Jump to content
The Education Forum

Oswald Leaving TSBD?


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Alistair Briggs said:

Mike,

I am totally with you on the 'Observations can be helpful in finding truths and eliminating non truths', and I agree that one 'can't eliminate a point or possibility that has not been considered'. :)

Couple of things from your post that I would like to make mention of (I have bolded them above)...

"LHO said he was on the steps at the time"

I have seen that said by people many times. I have also seen it said that at the time of the shots LHO was out front with Shelley. The thing is I have never actually seen where LHO said those things. There are two things I have seen about where LHO was at the time of the shots - each came from a different 'interrogation' of LHO (more details here)

1) "I was having lunch about that time on the first floor,"
2) He said that before he could finish what he was doing, all the commotion surrounding the assasination took place, so he said, "I just went on downstairs" to "see what it was all about."

The part about 'being out front with Shelley' can be found in the same interrogation, and not long after the 'I was having lunch about that time on the first floor'

And nowhere was it said that Oswald claimed to have been standing outside talking to his carpool pal Frazier when the shooting occurred.

 

3 hours ago, Alistair Briggs said:

"No one would be able to put a gun in my car, and tell me it was curtain rods, without me knowing better or at least being suspicious."

I agree with that, but would add the caveat that it would be only if they turned up 'blind' on the Friday morning with the package.

That's not what happened though, and as such, from the point of view of Frazier, he would have no reason to not know better or no reason to be a bit suspicious on the Friday morning, because of what his expectation would be - his expectation on the Friday morning would be that Oswald would have a package with him and that package would contain cutrain roads... Normally Frazier would only give Oswald a lift home (to the Paines) on a Friday after work, and only give him a lift back in to work on a Monday morning. On the Thursday (the day before the assassination) Oswald asked Frazier for a lift home that day, Frazier was actually a bit 'surprised' at such a deviation from the normal routine and actually asked Oswald why, that was when Oswald told him that it was to pick up curtain rods for his apartment. Frazier gave Oswald a lift home (to the Paines on the Thursday after work). On the Friday morning Frazier would expect Oswald to be bringing a package with him and he would expect that package to be 'curtain rods'...

Here is a relevant part of Frazier's testimony...

Regards

That is correct. Frazier did ask what was the package about and Lee gave a satisfactory answer that made sense seeing how Lee was coming  from one location and would be going back to the rooming house.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 3.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Bill, Allistair, I get it. It's bad form to post like I did. Some members go into great detail with their observations. It is only when I don't go into detail that it doesn't feel right. It does feel good when you provide the documentation and stick with hypotheses that your documentation can support. It's just frustrating when you give the conspirators all the benefit of the doubt when they have the weight of all levels and quarters of the government helping them run. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Michael Clark said:

Bill, Allistair, I get it. It's bad form to post like I did. Some members go into great detail with their observations. It is only when I don't go into detail that it doesn't feel right. It does feel good when you provide the documentation and stick with hypotheses that your documentation can support. It's just frustrating when you give the conspirators all the benefit of the doubt when they have the weight of all levels and quarters of the government helping them run. 

To claim conspiracy where there is no evidence of any only hurts the good evidence that supports there was a conspiracy. Each claim of alteration for example should be thoroughly considered. To hold the position that we should remain loyal to everything as being conspiratorial demonstrates we are biased and that are examinations should be suspect because of that bias.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Well, it is only correct  (and only an approximation, though a pretty good one) up to the point where I approximate Baker's foot is going to touch down. (At the time the camera is blocked by Very Big Man.)

My blue line extends out even beyond that, to the east. That extension is an extrapolation that assumes Baker will continue running in the same direction as in his last step, as we see it.

That is not a very good assumption. But I believe it would be considered the best assumption.

If you see a duck flying north, then close you eyes for a couple seconds, and then open them, where would you bet $10  the duck is going to be? I would say further north than it was before. But really, the duck may well have changed course.

I'm no statistician, but I'll bet that the odds really are greatest that the duck will still be flying north. Not being a statistician, I cannot explain why that would be the case. It's just my gut feeling. As an engineer I've used extrapolation numerous times to predict an outcome and have had generally good success doing so. Probably because my intuition tells me what things can be predicted and what things cannot be.

I probably should never have drawn that extrapolation in. I did so because it is something an engineer would do and something that other engineers would understand and agree to. We'd all know it's a guess.

 

 

...

blue line correction1.JPG

8 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Yeah, that is pretty much what I wished I had drawn.

The whole reason for this ambiguity is that I had to estimate where Baker's final footstep hit, the one obscured by Very Big Man. I believe it is a very good estimate. But as you can readily see, being of by just a little can change the path from being parallel to not being parallel or vice versa.

I'm glad that I got it right. No real big difference in it really. ;)

9 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

My blue line extends out even beyond that, to the east. That extension is an extrapolation that assumes Baker will continue running in the same direction as in his last step, as we see it.

That is not a very good assumption. But I believe it would be considered the best assumption.

If you see a duck flying north, then close you eyes for a couple seconds, and then open them, where would you bet $10  the duck is going to be? I would say further north than it was before. But really, the duck may well have changed course.

I'm no statistician, but I'll bet that the odds really are greatest that the duck will still be flying north. Not being a statistician, I cannot explain why that would be the case. It's just my gut feeling. As an engineer I've used extrapolation numerous times to predict an outcome and have had generally good success doing so. Probably because my intuition tells me what things can be predicted and what things cannot be.

I probably should never have drawn that extrapolation in. I did so because it is something an engineer would do and something that other engineers would understand and agree to. We'd all know it's a guess.

One doesn't need to be a statistician to explain it, simple logic suffices... ;)

If one sees a duck flying, it is logical to assume that the duck is on a journey from one place to another, it is also logical to assume that the duck would take the shortest and most direct route. It is logical then to say that the duck wouldn't change course - with the caveat unless it had reason to do so.

'Extrapolating' that to be about Baker...

If one sees Baker running, it is logical to assume that Baker is on a journey from one place to another, it is also logical to assume that Baker would take the shortest and most direct route. It is logical then to say that Baker wouldn't change course - with the caveat unless he had reason to do so.

Here is a quick something I knocked up to act as a visual to the explanation that follows.

bakers run.JPG

The orange dot represents where Baker 'parked' his motorcycle.
The blue lines represent the shortest and most direct routes to either of the places that Baker could conceivably be headed.
The red line represents Bakers path according to Sandy's gif.

If it's logical to assume that there would be no change in course unless there was a reason for it.


If Baker planned to run to the Dal-Tex entrance why wouldn't he go in the most straight direction? At the point of leaving his motorcycle there is just the same amount of people 'blocking' him in that direction as there was 'blocking' him in the direction that he can be seen running. In general terms it appears that Baker ends up running past more people in the clip than he would have done had he set off directly to the Dal-Tex. The logical inference then is that Baker's initial intention was to run towards the TSBD entrance, what then would cause his deviation away from there and in the direction towards the Dal-Tex (as per the red line above)?

Regards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The next thing to ponder is if there is anything that could cause a problem with the hypothesised run of Baker (small red line in image in previous post) (blue line in following pic) from the point of his 'last step' onwards. This part may be of interest. For ease of reference I shall call them 'Purse Lady', 'Dark Skirt Lady' & 'Light Skirt Lady'.

baker narrowed

Focus on those three ladies in Sandy's gif below.

  

bakers_new_course_zpssruxp2pb.gif

1. PL is standing (with at least one foot) between the grey and blue line and does not seem to move from that point.
2. Running Woman (red line) runs directly in front of PL.
3. DSL's path takes her across the blue line in to a position between the grey and blue line and she turns her head and (possibly) looks at LSL
4. LSL as she is walking towards the blue line turns round just in time to avoid bumping in to DSL. and seems to catch the eye of DSL
5. LSL seems to stop (look at her head before and after Suit Man walks by)

Considering that at the point of Baker's last seen movement the theory is that he will land on the blue line and move onwards on the blue line that is 'parralel' (NB:1) to the curb, and considering that Baker is running at the time, does the position of Dark Skirt Lady, Light Skirt Lady and, in particular, Purse Lady not cause a problem?

;)

Regards

(NB1) The blue line should, perhaps, as Sandy said earlier, be less parralel to the curb and more pointed towards it, like this,
blue line correction1.JPG

 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Bill Miller said:

 

On 1/25/2017 at 10:05 PM, Sandy Larsen said:

If anything I said that when Baker begins to cross the street, he is running in the direction his shadow is pointing. Because ALL the people crossing the street are walking or running in the direction their shadows are pointing to. Roughly speaking.

Roughly speaking ... that is nonsense. Peoples shadows are cast by the sun regardless of which direction they are walking. You merely plotted a course on the street from point A to point B without any consideration to the skewed view due to Darnell's location. One would think after the discussion and examples that were posted concerning how misleading Zapruder and Altgens skewed views were when it came to the witnesses spacing to one another Vs. when seen against the Bronson photo ... that this might be considered in your location of Baker in relation to the stairs in Darnell's film.

 I also said the when Baker begins to cross the street you can see his butt. Same as you can see the butt of everybody crossing the street.

That is because of the location of the camera in relation to those people.

In both cases I was going on memory and wasn't sure.

That I am aware of.

I just now checked and you can't really tell if Baker, at the beginning, is running in the direction his shadow is pointing. Because his shadow is obscured by lots of people. However, you can see his butt when he first begins to cross the street.

Seeing any portion of the Patrolman's butt does not tell someone the exact route he ran. The further from the camera Baker travels - the more of his butt will be seen. Many people's backsides are seen and yet just a few degrees difference between witnesses would offer a different path traveled if plotted against two reference points. It's like the difference between two people being turned ... one at 12 o'clock from the camera and 12:03 ... the difference is minimal when starting out at point A, but can make a big difference where they are from each other at 40' further away. Your people and shadows seem close together from Darnell's skewed view, but if you were behind those people then you would see them as being much further apart. Again I reference the Bronson photo against the Altgen's photo and Zapruder film.

The only thing that can be determined is that where Baker's shadow turns upward on the curb wall is where he will cross from the street to the sidewalk. All else is what we used to call Fetzer's claims of Assassination Science = Junk Science. It's like when someone claims that Frazier and Montana didn't see Baker pass by them - it means little if the two witnesses didn't see Baker even cross the street. Yet when a witness does recall seeing Baker go up the stairs, then anyone anti-Baker will immediately take the position that the witness must be lying. And when Frazier says the officer could have came up the stairs while his attention could have been elsewhere such as looking to the west towards the sounds of the shots or sizing up Prayer Man, then Frazier is said to be lying. I honestly think that if someone pulled grandpa's old home movie films out of his closet and found that one of the films was taken of the front of the TSBD at the assassination and from a different angle so to show Baker and Truly doing just what they claimed they had done, then immediately that film would be being claimed to be a fake/altered.

 

 


You misunderstood nearly everything I wrote.

 

Edited by Sandy Larsen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Alistair Briggs said:

Here is a quick something I knocked up to act as a visual to the explanation that follows.

bakers run.JPG

The orange dot represents where Baker 'parked' his motorcycle.
The blue lines represent the shortest and most direct routes to either of the places that Baker could conceivably be headed.
The red line represents Bakers path according to Sandy's gif.

If it's logical to assume that there would be no change in course unless there was a reason for it.


If Baker planned to run to the Dal-Tex entrance why wouldn't he go in the most straight direction? At the point of leaving his motorcycle there is just the same amount of people 'blocking' him in that direction as there was 'blocking' him in the direction that he can be seen running. In general terms it appears that Baker ends up running past more people in the clip than he would have done had he set off directly to the Dal-Tex. The logical inference then is that Baker's initial intention was to run towards the TSBD entrance, what then would cause his deviation away from there and in the direction towards the Dal-Tex (as per the red line above)?

Regards

 

Alistair,

I believe that my presentation shows that even initially Baker had no intention of running to the TSBD entrance. Because if you extrapolate his initial course -- before he veers right -- with a straight  line over to the sidewalk, the line ends up to the right of the stairway.

(Since this line -- the blue one -- represents Baker's path down on the surface of the pavement, there can be be no perspective errors to be concerned with.)

So what was Baker's initial destination? Well, his initial path follows the direction of the crosswalk. He was crossing the road to get to somewhere on the other side obviously. Maybe he was headed to the east side of the TSBD. Maybe he thought that someone shot from the TSBD and might run out an exit other than the front door. Or maybe he had seen a suspicious person over in that general area.

I personally won't rule out that he might have been headed for the Dal-Tex building. People don't always take the shortest paths when they are accustomed to following other paths that aren't really that much longer.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Alistair Briggs said:

The next thing to ponder is if there is anything that could cause a problem with the hypothesised run of Baker (small red line in image in previous post) (blue line in following pic) from the point of his 'last step' onwards. This part may be of interest. For ease of reference I shall call them 'Purse Lady', 'Dark Skirt Lady' & 'Light Skirt Lady'.

baker narrowed

Focus on those three ladies in Sandy's gif below.

  

bakers_new_course_zpssruxp2pb.gif

Alistair, I may disagree with one of the premises to your thesis, but I agree with all the others. I will explain my possible disagreement below, and will elaborate a little on what you observed.

For the sake of what I will say here, assume that Elm Street extension runs directly east and west. (I believe that it actually runs at a bit of an angle. But I think most of us here talk as though it runs east and west.)

1. PL is standing (with at least one foot) between the grey and blue line and does not seem to move from that point.

I agree. And Purse Lady is facing west.

2. Running Woman (red line) runs directly in front of PL.

I agree.

3. DSL's path takes her across the blue line in to a position between the grey and blue line and she turns her head and (possibly) looks at LSL

I disagree if you are saying that we see Dark Skirt Lady between the blue and gray lines at any time. DSL is walking north-eastward, but more to the east than north. The whole time we see her, she is on the south side of the blue line. (Look at her feet.) She does get closer to the blue line as she walks, but never crosses it.

Remember, the blue line is on the surface of the pavement. If DSL crossed over the blue line (to its north side), the blue line would not be crossing over her lower legs. Her feet would be between the blue and gray lines.

On the other hand, if you're saying that DSL's path has her crossing the blue line later, then I agree.

4. LSL as she is walking towards the blue line turns round just in time to avoid bumping in to DSL. and seems to catch the eye of DSL

I agree. When Light Skirt Lady begins to walk, to me it appears that she (her body) is facing the TSBD steps. She walks at a north-west direction toward the steps, so at an angle relative to the blue line. It is hard to tell how far away from Dark Skirt Lady she is, so I don't know if she's about to bump into her. But my best guess is they are about two feet apart. And so your assessment seems about right to me. Especially in light of your #5 observation.

5. LSL seems to stop (look at her head before and after Suit Man walks by)

I agree.

Considering that at the point of Baker's last seen movement the theory is that he will land on the blue line and move onwards on the blue line that is 'parralel' (NB:1) to the curb, and considering that Baker is running at the time, does the position of Dark Skirt Lady, Light Skirt Lady and, in particular, Purse Lady not cause a problem?

I don't see a problem. I will address Baker's passing of each of the three ladies. (Yours is a very pertinent inquiry and analysis, BTW. I hadn't considered it before.)

  1. Purse Lady:  Purse Lady is standing between the blue and gray lines. She's sort of in the middle of the two, but seemingly closer to the blue line. (It's hard to say for sure because the image jumps around a little from frame-to-frame relative to my lines.). The distance between the blue and gray lines is about 6 ft, using Baker's shadow length as a reference. I would say PL is north of the blue line by about 2 ft.

    The blue line predicts that Baker's left shoulder will brush or bump against PL's right shoulder as he passes her by. PL may have moved a little to avoid that contact. Or my estimate of where Baker's foot will land may be off a little. It could be that the blue line should move slightly AWAY from the gray line the further east it is, opposite from what I said earlier. As I said earlier, my estimate of where Baker's foot will land is just that... an estimate. (After passing the woman without brushing against her, Baker would than have corrected his course as necessary.)

     
  2. Dark Skirt Lady: Since DSL is moving toward the blue line as she walks, it is impossible to say where she will be by the time Baker passes her. She might have passed over the blue line. But the blue line does say that Baker's intention is to pass by her on her north side. If she gets in his way as he approaches, Baker undoubtedly will change course a little so as to avoid a collision.
     
  3. Light Skirt Lady: Her location and movement from Baker's perspective is similar to that of Dark Skirt Lady's. Baker would have had to change course had she gotten in his way, and then corrected course afterward.

I will write down what I think Baker's thought process was as he was running east: "Running Woman will be out of my way by the time I get there. I need to change course to the right -- so very slightly -- to run past Purse Lady without brushing up against her. I do so. (She will be on my left as I pass her.) I see Dark Skirt Lady and Light Skirt Lady up ahead and they are not in my way. I will run past them -- just north of them -- if they stay out of my way. But they are moving and I may have to alter my course to avoid hitting them."

Alistair, due to this analysis, it is my current thinking that Baker's path actually WAS parallel with the gray line, or possibly diverging slightly from it, for the purpose of not brushing up against or bumping Purse Lady. After passing her by, he likely changed course... possibly so much so that he runs more toward the sidewalk. If that was the case, he would have not had to try and avoid colliding with Dark Skirt Lady or Light Skirt Lady.

;)

Regards

(NB1) The blue line should, perhaps, as Sandy said earlier, be less parralel to the curb and more pointed towards it, like this,
blue line correction1.JPG

 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Alistair Briggs said:

The next thing to ponder is if there is anything that could cause a problem with the hypothesised run of Baker (small red line in image in previous post) (blue line in following pic) from the point of his 'last step' onwards. This part may be of interest. For ease of reference I shall call them 'Purse Lady', 'Dark Skirt Lady' & 'Light Skirt Lady'

Focus on those three ladies in Sandy's g1. PL is standing (with at least one foot) between the grey and blue line and does not seem to move from that point.

Alistair,

The orange dot on your illustration is in the wrong street. Baker parked his bike on the street Kennedy's limo traveled.

Also, try to remember that these people are being filmed from a skewed line of sight. To say one is 1' from the other has not been established. As I stated earlier - the people in the Zapruder film look to be shoulder to shoulder when in face a photo taken with frontal few shows far more spacing between those people. 

Bronson photo.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Alistair,

I believe that my presentation shows that even initially Baker had no intention of running to the TSBD entrance. Because if you extrapolate his initial course -- before he veers right -- with a straight  line over to the sidewalk, the line ends up to the right of the stairway.

(Since this line -- the blue one -- represents Baker's path down on the surface of the pavement, there can be be no perspective errors to be concerned with.)

So what was Baker's initial destination? Well, his initial path follows the direction of the crosswalk. He was crossing the road to get to somewhere on the other side obviously. Maybe he was headed to the east side of the TSBD. Maybe he thought that someone shot from the TSBD and might run out an exit other than the front door. Or maybe he had seen a suspicious person over in that general area.

I personally won't rule out that he might have been headed for the Dal-Tex building. People don't always take the shortest paths when they are accustomed to following other paths that aren't really that much longer.

 

 

Sandy,

The way I look at it is there was one starting point and only two feasible ultimate end points, but that doesn't go on the assumption that he would directly be going to either from the start point because anything could have caused him to change his mind, initially he might have been planning to head to the east side, for either of the reasons you gave, something could have happened to change his mind... I have no issue with that being a possibility. He might have planned to run towards the corner, he might have planned to run towards the dal-tex building, perhaps the reason he was running in the first place was he had to post a letter in the mailbox (lol). There are certainly possibilities.

Just about to read your last (second) post - I won't quote it all. ;)

3 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

For the sake of what I will say here, assume that Elm Street extension runs directly east and west.

10-4 :)

3 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

On the other hand, if you're saying that DSL's path has her crossing the blue line later, then I agree.

Yep we will go with that. From what is seen in the clip DSL doesn't cross the blue line, but the path she is on would cross it later.

The good thing is we are in agreement (the 5 points) generally on what we are seeing regarding the 3 woman.

3 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I don't see a problem. I will address Baker's passing of each of the three ladies. (Yours is a very pertinent inquiry and analysis, BTW. I hadn't considered it before.)

I can visualise how Baker could avoid all three of the ladies by changing course. Obviously our view is stopped, both by the end of the clip and just before that by Suit Man... my visual interpretation is that there are the following ways Baker could run and not crash in to anyone;

a. between running woman and PL
b. between PL and DSL
c. between DSL and LSL (personally I don't think there is enough room there so would discount it)
d. to the 'right' of LSL

No matter which one of those is picked Baker would have to, as you have previously mentioned, change his course.

Slight bone of contention is that Baker is running. If Baker was walking he could stop quickly and change his course quickly and 'side-step' anyone that was in his way. The faster he is going the harder it would be to stop quickly and change his course and 'side-step' anyone. It's possible of course, after what we see of Baker in the clip, he slows down and then can 'side-step' to his hearts content, but if he does keep running he would have to (imo) at least change his course to be going 'to the right'' of LSL. From where you have placed his last foot, making his next step further from the blue line (ie if moving the blue line further away from the gray line) it would make a much bigger change of course...

I wouldn't say an impossible change of course, but...

A couple of 'experiments' to do (sadly, I confess I did genuinely try these out before writing this. lol)

Experiment 1.If you were to go outside just now to a road where there is a curb (as reference to a straight line), be a few steps away from the curb, draw a line parallel to the curb or use something (plank of wood) that can be placed parallel to the curb, angle yourself towards it similar to what Bakers angle is in the clip, from your standing position move your right foot on that angle on to the line (first step) and then (second step) bring your left foot round so that it lands on the line (parralel to the curb).

Experiment 2. Same as Experiment 1 except (second step) bring your left foot round so that it lands further away from the line

... it's possible to do but not a 'comfortable' move to do.

That is just from a standing position though. If repeated when running the likeliehood is that it would result in, at best, stumbling all over the place, and, at worst, 'falling over'.

*(Please don't try it running as it may end up in broken bones. ;) )

Sandy, I think those experiments rule out 'd. to the 'right' of LSL and I think c. is ruled out as not enough room to move between them. So either a. between running woman and PL or b. between PL and DSL are better avenues to investigate. ;) (although if Baker stopped his run abruptly, then it's anyone's guess. lol)

Anyroads,

I think we can agree that at some point Baker did enter the TSBD - the question is as to when that happened. The contention seems to be whether it was 30 seconds after the shots or 3 minutes after the shots.

As previously mentioned, I am of the opinion that Baker entered the TSBD after 30 seconds, and that is the time he is seen running across the road. Noted, it does look to me that his run will not take him directly to the steps but my feeling is that he will 'course correct' that... from watching the clip, just focusing on Bakers run (and setting aside for the moment his 'final- step' and what may happen after it), it looks to me that as Baker makes his run he is looking down the road, and experience tells me that doing so would mean his run 'drifts' off in the opposite direction (not by much mind you) - a person trying to run in a straight line when looking to their left will drift to the right. Also it looks to me that Baker moves more to the right as he passes Truly. Both of those things lead me to think that Baker has been diverted further to the right than what his original plan was - if so then his original plan would have been to be further left than where he ended up...

That's how I read his run (as I said though, that was setting aside his 'final step' and what may happen after it)... to me it looks like his original planned destination was the TSBD door but two things made his path divert further to the right.

NB, even if that was his originally planned destination, what you have put forward, Sandy, could still stand. ;)

Regards

P.S. I'm soon to be heading out to play my ritual Friday night game of football (soccer). Lots of running and swerving and avoiding the other players involved. ;) Later on when I'm back, I have a bit more to add on this subject in a kind of 'looking at it all from a different angle'.

  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bill Miller said:

Alistair,

The orange dot on your illustration is in the wrong street. Baker parked his bike on the street Kennedy's limo traveled.

Also, try to remember that these people are being filmed from a skewed line of sight. To say one is 1' from the other has not been established. As I stated earlier - the people in the Zapruder film look to be shoulder to shoulder when in face a photo taken with frontal few shows far more spacing between those people. 

 

No worries, my image representation wasn't meant to be to scale or even accurate, just to illustrate the different options 'relatively'.

*Not sure I ever said 'one is 1' from the other. lol But yeah, visually it can be hard to see what kind of gap between people there is depending on the line of sight. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎1‎/‎25‎/‎2017 at 10:32 PM, Michael Clark said:

To me, Baker looks more like he is running by than running to the steps. I just look at sandy's argument and make a decision as to how it looks to me; I try not to get too into it.

As far as testimony goes, I don't want to call anyone a prevaricotor, but the WCR as a unit is a lie and there is too much solid info that there was tremendous fear, intimidation pressure and outright falsification, omission and deletion of accounts to just accept everyone's story at face value. There were enough people there, looking and pointing at the TSBD to influence Baker's actions. 

I cant discount the story of the  5th floor guys eating lunch who heard shots fired, the ceiling shake and dumping debris on them to not think that a gun was fired as a diversion, and part of the set-up, on the 6th floor....

I know other forum members are much more careful and detailed when presenting an argument, and that is good. I'm not presenting an argument. I'm just making observations that are not studied. Observations can be helpful in finding truths and eliminating non truths. Certainly you can't eliminate a point or possibility that has not been considered.

Cheers, Mike

Mike,

Thanks for your concise summary of your current opinion.   Although I agree with you that overall the WCR is a lie, nevertheless, I have come to insist upon nuances, and I want to know what parts are the lies, instead of just writing off all 488 WC witnesses as paid-off fabricators.

Many WC witnesses testified that they heard shots from the Grassy Knoll.  I believe they were all telling the truth.

I also believe that Marina Oswald was telling the truth to the WC when she was under oath -- despite the fact that she emotionally denied everything to the FBI when she was first taken into FBI and Secret Service custody (for her protection).  Yes, Marina eventually turned against LHO, but she insisted that she was only guessing, based on the evidence that she was allowed to see.

I also believe that Ruth Paine and Michael Paine were telling the truth.  Michael Paine withheld one fact (that he later told Dan Rather in 1993) namely, that he had seen a Backyard Photograph when he first met LHO in his Neely Street apartment on April 2, 1963.   Other than that omission (which he was not questioned about) I maintain that Michael Paine told the truth to the WC.

I also believe that 95% of the WC witnesses told the truth as they knew it. 

The fabrication in the WC comes mostly from the FBI and the DPD top-brass.  J. Edgar Hoover had decided upon the "Lone Nut" theory of the JFK assassination before the day of the assassination was over -- and he and the FBI refused to change that story no matter WHAT evidence came up.  The FBI felt justified, therefore, in tampering with all evidence of witnesses, ballistics, crime scene, photographs, film and suspects. (As for the DPD top-brass, they consistently insisted on a "Communist plot" theory of the JFK assassination.)

Because LBJ, Earl Warren and Allen Dulles had agreed to J. Edgar Hoover's "Lone Nut" theory, LBJ also authorized Bethesda Hospital to tamper with the autopsy evidence.  That was basically proved by David Lifton in 1981.  

So -- the Lone Nut theory is the origin, the root of most of the fabrication in the WCR.   (The Dallas top-brass make up the rest of the fabrication.)  Everything else is good evidence, IMHO.  Remember that Ruth Paine originally said she doubted that LHO was the JFK shooter -- or certainly not the only JFK shooter if he was involved (based on the DPD possession of his rifle).   Michael Paine said the same.  Marina Oswald said the same.  Robert Oswald said the same.  Marguerite Oswald said the same.  George De Mohrenshildt said the same.  And so on.

There's still lots of good evidence in the WCR, I say, but it takes a lot of hair-splitting, Mike, I'll grant you that.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

 

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎1‎/‎25‎/‎2017 at 10:32 PM, Michael Clark said:

...Prayer man looks like LHO to me, he looks like he is chatting with Frazier. I can't believe that Frazier was unaware of anyone standing in that position. LHO said he was on the steps at the time. Frazier going to the basement to eat lunch is bizarre. He is too close to Oswald to believe, without solid evidence, that he was not wrapped up in all of this somehow. No one would be able to put a gun in my car, and tell me it was curtain rods, without me knowing better or at least being suspicious.

Perhaps Frazier was helping a conspirator from the basement, maybe dealing with guns, or providing communications from the phone distribution board in the basement. It just doesn't make sense that he went down there for lunch at that time. His body language doesn't jibe with how an innocent man would look or act at that time... 

Cheers, Mike

Mike,

As for Wesley Buell Frazier, I find him to be innocent as a lamb -- of the JFK assassination.   I have a few points to add:

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

(2) I believe Frazier when he says he was fooled by LHO by his lie that the rifle inside this package on his back seat was curtain rods -- because in my opinion, Frazier was gay, and was trying to get into a homosexual relationship with Oswald.  This is my reading of Frazier's motivation from his own WC testimony.  It is odd that Frazier, who never met Oswald before that first day of work, would (2.1) try to make instant friends with LHO; and (2.2) immediately agree to be LHO's chauffer to and from work.  

Here's a snippet from Frazier's WC testimony that shows what I mean: 

-------- BEGIN EXTRACT OF WC TESTIMONY BY WESLEY BUELL FRAZIER ---------------

Mr. BALL:  When did you first hear of Lee Harvey Oswald, first hear the name?

Mr. FRAZIER:  ...The first time I ever saw him was the first day he come to work.

Mr. BALL:  ...Had your sister told you that this fellow Lee was coming to work?

Mr. FRAZIER:  Yes...she found out from one of the neighbors there he came over for that interview with Mr. Truly and Mr. Truly had hired him.

Mr. BALL:  You heard that from your sister?

Mr. FRAZIER:  Yes.

Mr. BALL: ...Where was he when you first saw him?

Mr. FRAZIER:  When...I first saw him he was...getting some orders, and...the foreman there was getting him out some real easy orders...

Mr. BALL:  What was the name of the foreman showing him?

Mr. FRAZIER:  You mean the foreman, that was Mr. Shelly.

Mr. BALL:  ...Did Shelly introduce you to him or did you go up and shake hands with him?

Mr. FRAZIER:  No, sir; he didn't. I remember, I knew, you know that he was going to be coming to work so naturally I hadn't been there very long, you know, living in Dallas and so I wanted to make friends with everybody I could, because you know yourself friendship is something you can't buy with money and you always need friends, so I went up and introduced and he told me his name was Lee and I said "We are glad to have you." We got talking back and forth and he come to find out I knew his wife was staying there at the time with this other woman and so I thought he would go out there and I said, "Are you going to be going home this afternoon?" And he told me then, he told me that he didn't have a car, you know, and so I told him. I said, "Well, I live out there in Irving,"- I found out he lived out there and so I said, "Any time you want to go just let me know." So I thought he would go home every day like most men do but he told me no, that he wouldn't go home every day and then he asked me could he ride home say like Friday afternoon on weekends and come back on Monday morning and I told him that would be just fine with me. I told him if he wanted a ride any other time just let me know before I go off and leave him because when it comes to quitting time some of these guys, you know, some of them mess around the bathroom and some of them quit early and some of them like that, and some leave at different times than others. But I said from talking to him then, I say, he just wanted to ride home on weekends with me and I said that was fine.

-------- END EXTRACT OF WC TESTIMONY BY WESLEY BUELL FRAZIER ---------------

So, Mike, as shocking as that might be (and I believe it is my original theory, never read before) that the motive of the friendship of Frazier was that he was gay -- at least unconsciously -- I think it explains all of Frazier's behavior with regard to LHO.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just as a point of clarification!

1 minute ago, Paul Trejo said:

 I have a few points to add:

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

Fritz doesn't claim that LHO said he was on the steps at the time...

 Here is two bits of text from Bugliosi's book Four Days In November - (no contentions on my part on the 'veracity' of the actual words spoke)...

First is an exchange between Fritz and Oswald from his interrogation on the day of the assasination that started at approx: 3:40pm

Quote

"What part of the building were you in at the time the president was shot?" Fritz quizzes.
"I was having lunch about that time on the first floor," Oswald says dryly. "We broke for lunch about noon and I came down and ate."
"Where were you when the officer stopped you?" Fritz asks, referring to the story that Roy Truly, the building manager had told him earlier.
"I was on the second floor drinking a Coke when an officer came in," Oswald replies. "There's a soda machine in the lunchroom there. I went up to get a Coke."
"Then what did you do?" Fritz prompts.
"I left," Oswald says, like it's nothing.

also,

in a later interrogation of Oswald by Fritz (with Holmes present) starting at approx. 11am on the Sunday

Quote

Captain Fritz asks Oswald again where he was at the time of the shooting.
"When lunchtime came," Oswald says, "one of the Negro employees invited me to eat lunch with him, and I said, 'you go down and sent the elevator back up and I will join you in a few minutes'". He said that before he could finish what he was doing, all the commotion surrounding the assasination took place, so he said, "I just went on downstairs" to "see what it was all about." On the way, he says, he stopped to get a Coke, and before he could proceed on his way out of the building, "a police officer stopped me" to ask some questions, but "my superintendent stepped up and told the officer that I am one of the employees of the building. So, he told me to step aside for a little bit and we will get to you later. Then I just went out the front door and into the crowd to see what it was all about."
Postal Inspector Holmes notices that Oswald didn't say what floor he was on at the time of the shooting, or whether he had taken the elevator or stairs down.*

*But Holmes testified that Oswald made it clear that "he was still up in the building" when the shooting started and had "rushed downstairs to go out and see what was going on".

 

Whether Oswald actually said it OR it's just Fritz claiming that Oswald said it... either way at no point is it said that Oswald was on the front steps at the time of the shooting. (The only time he mentioned being on the front steps (with Shelley) was as he was leaving - after the 2nd floor encounter with Baker/Truly)

Anyroads,

15 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

(2) I believe Frazier when he says he was fooled by LHO by his lie that a rifle was inside this package on his back seat was curtain rods -- because in my opinion, Frazier was gay, and was trying to get into a homosexual relationship with Oswald. is this.   This is my reading of Frazier's motivation from his own WC testimony.  It is odd that Frazier, who never met Oswald before that first day of work, would (2.1) try to make instant friends with LHO; and (2.2) immediately agree to be LHO's chauffer to and from work.  

Wait, wait, wait, WHAT? Did I read that right, Paul, are you saying that because Frazier believed Oswald when Oswald said it was curtain rods that it was because Frazier wanted to start a homosexual relationship with him? That's a non-sequitur if ever I saw one. lol And wait, wait, wait, WHAT? You find it odd that Frazier would, on meeting Oswald, want to make friends with him! You find it odd that Frazier agrees to give Oswald, who lives nearby, a lift home on a Friday after work and back in on a Monday morning!

37 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

So, Mike, as shocking as that might be (and I believe it is my original theory, never read before) that the motive of the friendship of Frazier was that he was gay, I think it explains all of Frazier's behavior with regard to LHO.
 

Even if Frazier was gay (and nothing wrong with that) it doesn't follow that that explains all his behaviour with regard to LHO, unless you are saying that a gay man can't be friends with another male without wanting to be bum buddies start a homosexual relationship with him... (and I really hope you aren't saying that...)

Regards

P.S. As a slight aside, on the point of the 'package' Oswald had... just as a point of clarification (moreso for anyone else reading), Oswald didn't just randomly turn up at Frazier's unannounced on Friday morning...

Here is a relevant part of Frazier's testimony...

Quote

Mr. Ball - Now, there was the one date that Oswald came to you and asked you to drive him back to Irving, it was not a Friday, was it?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; it wasn't.
Mr. BALL - It was on a Thursday.
Mr. FRAZIER - Right.
Mr. BALL - Was that the 21st of November?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL - Well, tell us about that.
Mr. FRAZIER - Well, I say, we were standing like I said at the four-headed table about half as large as this, not, quite half as large, but anyway I was standing there getting the orders in and he said, "Could I ride home with you this afternoon?"
And I said, "Sure. You know, like I told you, you can go home with me any time you want to, like I say anytime you want to go see your wife that is all right with me."
So automatically I knew it wasn't Friday, I come to think it wasn't Friday and I said, "Why are you going home today?"
And he says, "I am going home to get some curtain rods." He said, "You know, put in an apartment."
He wanted to hang up some curtains and I said, "Very well." And I never thought more about it and I had some invoices in my hands for some orders and I walked on off and started filling the orders.

Anyroads,

Frazier may well have been gay, but that really is besides the point. Believing someone when they lie to you, wanting to be friends, and giving them lifts somewhere does not a gay person make - if it did, it would be the death knoll for the entire human race.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...