Then went inside with the curtain rods

[Bill Chapman]

I know why he was there in the first place and why he left.

I too exchanged private PMs with Tony....   But when he suddenly stopped posting, I was concerned that his health was failing, but I didn't want to pry.  Can you shed any light on what happened to Tony?

He originally said he was here to distract himself because his "dear wife" had passed a few months earlier.
When I noticed him gone, I figured he had healed enough to not need his days here as an emotional crutch any longer.

[Bill Chapman]

In CT Wonderland nothing is knowable, nothing is provable, and nothing is believable.

Said the guy who, for complete lack of knowledge, only speculates, provides no evidence to prove anything, and lacks any credibility to be believed on anything.

In the meantime:

1) Buell kept repeating that he wasn't paying attention to the bag.
2) Buell testified to not seeing the bag from the front while being carried by Oswald
3) Buell testified to the bag being folded top & bottom while on the back seat.
4) Buell testified that he wouldn't be able to tell (from his vantage point) if the package was protruding out front or not.

Which all favors the package being too short to conceal a broken down MC rifle, exactly as Buell Frazier is still saying to this day and nobody has even come close to prove him wrong.

I bet you can't even explain how any of this can justify the conclusion that the bag was really long enough to conceal the MC rifle.

Sounds to me that the spread-out version of the bag that you CSI brainiacs try to palm off as the carrying profile (To wit: Tony Fratini) is in fact fully capable of being easily reduced in real time.

Sure. The bag can be reduced in size, but a rifle can't.

Ha! The rifle can be reduced to 34.8" and is the only size of the 24/27.5/34.8 sizes that comes close to Randle's 'almost touching the ground' statement. And Randle's estimates kept shrinking (from 3 feet) as did Buell's nut sack as it became evermore clear to the pair of them (after the physical threats by Fritz in the interview) woke them both up to the real gravity and seriousness of the situation they were involved in. You think the cops were about to buy anything about Oswald and Buell just being friends and merely car-pooling? Ha!

[Martin Weidmann]

Ha! The rifle can be reduced to 34.8" and is the only size of the 24/27.5/34.8 sizes that comes close to Randle's 'almost touching the ground' statement. And Randle's estimates kept shrinking (from 3 feet) as did Buell's nut sack as it became evermore clear to the pair of them (after the physical threats by Fritz in the interview) woke them both up to the real gravity and seriousness of the situation they were involved in. You think the cops were about to buy anything about Oswald and Buell just being friends and merely car-pooling? Ha!

Total BS. It's somewhat pathetic that you desperately want to cling to one vague description by Randle while at the same time ignoring the fact that Buell Frazier not only had a far better view of the package but also describes perfectly how he saw Oswald carry the package (in the cup of his hand and under the shoulder) as well as the - for you - devastating fact that on Friday evening, only hours after the event, Frazier was being polygraphed when he was shown the paper bag "found" at the TSBD and he instantly dismissed it as the bag he had seen Oswald carry, causing a massive panic at the DPD with Lt Day struggling to come up with a completely bogus 2 bag theory and Fritz trying to pressure Frazier to sign a pre-written confession.

The bottom line is that there is not a shred of evidence to justify the conclusion that Oswald carried a broken down MC rifle concealed in a paper bag to the TSBD on Friday morning. There never was any such evidence and, regardless of your speculation, there never will be.

What is it that prevents you from understanding that some paper bag, made from TSBD materials and found at the TSBD, by itself, is of no relevance whatsoever, unless it can be demonstrated that that bag actually ever contained a broken down MC rifle. Without that, all you've got is an insignificant piece of paper, allegedly found at a location (without a in situ photo to prove it) by somebody (nobody knows exactly who, as there are several claims made about that) and massive speculation.

[Bill Chapman]

Sounds to me that the spread-out version of the bag that you CSI brainiacs try to palm off as the carrying profile (To wit: Tony Fratini) is in fact fully capable of being easily reduced in real time.

Why are you attacking Tony Fratini.....  He hasn't posted anything in a couple of years.....But when he posted,  a reader could accept nearly anything he posted, as factual information.   You Mr Chapped man are the antithesis of Toni Fratini....  I know of no one who accepts anything that you post.

It doesn't matter to me who accepts what I post. And you're the guy with the bucket-full of fabrication-charges levelled against you.. and by none other than a prominent member of your own species, no less.

[Richard Smith]

Total BS. It's somewhat pathetic that you desperately want to cling to one vague description by Randle while at the same time ignoring the fact that Buell Frazier not only had a far better view of the package but also describes perfectly how he saw Oswald carry the package (in the cup of his hand and under the shoulder) as well as the - for you - devastating fact that on Friday evening, only hours after the event, Frazier was being polygraphed when he was shown the paper bag "found" at the TSBD and he instantly dismissed it as the bag he had seen Oswald carry, causing a massive panic at the DPD with Lt Day struggling to come up with a completely bogus 2 bag theory and Fritz trying to pressure Frazier to sign a pre-written confession.

The bottom line is that there is not a shred of evidence to justify the conclusion that Oswald carried a broken down MC rifle concealed in a paper bag to the TSBD on Friday morning. There never was any such evidence and, regardless of your speculation, there never will be.

What is it that prevents you from understanding that some paper bag, made from TSBD materials and found at the TSBD, by itself, is of no relevance whatsoever, unless it can be demonstrated that that bag actually ever contained a broken down MC rifle. Without that, all you've got is an insignificant piece of paper, allegedly found at a location (without a in situ photo to prove it) by somebody (nobody knows exactly who, as there are several claims made about that) and massive speculation.

So much bad luck for Old Lee.  He carries his lunch in a bag over two feet long, tells nosy Frazier it is curtain rods, a long bag is found right next to the SN with Oswald's prints on it, it can't be accounted for in other way, Oswald's rifle is also found on that floor with the same serial number as the one sent to his PO box by Klein's, he knocks off early for a movie, decides to get his pistol, is the only person on planet Earth to be in the TSBD and pass the scene of the Tippit murder, and he looks so much like the Tippit shooter that multiple witnesses identify him, and he decides to sneak into a movie instead of buying a ticke, and instead of waiting to see what the police want he decides to punch them and then he has the same two brands of ammo as used at the Tippit scene.  Not a shred of evidence!  You should be ashamed.  You lose are credibility when you make outrageous claims like that.

[Bill Chapman]

Not-to-mention that poor little angel Oswald was the only person on Planet Earth who was on scene & accounted for during both murders.

[Walt Cakebread]

It doesn't matter to me who accepts what I post. And you're the guy with the bucket-full of fabrication-charges levelled against you.. and by none other than a prominent member of your own species, no less.

Some folks simply don't understand that proposing a theory about how an event happened, and then working with the evidence and eyewitness accounts, to prove or disprove that theory is SOP in solving crimes.

[Martin Weidmann]

So much bad luck for Old Lee.  He carries his lunch in a bag over two feet long, tells nosy Frazier it is curtain rods, a long bag is found right next to the SN with Oswald's prints on it, it can't be accounted for in other way, Oswald's rifle is also found on that floor with the same serial number as the one sent to his PO box by Klein's, he knocks off early for a movie, decides to get his pistol, is the only person on planet Earth to be in the TSBD and pass the scene of the Tippit murder, and he looks so much like the Tippit shooter that multiple witnesses identify him, and he decides to sneak into a movie instead of buying a ticke, and instead of waiting to see what the police want he decides to punch them and then he has the same two brands of ammo as used at the Tippit scene.  Not a shred of evidence!  You should be ashamed.  You lose are credibility when you make outrageous claims like that.

Not a shred of evidence! You should be ashamed.

Really? What evidence, in the JFK murder, other than a MC rifle - that can be tentatively linked to Oswald - is there?

Everything else you have presented is a concocted narrative based on mere speculation and assumptions and none of it comes even remotely close to being evidence of the MC rifle having been in the bag Oswald carried on Friday morning.

Just like Bugliosi's "he left his wedding ring in Irving, so he must have killed the President", your "he went to a movie, so he must have killed JFK", is also the "reasoning" of a 5 year old with brain damage.
 
As per usual you present an extremely weak circumstantial case, based on highly questionable information, misrepresentations of the evidence and false claims, to reach a flawed predetermined conclusion, which you subsequently use to argue that the MC rifle must have been in the bag, because in your limited brain capacity there is no room for alternative explanations. That's not evidence.... it's wishful thinking....A fairytale from la la land.

With enough assumptions and speculations, while ignoring the implications of the actual evidence, you can always come to the conclusion you want to reach. With enough assumptions and speculations I can easily make the case that your father paid for the killing of JFK to punish your mother for not having an abortion and leaving us stuck with you. Now, that would be a defense!

The bottom line, as far as the JFK murder is concerned, is that the only piece of physical evidence there is, is the MC rifle that was found on the 6th floor of the TSBD. That's it! You can not place that rifle in Ruth Paine's garage, nor can you place it in the bag Frazier saw. You can't even prove that the rifle was fired on 11/22/63 nor can you place Oswald conclusively on the 6th floor at 12:30 PM and you have no plausible explanation for how he ended up in the 2nd floor lunchroom 90 seconds after the last shot or how he could have come down the stairs without being seen by Dorothy Garner on the 4th floor.