Jump to content
The Education Forum
James DiEugenio

Does everyone know what these pics are about?

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, David Josephs said:

Thanks Paz...

David,

I'm frankly astonished someone here is criticizing you instead of criticizing the one every day, all day long insulting you and your excellent work

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

...connect the bag to Oswald, the rifle and the ride to work...

And yet, even though the brother-and-sister team (per some CTers) was
framing LHO for the President's murder, they EACH decided to remain
steadfast and firm when it came to their "27 inch" or "about 2 feet
long" measurements regarding the brown paper bag that THEIR OWN PATSY
was carrying on November 22nd.

Doesn't add up for those CTer requirements, of course.

But what does add up is this.....

Oswald positively took a bulky paper bag into work with him on
11/22/63.

-- plus: --

Oswald lied to Wes Frazier about the contents of that paper bag.

-- plus: --

Both Frazier & Randle observed Oswald carrying a long, "bulky" brown
paper bag on the morning of President Kennedy's assassination.

-- plus: --

After the assassination, Oswald's rifle turns up missing from its
KNOWN storage location of Ruth Paine's garage.

-- plus: --

An EMPTY 38-inch-long paper bag (similar in color to the bag
seen by Frazier & Randle) turns up in the TSBD's Sniper's Nest, from
where an Oswald-like individual was seen firing a RIFLE at JFK's car.
And the empty bag has--Voila!--Oswald's prints on it. With one of the
prints--the right-hand palmprint--perfectly matching the way Wes
Frazier said that Oswald carried the bag. And fibers matching the
blanket in Paine's garage are found inside the empty bag as well.

-- plus: --

At 1:22 PM CST on November 22nd, Oswald's RIFLE (Serial Number C2766),
with Oswald's own prints on it, was found on the same floor of the
TSBD where the empty paper bag was found.

-- plus: --

Oswald, from the weight of all the evidence, carried NO PACKAGE at all
out of the Depository when he left the building at approx. 12:33 PM on
11/22/63.

-- equals: --

Lee Harvey Oswald carried his Carcano rifle into the Depository on
November 22, concealed inside a homemade paper bag (the length of
which was incorrectly estimated by witnesses Frazier and Randle),
with Oswald then leaving the empty paper bag (with his prints on it)
underneath the window from where he fired the shots that killed
President Kennedy.

Any other alternative scenario that differs greatly from the above
version of events cannot hold up to any kind of scrutiny (or common
sense) at all.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Paz Marverde said:

David,

I'm frankly astonished someone here is criticizing you instead of criticizing the one every day, all day long insulting you and your excellent work

DVP is here to remind us the government is benevolent and NEVER lies to its people...

He never met Allen Dulles or John McCloy....

:cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, David Josephs said:

DVP is here to remind us the government is benevolent and NEVER lies to its people...

He never met Allen Dulles or John McCloy....

:cheers

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Bart Kamp said:

And he cupped it in his hand underneath his arm pit......

Yeah that's a snug fit :P

That's me ( 6 5") holding the wooden rifle body of a Mannlicher Carcano underneath my armpit, thanks to Ian Griggs.

IMG_0937.jpg

But.. it's too long.  Your not cupping  the tip of it in your hand.  How can that be?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎3‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 12:13 AM, Ron Bulman said:

Thanks Bart.  #9 helped me put # 14 Jim posted in perspective.  IT is not taken from 5th St. but Westbrook as the Randle home set on the corner of those streets.  I've been by there many years ago on my way to the Paine house, where a friend lived at the time.  But I never knew exactly where the Randle home was.  From 2515 W. 5th Oswald walked East past four (as Jim mentioned) houses, turned left (North) on Westbrook around to the back of the Randle house which was actually at 2439 W 5th.  Linne Mae could have seen him walking by out the kitchen window.  But she could not have trying to look out the door through the slats on the carport.  Why would she in the first place?  Oswald rode with her brother several times before, though not on a Friday.  But why would she consciously make the effort to try to look at him through the slats she knew she couldn't see through?   It was cool that morning, the door wouldn't have been open.  Had she seen the packaged curtain rods through the window and had to have a closer look?

I don't think so.  She was coached.

Here's the house today with the now enclosed and expanded carport (now garage) on the left.  Scroll around for better views.

 https://www.google.com/maps/@32.8095135,-96.9785522,3a,90y,59.75h,108.56t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sABa2y6qcqj3tU0s3V0DHPg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

This thread is about the pictures Jim DiEugieno  posted and those Bart Kamp posted which compliment them.  Not about a paper bag or it's length Linne Mae may or may not have seen from the kitchen window (which she couldn't have from the door to the car port).  Based on DVP's prior recent inactivity and his current activity on this thread is he trying to hijack it?  Does that mean it's a Really important subject?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Ron, and now I can finally state the question I wanted to ask.

These pics are in the WC volumes.

The FBI took them fairly early in the proceedings.

If one reads the WC testimony of Wesley and his sister, I do not recall one question based on the obvious contradictions the pics make with her story.

Does anyone else?

The obvious question is why?

But beyond that, this is my complaint with the first generation critics:  I don't recall any of them asking about this either.  They just accepted the testimony of both. And they proceeded to do what Ray is doing, ask questions about the length of the bag.  Instead of the much more serious question:  How the heck could Linnie have seen Oswald through the car, the slats, and another car?

Edited by James DiEugenio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Thanks Ron, and now I can finally state the question I wanted to ask.

These pics are in the WC volumes.

The FBI took them fairly early in the proceedings.

If one reads the WC testimony of Wesley and his sister, I do not recall one question based on the obvious contradictions the pics make with her story.

Does anyone else?

The obvious question is why?

But beyond that, this is my complaint with the first generation critics:  I don't recall any of them asking about this either.  They just accepted the testimony of both. And they proceeded to do what Ray is going, ask questions about the length of the bag.  Instead of the much more serious question:  How the heck could Linnie have seen Oswald through the car, the slats, and another car?

Agreed, James. Sorry for helping DVP to derail your thread. Linnie Mae is said to have seen Oswald through the narrow slats shown in the photos, and behind Frazier's car which is almost impossible to discern through the slats. Certainly throw a lot of doubt over her testimony. 

Edited by Ray Mitcham

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Ray Mitcham said:

Agreed, James. Sorry for helping DVP to derail your thread. Linnie Mae is said to have seen Oswald through the narrow slats shown in the photos, and behind Frazier's car which is almost impossible to discern through the slats. Certainly throw a lot of doubt over her testimony. 

But, Ray (and James D.), if the idea promoted by conspiracists is true and the paper bag story is total fiction, then wouldn't you think that Buell Wesley Frazier, in his recent interviews, would be ready to shout from the rooftops: "The Dallas police made me pretend I saw Lee Oswald with a package! But the truth is: there was never any large paper bag at all!" ??

Why, in all the years since the assassination of JFK, has Buell Frazier never once said anything like the simulated quote presented above?

After all, Buell has been quite vocal in his public interviews about his belief that there was NO WAY the package could have contained a rifle. So he's certainly not being "controlled" by any evil forces that would like him to keep spouting the "Lone Assassin Government line". So why is Buell still insisting he saw Oswald with a package if, as many conspiracy theorists advocate, there never was a bag in the first place? Especially in light of Buell's more recent tale about Captain Will Fritz, which is a story I find a little hard to completely accept, particularly the part where Frazier says that Fritz raised a hand to physically strike him. So, given that tale now being told by Mr. Frazier, it's even more difficult to believe that Wesley's actions and words are being controlled by anyone who wants to quell all talk of conspiracy or cover-up.

Do CTers think that Mr. Frazier just cannot allow himself to tell the truth after all these years---even though he, himself, is really (when it comes right down to it, based on a number of things he has said in his interviews over the years) a believer in a conspiracy himself?

Also....

Since many CTers think that Buell Wesley Frazier is a great big l-i-a-r when it comes to the topics of "The Paper Bag" and "The Curtain Rod Story", then I'm wondering what in the world would make him have any desire at all to voluntarily put himself in a position where he would need to lie his a-s-s off whenever the interviewer brings up the subjects of the paper package and those phantom curtain rods?

Do CTers think Buell was paid a whole lot of money to do those interviews and lie like a cheap rug every single time? Or was Buell doing it just because he ENJOYED the idea of lying in front of hundreds of people (and on camera for the Internet streams)?

Bottom Line (IMHO & FWIW) --- The conspiracy theorists who keep insisting that Buell Frazier and Linnie Randle saw no large-ish  paper bag in the possession of Lee Harvey Oswald on 11/22/63 are just plain nuts.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Buell+Wesley+Frazier+Logo.png

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leave it to DVP to do a Bugliosi on us.

He does not answer the question I posed:  Which is, why did the WC not ask either witness about the contradiction the pics clearly demonstrate?  That is a matter of simple spatial relationships. In fact, the obvious thing to have done would have been for the WC to take the witnesses to the location and taken a gander themselves  to test it first.

Instead, he does his usual VB style pivot towards the factor of motivation.  Whichis a matter of human psychology, something that is much more murky and hidden, especially in a case of this magnitude and complexity. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Thanks Ron, and now I can finally state the question I wanted to ask.

These pics are in the WC volumes.

The FBI took them fairly early in the proceedings.

If one reads the WC testimony of Wesley and his sister, I do not recall one question based on the obvious contradictions the pics make with her story.

Does anyone else?

The obvious question is why?

But beyond that, this is my complaint with the first generation critics:  I don't recall any of them asking about this either.  They just accepted the testimony of both. And they proceeded to do what Ray is doing, ask questions about the length of the bag.  Instead of the much more serious question:  How the heck could Linnie have seen Oswald through the car, the slats, and another car?

Hi Jim:

Just a brief chronology regarding the background on these specific photographs, and to get the subject matter back on track. The impetus for the photo's came about as a result of a lengthy request from the Commission via a letter composed by J. Lee Rankin dated March 4, 1964.[62-109060-2579] The letter begins with Rankin indicating that "In connection with the proposed examination of Buell Wesley Frazier and Linnie Mae Randle by the Commission on March 11, we would like to have the following exhibits available:" Rankin then went on to list eight specific and lengthy requests, numbers 5  and 6 of which dealt specifically with the issue of the Randle residence and its surrounding environs. Hoover [actually the courier service letter was constructed by James Malley, FBI liaison with the Commission] answered Rankin on March 6, 1964, confirming a conversation that the Bureau had with staffer Howard Willens concerning the upcoming testimony sessions of Frazier and Randle at which time Willens was advised that the Commission requests were "very extensive in nature and could possibly require considerable time to obtain the desired information."[62-109060-Unrecorded, but can be found in the same file reference indicated above].

Two days later, March 8, 1964, a two page teletype was issued from the Dallas FO to the attention of the Director regarding the work involved to fulfill the Rankin requests of March 4th.[62-109060-2686] This teletype ends with the following sentence: "Assignment will be completed and available to the Commission by March 16, 1964." This dating is of course five days after Randle and Frazier are scheduled to appear before the Commission. The first question that arises in my mind is if this information regarding the potential date that the exhibits, including the photographs that will be taken of the Randle house, reached the Commission was any effort made to re-schedule the date of the Randle-Frazier testimony sessions? They were scheduled to testify on March 11th [and they did on that date] but the exhibits specifically requested by Rankin were not going to be available until March 16th.

On March 9, 1964, SA Arthur E. Carter of the Bureau's Exhibit's Section took a series of photographs of the Randle residence, the contents of which are described in detail in the FD-302 report prepared by Carter on that same date, March 9th. [Found in Robert Gemberlings  massive FO report dated April 15, 1964, pp. 153-154, designated CD897 by the WC]. As you stated, Jim, because of the timing of the completion of the project by members of the FBI Exhibits Bureau, these photographs were not shown to or introduced into evidence during the Randle-Frazier testimony sessions of March 11th but rather during the testimony session of Ruth Paine on March 19th, 20th, 1964.[3Hp1ff] It is apparent that during the March 9th  Carter exercise of taking the photographs Linnie Mae Randle was home and "aided" her previous statements of where she was and what she observed on the morning of the assassination by positioning herself at various locations within the house, resulting in the images you originally posted. [Bardwell D. Odum was also present; he filed and FD-302 interview report of his contact with Linnie Mae dated March 9, 1964, in which she corrects the direction from which she observed Oswald approach her house]

FWIW

Gary

 

 

Edited by Gary Murr
Trying to remove the stroke through

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Leave it to DVP to do a Bugliosi on us.

He does not answer the question I posed:  Which is, why did the WC not ask either witness about the contradiction the pics clearly demonstrate?  That is a matter of simple spatial relationships. In fact, the obvious thing to have done would have been for the WC to take the witnesses to the location and taken a gander themselves to test it first.

Such a Warren Commission Q&A session with Randle and/or Frazier would have had very little (probably ZERO) impact on a conspiracy theorist of your ilk, James. Because, regardless of what the answers to the WC questions would have been regarding Linnie Mae's ability or inability to see through the slats, you've got your mind made up (based on a variety of your other bogus allegations) that there really was no large brown paper package in Lee Oswald's hands AT ALL on 11/22/63. Nothing, at this point, is going to ever change your mind about that fanciful "No Bag" theory.

Along similar lines, nothing at this point is likely to change your mind regarding your equally-as-silly and nonsensical "The Baker/Oswald Lunchroom Encounter Never Happened" and "Howard Brennan Never Attended A Police Line-up" theories as well. (I'm noticing a trend in recent years among Internet conspiracy theorists—it's the "I'm Going To Pretend This Event Never Happened At All, Even Though Multiple Witnesses Verified It Really Did Happen" syndrome. Quite a curious ailment/syndrome indeed.)

As far as the question you asked ("...why did the WC not ask either witness about the contradiction the pics clearly demonstrate?")....

Since hindsight is, of course, always 20/20, there are a lot of things that now, 54 years later, we can look back on concerning the Warren Commission's investigation and ask ourselves questions about. Such as....

Why didn't they ask him/her this question?

or:

Why wasn't this or that witness called upon to testify?

or:

Why didn't the Commission do a timed re-creation of Victoria Adams' post-shooting movements?

or (one of my pet peeves with the WC):

Why on Earth didn't the Commission perform a third re-creation of Oswald's post-assassination movements, and this time have Oswald's stand-in running from the Sniper's Nest to the second floor, in order to establish the absolute minimum amount of time that was required to travel between those two points in the TSBD, instead of merely doing tests at two different "walking" speeds?

and a thousand other "Why didn't they...?" questions.

And, I guess, the question Jim D. asked above about Linnie Mae Randle and the carport slats would be another of those thousand questions that could be placed on such a "hindsight" list.

I don't know why the Commission didn't ask that exact question when Linnie Mae testified. But, without feeling the burden of assigning a "sinister" motive to the Commission's intent and actions, my guess would be that they just felt it wasn't necessary to grill Linnie Mae about the "slats" topic. She said she saw certain things through the carport, and the Commission accepted those answers as truthful ones. After all, if Linnie Mae really couldn't see anything at all through the slats in her carport, why would she lie to the Commission about something that could so easily be discovered to be a lie?

And this photo definitely shows that there is enough of a gap between the slats in the carport wall for a person to see at least a portion of what is on the other side of the carport. So this whole topic is really a non-issue, IMO.

For the record, here's the Warren Commission testimony of Linnie Mae Randle dealing with the topic of Randle seeing Oswald go to Frazier's car....

Mr. BALL. Did you see him go to the car?

Mrs. RANDLE. Yes.

Mr. BALL. What did he do?

Mrs. RANDLE. He opened the right back door and I just saw that he was laying the package down, so I closed the door. I didn't recognize him as he walked across my carport and I at that moment I wondered who was fixing to come to my back door, so I opened the door slightly and saw that it--I assumed he was getting in the car, but he didn't, so he come back and stood on the driveway.

Mr. BALL. He put the package in the car.

Mrs. RANDLE. Yes, sir; I don't know if he put it on the seat or on the floor, but I just know he put it in the back.

[Later....]

Senator COOPER. Did you see Lee Oswald place the package in the automobile?

Mrs. RANDLE. In the automobile. I do not know if he put it on the seat or on the floor.

Senator COOPER. I mean, did you see him throw open the door?

Mrs. RANDLE. Yes, sir.

Senator COOPER. When he placed the package in there, do you remember whether he used one hand or two?

Mrs. RANDLE. No; because I only opened the door briefly, and what made me establish the door on Wesley's car, it is an old car and that door, the window is broken and everything and it is hard to close, so that cinched in my mind which door it was, too. But it was only briefly that I looked.

Mr. JENNER. Mr. Chief Justice, could I ask--how far away were you? You were at the kitchen door and the automobile was in the driveway, what was the distance between yourself and Mr. Oswald?

Mrs. RANDLE. Sir, I don't know. The carport will take care of two cars, and then Wesley's car was on the other side of the carport, so that would be three car lengths plus in-between space.

Mr. JENNER. Car widths?

Mrs. RANDLE. Car widths, excuse me.


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

Also....

The following section of Linnie Mae Randle's WC testimony is quite interesting as well, in that it demonstrates that Linnie Mae was aware of Lee Oswald's curtain rod story as early as Thursday afternoon or evening, November 21st. In other words, if this testimony below is the absolute truth, which I believe it to be (but many conspiracists must think this is just another in a series of lies coming from the mouth of Mrs. Randle), then the "curtain rod" story could not have been a story that was created by Frazier or the Dallas Police after the assassination had occurred....

Mr. BALL. Do you remember anything about curtain rods?

Mrs. RANDLE. Yes.

Mr. BALL. What do you remember about that?

Mrs. RANDLE. He had told Wesley--

Mr. BALL. Tell me what Wesley told you.

Mrs. RANDLE. What Wesley told me. That Lee had rode home with him to get some curtain rods from Mrs. Paine to fix up his apartment.

Mr. BALL. When did Wesley tell you that?

Mrs. RANDLE. Well, that afternoon I suppose I would have had to ask him, he wouldn't have just told me.

Mr. BALL. You mean that night?

Mrs. RANDLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. After he came home?

Mrs. RANDLE. I was on my way to the store. So I probably asked him when I got back what he was doing riding home with him on Thursday afternoon.

Mr. BALL. You think that was the time that Wesley told you--

Mrs. RANDLE. Yes, sir; after I got back home.

Mr. BALL. That Lee had come home to get some curtain rods?

Mrs. RANDLE. Yes, I am sure he told me that.
[DVP's emphasis.]

-----------------
 

Edited by David Von Pein

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...