a lot of pressure to change my story, but I refused. I told them what I saw and I know they did not like it.' "

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3326233/I-drove-Lee-Harvey-Oswald-book-depository-don-t-believe-shot-JFK-52-years-assassination-Oswald-s-friend-says-convinced-patsy-real-gunman-grassy-knoll.html

 

 

 

 

[Michael Clark]

While retrieving another quote, i came upon this. I though it had some relevance to this thread, if not immediate significance.

WC testimony: Wesley Buell Frazier

Mr. BALL - Did you notice whether or not Lee had a package that looked like a lunch package that morning?
Mr. FRAZIER - You know like I told you earlier, I say, he didn't take his lunch because I remember right when I got in the car I asked him where was his lunch and he said he was going to buy his lunch that day.

Mr. BALL - He told you that that day, did he?
Mr. FRAZIER - Right. That is right. So, I assumed he was going to buy it, you know, from that catering service man like a lot of the boys do. They don't bring their lunch but they go out and buy their lunch there.

[Alistair Briggs]

17 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Alistair,

(1) I don't recall seeing Shelly/Lovelady in the Prayer Man footage.  I think that's important.  If I'm missing them, I respectfully request somebody to point them out for me.

here's the Synchronized Couch - Darnell GIF from which the above clips were taken:

(NB: it is still in dispute whether it is or isn't Shelley and Lovelady in the clip) (To be fair, Paul, I did point this out to you a while ago in this comment)

27 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

(2) I've been to the TSBD and the Grassy Knoll, personally.  IMHO, it's a lot smaller in person than it looks in film.

Absolutely... eh, the 'bone of contention' comes from the testimony of Shelley and the testimony of Lovelady, as Shelley says they left the steps and went to the island for a bit of time before heading further down and then turned to see Baker/Truly enter the building and Lovelady says it was approx. 25 steps after leaving the steps that he turned round to see Baker/Truly enter the building. Both put the time of it at approx. 3 minutes + after the shots. The clip is approx. 30 seconds after the shots. That's one of the reasons why it is still dipsuted that it is them in the clip or not.

31 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

(3) I don't recall seeing Frazier, Molina or Williams in the Prayer Man footage, either.  I think that's important.  If I'm missing them, I respectfully request somebody to point them out for me.

 

That is said to be Frazier. Not sure if Molina or Williams have totally been identified in that pic, but from the testimony they can be said to be there at the time.

Regards.

P.S. I say all the above with no contentions on my part.

[Alistair Briggs]

14 minutes ago, Michael Clark said:

 

"Buell would later tell the Warren Commission, set up to investigate the shooting, that he didn't think the brown paper package was long enough to be a rifle.

To this day he doesn't believe Oswald was carrying a gun.

 

Members of the panel, who included Gerald Ford, later to become 38th President, insisted he must have been mistaken about the brown package carried by Oswald.

'I told them it wasn't big enough to be a rifle, but they said I must have been mistaken,' he said.

'They asked if I was traumatized by the events, but I wasn't. I know what I saw and the package was about two foot in length. I know how long a rifle is and it is not two feet.

'I came under a lot of pressure to change my story, but I refused. I told them what I saw and I know they did not like it.' "

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3326233/I-drove-Lee-Harvey-Oswald-book-depository-don-t-believe-shot-JFK-52-years-assassination-Oswald-s-friend-says-convinced-patsy-real-gunman-grassy-knoll.html

 

 

 

 

 Just on that subject, until I started looking in to the JFK assassination I didn't know that a rifle could be dismantled. lol

8 minutes ago, Michael Clark said:

While retrieving another quote, i came upon this. I though it had some relevance to this thread, if not immediate significance.

WC testimony: Wesley Buell Frazier

Mr. BALL - Did you notice whether or not Lee had a package that looked like a lunch package that morning?
Mr. FRAZIER - You know like I told you earlier, I say, he didn't take his lunch because I remember right when I got in the car I asked him where was his lunch and he said he was going to buy his lunch that day.

Mr. BALL - He told you that that day, did he?
Mr. FRAZIER - Right. That is right. So, I assumed he was going to buy it, you know, from that catering service man like a lot of the boys do. They don't bring their lunch but they go out and buy their lunch there.

Very relevant, Michael.

It speaks to Oswald not taking a lunch in with him, and there are no reports (as far as I know) that Oswald did buy a lunch that day. It's relevant because a lot of theories are predicated on Oswald having lunch.

Kudos.

[Michael Clark]

I'm posting this because there seems to be some confusion on what was said about the package of curtain rods.

 

WC Testimony: Wesley Buell Frazier

Mr. FRAZIER - Let's see, when I got in the car I have a kind of habit of glancing over my shoulder and so at that time I noticed there was a package laying on the back seat, I didn't pay too much attention and I said, "What's the package, Lee?"
And he said, "Curtain rods," and I said, "Oh, yes, you told me you was going to bring some today." That is the reason, the main reason he was going over there that Thursday afternoon when he was to bring back some curtain rods, so I didn't think any more about it when he told me that.
Mr. BALL - What did the package look like?
Mr. FRAZIER - Well, I will be frank with you, I would just, it is right as you get out of the grocery store, just more or less out of a package, you have seen some of these brown paper sacks you can obtain from any, most of the stores, some varieties, but it was a package just roughly about two feet long.
Mr. BALL - It was, what part of the back seat was it in?
Mr. FRAZIER - It was in his side over on his side in the far back.
Mr. BALL - How much of that back seat, how much space did it take up?
Mr. FRAZIER - I would say roughly around 2 feet of the seat.
Mr. BALL - From the side of the seat over to the center, is that the way you would measure it?
Mr. FRAZIER - If, if you were going to measure it that way from the end of the seat over toward the center, right. But I say like I said I just roughly estimate and that would be around two feet, give and take a few inches.
Mr. BALL - How wide was the package?
Mr. FRAZIER - Well, I would say the package was about that wide.
Mr. BALL - How wide would you say that would be?
Mr. FRAZIER - Oh, say, around 5 inches, something like that. 5, 6 inches or there. I don't--
Mr. BALL - The paper, was the color of the paper, that you would get in a grocery store, is that it, a bag in a grocery store?

--------------------------

Mr. BALL - What did he do about the package in the back seat when he got out of the car?
Mr. FRAZIER - Like I say, I was watching the gages and watched the car for a few minutes before I cut it off.
Mr. BALL - Yes.
Mr. FRAZIER - He got out of the car and he was wearing the jacket that has the big sleeves in them and he put the package that he had, you know, that he told me was curtain rods up under his arm, you know, and so he walked down behind the car and standing over there at the end of the cyclone fence waiting for me to get out of the car, and so quick as I cut the engine off and started out of the car, shut the door just as I was starting out just like getting out of the car, he started walking off and so I followed him in.
So, eventually there he kept getting a little further ahead of me and I noticed we had plenty of time to get there because it is not too far from the Depository and usually I walk around and watch them switching the trains because you have to watch where you are going if you have to cross the tracks. One day you go across one track and maybe there would be some cars sitting there and there would be another diesel coming there, so you have to watch when you cross the tracks, I just walked along and I just like to watch them switch the cars, so eventually he kept getting a little further ahead of me and by that time we got down there pretty close to the Depository Building there, I say, he would be as much as, I would say, roughly 50 feet in front of me but I didn't try to catch up with him because I knew I had plenty of time so I just took my time walking up there.
Mr. BALL - Did you usually walk up there together.
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; we did.
Mr. BALL - Is this the first time that he had ever walked ahead of you?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; he did.
Mr. BALL - You say he had the package under his arm when you saw him? 

FRAZIER - Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL - You mean one end of it under the armpit?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; he had it up just like you stick it right under your arm like that.
Mr. BALL - And he had the lower part--
Mr. FRAZIER - The other part with his right hand.
Mr. BALL - Right hand?
Mr. FRAZIER - Right.
Mr. BALL - He carried it then parallel to his body?
Mr. FRAZIER - Right, straight up and down.
Representative FORD - Under his right arm?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL - Did it look to you as if there was something heavy in the package?
Mr. FRAZIER - Well, I will be frank with you, I didn't pay much attention to the package because like I say before and after he told me that it was curtain rods and I didn't pay any attention to it, and he never had lied to me before so I never did have any reason to doubt his word.
Mr. BALL - Did it appear to you there was some, more than just paper he was carrying, some kind of a weight he was carrying?
Mr. FRAZIER - Well, yes, sir; I say, because one reason I know that because I worked in a department store before and I had uncrated curtain rods when they come in, and I know if you have seen when they come straight from the factory you know how they can bundle them up and put them in there pretty compact, so he told me it was curtain rods so I didn't think any more about the package whatsoever.
Mr. BALL - Well, from the way he carried it, the way he walked, did it appear he was carrying something that had more than the weight of a paper?
Mr. FRAZIER - Well, I say, you know like I say, I didn't pay much attention to the package other than I knew he had it under his arm and I didn't pay too much attention the way he was walking because I was walking along there looking at the railroad cars and watching the men on the diesel switch them cars and I didn't pay too much attention on how he carried the package at all.