Jump to content
The Education Forum

PRAYER PERSON - PRAYER MAN OR PRAYER WOMAN? RESEARCH THREAD


Guest Duncan MacRae

Recommended Posts

When Frazier was arrested that evening, the police did  a search of his home and found a .303 Enfield rifle with clip and ammo.

This was the very first rifle reported to have been found that day, even before the Mauser.  There is no official police report on  this but two media reports, NBC TV and WBAP radio per Walt's chronology and the article The Gun that Didn't Smoke by Walter F. Graf and Richard R. Bartholomew.

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Yeah.  Makes a lot of sense to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎3‎/‎14‎/‎2017 at 9:57 AM, James DiEugenio said:

Sandy, I tend to agree with Andrej on this issue.  But let me say that I understand that there can be no firm conclusions drawn. 

I have talked before about the  first generation critics' shibboleths about the Warren Report.  That is, points they would not really challenge e.g. the second floor lunch encounter or the MC rifle they said was Oswald's. Well here is another sentence attributed to Oswald pretty much as fact: "Oswald told Frazier that he would like to drive to Irving to pick up some curtain rods for an apartment in Dallas."  Except that Oswald never admitted saying this.  He , in fact, denied it.

In Reclaiming Parkland, which I guess no one here has read, I spent 12 pages on this issue.  And as Andrej noted, a good jumping off point is O'toole's book, since he was the first to draw attention to the importance of Wesley Frazier and his sister in the riddle of Oswald and how the DPD made their case.

But to answer your question about what you term to be two lies.  I approach this question on two levels in RP.  First, the problems with the so called gun sack.  Both Gil Jesus and Pat Speer have brought up some very serious questions about this piece of evidence.  As Sylvia Meagher and Roger Feinman insisted until their dying days:  why did the DPD not photograph it in situ?  It would have gone a long way toward making their case, and OTOH, they photographed pretty much the whole floor.  But somehow, they did not shoot a pic of this key piece of evidence.

To my knowledge, the first time we see this gun sack is outside the building.  And as both Gil and Pat demonstrate in spades, it is very hard to imagine that this is the bag that Frazier and his sister are talking about.  I won't go through all the problems inherent in the paradoxes of those pictures.  You can go to each of their sites and read them.  I will say that, for me, its almost ludicrous to say that that is the gun sack Oswald stuck under his arm. And then there is, as there always is, the problem of corroboration and chain of possession. Why did no one else see Oswald with the gun package inside the TSBD?  Most notably Jack Dougherty?  And I don't have to add the indelible testimony of Troy West who Harold Weisberg immortalized in Whitewash. How does one get around his testimony if Oswald himself made the gun sack?  (Harold did for West what Thompson did for S. M. Holland.)  Cadigan said he found no oil or grease marks on the sack, yet the MC rifle was wiped with Cosmoline before it was transported. Further, no one ever said they saw this paper sack on Oswald's person or in his possessions did they?   I could go on and on, but I think the weight of the evidence implies that the origins of the gun sack pictured outside the TSBD with the cops is dubious. In a court of law, it would have been under sustained and effective attack.  And as Gil Jesus shows with convincing evidence, the FBI was almost surely covering up for the DPD on the issue.  (Reclaiming Parkland, pgs 204-05)  

The problem, as the late Roger Feinman so simply stated was this: if the police found a rifle on the sixth floor, then how did the suspect get it there? For if they could show he clandestinely carried it in, that would be pretty incriminating.  So to make that case, they needed Frazier.  Very conveniently for the DPD, Frazier owned an Enfield rifle, which in Walt Brown's chronology is the first rifle the DPD reported as being the weapon used.  And herein comes one of the most interesting parts of O'toole's book: the midnight polygraph of Frazier that O'toole had such a hard time verifying since none of the police wanted to talk about it. As described in Jim Bishop's volume, The Day Kennedy was Shot, Frazier was emotionally distraught to the point he could not compose himself. Bishop called the scene "controlled hysteria". (ibid, p. 207)  It was so bad, the  technician could not get legitimate readings.  Now, that technician did not sign the report and did not testify before the Commission.  And that report is nowhere to be found today, but somehow Frazier passed the test. 

As per Linnie Mae, I won't belabor the story about her seeing LHO come up the street as pictured in the WC.  We have been through that whole thing and to me it simply is not credible, what with her position at the window, and then the garage slats, which she does not mention in her testimony etc etc.  And the person who did see Oswald approach the house, mother Esther Williams, said nothing about any guns sack. (p. 208)

Let me add two other evidentiary points.  First, Wesley told the HSCA that he always locked his car at night since it was positioned outside.  Naturally they then asked him, well how did Oswald open the door to deposit his bag?  Wesley said that particular door was broken. To which the questioner said, "You figure that one out OK?"  Finally, the WR states, with the help of Jerry Ford, that Frazier followed Oswald into the TSBD that morning, with LHO walking ahead at a brisk pace. But yet there is co-worker Edward Shields who testified  to the HSCA differently.  He worked at the warehouse building north of the TSBD.  He said that he saw Frazier park his car that morning and someone asked him where his friend was.  Frazier replied, "I dropped him off at the building."

In my view, the Frazier/Randle guns sack poses some very serious questions.  And as I note above, if Frazier was threatened with being a suspect or accomplice, would that not be a reason for him to go along with the dog and pony show.  But yet, to shove it back at them he would disagree with the length.  

James,

Evidently you want me to review your "evidence" for your CIA-did-it CT yet again.   OK.

1.  You wish to challenge the 2nd floor Oswald encounter with Truly and Baker?  On what rational grounds?

2.  You wish to challenge Oswald's ownership of a Manlicher-Carnano rifle?   On what rational grounds?

3.  You say that Oswald "denied" the curtain rod story.   Yet your only basis for that claim is Captain Fritz & Co., in whose custody Oswald was murdered -- surrounded by Dallas police.

4.  You spent 12 pages in "Reclaiming Parkland" on this issue?  Well, you spent 12 pages in DB2 accusing Ruth Paine of being a CIA agent, too, and we've seen what a waste that was.

5.  As for the gun sack -- the most likely scenario is that Oswald handed his MC rifle to somebody outside of the TSBD (per A.J. Weberman.  (Also, the handoff may have been to Roscoe White, who was Oswald's body double for the Backyard Photographs, according to Jack White, as well as a DPD cop on 11/22/1963).  So, that sack will *never* be found, and the DPD and FBI knew that very well.

6.  Nobody else saw Oswald with the gun sack inside the TSBD, most likely because Oswald handed it off outside the TSBD.

7.  The problem with the gun sack is the handoff, and the problem with the handoff is that it comes closer to a DPD handoff.

8.  On this point we agree -- the FBI (James Hosty) was certainly covering up for the DPD (Captain Fritz).   

9.  It is quite correct to recognize that the DPD cops were eager to find scapegoats, and Buell Wesley Frazier was low-hanging fruit.  He transported the murder weapon, and he lived close to Ruth Paine, a Communist.  Case closed, according to Buddy Walthers and his "six or seven metal filing cabinets full of names of Cuba sympathizers (which nobody ever photographed, logged or found).  No wonder Frazier was terrified. 

10. Linnie Mae Randle is believable -- but she also wanted to keep her brother out of the electric chair for something he didn't do.  She saw the package, all right -- but she had no clue in the world how long it was.  It was a mind game between the WC attorneys, Frazier and Randle to guess, double-guess, triple-guess, quadruple-guess the length of that paper sack.  Who in the world measures a random paper sack?

11. IMHO, the best answer to the MC paper sack is still given by A.J. Weberman's interviews with Gerry Patrick Hemming.  Oswald brought it to the TSBD building to hand it over to a trusted underworld colleague.  It was either Loran Hall, Roscoe White, or the lying Hemming himself.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
typos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How the above with Frazier qualifies as a CIA did it CT escapes me, and I think, everyone else.

If you can show me where I said that or even implied that, I think it would say more about you than it would me.  Because I did not.

But it shows once more, as if we needed more, the blinkers you have on about the evidence.

Everything I wrote above is nestled in the record.  And you probably did not know the half of it.

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly Jim, Paul just sucks stuff out of his thumb and declares it to be gospel.

This is no different from the dross on page 65, 2nd post from the top.

If there is one person who fails miserably it is PT

Pure make believe, without the backing of any evidence whatsoever, no different like Doyle and Miller.

And when they do they hammer on about one little thing, pushing their beliefs up to the hilt, yet what neither of these three understand is that no one is buying it.

Don't just peel the onion, cut it half and remove all the layers of the evidence, then come back to us.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Bart Kamp said:

Exactly Jim, Paul just sucks stuff out of his thumb and declares it to be gospel.

This is no different from the dross on page 65, 2nd post from the top.

If there is one person who fails miserably it is PT

Pure make believe, without the backing of any evidence whatsoever, no different like Doyle and Miller.

And when they do they hammer on about one little thing, pushing their beliefs up to the hilt, yet what neither of these three understand is that no one is buying it.

Don't just peel the onion, cut it half and remove all the layers of the evidence, then come back to us.

Bart,

What is your CT?   Who do you think was behind the JFK conspiracy?

BTW, my CT has the backing and evidence of select witnesses for the WC, for the HSCA, writings from Jim Garrison, from Mark Lane, from Dick Russell, from David Lifton, from Jack White, from Gaeton Fonzi, from Larry Hancock, from Hardway-Lopez, from Bill Simpich and from Jeff Caufield, as well as the 90 boxes of General Walker's personal papers in Austin, and personal interviews with Priscilla Johnson McMillan, Ron Lewis, Harry Dean, Larrie Schmidt, Duncan Gray and Ruth Paine.  I do have evidence.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/14/2017 at 10:55 AM, Andrej Stancak said:

I apologise to everyone for dragging the discussion to curtain rod story but the question asked repeatedly and understandably by fellow researchers is why would Mr. Frazier not say whether Prayer Man was or was not Lee Oswald, and the answer would be that he may not volunteer any information about who stood next to him (if it were Oswald) since he was compromised from the very beginning.

Huh?   If Frazier had said Lee was standing there with him and the others - there would have been no need to fear anything for Oswald could not have been on the 6th floor and next to Frazier at the top of the stairs in front of the TSBD at the same time.

Edited by Bill Miller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎3‎/‎14‎/‎2017 at 10:55 AM, Andrej Stancak said:

I apologise to everyone for dragging the discussion to curtain rod story but the question asked repeatedly and understandably by fellow researchers is why would Mr. Frazier not say whether Prayer Man was or was not Lee Oswald, and the answer would be that he may not volunteer any information about who stood next to him (if it were Oswald) since he was compromised from the very beginning.

Andrej,

Are you saying that Buell Wesley Frazier was "forced" to remain silent about who stood next to him?

Are also saying that the same conspirators who obliged the medical staff at Bethesda Naval Hospital to alter the results of their autopsy were the same people who "forced" Frazier to remain silent?

Are you saying that if Frazier had not been "forced" to remain silent, then he "would have" testified that Lee Harvey Oswald was "Prayer Man?"

Then, are you also saying that Bill Shelley and Billy Lovelady were also "forced" to remain silent about it?   And all other TSBD workers on the steps of the TSBD who also testified for the Warren Commission?

If so, Andrej, then IMHO you are simply making stuff up.  You have no evidence for such a claim.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill:

I think what Andrej is saying is that from his ordeal on the first day where he was detained and arrested and his house was searched and he was brought in for a polygraph etc., that he knew that the police were honed in on Oswald as the perp.

Therefore, if he said anything that violated that belief, they would go after him any way they could.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Andrej,

Are you saying that Buell Wesley Frazier was "forced" to remain silent about who stood next to him?

Are also saying that the same conspirators who obliged the medical staff at Bethesda Naval Hospital to alter the results of their autopsy were the same people who "forced" Frazier to remain silent?

Are you saying that if Frazier had not been "forced" to remain silent, then he "would have" testified that Lee Harvey Oswald was "Prayer Man?"

Then, are you also saying that Bill Shelley and Billy Lovelady were also "forced" to remain silent about it?   And all other TSBD workers on the steps of the TSBD who also testified for the Warren Commission?

If so, Andrej, then IMHO you are simply making stuff up.  You have no evidence for such a claim.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Paul:

I have commented on reasons for which those seeing Oswald in the doorway in a number of my previous posts. For instance, I pointed to the treatment which witnesses opposing the official line received (e.g., Serrano's interview in the RFK case, The Thin Blue Line which actually relates to Dallas) unless they agreed to keep silence. Only the people on the top landing were in position to see Prayer Man. Other people, such as Carl Jones standing at the lower west corner of the doorway, would not know who stood behind him. Oswald stood in the doorway for a short period of time, maybe 120 seconds, and it was the time of pandemonium; Prayer Man would not be a conspicuous person to remember even if someone would glance on the doorway. He would only be seen from certain view angles, excluding a large number of potential random observers. 

The lack of information about Oswald's whereabouts, especially at the time of shooting and shortly later as he was leaving the Depository, equals the lack of information related to his possible short stay in the doorway. He allegedly left three minutes after the shooting, and there were already people around on his way out in the doorway and the vestibule. No one from the employees remembered seeing him leaving?  How comes?

The reason for covering up Lee's whereabouts after 12.00noon was the necessity to place him to the sixth floor. Any testimony about Lee's whereabouts would lead to further questions and to a likely dismantling of the cover-up. 

I will come to Mr. Frazier's credibility in one of my next posts. I am on travel at the moment and have no access to my notes and to original sources. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Bill:

I think what Andrej is saying is that from his ordeal on the first day where he was detained and arrested and his house was searched and he was brought in for a polygraph etc., that he knew that the police were honed in on Oswald as the perp.

Therefore, if he said anything that violated that belief, they would go after him any way they could.

Oswald could have been seen as having some involvement in the assassination and still been seen as standing next to Buell at the time of the shooting. And like many witnesses in the last 10 to 20 years that spoke out against the official version - Frazier said he saw Lee after the shooting in his interview with the 6th Floor Museum which he didn't say to the Commission in 64. So had Lee of been on the stairs with Buell .... I do not believe Buell would withhold that information at this time.

What if someone said Bill Shelley shot the President - do you really think no one would have spoke up and said he was on the steps with me and other  workers who were watching the parade?  Of course they would have spoken up. And I still say that Prayer Man is too wide to be Oswald.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oswald could have been seen as having some involvement in the assassination and still been seen as standing next to Buell at the time of the shooting. And like many witnesses in the last 10 to 20 years that spoke out against the official version - Frazier said he saw Lee after the shooting in his interview with the 6th Floor Museum which he didn't say to the Commission in 64. So had Lee of been on the stairs with Buell .... I do not believe Buell would withhold that information at this time.

What if someone said Bill Shelley shot the President - do you really think no one would have spoke up and said he was on the steps with me and other  workers who were watching the parade?  Of course they would have spoken up. And I still say that Prayer Man is too wide to be Oswald.

 

 

Yup.............

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let us look at some details in Mr. Frazier's testimonies. 

Below is a transcript from the "Living History with Buell Wesley Frazier" interview recorded by the Sixth Floor Museum and posted on August 27, 2013. Mr. Fagin led the interview. The interview can be found on YouTube.com by typing the title of the video broadcast.

The relevant section of the interview starts at 33 min 50 s:

Mr. Fagin: In the chaos that followed the shooting, did you see Oswald at all?

Mr. Frazier: (pause) I did. This was all... I do not know how many minutes later … (noisy recording), but the lady I stand next to. Some of the people, Bill Shelley and Mr. Billy Lovelady, they went down towards the Triple Underpass because before they went down there, a lady came by, a woman came by, she was crying and she said "Somebody has shot the President".

So we looked ...(unintelligible). And I turned to Sarah: "She said somebody shot the President", I said I doubt what she said. She said that she did say that. So we stayed there for few minutes, and, and I walked down to the first step where Billy was standing there by myself so to look around it. And it was just total chaos there.

And then forbear I started to go down If can see Bill Shelley and Billy Lovelady, and it was so much chaos down there. And I said, well, I better go back to work, go back to the steps, so now, and I did, I walked back to the bottom of the steps, and then I walked out to the corner of the building right there where Houston comes side of the building. And I was talking to someone, it  was a lady, and I looked to my left, and come walking alone the side of the Texas School Book  building was Lee Oswald.

Mr. Fagin: walking along this side of the building?

Mr. Frazier: Yes.

Mr. Fagin: Houston Street.

Mr. Frazier. Yes, Houston Street. So, he'd come around after the dock there. So, he walks up and I talked to this lady. He didn't say anything. And he crosses Houston. I watch him crossing Houston as I talked to this little lady. and as he gets over to the other side of Houston, and then he crosses  Elm. And somebody said something to me and I turned, and he was about half-way across the street, and when I turned back he was gone in the crowd, and I don’t know what happened to him. But I did not worry too much about that because there were several places around there where you can go when you need a sandwich, and I never asked him that morning when he and I were riding to work, and I says: Where is your lunch? He said: Oh, I will buy off the truck today. I said: “OK”, Well, I didn’t think anything when he told me about buying off the truck.

He said, buy his lunch, “I will  buy my lunch today”, and … I did not like … (unintelligible) so, but I though he was talking about "Cader Crock" (I not sure I have transcribed this name correctly) , but …

Mr. Fagin: There is no doubt in your mind that this was Lee Harvey Oswald?

Mr. Frazier: This (They?, AS) was.

Mr.Fagin: Could you see the expression of his face, or anything you can tell us about the way he looked?

Mr. Frazier: There was nothing different about Lee. Expression on his face was … He looked perfectly normal. And that’s the last time I remember seeing him.

End of transcript.

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

There are at least two points in this interview which contradict Mr. Frazier's testimony for  the Warren Commission which statements were made under oath: 

1. The point of his whereabouts and moves immediately after the shooting. This is what Mr. Frazier had to say in his testimony:

Mr. FRAZIER - I believe Billy and them walked down toward that direction but I didn't. I just stood where I was. I hadn't moved at all. 
Mr. BALL - Did you see anybody after that come into the Building while you were there? 
Mr. FRAZIER - You mean somebody other that didn't work there? 
Mr. BALL - A police officer. 
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I stood there a few minutes, you know, and some people who worked there; you know normally started to go back into the Building because a lot of us didn't eat our lunch, and so we stared back into the Building and it wasn't but just a few minutes that there were a lot of police officers and so forth all over the Building there. 
Mr. BALL - Then you went back into the Building, did you? 
Mr. FRAZIER - Right. 
Mr. BALL - And before you went back into the Building no police officer came up the steps and into the building? 
Mr. FRAZIER - Not that I know. They could walk by the way and I was standing there talking to somebody else and didn't see it. 
Mr. BALL - Did anybody say anything about what had happened, did you hear anybody say anything about the President had been shot? 
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; right before I went back, some girl who had walked down a little bit further where I was standing on the steps, and somebody come back and said somebody had shot President Kennedy. 
Mr. BALL - Do you know who it was who told you that? 
Mr. FRAZIER - Sir? 
Mr. BALL - Do you know who the girl was who told you that? 
Mr. FRAZIER - She didn't tell me right directly but she just came back and more or less in a low kind of hollering she just told several people. 
Mr. BALL - Then you went back into the Building, did you? 
Mr. FRAZIER - Right. 
Mr. BALL - And police officers came in there? 
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; I would say by the time, you know some of us went back in, and it wasn't just a few minutes, I say there were several. 
Mr. BALL - Did you stay on the first floor? 
Mr. FRAZIER - Well, stayed on the first floor there for a few minutes and I hadn't eaten my lunch so I had my lunch down there in the basement and I went down there to get my lunch and eat it and I walked back up on the first floor there. 
Mr. BALL - When you came back into the Building, you came in the front door, didn't you? 
Mr. FRAZIER - Right 
Mr. BALL - Did you go down to the basement immediately or did you stand around on the first floor? 
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I stood around for several minutes there, you know, and then, you know, eventually the ones who hadn't eaten their lunch, some of them had taken their lunch outside. 

According to Mr. Frazier's testimony, he stayed on the spot where he was during the shooting, and after a girl (Calvary?) came in and told about the shooting on President Kennedy he went into the building, stayed in the first floor, and went to the basement alone. There is no mention of him going down the steps, walking outside in direction of Shelly and Lovelady, then back to steps and then still to the east corner of the building.

2. The point of when Mr. Frazier saw Lee Oswald for the last time. His Warren Commission statements were this:

Mr. BALL - When was the last time you can remember you saw Lee?

Mr. FRAZIER - You mean on the 22d?

Mr. BALL - On the 22d, that day.

Mr. FRAZIER - Somewhere between it was after 10 and somewhere before noon, because I remember I was walking down to the first floor that day, that was the only time I went up on the elevator was, like I say, for a few minutes and, I put that box of books up and put it down, and I was on the first floor putting up books all day and I seen him back and forth and he would be walking and getting books and put on the order.

Mr. BALL - That was the last time you saw him all day?

Mr. FRAZIER - Right

Mr. BALL - You didn't talk to him again?

Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I didn't.

In his testimony for the Warren Commission, Mr. Frazier asserted that he has seen Lee after 10AM for the last time. Now, in his Living History interview, he describes a full knew story in which he saw him leaving the depository from the back of the building, not from the front as the official version had it for fifty years.

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

The details about his lunch conversation with Lee in "Living History" appears new to me. It cannot be classified as a lie because no one asked Mr. Frazier about Lee's lunch during the testimony, however, it certainly provides further damning evidence against Lee Oswald because it disputes Lee's defense that he had a lunch in the first floor before the shooting. How could he have a lunch if he did not bring any lunch with him, and there is no evidence or sighting of Oswald going out of the building to buy it and coming back? An accused assassin was not supposed to go out of the building to buy lunch anyway, he was supposed to wait on the sixth floor for his chance to shoot the President.

So, Mr. Frazier with his details about Lee not bringing his lunch that morning says that the package Lee Oswald brought to work this morning was: 1) not a lunch, 2) not a rifle as you cannot carry a Mannlicher Carcano rifle  this way:

Mr. BALL - One end of it was under the armpit and the other he had to hold it in his right hand. Did the package extend beyond the right hand? 
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir. Like I say if you put it under your armpits and put it down normal to the side. 
Mr. BALL - But the right hand on, was it on the end or the side of the package? 
Mr. FRAZIER - No; he had it cupped in his hand. 
Mr. BALL - Cupped in his hand? 
Mr. FRAZIER - Right. 

The Mannlicher-Carcano rifle, even if disassembled, would be much too long to carry it this particular way. Mr. Frazier was always consistent about the way how the parcel was worn in his subsequent interviews.

=======================================================================================================================================

Where does all this lead to?

Mr. Frazier either lied under oath in his Warren Commission testimony, or he lied in his "Living History" interview. His sudden recall of the important details of his Friday are not a recall problem - he adds vivid details. He does not shrink the story which one would expect as a result of forgetting, he expands it.

Mr. Frazier, sorry to say, lied in important parts of the event. No one would wish to lie. There is no evil motive in Mr. Frazier's heart making him to lie against Lee Oswald. My interpretation is that he is being led, even now, more than fifty years after the fact. The interview not only contains information proving that Mr. Frazier lied either to the Warren Commission or in "Living History", but this information is also a message that we can forget to learn anything useful about the case because not even the information in the Warren Report might be truthful. In my view, the Living History interview with Wesley Frazier is a part of ongoing cover-up.

Mr. Frazier's interview also suggests that he might have other trumps in his sleeve as he was able to produce a brand new and never heard information after fifty years. Maybe, his ultimate card will be Prayer Man's identity. 

Late edit: It is a sort of curiosity that the original Prayer Man thread "Oswald leaving ..." started on August 14, and the first Prayer Man post by Sean Murphy dates August 15, 2013. The interview with Mr. Frazier was posted (not sure when it was recorded though) on August 27, 2013. An interview that pushes Lee away from the first floor, in particular from the first floor vestibule, by having him exiting the building from the back of the building. Mr. Frazier did not see a Coke in Lee's hand (or did he?), so did Lee drink the alleged full bottle of Coke before leaving? Should we believe that he descended from the second floor via the front stairs, drank the Coke somewhere on the first floor as he was moving to the north side of the building, did not take his jacket from the first floor lunchroom, and then left whilst appearing perfectly normal to Mr. Frazier. And no one saw Oswald on the first floor while he was leaving even if he had to walk through the whole first floor to get to the back door.

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

Edited by Andrej Stancak
"out of trunk" replaced with "off the truck" in the transcript section
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frazier didn't know that Lee was going across Elm Street to buy his lunch - he assumed so. He said Lee sometimes bought something off the "truck".

And you are correct - Frazier said he saw Lee post shooting to which he did not tell the Commission. Some 50 years later and he is not afraid to divulge seeing Lee after the shooting, so I doubt he would be afraid to tell people that Lee was standing outside on the landing at the top of the stairs had that of been the case. Perhaps a researcher could contact Buell and talk to him about his seeing Lee after the shooting and ask why he didn't tell that to the Commission.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...