Ian Lloyd

Time of declaration of death is different to time of murder.

Precisely my point...

Callaway says he heard shots "around 1pm". Markham says she thinks the shooting occured around 1:06-1:07 based on a routine of hers to catch a bus. Bowley says he was at the scene at 1:10 (after the shooting) after checking his watch. BUT: Callaway might have heard the shots anytime between 1:00 & 1:30. Markham's clock may have been out by 5 or 6 minutes. Bowley's watch may have been out by 5 or 6 minutes. Hmmm... Also, what was the (original) recorded time for DOA?

Bowley's watch could have been off by 5 or 6 minutes, then again, it may not have been...He seemed quite relaint on it so I would expect him to ensure it was reading the correct time. Trying to make things fit a narrative?

Makes sense to me that she left her home at "...around 1:00..." to catch the 1:12 bus - I can't imagine she would leave at 1:00 to catch a 1:22 bus when it was only a block or so i.e. a few minutes' walk for her. Also, I can't imagine that the bus would arrive at the stop at precisely 1:12 every time, if anything probably late rather than early (if early, it should wait until the alloted time to leave), so she thinks of it as a 1:15 bus...Even if she gets there a little later, it's only around 10 minutes extra wait for the 1:22, so she gives herself a safety net. Again, if so, this would convince me that she normally caught the 1:12 bus. It seems that she caught this bus regularly and has her timings quite precise in her WC testimony.

Could the first document be read differently in that, following the search of LHO's trousers, anything that was found was removed, leaving the pockets empty (though the piece of paper mentioned in the first paragraph was missed)?

Still wondering why we have to believe that the Carcano had to have been disassembled to get it into the TSBD...there may be other ways an assembled Carcano could have been taken into the TSBD (one example by Greg)...? Perhaps this assumption needs more exploration.

1:59 and 2:22 of this clip...

Certainly does Chris - nice work again!!! I wonder if any film of the search shows any cops with guns of any sort? Plenty outside carrying shotguns...I'd be surprised if the cops were going in for a search for an alleged armed shooter but were told to leave their weapons outside in case they contaminated the search area???

Notwithstanding the YouTube comment, I thought this had been previously addressed and explained as being a cop's shotgun? Maybe a clearer image will help...

I did read it - the hypothesis still relies on the rifle being broken down but, if I am reading it correctly, also requires 2 bags and additional people separately bringing different parts of the rifle?

I'm wondering if we've been 'conditioned' over the years to believe that the only way the rifle could have got into the TSBD is by Oswald breaking it down and taking it in the "paper sack"? The rifle that was supposedly ordered was advertised as being 36" long. The rifle supposedly delivered was 40.2" long; that's a difference of ~4". If that was delivered to Oswald, would he (assuming he received the rifle) have noticed the difference in length? When the paper sack was fabricated, maybe whoever made it thought, or was told, that it needs to be 38" long (to cater for a 36" rifle as the person thought it was 36" long since that is what was ordered, and the 4" difference hadn't been noted) with an additional 2" to allow for folding the end over the fully assembled rifle. When the rifle was placed in the sack it was then noticed that 2" of the end of the barrel was sticking out of the end. This is a dilemma but is surely easily resolved, but not by deciding the only answer is to dismantle the rifle to make it fit but just place, say, a standard paper grocery bag over the protruding 2" of barrel? Or... The rifle was taken into the TSBD fully assembled. Another thing...If I recall correctly, the rifle was found upside down i.e. resting on the scope? Again, we seem to have been conditioned to believe is that the scope on the rifle was faulty during the assassination (assuming it was used) - but it may have been ok until the rifle was dropped between stacks of boxes in an upside down position i.e. it landed on the scope and that's when the damage occurred?

Did Ellsworth take part in the initial search of the TSBD as well?

Deleted

Does the fact that he announced to the world that he was a "patsy" also suggest that he was involved in, or had some knowledge of, a plot?

Depending where you look, if I recall correctly, the DPD gave one figure and the WC gave another...

13.87?

Wouldn't the limo braking sharply cause JFK's head to move forward, not backwards?

Good points Bill - surely, if the sling was still fixed to the "disassembled" rifle, it's only going to make it more awkward to reassemble the thing, what with getting it untangled etc.?

Last paragraph on page 353, LHO letter to Robert, is a bit cryptic... "If you find out any information about me, please let me know, I'd like to be ready on the draw so too [sic] speak" ???

From his WC testimony: Mr. BALL - As you were having breakfast did your mother say anything to you aboutMr. FRAZIER - Well, I say--Mr. BALL - Oswald?Mr. FRAZIER - I was sitting there eating my breakfast there, so sitting there, I usually talk to my little nieces, you know, they have them cartoons on for a while and we usually talk a little bit back and forth while eating breakfast and I was just finishing my coffee there and my sister, you know, was working over there around, you know the sink there, and she was fixing my lunch so she was somewhere around there over on the cabinets fixing the cabinets and mother just happened to glance up and saw this man, you know, who was Lee looking in the window for me and she said, "Who is that?"And I said, "That is Lee," and naturally he just walked around and so I thought he just walked around there on the carport right there close to the door and so I told her I had to go, so I went in there and brushed my teeth right quick and come through there and I usually have my coat laying somewhere on the chair and picked it up and put it on and by that time my sister had my lunch, you know, in a sack and sitting over there on the washer where I picked it up right there by the door and I just walked on out and we got in the car.Mr. BALL - Now, did your sister say anything as you were having breakfast?Mr. FRAZIER - No; she didn't say anything to me at all.Mr. BALL - She didn't say anything to you either about Oswald or did she?Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; say, she didn't say, you know, when I looked up and saw him I knew who it was.Mr. BALL - You saw him?Mr. FRAZIER - Right.Mr. BALL - What was he doing?Mr. FRAZIER - He just looked through the kitchen window. To see from there on the ground outside there. I say you don't have to be any height at all, you don't have to be too tall to be able to look in the kitchen window there.I say, if you have the window open you can see in, if you have light on in there.Mr. BALL - When your mother mentioned, "Who is that," you looked up and saw Lee Oswald in the kitchen window?Mr. FRAZIER - I just saw him for a split second and when he saw I saw him, I guess he heard me say, "Well, it is time to go," and he walked down by the back door there.Representative FORD - When he would go with you on Monday, on any Monday, was this the same procedure for getting to, getting in contact with you?Mr. FRAZIER - You mean coming in there and looking through the window?Representative FORD - Yes.Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; it wasn't. I say, that is the first time he had ever done that. I say. most times I would usually call him, you know, I was already out in the car fixing to go out the driveway there, and, you know, around to pick him up if he hadn't come down but most times, once in a while I picked him up at the house and another time he was already coming down the sidewalk to the house when I was fixing to pick him up and I usually picked him up around the corner there.Representative FORD - Did this different method of him meeting you raise any questions in your mind?Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; it didn't. I just thought maybe, you know, he just left a little bit earlier but when I looked up and saw that the clock was. I knew I was the one who was running a little bit late because, as I say, I was talking, sitting there eating breakfast and talking to the little nieces, it was later than I thought it was.Mr. BALL - When you went out the back door where was Oswald?Mr. FRAZIER - He was standing just a few feet there outside the back door there.Mr. BALL - He wasn't in the car?Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; he wasn't.Mr. BALL - Was he near the car?Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; he wasn't.You see, always I keep my car parked outside the carport there, on the other side.Mr. BALL - He was just a few feet outside your back door when you came out?Mr. FRAZIER - Right.Mr. BALL - Did you walk together to the car?Mr. FRAZIER - Yes; we did.Mr. BALL - And you got in one side and he got in the other?Mr. FRAZIER - Yes. Right in front there.Mr. BALL - Did you say usually you had to go by and pick him up?Mr. FRAZIER - Well, I said I had a couple of times. Most of the time, you know, he was usually walking down the sidewalk as I was driving out of the driveway so, therefore, I didn't have to go up to the house there to pick him up. I just usually picked him up around the corner because he was usually on the sidewalk and I just stopped and picked him up.Mr. BALL - Were you later than usual that morning?Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I don't believe we were, because we got to work on time. I say, when I looked at the clock, after I glanced he was there a split second and I just turned around and looked at the clock to see what time it was and it was right amount 7:21 then and I went in and brushed my teeth real quick and running through the house put my coat on and we left.Mr. BALL - You both got in the car about the same time?Mr. FRAZIER - Right.

Regarding Frazier's and Randle's (or Randall? - seems to have 2 different spellings but I'll stick with Randle as it appears in WCR) statements and testimonies regarding the length of the bag but only one other seems to have questioned, briefly, what they actually say they saw, particularly Randle. I have various concerns with their statements and testimonies: 1. It is not established which kitchen window Oswald was seen looking through – Frazier says “He just looked through the kitchen window. To see from there on the ground outside there. I say you don't have to be any height at all, you don't have to be too tall to be able to look in the kitchen window there…” which seems to indicate the low window on the opposite side of the kitchen from the carport (see CE442)– why would Oswald have walked all the way round to there? Also, if Frazier and his mother were sitting at the kitchen table with Randle at the sink, obscuring the view through that window, how did Frazier’s mother see Oswald at the window, and Frazier also see him to identify him? 2. Then Randle’s description of having seen Oswald only from the waist up seems to indicate that she saw him only from the window in front of the house, in which case, she wouldn’t have seen his lower half which leads to the issue of whether she had actually seen the package at all if she’d only seen Oswald from the waist up. 3. Strange that Frazier was running late that morning and Oswald still got there before Frazier was ready when Oswald himself had also apparently overslept. Both sleeping late on the same, this most important and infamous, of days!?!? 4. Why did Frazier have to “charge the battery” on his car – he’d just driven 15 miles to work? 5. Why did Oswald wait for Frazier to get out of the car before walking ahead of him anyway? If he was waiting for him, why didn’t they walk in together as Frazier testifies they usually did? Frazier testified that they would normally walk in together. Or was it actually the other way round and Frazier was waiting for Oswald to leave for some reason and he only left the car when Oswald got fed up of waiting and started walking in himself? 6. Why is Randle so interested in the package, almost to the exclusion of everything else – I mean, she didn’t even recognise Oswald and could not recall what Oswald was wearing yet she can describe the package in great detail? 7. It is clear that Randle could not possibly have seen Oswald placing any package in Frazier’s car since Frazier’s car was parked outside the carport (CE447) and her view would have been blocked by the car that was in the carport (Randle’s?) and, not forgetting, the side-wall of the carport. Frazier also says in his affidavit to the DPD that “…it was parked backed up at the side of the carport…” so the rear right door to which Randle refers was also on the furthest side of Frazier’s car! 8. Randle described the reason she ‘knew’ it was the right rear door of the car because “…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…” – If she saw Oswald place a package in the car through the rear right door, why does she resort to describing it like this? Perhaps it is because she didn’t actually see it and just heard the noise of somebody trying to close the door by slamming it because it was difficult to close? 9. Randle says of seeing Oswald that she “…just saw him from the waist up…” – if that was the case, how did she manage to see him with the package as he “…carried it in his right hand, had the top sort of folded down and had a grip like this, and the bottom, he carried it this way, you know, and it almost touched the ground as he carried it…”? 10. Whilst samples of packaging paper were taken from the Paine house, neither Ruth Paine or Marina Oswald were asked whether there was any indication that Oswald had helped himself to the bread, cheese and fruit for his lunch that he said he took with him to work that day nor, indeed, were they asked whether there were any paper sacks or bags in the house that Oswald might have taken from the house that morning? The only thing Marina was asked was whether he had taken anything to work with him that morning, even though she’s already said that she hadn’t seen him leaving. Her reply “I think that he had a package with his lunch. But a small package” seems to indicate that, when staying at the Paine’s house, he would take a lunch with him to work – what did he usually carry it in? 11. Why is Randle being so defensive about mentioning a job in the TSBD? She seems desperate to distance herself from anything to do with this and, in fact throughout her testimony, she never once mentions the words or letters (Texas School Book Depository/TSBD), she just calls it “over there”!?!? Then Ruth Paine is saying in her testimony that Randle volunteered the information…? This leads me on to a few thoughts… · Did 2 people appear at the Randle house that morning? One who put something in the car then left and then Oswald who appeared at the window you might have expected him to appear at first if he’d just walked down from the Paine house? · Did one person appear there – Oswald? Was he was just carrying a lunch sack with cheese, bread and fruit in it - as he said to Fritz - which would explain Randle’s description of the way the bag was being carried and the fact it appeared heavier and bulkier toward the bottom – as it probably would if it were a brown paper lunch bag containing bread, cheese and fruit? This would probably also explain a bit better the way Frazier described Oswald’s way of carrying the package to the Depository. It is interesting to note that Frazier was arrested (not sure on what charge at the moment) on the 22nd November and questioned at some length. A .303 Enfield rifle and ammunition rounds were also found after a search of Randle’s house, where he was staying at the time – See DPD Officer G.F. Rose report of officer’s duties in DPD JFK archives, box 1, folder 6, item 21, this is also one of the reports saying that Ruth Paine made the comment as the Dallas Police arrived to search her house “Come on in, we were expecting you…”. As the police were driving Frazier home, they had a radio call to bring him back in for questioning under polygraph – the results are reported as confirming his affidavit in this report (though, Rose's supplementary report says that the polygraph test was carried out first!) – I wonder what questions were asked? Also, Frazier wasn’t arrested until 18:30-18:45 that evening – where had he been since leaving the book depository earlier in the afternoon and going to see his step-father in hospital? Why is Randle saying that she saw Oswald open the car door and place something in the car when she clearly could not possibly have seen this? In the Paine testimony, it is apparently stated by Jenner that the floor plan drawing, CE441 was not available at the time of Randle’s testimony and she was never asked to look at any pictures, photographs or diagrams to neither confirm nor describe anything during her testimony so I guess it can be fairly safely assumed that the photographs, CEs 442, 443, 446 & 447 either hadn’t been taken or were not available at that point, in which case, did someone realise that when Randle’s testimony was read and compared with the photographs that had been taken with Frazier’s car outside the carport and another white car inside the carport (CE446) that there was a problem in that it became apparent that Randle could not possibly have seen Oswald place anything inside the car?...It was too late by then as Randle had given her testimony, so did someone have the idea that they could perhaps go back and ask Frazier to swap the cars to take another photograph with Frazier’s car inside the carport? How do Randle and Frazier manage to recall the package in great detail yet are extremely vague about most other things and “…didn’t pay too much attention..” ? Then there is the photograph of the bag being removed from the Depository – it has clearly been folded horizontally along the length a couple of times (appears to be in half then in half again) yet doesn’t appear to be significantly creased in the way it might have been if carried in the way both Randle and Frazier describe (Frazier described in his affidavit that it had been folded down at the top and folded under along its length – why is there no crease along its length in the photograph?). It appears to be rather large for it to be tucked under the arm as Frazier described Oswald carried it. One more thought on the rifle – if it was disassembled to get it into the depository surely, whilst disassembling, any unnecessary parts would have been removed and left, particularly the strap, to make sure it’s as small as possible, light as possible, easier to conceal and as easy & quick as possible to re-assemble? (If the sniper’s nest “design” was already established for the purpose, the strap would not have been required). Why did Randle go round to the Paines’ house when the police arrived there on the afternoon of the 22nd and tell them about her brother giving Oswald a lift to work that morning carrying a package that "made her suspicious"??? Also, during an interview on TMWKK, Frazier describes the bag as being made from “…the same type of packing material that you find in any company that packs materials for shipment, just the brown paper and the tape which you normally find…” - Has he now decided to toe the party line? Another thing is that isn't it a coincidence that Frazier used to work in a store where, he says, he used to unpack curtain rods, the Paines had curtain rods in their garage and Oswald allegedly said that he was picking up curtain rods? Finally: Mr. Ball: How was Lee dressed that morning? Mrs. Randle: He had on a white T-shirt, I just saw him from the waist up, I didn't pay any attention to his pants or anything, when he was going with the package. I was more interested in that. But he had on a white T-shirt and I remember some sort of brown or tan shirt and he had a gray jacket, I believe. She only saw him from the waist up? Well, how did she manage to see him carrying a package down at his side that almost touched the floor? Also, has Randle got X-ray vision? She manages to describe that Oswald was wearing a jacket over a shirt, AND managed to see he was also wearing a T-shirt underneath all of this, all the time whilst not paying too much attention and being unable to recognise him!?!? Mr. Ball: A gray jacket. I will show you some clothing here. First, I will show you a gray jacket. Does this look anything like the jacket he had on? Mrs. Randle: Yes, sir. Mr. Ball: That morning? Mrs. Randle: Similar to that. I didn't pay an awful lot of attention to it. Mr. Ball: Was it similar in color? Mrs. Randle: Yes, sir; I think so. It had big sleeves. So, even though the jacket had “big sleeves”, she still managed to recognise that he was wearing a shirt & a white T-shirt underneath!?!? Mr. Ball: Take a look at these sleeves. Was it similar in color? Mrs. Randle: I believe so. Mr. Ball: What is the Commission Exhibit on this jacket? Mrs. Randle: It was gray, I am not sure of the shade. Mr. Ball: I will show you another shirt which is Commission No. 150. Does this look anything like the shirt he had on? (CE150 is a long-sleeved shirt...) Mrs. Randle: Well now, I don't remember it being that shade of brown. It could have been but I was looking through the screen and out the window but I don't remember it being exactly that. I thought it was a solid color. Mr. Ball: Here is another jacket which is a gray jacket, does this look anything like the jacket he had on? Mrs. Randle: No, sir; I remember its being gray. Now she’s beginning to remember? Mr. Ball: Well, this one is gray but of these two the jacket I last showed you is Commission Exhibit No. 162, and this blue gray is 163, now if you had to choose between these two? Mrs. Randle: I would choose the dark one. Mr. Ball: You would choose the dark one? Mrs. Randle: Yes, sir. Mr. Ball: Which is 163, as being more similar to the jacket he had? Mrs. Randle: Yes, sir; that I remember. But I, you know, didn't pay an awful lot of attention to his jacket. I remember his T-shirt and the shirt more so than I do the jacket. Does she really remember? She didn’t know a few lines ago, now she CAN remember but then ”… didn’t pay much attention”!?!? And THEN remembers the T-shirt and the shirt more than the jacket when the jacket was on top of all of this!!? CE446 & CE447 purport to show Frazier's car parked as it was on the morning of the 22nd - note in CE447 it's shown outside the carport as mentioned above - how did Linnie Mae Randle see what she said she saw? Note also the car inside the carport - a white car. Now look at CE446 which purports to show the view that Randle had from the kitchen door - is it my imagination or have the 2 cars been swapped round to give the impression that Randle could actually have seen the car from the kitchen door?

Kinda like why the rifle had to be "broken down" - it would have been too long to fit into the bag!!! Seems like the wrong bag was used whichever way you look at it!!😕