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

[Colin Crow]

Affidavit Of Ruth Hyde Paine

The following affidavit was executed by Ruth Hyde Paine on June 24, 1964.

PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION ON THE ASSASSINATION OF AFFIDAVIT PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

STATE OF TEXAS, County of Dallas, ss: Ruth Hyde Paine, being affirmed, says:

1. I reside at 2515 West 5th Street, Irving, Texas. I am the Ruth Hyde Paine who testified before the Commission on March 18, 19 and 20, 1964, and gave testimony by deposition in Washington, D.C. at the offices of the Commission on Saturday, March 21, 1964, and gave further testimony by deposition in my home the evening of Monday, March 23, 1964.

The "garage adventure" took place on the evening of 3/23/64?

If so the "date error"  theorists claim that the date that Howlett provided Day with the garage rods was actually the next morning, 3/24/94 at 9.45am. Day then processed the rods with particular focus on Oswald's prints and released them back to Howlett at 9.50am. Remarkably fast processing......

[John Iacoletti]

Denis, If you think on it a bit, the most reasonable explanation for this whole thing is that March 15 was marked in error.

That?s always the go-to excuse for inconvenient evidence.

[John Iacoletti]

I would suggest Jenner was being rather disingenuous and instructed Howlet to remove the rods from the garage, whilst RP was in Washington, have them tested for fingerprints etc and then return them in time for the garage inspection with himself, RP and Howlet, a week or so later.

If the WC was willing to be this devious and dishonest with a piece of evidence (not to mention breaking the law), what does that tell you about the integrity of the rest of the investigation?

[Colin Crow]

Frazier and Randle testified that they discussed the trip to pick up the curtain rods on the evening of 21st November 1963.

Mr. BALL - Do you remember the night before, that is after you got home that night, that your sister asked you how it happened that Oswald came home with you?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes; I believe she did or something. We got to talking about something and said, I told her that he had rode home with me and told her he said he was going to come home and pick up some curtain rods or something. I usually don't talk too much to my sister, sometimes she is not there when I am in because she is either at the store or something like that and I am either when she comes in as I say I am playing with the little nieces and we don't talk too much about work or something like that.
Mr. BALL - This night, this evening, do you remember you did talk to her about the fact that Oswald had come home with you?
Mr. FRAZIER - 1 believe I did.
Mr. BALL - Did you tell her what he had told you?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir. I believe she said why did he come home now and I said, well, he says he was going to get some curtain rods.

Mr. BALL. Do you recall on a Thursday night, November 21 that you saw Lee get out of Wesley's car?
Mrs. RANDLE. That is right.
Mr. BALL. About what time of night was it?
Mrs. RANDLE. About 5:20, I believe, 5:15 or 5:25 something like that.
Mr. BALL. Where were you when you saw him?
Mrs. RANDLE. I was on my way to the grocery store.
Mr. BALL. Did you talk to Wesley about the fact that he had brought Lee home on this night?
Mrs. RANDLE. No, sir.
Mr. BALL. Did you think it was unusual that he had come home that night?
Mrs. RANDLE. Well, I knew that he had--Friday is the only time he had ever ridden with him before which was a couple of times, I don't think he rode with him over three times, I am not sure but I never did know of him arriving, you know, except on Friday.
Mr. BALL. Well, did you mention to Wesley that night or did you ask Wesley that night how Lee happened to come home on Thursday?
Mrs. RANDLE. I might have asked him.
Mr. BALL. Do you remember anything about curtain rods?
Mrs. RANDLE. Yes.
Mr. BALL. What do you remember about that?
Mrs. RANDLE. He had told Wesley--
Mr. BALL. Tell me what Wesley told you.
Mrs. RANDLE. What Wesley told me. That Lee had rode home with him to get some curtain rods from Mrs. Paine to fix up his apartment.
Mr. BALL. When did Wesley tell you that?
Mrs. RANDLE. Well, that afternoon I suppose I would have had to ask him, he wouldn't have just told me.
Mr. BALL. You mean that night?
Mrs. RANDLE. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. After he came home?
Mrs. RANDLE. I was on my way to the store. So I probably asked him when I got back what he was doing riding home with him on Thursday afternoon.
Mr. BALL. You think that was the time that Wesley told you-
Mrs. RANDLE. Yes, sir; after I got back home.
Mr. BALL. That Lee had come home to get some curtain rods?
Mrs. RANDLE. Yes, I am sure he told me that.

Ignoring the apparent contradiction by LMR about the conversation. Why was there any confusion from her regarding the package on the morning of the 22nd? She knew Oswald's purpose according the Buell.....to get the rods....

Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do?
Mr. ADAMCIK. Coming back, Mrs. Frazier, I believe it was, drove up to the house as I was coming back with--no, it was Mrs. Bill Randle. She (Mrs. Randle) was a neighbor there and she was driving up to the house, so I asked her whether she knew anything about what had happened, and whether she had seen Lee Oswald, and she did tell me that Lee Oswald rode to work with her brother, which is Wesley Frazier, who was staying with her, and he rode to work with him that morning. She told me that she saw--she was up early in the morning and was drinking coffee, and saw Lee Harvey Oswald go across the front yard, across the yard carrying like a long package wrapped in something, carrying it from the Paine house to Wesley's car.
Mr. BELIN. Did she say how he was carrying the package?
Mr. ADAMCIK. No; she didn't. I think we got an affidavit. In fact, I know we did, but I didn't take it.
Mr. BELIN. Did she say about how long the package was?
Mr. ADAMCIK. No; she said it was long and wrapped in a paper or a box. That is all I remember her saying.

Seems she forgot about the curtain rods when talking to the police immediately after the shooting.

[Tim Nickerson]

That?s always the go-to excuse for inconvenient evidence.

Is it? I don't really need to make an excuse for this evidence. It's not important. It's a small insignificant aspect of the case. I'm only trying to present a reasonable explanation. Something that you've yet to do. I've provided two so far. Why don't you give it a shot? Try to keep it from being too wild and keep your list of liars to a minimum.

[Colin Crow]

Is it? I don't really need to make an excuse for this evidence. It's not important. It's a small insignificant aspect of the case. I'm only trying to present a reasonable explanation. Something that you've yet to do. I've provided two so far. Why don't you give it a shot? Try to keep it from being too wild and keep your list of liars to a minimum.

I agree that the curtain rods found in the Paine garage on the evening of 3/24/63 were of no evidentiary value. Oswald's prints on them (or not) were meaningless.

[Tim Nickerson]

I agree that the curtain rods found in the Paine garage on the evening of 3/24/63 were of no evidentiary value. Oswald's prints on them (or not) were meaningless.

Colin, I sense that you haven't been following along here. Alan Ford postulates that the curtain rods removed from the Paine garage are not the curtain rods submitted to the DPD crime lab by John Howlett. He is claiming that the two rods submitted to the DPD crime lab were found at the TSBD. That they were in fact the curtain rods that Oswald told Buell Frazier were in the long package he carried with him on the morning of the 22nd. When asked why Oswald denied anything to do with curtain rods during his interrogations and interviews, Ford dismisses those who reported the denial as being liars.

[Denis Pointing]

Alan, for reasons of clarity, do you mind if I just cut to the very basics of your theory? If I understand correctly, you're suggesting that Jenner, agent Howlett and possibly others unknown, concocted the idea of staging a visit to RP's garage for the purpose of having it on record that 2no curtain rods were retrieved and sent to the police lab. Correct so far? The sole reason for this deception was to enable 2no curtain rods, previously found at the TSBD, to be in effect, 'lost'..yes?
Two obvious questions immediately begged to be asked; Why concoct and execute such a very complicated, not to say dangerous 'plot' in the first place? There was obviously no record of rods ever being found at the TSBD, if there was they must have been destroyed, so why not just destroy the TSBD rods as well? The next question is; Is it really feasible, that after going to such lengths to ''swape' the rods, agent Howell would be stupid enough to 'cock' everything up by submitting the TSBD rods nine days too early!! I'm sorry Alan, but IMO, the very basics of your theory don't make any sense, they just don't add up.
Alan, I'm very glad you brought this document to light, it was certainly something I'd missed, and it certainly needed to be addressed and answered. I'm afraid, at least in my humble opinion, it has been just that, addressed and answered. If you have anything new to substantiate your theory I'd be very happy to read it. Thank you.