BWF and LMR may not have been the only ones who saw LHO with a bag on 11/22/1963

[Alan Ford]

Now!

A cogent objection might be made to the theory I am putting forward:

How did those framing Mr Oswald know for sure in advance that he would make an untypical visit to the Paine home the night before the assassination?

The simple answer is:

They didn't!

And that's where this gets really interesting...

 

[Walt Cakebread]

Now!

A cogent objection might be made to the theory I am putting forward:

How did those framing Mr Oswald know for sure in advance that he would make an untypical visit to the Paine home the night before the assassination?

The simple answer is:

They didn't!

And that's where this gets really interesting...

 

How do you know that they wouldn't have known?.....   It appears to me that they knew that Lee would want to spend his last night in the US, with his family,   before fleeing to Cuba after the hoax attempt on JFK.....  And they capitalized on that by attempting to make it appear that Lee had gone to Irving to get the rifle.

[Alan Ford]

23 March 1964, Paine home, Irving:

Mr. JENNER - Now, Mrs. Paine, one of the things we said we might see is a package that was in your garage containing curtain rods.
Mrs. PAINE - Yes--as you recall.
Mr. JENNER - You said you would leave that package in precisely the place wherever it was last week when you were in Washington, D.C., and have you touched it since you came home?
Mrs. PAINE - I have not touched it.
Mr. JENNER - And is it now in the place it was to the best of your recollection on November 21, 1963?
Mrs. PAINE - Yes.
Mr. JENNER - Now, would you rise and enter the garage and point out in my presence and in the presence of Mr. Howlett where that package is?
(At this point the persons heretofore mentioned entered the garage as stated by Counsel Jenner.)

Pure pantomime!

The 'Mr Howlett' mentioned by Mr Jenner is the selfsame Agent Howlett who----------just 8 days before----------had submitted 2 curtain rods for fingerprinting to Lieutenant J. C. Day!

Purpose of the fingerprinting? To check for Mr Oswald's prints!

And now here he is, about to 'inspect'.... 2 curtain rods!

With no mention by him, by anyone, of his concurrent Oswald-oriented investigation into the 'other' 2 curtain rods!

This laughable charade had been nicely set up the previous week in Washington:

Mr. JENNER - While you are doing that, Mrs. Paine, would you be good enough when you return to Irving, Tex., to see if those rods are at hand, and some of our men are going to be in Irving next week. We might come out and take a look at them, and perhaps you might surrender them to us.
Mrs. PAINE - You are perfectly welcome to them.

The curtain rods were indeed 'surrendered', though the more accurate past participle would be: given back----to Agent Howlett, and in turn to Lieutenant Day.

The following day, they would be re-released by Lieutenant Day to Agent Howlett:



And then---------or so another official release form tells us---------they were, on March 26, somehow re-re-released to a nameless A. N. Other!:



But is that what this second '3-26-64' official document is really showing us?

[John Iacoletti]

For ease of cross-reference!:



 

Very interesting find, Alan!  There's some shenanigans going on here...

[John Iacoletti]

There was an aunt or a mother in law that lived with Frazier and Randle who also saw Oswald that morning. Does anyone recall her name?

Their mother, Essie Mae Williams.  She looked out the same window and didn't see Oswald carrying anything.

[John Iacoletti]

Who prepared CE-142?

Where was it prepared?

Who gave it to Mr Oswald?

Maybe the same person who sent the backup bag:

[Alan Ford]

Very interesting find, Alan!  There's some shenanigans going on here...

Thank you, Mr Iacoletti!  And yes, shenanigans is about the word for it.

It is an extremely curious circumstance.

We have two official forms for the 2 curtain rods tested for Mr Oswald's fingerprints.

The first (call it CURTAINS #1) has the 'released' date of 3-24-64:



It is important to note that the elements on this document written in red pen are exactly replicated in the second version (call it CURTAINS #2), which has the 'released' date of 3-26-64:



This tells us that
---------------CURTAINS #1 is the original
---------------CURTAINS #2 contains text added to a photocopy of CURTAINS #1
---------------the photocopy of CURTAINS #1 was made, however, before the following elements had been written in: signature of 'John Joe Howlett' (the 2nd instance of this signature) + '3-24-64' + '750 a[.m.]' + signature of 'J. C. Day'.

This is the only logical way of accounting for the discrepancies.

In other words, CURTAINS #2, a.k.a. Commission Exhibit 1952----------

-----------is not just a photocopy (already obvious), but a photocopy of a deliberately prepared photocopy.

The question then becomes:

What benefit did having ready to hand this photocopied version bring?

Answer: flexibility in checking the 2 curtain rods in and out of the lab.