Then went inside with the curtain rods

[John Iacoletti]

Handy Guide to Walt's Fabrications by John Iacoletti
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,99.msg1042.html#msg1042

Walt may make up some fanciful stories, but at least what he posts is coherent and relevant.

[John Iacoletti]

Unreal.  So the authorities suppressed Oswald's curtain rod story to begin with, brought them to light on their own motion months later, only to suppress them once again.  I can only marvel at the logical inconsistencies of this bizarre narrative.

What I marvel at is the complete inability of the WC apologists to explain how curtain rods were "found" in Ruth Paine's garage 8 days after they were submitted into evidence.  And furthermore that they don't even wonder.  Alan's theory may be speculative but at least he's trying to reconcile the discrepancy.

[John Iacoletti]

I ridicule ALL who disbelieve that Lee Harvey Oswald killed President Kennedy.  How can you deny the evidence?  It is overwhelming, sir+

Feel free to provide some of this "overwhelming evidence".

[Zeon Mason]

Correction to my earlier post. That’s Arnold Rowland

[John Iacoletti]

But we have the key information: the rods were submitted for testing for Mr Oswald's prints. This means they must have been found at a location that merited their being tested for Mr Oswald's prints. And the only such location I, you or anyone else can think of is the Depository. Because the evidentiary stakes of a fingerprint test on rods found anywhere else would be zero.

I'm not sure I can think of any evidentiary value of Oswald's prints being on curtain rods found anywhere.

[John Iacoletti]

You may not understand or accept this, but your "logic inference" strategy is commonly used by "I am right unless you can prove me wrong" LNs.

I have to agree.  It's just what "Richard" does when he asserts that his speculative narrative about the rifle is "evidence" and if you don't agree then the problem is your "standards of evidence", not his.

[John Iacoletti]

Then how do you explain this quote:

Mr. BALL - The paper, was the color of the paper, that you would get in a grocery store, is that it, a bag in a grocery store?
Mr. FRAZIER - Right. You have seen, not a real light color but you know normally, the normal color about the same color, you have seen these kinds of heavy duty bags you know like you obtain from the grocery store, something like that, about the same color of that, paper sack you get there.

That's not contradictory.  He said the same color as the heavy duty bags like you obtain from the grocery store.