Jump to content
The Education Forum

Recommended Posts

If Oswald acting alone, bought the rifle, transported it to his place of work in a paper sack, when the time came went up to his lair, assembled the rifle, fired 3 shots, then would not logic suggest that he dis-assemble the rifle put it back into the paper sack, remove it from his place of work and then dispose of it.

Chris Brown.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 35
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Chris Brown Posted Yesterday, 07:03 PM

If Oswald acting alone, bought the rifle, transported it to his place of work in a paper sack, when the time came went up to his lair, assembled the rifle, fired 3 shots, then would not logic suggest that he dis-assemble the rifle put it back into the paper sack, remove it from his place of work and then dispose of it.

Chris Brown.

Chris, I believe the arguments against this would be the lack of time and prevailing panic mode after the event. In other words no time for him to disassemble it nor to dispose of it properly.

Anyone walking around the TSBD or out of the TSBD at 12:32 on 11/22/1963 with a fairly large paper sack would likely be spotted and/or stopped. However, in retrospect, it would have been a good idea to grab the shells too, which I believe, gave the investigating police the idea that the rifle matching the shells would likely be found not far from the shells, and definitely gave them the thought that must be the sniper's lair.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Chris Brown Posted Yesterday, 07:03 PM

If Oswald acting alone, bought the rifle, transported it to his place of work in a paper sack, when the time came went up to his lair, assembled the rifle, fired 3 shots, then would not logic suggest that he dis-assemble the rifle put it back into the paper sack, remove it from his place of work and then dispose of it.

Chris Brown.

Chris, I believe the arguments against this would be the lack of time and prevailing panic mode after the event. In other words no time for him to disassemble it nor to dispose of it properly.

Anyone walking around the TSBD or out of the TSBD at 12:32 on 11/22/1963 with a fairly large paper sack would likely be spotted and/or stopped. However, in retrospect, it would have been a good idea to grab the shells too, which I believe, gave the investigating police the idea that the rifle matching the shells would likely be found not far from the shells, and definitely gave them the thought that must be the sniper's lair.

The rifle is an enigma. As Jack has suggested, there is doubt that Oswald ever had one. However, let's assume he did. What he therefore did, if shooting Kennedy, cool as a cucumber (as Evan has said on a number of occasions, shooting a person is not something that the average person can do without some sort of intense mind/body disturbance) then

1. leaving behind the proof that he was the shooter.

2. then displaying a wish not to get caught by shooting Tippit, which is also really a way of committing suicide. He had already killed the President and possibly Connnally. Killing a cop (and particularly then in Dallas) is a definite no-no.

3. and then going to the movies where he is easily caught.

There is something missing.

One simple explanation is that the rifle was planted and subsequent events, possibly Oswald being led by the nose by others through a series of circumstances which should have assured his death.

1. Baker in the TSBD pointed a gun at him.

2. Tippit and while on the run.

3. In the theatre itself. The way they so obviously 'snuck' up on him giving him all opportunity to draw a gun and be shot.

4. The wound on his right temple is in the shape of a rifle stock butt. (this is a particularly vulnerable spot and could have been lethal)

5. Paraded publicly on a number of occasions.

6. The transfer itself where Ruby shot him.

7. The way the police handled him before he died apparently were contrary to how someone wounded like that should have been handled. It could be argued that they then actually killed Oswald.

Apologies to the Law Enforcement Officers who are the good guys. The fact is that the cops, and certain in areas of the south knew how to kill, and through 'brotherhood' conceal such, with silence, drop guns etc. There are numerous examples to draw on.

#Who can say with any certainty WHEN Wallace's fingerprints were adhered to evidence?

#It seems also that there are a number of unexplained events regarding the Hardy's Shoe Store that have been simply glossed over throughout the past half century.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Chris Brown Posted Yesterday, 07:03 PM

If Oswald acting alone, bought the rifle, transported it to his place of work in a paper sack, when the time came went up to his lair, assembled the rifle, fired 3 shots, then would not logic suggest that he dis-assemble the rifle put it back into the paper sack, remove it from his place of work and then dispose of it.

Chris Brown.

Chris, I believe the arguments against this would be the lack of time and prevailing panic mode after the event. In other words no time for him to disassemble it nor to dispose of it properly.

Anyone walking around the TSBD or out of the TSBD at 12:32 on 11/22/1963 with a fairly large paper sack would likely be spotted and/or stopped. However, in retrospect, it would have been a good idea to grab the shells too, which I believe, gave the investigating police the idea that the rifle matching the shells would likely be found not far from the shells, and definitely gave them the thought that must be the sniper's lair.

___________________________

I wonder how long it would have taken the authorities to link LHO to the A.J.Hidell-registered rifle if it hadn't been determined by Truly and Fritz that he was the "only" unaccounted-for TSBD employee around 2:20 P.M. Enough time to escape to another country, like Mexico or....? (If, of course, he hadn't been slowed down by being detained for the Tippit thing.) How long did it take the cops to find the rifle? Couple of hours?

Personally, I think the rifle was planted there before the assassination in order to frame LHO.

--Thomas

___________________________

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Stephen Turner
Chris Brown Posted Yesterday, 07:03 PM

If Oswald acting alone, bought the rifle, transported it to his place of work in a paper sack, when the time came went up to his lair, assembled the rifle, fired 3 shots, then would not logic suggest that he dis-assemble the rifle put it back into the paper sack, remove it from his place of work and then dispose of it.

Chris Brown.

Chris, I believe the arguments against this would be the lack of time and prevailing panic mode after the event. In other words no time for him to disassemble it nor to dispose of it properly.

Anyone walking around the TSBD or out of the TSBD at 12:32 on 11/22/1963 with a fairly large paper sack would likely be spotted and/or stopped. However, in retrospect, it would have been a good idea to grab the shells too, which I believe, gave the investigating police the idea that the rifle matching the shells would likely be found not far from the shells, and definitely gave them the thought that must be the sniper's lair.

___________________________

I wonder how long it would have taken the authorities to link LHO to the A.J.Hidell-registered rifle if it hadn't been determined by Truly and Fritz that he was the "only" unaccounted-for TSBD employee around 2:20 P.M. Enough time to escape to another country, like Mexico or....? (If, of course, he hadn't been slowed down by being detained for the Tippit thing.) How long did it take the cops to find the rifle? Couple of hours?

Personally, I think the rifle was planted there before the assassination in order to frame LHO.

--Thomas

___________________________

In a scenario where Oswald is the lone shooter, and with no clear plan of escape, what his actions ammount to is a suicide mission, and Oswald, not being a stupid Man would have realised this. That being the case several questions about his subsequant actions arise. Why leave your handgun back at the appartment? Why only three bullets loaded in the Carcano? Why mess around purchasing Dr Pepper when for all you know the building is about to be sealed? In fact, as it is a suicide mission, why attempt to escape at all, far better to go down, guns blazzing. None of this makes a scrap of sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is an interesting subject. The title being: "Why hide the rifle?"

I'd like to expland the hiding of the rifle to the brown paper bag, which Oswald allegedly used to bring the rifle to work with. Why did Linnie Mae Randle and Buell Wesley Frazier (brother and sister) testify that Lee placed a 2-2.5 foot long brown paper bag type parcel into Wes Frazier's car's back seat. Frazier testified the Lee carried it to the TSBD from the car. Lee had allegedly said it contained curtain rods he planned to use for his apartment room (apparently on N. Beckley), where he was staying.

Were both Mrs. Randle and Wes Frazier somehow pressured to testify that Lee had such a package with him, or did he in fact have this package with him. A similar empty bag, believed to be "the rifle bag" was found in the TSBD. What happened to the curtain rods? The rifle measured about 3 feet disassembled. Did Frazier and Randle just not recall the size of the bag correctly or did Lee in fact bring curtian rods to the TSBD and was the rifle a plant? Who disposed of the curtain rods? Was the paper bag story fabricated?

One fairly simple issue about the assassination, but yet so many unanswered questions. What's going on?

Edited by Antti Hynonen
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Stephen Turner
This thread is an interesting subject. The title being: "Why hide the rifle?"

I'd like to expland the hiding of the rifle to the brown paper bag, which Oswald allegedly used to bring the rifle to work with. Why did Linnie Mae Randle and Buell Wesley Frazier (brother and sister) testify that Lee placed a 2-2.5 foot long brown paper bag type parcel into Wes Frazier's car's back seat. Frazier testified the Lee carried it to the TSBD from the car. Lee had allegedly said it contained curtain rods he planned to use for his apartment room (apparently on N. Beckley), where he was staying.

Were both Mrs. Randle and Wes Frazier somehow pressured to testify that Lee had such a package with him, or did he in fact have this package with him. A similar empty bag, believed to be "the rifle bag" was found in the TSBD. What happened to the curtain rods? The rifle measured about 3 feet disassembled. Did Frazier and Randle just not recall the size of the bag correctly or did Lee in fact bring curtian rods to the TSBD and was the rifle a plant? Who disposed of the curtain rods? Was the paper bag story fabricated?

One fairly simple issue about the assassination, but yet so many unanswered questions. What's going on?

Antti, Both Frazier and randle, although testifying that Oswald did indeed bring a large brown paper sack with him on the 22nd, refused to identify it as the one the DPD claimed to have found in the "snipers nest" and continued to do so despite much pressure to comply. They claimed that the W/C sack was at least six inches to long, both brother and sister said that Oswald had caried the sack cupped in his hand, and tucked into his armpit, when Frazier attempted to replicate this with the W/C exhibit it was indeed far to long. Steve.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is an interesting subject. The title being: "Why hide the rifle?"

I'd like to expland the hiding of the rifle to the brown paper bag, which Oswald allegedly used to bring the rifle to work with. Why did Linnie Mae Randle and Buell Wesley Frazier (brother and sister) testify that Lee placed a 2-2.5 foot long brown paper bag type parcel into Wes Frazier's car's back seat. Frazier testified the Lee carried it to the TSBD from the car. Lee had allegedly said it contained curtain rods he planned to use for his apartment room (apparently on N. Beckley), where he was staying.

Were both Mrs. Randle and Wes Frazier somehow pressured to testify that Lee had such a package with him, or did he in fact have this package with him. A similar empty bag, believed to be "the rifle bag" was found in the TSBD. What happened to the curtain rods? The rifle measured about 3 feet disassembled. Did Frazier and Randle just not recall the size of the bag correctly or did Lee in fact bring curtian rods to the TSBD and was the rifle a plant? Who disposed of the curtain rods? Was the paper bag story fabricated?

One fairly simple issue about the assassination, but yet so many unanswered questions. What's going on?

Another question always never asked: What good are curtain rods WITHOUT CURTAINS?

You don't need curtain rods unless you have curtains. Why is an assassin interested in

decorating a tiny rented room?

Jack

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chris,

If Oswald acting alone, bought the rifle, transported it to his place of work in a paper sack, when the time came went up to his lair, assembled the rifle, fired 3 shots, then would not logic suggest that he dis-assemble the rifle put it back into the paper sack, remove it from his place of work and then dispose of it.

Chris Brown.

A flip side of this question is why the need for a paper sack at all?

Supposedly this rifle was in the Paine garage for months and survived at least one trip back and forth from Dallas to New Orleans, wrapped in a blanket, loading and unloading from a car without being detected as a rifle at all.

Why the need to transfer it from a blanket to a paper sack?

Steve Thomas

Link to post
Share on other sites
A flip side of this question is why the need for a paper sack at all?

Supposedly this rifle was in the Paine garage for months and survived at least one trip back and forth from Dallas to New Orleans, wrapped in a blanket, loading and unloading from a car without being detected as a rifle at all.

Why the need to transfer it from a blanket to a paper sack?

Steve Thomas

________________________________

Because no sociopathic lone nut in their right mind would even think about transporting curtain rods in a blanket?

Just kidding. :)

--Thomas

________________________________

Link to post
Share on other sites

correction. there were 4 bullets in all, 3 hulls on the floor and 1 that was in the chamber when the rifle was found. i think it was captain fritz who cycled the rifle and an unfired round ejected.

hence, my question , again goes along with this is, why cycle the rifle to load a fourth round when the damage was done?

time, being of the essence for escape, why load a fourth round? then hide the rifle?

time was of the utmost essence but the supposed shooter had time to load a fourth round then hide the rifle. is it clear now?

Edited by Donald Diabo
Link to post
Share on other sites

I recall reading that the paper bag found on the 6th floor was not oily in any way. Yet the Carcano was well oiled. Also the shells were found fairly close to each other, this suggests they were placed there, and were not were they'd be had they been ejected from the carbine.

The best ear witnesses were the 3 African American men watching the motorcade on the 5th floor. One of them claimed to have heard the ejected shells drop onto the floor above him. Also one of these men had dust or something fall onto his head during the shooting from the floor above (the floor was being repaired at the time, which allowed for a need for Oswald and hsi employment there in the first place).

If they heard that much, I wonder why didn't they report hearing the assassin take steps (run/walk) to the other end of the 6th floor to hide the rifle after the deed? Why were they unable to give testimony as to how the assassin fled from the building? The elevators and staircases were right there. Surely they'd hear the elevator being operated or someone running in the staircase, if they could hear the shells falling onto the floor above?

Anyone get the feeling that some of the witness statements are false and that some of the evidence has been planted?

I am.

Edited by Antti Hynonen
Link to post
Share on other sites
I recall reading that the paper bag found on the 6th floor was not oily in any way. Yet the Carcano was well oiled. Also the shells were found fairly close to each other, this suggests they were placed there, and were not were they'd be had they been ejected from the carbine.

The best ear witnesses were the 3 African American men watching the motorcade on the 5th floor. One of them claimed to have heard the ejected shells drop onto the floor above him. Also one of these men had dust or something fall onto his head during the shooting from the floor above (the floor was being repaired at the time, which allowed for a need for Oswald and hsi employment there in the first place).

If they heard that much, I wonder why didn't they report hearing the assassin take steps (run/walk) to the other end of the 6th floor to hide the rifle after the deed? Why were they unable to give testimony as to how the assassin fled from the building? The elevators and staircases were right there. Surely they'd hear the elevator being operated or someone running in the staircase, if they could hear the shells falling onto the floor above?

Anyone get the feeling that some of the witness statements are false and that some of the evidence has been planted?

I am.

Years ago several of us researchers were allowed to tour the empty TSBD

building. Robert Cutler arranged it. He had a list of experiments he wanted

to perform. His first was simulating the firing of the last shot, running to

the opposite corner of the building and hiding the gun, and running down

the stairs to the second floor lunch room, timing it with a stopwatch.

The second was having a person on the sixth floor and persons on the

fifth floor directly below (I was one of those on the fifth floor). The sixth

floor person dropped a coin, and we could hear it, dropped several

times. He then RAN across the floor, and each step made a booming

klunk. In fact, we could communicate with each other by talking very

loudly.

You have to understand that at that time, this was an ancient warehouse,

not like a modern building. As I recall (I think photos show this), the

upper floors had no ceilings...just floor joists supporting the pine board

flooring above; so there was just an inch thickness of wood between

floors. I seem to recall that there were even cracks between some of

the boards. Sounds from the floor above were easily heard.

Jack

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. Gary Mack offers an explanation as to why the footsteps would not sound out from the 6th to the 5th floor of the TSBD. At the time of my reply to him, I wasn't aware that Mr. White had shared his experiences from the experiments had had been part of.

Our communiqué below:

Hi Antti,

What Jack did not tell you is that when JFK was shot, the sixth floor was filled with cartons and that is the reason footsteps did not "boom" out like they did for the test in an EMPTY warehouse. Knowing the real situation in 1963 is crucial to understanding what happened, and what did not happen.

Gary Mack

Hello Mr. Mack,

Thank you for your message.

I did not know (or didn't remember) what Jack had said about the steps. I just came to think that if you'd hear shells drop you'd probably hear the footsteps of the assailant hiding the weapon as well, all my thinking, not Jack's, unless it's by coincidence. You mean Jack White?

Good to know about the cardboard, I didn't know they had placed cardboard on the 6th floor in 11/1963.

I think the testimony of the three witnesses from the 5th floor in addition to Marina Oswald's (Porter's) is probably some of the weakest key testimony in this case.

What do you think of the Jarman, Norman et al. testimony? Does it hold scrutiny in your opinion?

Thanks.

Antti

Link to post
Share on other sites

Follow-up to the previous discussion.

Antti,

Jack White responded to your question by describing something he took part in - a test conducted in the TSBD when the floors were empty. Of course he heard the shells drop and of course he heard footsteps. But in 1963, the heavy book cartons all over the sixth floor deadened the noise.

Also, I suspect the assassin knew there were people below him, for the floors were very thin - just one layer of plywood - and the sound would easily carry through. Jack also ignored the simple fact that there were ten to fifteen vehicles and motorcycles right below the window along with cheering crowds, so there was a lot of ambient noise that could have masked some of the sounds from the floor above.

The guys on the fifth floor in 1963 always said they heard the shells hit the floor and the sound of the rifle being operated above them. I don't know of any reason to question their stories and I'm not aware of any researchers who have even attempted to debunk their claims.

Gary

Hi,

Thank you for sharing your view. I'm not sure what it was that made me think there were discrepancies in their stories, somehow I recall the timing of events seemed to get these gentlemen to "stumble". At any rate this was the impression I was left with, I do need to point out it was 2-3 years ago that I read their testimony.

Even with heavy book boxes on the floor, I can't quite figure out why they wouldn't also hear and then mention the movement of the assailant in their testimony. Even if not to set the record straight, they must have been afraid or concerned about this individual possibly moving down to the 5th floor and would therefore try and listen out to what that individual might be doing next, simply out of instinct.

Antti

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...