Then went inside with the curtain rods

[Martin Weidmann]

And yet you lot argue, on other occasions when it appears to y'all to be to your advantage to do so, that she wouldn't have been able to see what he was doing at the car through those thin spaces between the boards in the wall.

Now tell us how heavy curtain rods or a small lunch would be. The gun bag package was 7-8lbs or so and yes, would be awkward to carry in an awkward manner by the average citizen. But Oswald was young & fit, carrying (often heavy) boxes of books around all day. A guilty Oswald would have every reason to mask the profile of the weapon no matter how uncomfortable his method-of-carry might be during those few moments as he hurried to get the package out of sight.

Oswald's movements as described by Randle as he approached do not reveal whether-or-not elbow bend factored in to the point that the 34.8 length would fit the bill, like it does in real time with my own 34.8" device.

And yet you lot argue, on other occasions when it appears to y'all to be to your advantage to do so, that she wouldn't have been able to see what he was doing at the car through those thin spaces between the boards in the wall.

Stop trying to change the subject.

Now tell us how heavy curtain rods or a small lunch would be. The gun bag package was 7-8lbs or so and yes, would be awkward to carry in an awkward manner by the average citizen.

How in the world would you know what the weight of the package was that Oswald carried?

But Oswald was young & fit, carrying (often heavy) boxes of books around all day. A guilty Oswald would have every reason to mask the profile of the weapon no matter how uncomfortable his method-of-carry might be during those few moments as he hurried to get the package out of sight.

A guilty Oswald? Lol

Do you think before you post? We're talking about Irving on a Friday morning with hardly anybody around, yet you claim Oswald felt the need to "mask the profile of the weapon".... Really?

So, let's see what you are actually saying here; Oswald carried a 34.8" package on an empty street in an uncomfortable manner to mask the profile of the weapon, but then puts it in plain sight on the back seat of Frazier's car, only to take it out of the car in Dallas and carry it in the cup of hand and underneath his shoulder. And that actually makes sense to you? Really?

Oswald's movements as described by Randle as he approached do not reveal whether-or-not elbow bend factored in to the point that the 34.8 length would fit the bill, like it does in real time with my own 34.8" device.

Mr. BALL. We have got a package here which is marked Commission Exhibit No. 364. You have seen this before, I guess, haven't you, I think the FBI showed it to you?
Mrs. RANDLE. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Was the color of that package in any way similar to the color of this package which is 364?
Mrs. RANDLE. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Similar kind of paper, wasn't it?
Mrs. RANDLE. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Now, was the length of it any similar, anywhere near similar?
Mrs. RANDLE. Well, it wasn't that long, I mean it was folded down at the top as I told you. It definitely wasn't that long.

[Walt Cakebread]

And yet you lot argue, on other occasions when it appears to y'all to be to your advantage to do so, that she wouldn't have been able to see what he was doing at the car through those thin spaces between the boards in the wall.

Stop trying to change the subject.

Now tell us how heavy curtain rods or a small lunch would be. The gun bag package was 7-8lbs or so and yes, would be awkward to carry in an awkward manner by the average citizen.

How in the world would you know what the weight of the package was that Oswald carried?

But Oswald was young & fit, carrying (often heavy) boxes of books around all day. A guilty Oswald would have every reason to mask the profile of the weapon no matter how uncomfortable his method-of-carry might be during those few moments as he hurried to get the package out of sight.

A guilty Oswald? Lol

Do you think before you post? We're talking about Irving on a Friday morning with hardly anybody around, yet you claim Oswald felt the need to "mask the profile of the weapon".... Really?

So, let's see what you are actually saying here; Oswald carried a 34.8" package on an empty street in an uncomfortable manner to mask the profile of the weapon, but then puts it in plain sight on the back seat of Frazier's car, only to take it out of the car in Dallas and carry it in the cup of hand and underneath his shoulder. And that actually makes sense to you? Really?

Oswald's movements as described by Randle as he approached do not reveal whether-or-not elbow bend factored in to the point that the 34.8 length would fit the bill, like it does in real time with my own 34.8" device.

Mr. BALL. We have got a package here which is marked Commission Exhibit No. 364. You have seen this before, I guess, haven't you, I think the FBI showed it to you?
Mrs. RANDLE. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Was the color of that package in any way similar to the color of this package which is 364?
Mrs. RANDLE. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Similar kind of paper, wasn't it?
Mrs. RANDLE. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Now, was the length of it any similar, anywhere near similar?
Mrs. RANDLE. Well, it wasn't that long, I mean it was folded down at the top as I told you. It definitely wasn't that long.

The gun bag package was 7-8lbs or so

There was no rifle in that bag......

The model 91/38 Carcano weighs 7 pounds 7 ounces without a scope or leather sling.....  I believe the TSBD carcano weighed nearly 9 pounds.

[John Iacoletti]

Pretty sure Oswald's arm wasn't paralyzed and could bend and raise at the elbow. There's your first clue.

Pretty sure you're the one with no clue, Mr. "Other Frazier".

[John Iacoletti]

Oswald could hoist it up. Holding a package the way Randle described didn't rule out bending one's elbow enough to keep 34.8" a little off the ground. And tell us how far away Oswald was when 'she saw him at a distance'.

"didn't rule out".  LOL.

Talk about making what she said mean whatever you want it to mean...

[John Iacoletti]

That's quite an elaborate cover up.  Oswald would have to take wrapping paper from his building, hide it on his person, make a giant bag out of it, and then carry it to work all as a cover story for his domestic problems for "Gomer" Frazier who had forgotten all about the curtain rod story until he saw the bag and didn't give a fig about Oswald's personal life.

...and your evidence that Oswald took wrapping paper from his building, hid it on his person, made a giant bag out of it, and then carried it to work is . . .?

Oh yeah, you don't have any.

If Oswald did not carry any curtain rods as appears to be the case, then he lied to Frazier about the contents of his bag.  He had something else in the bag that he considered incriminatory.

"Richard" often confuses his own personal speculation bus with "evidence".

"logical conclusion".  LOL.

"belonging to Oswald".  LOL.

[John Iacoletti]

The Oswald defenders tie themselves up in absurdities with their defense of their man. The excuse here is that he wanted curtain rods for an apartment that he hadn't even rented yet. How did he know the new apartment needed curtain rods? Answer: he couldn't. He hadn't even rented one yet or even looked for one.

And you know this how?

Remember that he left his wedding ring and $170 - nearly all of his money - with Marina when he left the morning of the assassination. Why did he do this?: The Oswald defenders say he was splitting up with her. He was moving on.

Is this supposed to be evidence of murder?

And if he's getting an apartment he's going to need his money. Every apartment I've rented required a security deposit - usually a month's rent or another fee. But he can't get that apartment since he left his money back with Marina.

a) you don't know that this was all his money
b) you don't know whether or not he would still want to have an apartment instead of renting a room

It's all illogical and inconsistent and is a desperate attempt to wish away the evidence indicating that he brought his rifle in the bag.

There is none.

The reason for alternate explanations is to counter the irrational notion that leaving a wedding ring behind CAN ONLY MEAN that he was planning to shoot the president.  That's patently absurd.

This may work with one juror in a trial. But it's not going to work with reasonably intelligent people who aren't devoted to defending this miserable man.

"Reasonably intelligent people" defined as those who agree with Steve Galbraith's assumptions.

[John Iacoletti]

Now tell us how heavy curtain rods or a small lunch would be. The gun bag package was 7-8lbs or so and yes, would be awkward to carry in an awkward manner by the average citizen. But Oswald was young & fit, carrying (often heavy) boxes of books around all day. A guilty Oswald would have every reason to mask the profile of the weapon no matter how uncomfortable his method-of-carry might be during those few moments as he hurried to get the package out of sight.

"hurried to get the package out of sight".  LOL.  You sure like to make things up, don't you?

Oswald's movements as described by Randle as he approached do not reveal whether-or-not elbow bend factored in to the point that the 34.8 length would fit the bill, like it does in real time with my own 34.8" device.

So stop pretending that Randle's description of how he carried the package tells you anything different from her own length estimate.  It doesn't.