Jump to content
The Education Forum
James DiEugenio

Does everyone know what these pics are about?

Recommended Posts

Jim, as a guess I'm thinking they were made as part of evaluating her story of seeing Oswald and the package...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't Mrs. Randle testify that she saw Oswald come from Buell's car? Didn't she say that she saw him put something in the car? If so, would this not be "proof" that her testimony was plausible? Perhaps, as weak as it is, this would support Mrs. rendle's testimony in light of  Buell's claim as to where the car was parked?

 

???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
James DiEugenio said:

Does everyone know what these pics are about? Photos-From-CD-497.png

Those pictures were taken as part of an FBI booklet of photos called "Paine And Randle Homes", which became Warren Commission Document No. 497.

Here are some of my arguments regarding the topics of "Linnie Mae Randle & The Paper Bag"....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/07/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-746.html

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2012/10/dvp-vs-dieugenio-part-79.html#Linnie-Randle

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2012/11/dvp-vs-dieugenio-part-80.html#Linnie-Mae-Randle-And-The-Package

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/07/frazier-randle-and-paper-bag.html

 

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Michael Clark said:

Didn't Mrs. Randle testify that she saw Oswald come from Buell's car? Didn't she say that she saw him put something in the car? If so, would this not be "proof" that her testimony was plausible? Perhaps, as weak as it is, this would support Mrs. rendle's testimony in light of  Buell's claim as to where the car was parked?

 

???


Don't the photos above tend to show that Mrs. Randle could not have seen Oswald put the package in the car? Unless she walked up to the wood slats in the carport and peeked between their cracks?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Frazier is the best contradiction in the whole case - A man with an outrageous story that seems fabricated to frame Oswald as somebody with no advanced planning, yet he always makes sure to swear that the package was small enough to fit under Oswald's armpit while cupped in the same hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BUD SAID:

Do you think it is possible for her [Linnie Mae Randle] to have seen this [LHO putting the package in the back seat of Frazier's car], David?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID [OCT. 21, 2009]:

I'm not sure. But I certainly think it's possible, given the amount of space between the slats in the carport (as seen in the photo below):

CD497--13.jpg

I certainly don't think Linnie Mae was lying at all. She possibly HEARD more than she SAW.

I.E.,

She peeks out the kitchen door and HEARS the person who she just saw walk toward her brother's car (Lee Oswald). It's obvious that the person at Frazier's car at that point in time was the person Randle just saw cross the street (Oswald).

Randle then HEARS the door of Frazier's car being opened. It's also possible that she gets enough of a glimpse of Oswald through the slats of the carport to see at least a portion of Oswald as he places the bag in the car.

So, the combination of HEARING what Oswald was doing at the car and very likely SEEING a little bit of Oswald through the slats was certainly enough information, IMO, for Mrs. Linnie Mae Randle to reasonably testify in the following manner:

"He opened the right back door and I just saw that he was laying the package down, so I closed the door."

 

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:

Why was the bag not photographed in situ? And why does the bag in evidence not match the one the Fraziers said they saw?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID [OCT. 2012]:

Even though no picture of the bag was taken by the DPD that shows the bag in the Sniper's Nest, there were multiple police officers who testified that they DID see a paper bag lying on the floor in the southeast corner window on the sixth floor before the bag was picked up. Four of those officers are:

L.D. Montgomery [7 H 97]
Robert Studebaker [7 H 143-144]
J.C. Day [4 H 267]
Marvin Johnson [7 H 103]

It's fairly obvious, of course, why conspiracy [theorists] like DiEugenio feel the need to distance themselves from the reality concerning that brown paper bag. Because if those conspiracists were to actually face the stubborn truth about the bag (with that truth being: it was Lee Harvey Oswald's homemade bag and Oswald carried his rifle, inside that bag, into the Book Depository Building), then those conspiracists would be forced to admit that their precious "patsy" had probably taken that gun to work in order to shoot somebody with it on the day President Kennedy came to town.

What other reasonable and logical conclusion could anyone come to after they've admitted to themselves the obvious truth -- that Lee Oswald did, in fact, walk into the Texas School Book Depository on November 22, 1963, with a rifle wrapped in brown paper?

 

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:

Anyone who can say that Linnie Mae Randle and Wesley Frazier are just ordinary witnesses, I mean what can you say?

I don't know anyone in this case who was snapped up to a polygraph at midnight on the 22nd at the DPD.

I don't know anyone who was so panic stricken that the operator could not get a reading on him.

I don't know anyone who had an Enfield rifle in their house, the first rifle reported used in the assassination.

I don't know any witness who the DPD tried to deliberately cover up what they did to him as they did with Frazier.

I don't know any witness with who the DPD deliberately deep sixed the evidence of what happened to him to the point that it completely disappeared from the archives.

I don't know any testimony in which both witnesses to one event have been impeached.

And for Davey to say that...

1.) You can see anything distinguishable through those slats,

2.) You can see to the other side of the car,

This is just BS, so what does DVP do, he invents testimony about "hearing the door".

Utterly shameless.

But par for the course with him.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID [DEC. 3, 2012]:

Yes, you are shameless, Jimbo. You're shamelessly trying to smear the names of two totally innocent people with your outrageous and wholly unfounded BS about Frazier and Randle being "forced" by the DPD to make up the paper bag story from whole cloth. That's a despicable theory and anyone with any common sense knows it. But, of course, it's par for the DiEugenio course, because Jimmy D. couldn't live with the thought that Lee Oswald took that rifle into work with him on 11/22/63 (as the ludicrous 2010 quote shown below amply demonstrates).

"I think Wesley Frazier was pressured into doing what he did, and the Dallas police forced him into doing it because they needed somebody besides Brennan to pin the thing on Oswald." -- J. DiEugenio; Jan. 14, 2010

Yeah, right. As if all the bullets, shells, fragments, guns, fingerprints, fibers, paper bag, the Tippit murder, and Oswald's own actions weren't going to be nearly enough to hang Oswald. Jimbo's out to lunch.

And all of DiEugenio's other concerns melt away like butter on just-popped popcorn when evaluated in anything close to a reasonable way.

E.G.:

Frazier was scared stiff. So what? Wouldn't you be too, given the circumstances?

Frazier had an Enfield rifle. And since Frazier drove the assassin to work in his own car on the day of the assassination, OF COURSE Frazier (along with his rifle) is going to be considered a potential suspect and a possible accomplice. Why WOULDN'T he be considered in such a light right after an assassination had just been committed by a person who was driven to work by Frazier on the day it happened?

The same goes for Joe R. Molina, another Depository employee with an apparent "subversive" history (per the DPD files). Molina was questioned within 24 hours of the assassination and released when it was discovered he had nothing to do with the assassination. The same with Frazier.

William Randle's rifle (scope) is investigated. Again, so what? That's to be EXPECTED, in my opinion, since Mr. Randle had a "connection" to Buell Wesley Frazier, who was also investigated.

I can just hear you conspiracy clowns balking and complaining if Frazier and Mr. Randle HADN'T been investigated. You'd be crying: "Why were they and their rifles totally ignored?"

But when they (and their rifles) ARE investigated by the authorities, you still want to complain that THAT action is sinister and suspicious too.

There's no pleasing a conspiracy hound. Is there, Jimmy?

More:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2012/11/dvp-vs-dieugenio-part-80.html

 

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:


Don't the photos above tend to show that Mrs. Randle could not have seen Oswald put the package in the car? Unless she walked up to the wood slats in the carport and peeked between their cracks?

 

I think this is the most accurate observation on the evidence in play.

This is so disturbing to the other side that it woke DVP up. 

 

But let me add, whenever the WC smelled something rotten in Denmark they did something like this.  For example, when Ruth Paine gave that ersatz story about being able to see Oswald's letter to the embassy, they actually visited her house to do measurements.

Well, when Linnie Mae told her (uh hem) story about seeing Oswald from inside the house go to the car door and drop in a package, well, they realized there was a problem.  So they sent the FBI out there, and guess what--golly gee--there was a problem.  A big one. Because the picture with the arrow pointing down is where the car was supposed to be that LHO approached

This got to be such a serious problem that the story changed even at that.

To be continued.

Edited by James DiEugenio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, David Von Pein said:


Frazier had an Enfield rifle. And since Frazier drove the assassin to work in his own car on the day of the assassination, OF COURSE Frazier (along with his rifle) is going to be considered a potential suspect and a possible accomplice. Why WOULDN'T he be considered in such a light right after an assassination had just been committed by a person who was driven to work by Frazier on the day it happened?

The same goes for Joe R. Molina, another Depository employee with an apparent "subversive" history (per the DPD files). Molina was questioned within 24 hours of the assassination and released when it was discovered he had nothing to do with the assassination. The same with Frazier.

William Randle's rifle (scope) is investigated. Again, so what? That's to be EXPECTED, in my opinion, since Mr. Randle had a "connection" to Buell Wesley Frazier, who was also investigated.

 

 

Don't overlook a common police interrogation technique. Treat all suspects as if they are guilty and force them to prove they are innocent.
See the FBI  interview of William Chambers. Captain Jones pulls him aside and instructs him that when interrogating the three tramps,
 "Find out which one shot the President".

 FBI 124-10179-10312
http://jfkassassinationfiles.com/fbi_124-10179-10312
page 2

That's the way Buell Wesley Frazier was treated. That's the way Joe Molina was treated.

 

Steve Thomas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:


Don't the photos above tend to show that Mrs. Randle could not have seen Oswald put the package in the car? Unless she walked up to the wood slats in the carport and peeked between their cracks?

 

Sandy,

What I am getting at is that it defies any sensible stretch of the imagination to think that Mrs. Randle could have seen what she says she did. But, alas, it is possible that she may have seen a bit of movement through the slats, and that is about all. The Warren Commission does this leap of faith act over and over, like the SBT itself and LHO's hat trick firing the rifle and his pistol that day. It's not really possible, or plausible, but as long as it is imaginable, the WC is willing to say it happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before making this next comment, I must add that the top pictures are a bit deceiving since they are not really POV shots from where Randle says she was standing when she looked that way.  They appear to be taken from inside the carport and just a few feet from the car.  I think this was done to discount the fact that from a proper perspective Linnie would be looking through both the slats and the car in front of those slats.

With that explained, ponder the following: When asked by the WC, she said that Oswald opened the door on the far right of the car.

Which, from the picture arrangement, would indicate that he opened the rear door furthest away from the house.

In other words, she was looking through a car, the slats and another car to see Oswald doing whatever he did.

And no one asked her how she performed that feat.  Or confronted her with the photos that would have made it so hard to beleive.

Edited by James DiEugenio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, if one is parking one's car outside in an area that is not really the Beverly Hills of Dallas/Fort Worth, one would understandably lock the doors to the auto before going to sleep.

And this is what Wesley Frazier told Jack Moriarty of the HSCA that he did.  Unlike the WC, Moriarty was not on a mission to impersonate the three monkeys--see no evil, hear no evil, say no evil.

So he actually did something the WC would not do: he asked a logical follow up  question. He responded with: If such were the case, then how did Oswald do what Linnie said he did, namely open the door and drop off his package?

Wesley replied that one of the doors was broken.  Naturally, Moriarty was puzzled by this, so continuing in his anti WC manner he said, "You figure that one out OK?"  (Reclaiming Parkland, p. 209)

Edited by James DiEugenio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moriarty was a bit better than the monkeys on the Warren Commission.  But if it had been me I would have pursued this a bit further.

The obvious question to ask would have been:  "Which door lock was broken?"

Because if it was not the one Linnie seemed to indicate, that is the right rear, then in addition to seeing through layers of a car and port slats and another car, Linnie would have had the wrong door also.  And, I think with that, she would have been pretty much reduced to Howard Brennan/Mary Bledsoe land.

But there are indications that it was a stage show anyway.

The best discussion of this issue I ever saw was back in 2013 at ROKC with Al Rossi, myself, Greg Parker and Lee Farley among others.

During that discussion, it was pointed out that although the WC had tried to line up Linnie and Wesley's stories in advance, they did not rehearse them well enough.

Linnie had changed her story about which way the car was pointed.  She had originally said the car was pointed toward the rear fence.  After Rankin had the FBI take the pics, she now changed her story and said the car was pointed toward the street.  Bu ton November 23rd, Wesley said he had backed his car out of the drive that morning.  You could not have done that if Linnie was telling the truth before the WC.

Edited by James DiEugenio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...