Basic facts that seem like conspiracy-killers to me

[David Von Pein]

33 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

We know they were fudging, moreover, because that report failed to acknowledge that Frazier had been shown the original sack, in its original color, while attached to a lie detector on the night of the shooting, and not only refused to ID the sack, but convinced the DPD the sack he saw was another sack. 

Where did you come by that info, Pat? I thought Frazier's polygraph results were lost forever.

 

[Charles Blackmon]

2 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

 

 

If only we knew how big those pockets were in Oswald's blue jacket (and how many pockets it contained; were there any on the inside of the coat perhaps?). That might be the answer to this part of the story right there.

 

 

Edited January 25, 2023 by Charles Blackmon
deleted

[James DiEugenio]

Oswald  did not smuggle any paper out of the TSBD.

Troy West would be a very compelling witness as to why.

[Gerry Down]

4 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Oswald  did not smuggle any paper out of the TSBD.

Troy West would be a very compelling witness as to why.

Oswald could have made the sack after Troy West had gone home one evening. There is an account, possibly from Nov 11th, of LHO carrying part of the gun in a brown paper sack to a furniture shop. LHO may have made the sack as early as the beginning of Nov in anticipation of taking the rifle to a gunsmith to have it's scope repaired.

[Pat Speer]

26 minutes ago, Gerry Down said:

Oswald could have made the sack after Troy West had gone home one evening. There is an account, possibly from Nov 11th, of LHO carrying part of the gun in a brown paper sack to a furniture shop. LHO may have made the sack as early as the beginning of Nov in anticipation of taking the rifle to a gunsmith to have it's scope repaired.

Nope. The FBi's paper analysis traced the sack paper to a particular roll that was in use on the 22nd, and for but a few days before and after. The only day he visited Irving in this period was the 21st. 

[Pat Speer]

1 hour ago, David Von Pein said:

Where did you come by that info, Pat? I thought Frazier's polygraph results were lost forever.

 

You are correct in that the results of the polygraph were not published. But it can not be doubted that Frazier was asked about the bag and that he passed, seeing as the DPD officers involved deferred to his insistence the bag shown him was not the bag he saw earlier that day in Oswald's possession. . 

[Mark Ulrik]

5 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

Now imagine that over the next few days an "official" story emerges as to what happened. There are no witnesses to the brawl itself. Nevertheless, the authorities claim Bench brought a Louisville Slugger into the bar inside a long paper bag, and just teed off on the bartender. Now, you know this is bs. You saw the bag in his possession and it was a grocery bag. So what do you do? Do you say "Well, the authorities are never wrong, and never lie, so I must be mistaken--Johnny Bench must be a cold-blooded killer?" Or do you say "Yikes! I don't know what happened, but I know what didn't happen, and Johnny Bench did not go into that bar with a Louisville slugger in a bag and just start braining a bartender!" 

I know what I'd do. 

Or you remember seeing an unusually long paper bag, but won't admit (even to yourself) how long it likely was, out of fear that it would get you in trouble (or perhaps to subconsciously alleviate a sense of guilt for not having prevented the crime).

[Gerry Down]

Curtain rods don't fit in a grocery bag. It could not have been a grocery bag.

[Greg Doudna]

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

You are correct in that the results of the polygraph were not published. But it can not be doubted that Frazier was asked about the bag and that he passed, seeing as the DPD officers involved deferred to his insistence the bag shown him was not the bag he saw earlier that day in Oswald's possession. . 

Yes, it is certain he would have been asked, and his registering truthful on an answer that was not the answer wanted is the most likely explanation why those polygraph results were lost. 

Frazier has told of how he (and Linnie Mae) were made to make paper reconstructions, hand estimations of length, over and over and over. Length of the bag, over and over and over, 24-27" with convergence on 27" (not 24"). That Friday night. Very important issue to police, the length of that bag Frazier was telling Oswald carried. The 27" length of Frazier's highly consistent testimony is the exact length of curtain rods in the Paines' garage (27") as Pat brings out. Intention of an imminent move, and Oswald's room at Beckley had damaged curtain rods (probably by Lee accidentally, Mrs. Roberts had no idea how they were damaged, speculated police or reporters, no idea), needing fixed before moving. Motive and opportunity.

And it's what Oswald said they were (to Frazier). And he did not bring out any TSBD wrapping paper the day before (Frazier emphatic testimony including to Pat on that).

At one point in her testimony Marina says she saw Lee with a "small" package less than the size of a rifle, leaving the morning of Nov 22. Lee and Marina both had opportunity the previous evening for access to the garage, Marina especially after Ruth went to bed.

Four curtain rods originally in the Paine house. Marina/Lee gave Lee 2, leaving 2 left in the garage which are what are there when the Warren Commission goes to the garage. (In Pat's curtain rods discussion he missed on the description of the garage photo--the ends of the remaining 2 Paine curtain rods, not in any wrapping, are actually visible loose, the curved end of at least one visible, in that photo on a small shelf below where Pat was looking in his discussion (above the workbench). Pat missed that! Its there if you just look again Pat! 🙂 )

The curtain rods would not have been the reason Lee went to Irving Thu night Nov 22 but it would be the reason told Frazier, and not untrue. (Non-assassination reason for going out Thu night: he had already missed seeing Marina and his kids the weekend of Nov 16-17, and he told Frazier he was going to get his driver's license the next Saturday Nov 23, and he was asking Marina to get an apartment with him that weekend Nov 23-24. Going out Thursday night sensible in that context since he was not going out with Frazier Fri night.) 

Frazier saw Lee walk with the curtain rods into the first door on the enclosed loading dock. But Lee was not seen entering with the package inside the second door from the loading dock to the TSBD proper, the door by the Domino Room. He probably stashed the curtain rods somewhere out of sight on the loading dock where they would be undisturbed until he was off work and would take them to Beckley with him by bus. The assassination interrupted that. The package, abandoned by Lee, was probably thrown out as trash from clearing that loading dock without anyone realizing or caring what was being thrown out, went into a dumpster, no one knew what became of it.

The large paper bag despite incongruities in the find reporting, probably was associated with the rifle, with both that bag and rifle having been Oswald's prior to Nov 11, the day Lee took the rifle out of the garage and had the scope reinstalled on it that day for purpose of preparation for sale or conveyance. 

OK, there's the alternative narrative. It agrees and makes sense of the emphatic and credible 27" length from Frazier, likely upheld by polygraph examination late that night (and that very upholding then covered up and the reason it was covered up). 27" and 27" (exact length of the Paine curtain rods). Check and check. And its what Lee told Frazier all along they were. Because its what they were. 

Edited January 25, 2023 by Greg Doudna

[Pat Speer]

2 hours ago, Mark Ulrik said:

Or you remember seeing an unusually long paper bag, but won't admit (even to yourself) how long it likely was, out of fear that it would get you in trouble (or perhaps to subconsciously alleviate a sense of guilt for not having prevented the crime).

If we're gonna go down that road, Mark, we have to accept the possibility that 1) Brennan lied about seeing Oswald out of fear the real killer would hunt him down if he didn't, 2) Jack Ruby lied about his reasons for killing Oswald out of fear the plotters in JFK's death would gun him down, and 3) the FBI and DPD crime lab people all lied out of fear of getting in trouble should they not properly pin the tale on the Oswald.

It's a slippery slope. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. If you're gonna say Frazier lied to save his butt you have to accept that LBJ and Warren ran a whitewash to save their own butts. 

The problem is, of course, that Frazier has more credibility than those other upstanding citizens. 

[Pat Speer]

3 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

Yes, it is certain he would have been asked, and his registering truthful on an answer that was not the answer wanted is the most likely explanation why those polygraph results were lost. 

Frazier has told of how he (and Linnie Mae) were made to make paper reconstructions, hand estimations of length, over and over and over. Length of the bag, over and over and over, 24-27" with convergence on 27" (not 24"). That Friday night. Very important issue to police, the length of that bag Frazier was telling Oswald carried. The 27" length of Frazier's highly consistent testimony is the exact length of curtain rods in the Paines' garage (27") as Pat brings out. Intention of an imminent move, and Oswald's room at Beckley had damaged curtain rods (probably by Lee accidentally, Mrs. Roberts had no idea how they were damaged, speculated police or reporters, no idea), needing fixed before moving. Motive and opportunity.

And it's what Oswald said they were (to Frazier). And he did not bring out any TSBD wrapping paper the day before (Frazier emphatic testimony including to Pat on that).

At one point in her testimony Marina says she saw Lee with a "small" package less than the size of a rifle, leaving the morning of Nov 22. Lee and Marina both had opportunity the previous evening for access to the garage, Marina especially after Ruth went to bed.

Four curtain rods originally in the Paine house. Marina/Lee gave Lee 2, leaving 2 left in the garage which are what are there when the Warren Commission goes to the garage. (In Pat's curtain rods discussion he missed on the description of the garage photo--the ends of the remaining 2 Paine curtain rods, not in any wrapping, are actually visible loose, the curved end of at least one visible, in that photo on a small shelf below where Pat was looking in his discussion (above the workbench). Pat missed that! Its there if you just look again Pat! 🙂 )

The curtain rods would not have been the reason Lee went to Irving Thu night Nov 22 but it would be the reason told Frazier, and not untrue. (Non-assassination reason for going out Thu night: he had already missed seeing Marina and his kids the weekend of Nov 16-17, and he told Frazier he was going to get his driver's license the next Saturday Nov 23, and he was asking Marina to get an apartment with him that weekend Nov 23-24. Going out Thursday night sensible in that context since he was not going out with Frazier Fri night.) 

Frazier saw Lee walk with the curtain rods into the first door on the enclosed loading dock. But Lee was not seen entering with the package inside the second door from the loading dock to the TSBD proper, the door by the Domino Room. He probably stashed the curtain rods somewhere out of sight on the loading dock where they would be undisturbed until he was off work and would take them to Beckley with him by bus. The assassination interrupted that. The package, abandoned by Lee, was probably thrown out as trash from clearing that loading dock without anyone realizing or caring what was being thrown out, went into a dumpster, no one knew what became of it.

The large paper bag despite incongruities in the find reporting, probably was associated with the rifle, with both that bag and rifle having been Oswald's prior to Nov 11, the day Lee took the rifle out of the garage and had the scope reinstalled on it that day for purpose of preparation for sale or conveyance. 

OK, there's the alternative narrative. It agrees and makes sense of the emphatic and credible 27" length from Frazier, likely upheld by polygraph examination late that night (and that very upholding then covered up and the reason it was covered up). 27" and 27" (exact length of the Paine curtain rods). Check and check. And its what Lee told Frazier all along they were. Because its what they were. 

I'm not sure why you think I missed the ends of the curtain rods in my  chapter. I am fairly certain I was the first to notice them. 

From chapter 4h at patspeer.com:

[Greg Doudna]

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

I'm not sure why you think I missed the ends of the curtain rods in my  chapter. I am fairly certain I was the first to notice them. 

From chapter 4h at patspeer.com:

The Warren Commission visit to Ruth Paine's garage, stenographer accompanying, regarding the curtain rods, has them standing in front of the bench (below the part of the photo you show) and seeing the curved end of a curtain rod peeking out at one end on a shelf below the roof but above the workbench. I am seeing the curtain rod as that lengthy dark object with upturned end closest to the viewer right in the middle of the lower part of the photo, below and parallel to your double arrow blue line above. I am seeing the shelf upon which the curtain rod or rods rest as suspended from a wall bracket which is visible in the photo looking (in the photo) like a profile view of a chair without the rear legs, between the dark curtain rod below and blue double arrow above. I am seeing the shelf itself as the less dark (than the curtain rod) line below the curtain rod dark line, parallel to the line of shelving above, not parallel to the darker curtain rod slightly above it. The angle of the shelf is flat compared to the floor and ceiling. The darker object, what I am seeing as the curtain rod, is not perfectly parallel or flat relative to the floor, or to the shelf on which it rests, but rises in angle slightly from left to right in the photo. The photo is showing one end of one or two curtain rods which are not lying flat on the shelf but are resting at that end on the shelf at the end of the shelf (nearest the viewer). The other end of the curtain rods is out of sight in the photo but resting on something higher than the shelf base. The dark end of the dark curtain rod at the end appears pointing upward at 11 o'clock in the photo I am interpreting as actually a 90 degrees angle in the metal object itself, the curtain rod, but the end is tipped over until blocked by the wall such that the end is not upright and visually looks in the photo like it is less than 90 degree angle, but it is actually a 90 degree angle. What do you think? Do I have that right or wrong? If you don't think what I am seeing is right what do you think that dark object, that looks vaguely like a golf club on its side (but clearly is not a golf club) is? It cannot be the base of a shelf because the angle is wrong. I am seeing it as an object lying on the shelf that is the loose, unwrapped curtain rods that the Warren Commission delegation described in words as seeing in that position.

[Pat Speer]

24 minutes ago, Greg Doudna said:

The Warren Commission visit to Ruth Paine's garage, stenographer accompanying, regarding the curtain rods, has them standing in front of the bench (below the part of the photo you show) and seeing the curved end of a curtain rod peeking out at one end on a shelf below the roof but above the workbench. I am seeing the curtain rod as that lengthy dark object with upturned end closest to the viewer right in the middle of the lower part of the photo, below and parallel to your double arrow blue line above. I am seeing the shelf upon which the curtain rod or rods rest as suspended from a wall bracket which is visible in the photo looking (in the photo) like a profile view of a chair without the rear legs, between the dark curtain rod below and blue double arrow above. I am seeing the shelf itself as the less dark (than the curtain rod) line below the curtain rod dark line, parallel to the line of shelving above, not parallel to the darker curtain rod slightly above it. The angle of the shelf is flat compared to the floor and ceiling. The darker object, what I am seeing as the curtain rod, is not perfectly parallel or flat relative to the floor, or to the shelf on which it rests, but rises in angle slightly from left to right in the photo. The photo is showing one end of one or two curtain rods which are not lying flat on the shelf but are resting at that end on the shelf at the end of the shelf (nearest the viewer). The other end of the curtain rods is out of sight in the photo but resting on something higher than the shelf base. The dark end of the dark curtain rod at the end appears pointing upward at 11 o'clock in the photo I am interpreting as actually a 90 degrees angle in the metal object itself, the curtain rod, but the end is tipped over until blocked by the wall such that the end is not upright and visually looks in the photo like it is less than 90 degree angle, but it is actually a 90 degree angle. What do you think? Do I have that right or wrong? If you don't think what I am seeing is right what do you think that dark object, that looks vaguely like a golf club on its side (but clearly is not a golf club) is? It cannot be the base of a shelf because the angle is wrong. I am seeing it as an object lying on the shelf that is the loose, unwrapped curtain rods that the Warren Commission delegation described in words as seeing in that position.

Here are the curtain rods, as published by the WC. I'm not sure what that dark shape you see is, but if I recall they said there were roll-up blinds on that shelf as well.

 

 

[Guest]

It's mind blowing that Truly was only asked in August '64 whether someone would have found curtain rods over the last months... too late dudes... Same for checking Ruth's garage, too late...

As such NO ONE can proof LHO did not bring curtain-rods in the TSBD, simply because DPD did not search the building for them...  They should have turned that building upside down,  they would have found his jacket as well IF THEY HAD looked...  and who knows what other stuff... we'll never know...

But LHO's "weapon-alibi" has not been de-bunked, they were some 9 months late in checking... When it was to late all they could do now was quarrel about the length of the bag...  too little too late...

 

 

Edited February 10, 2023 by Jean Paul Ceulemans

[David Von Pein]

9 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

And it's what Lee told Frazier all along they were. Because it's what they were [i.e., curtain rods]. 

Then why did Lee tell this lie to Fritz? ....

"I asked him [Lee Oswald] if he had told Buell Wesley Frazier why he had gone home a different night, and if he had told him anything about bringing back some curtain rods. He denied it." -- Captain Will Fritz' written report [WCR; pg. 604]

So, you're going to try to convince people that LHO really did have curtain rods in that package on 11/22, but he then deliberately LIES to the police after he's arrested concerning that very thing---whether he did or did not bring curtain rods into the building?!

Come on! Let's not allow all common sense to go sliding down the drain here!

Or am I supposed to believe that Captain Fritz was the real li@r in the above quote from his report?

And if you think that Fritz was actually the person telling tall tales about the curtain rods, instead of Mr. Oswald being the li@r, then you also have no choice but to add FBI agent James Bookhout to your Li@rs List in this regard as well. Because Bookhout, in this 11/23/63 FBI report, said he also heard Oswald denying all knowledge of any curtain rods:

"He [LHO] denied telling Wesley Frazier that the purpose of his visit to Irving, Texas, on the night of November 21, 1963, was to obtain some curtain rods from Mrs. Ruth Paine." -- James W. Bookhout; Warren Report; Page 621
 

Edited January 25, 2023 by David Von Pein