Why are the CT's so obsessed with disproving the innocent Bus and Cab rides?

[Walt Cakebread]

Years ago [1975 or so] I bought some books from a lady who had spoken to Frazier.
Wes Frazier was only about 19 at the time of the assassination and he told her [she said] that the cops had come down on him really hard...physically and mentally.
So being forced to either "play ball" "or else" it seems that Wes just told the cops and the Commission what he thought they wanted to hear.
After awhile ... and so many years...he started to believe it himself [just like Johnny Brewer with his tale]

Thanks for posting that Jerry.... I also believe that Frazier  "just told the cops and the Commission what he thought they wanted to hear.   After awhile ... and so many years...he started to believe it himself [just like Johnny Brewer with his tale]

As I recall Frazier said that he now pals around with a couple of the DPD cops.   Maybe a true and real friendship did develop, but you can bet those cops were there at Frazier's side to remind him that he'd better keep his mouth shut.

[Richard Smith]

Thanks for posting that Jerry.... I also believe that Frazier  "just told the cops and the Commission what he thought they wanted to hear.   After awhile ... and so many years...he started to believe it himself [just like Johnny Brewer with his tale]

As I recall Frazier said that he now pals around with a couple of the DPD cops.   Maybe a true and real friendship did develop, but you can bet those cops were there at Frazier's side to remind him that he'd better keep his moth shut.

Whew.  The same Frazier that speaks freely at public events casting doubt on Oswald's guilt.  Claiming that Oswald was nice to kids, carried a bag too short to contain the rifle etc.  That guy?

[Walt Cakebread]

Whew.  The same Frazier that speaks freely at public events casting doubt on Oswald's guilt.  Claiming that Oswald was nice to kids, carried a bag too short to contain the rifle etc.  That guy?

Casting doubt on Lee's guilt??    As I see it , Frazier only adds to the mystery.....  To my knowledge he has never  expressed an opinion about Lee's involvement in the assassination.   I believe that if I were in BWF shoes, I would clearly state that I didn't accept the finding of LBJ's Special Select Committee ( The warren commission) and I believe that Lee was railroaded.

I believe that there is a BIG question to be answered about that paper sack that Frazier claims the Lee carried that morning.

Was there in fact such a sack??    Lee Oswald said that he never carried any sack other than his lunch sack....And I strongly suspect that Frazier exaggerated the size of Lee's lunch sack.   In another thread just this morning someone raised the question about whether Frazier went to the Irving hospital to visit his step father IMMEDIATELY after leaving the TSBD.   I believe that he first went home and talked with his mother and his sister about the astonishing event that was at that moment being broadcast on the TV.  Lee was identified as a suspect quite early after the shooting and it would have been natural for Frazier to have speculated about whether Lee was concealing a gun in that large lunch sack.   If it's true that Frazier went home before  going to the Hospital to visit his step dad ....then that might explain where his sister got the idea that Lee was carrying a long paper sack and she wanted to apprise the police who were at the Paine's house.   

[Richard Smith]

Casting doubt on Lee's guilt??    As I see it , Frazier only adds to the mystery.....  To my knowledge he has never  expressed an opinion about Lee's involvement in the assassination.   I believe that if I were in BWF shoes, I would clearly state that I didn't accept the finding of LBJ's Special Select Committee ( The warren commission) and I believe that Lee was railroaded.

I believe that there is a BIG question to be answered about that paper sack that Frazier claims the Lee carried that morning.

Was there in fact such a sack??    Lee Oswald said that he never carried any sack other than his lunch sack....And I strongly suspect that Frazier exaggerated the size of Lee's lunch sack.   In another thread just this morning someone raised the question about whether Frazier went to the Irving hospital to visit his step father IMMEDIATELY after leaving the TSBD.   I believe that he first went home and talked with his mother and his sister about the astonishing event that was at that moment being broadcast on the TV.  Lee was identified as a suspect quite early after the shooting and it would have been natural for Frazier to have speculated about whether Lee was concealing a gun in that large lunch sack.   If it's true that Frazier went home before  going to the Hospital to visit his step dad ....then that might explain where his sister got the idea that Lee was carrying a long paper sack and she wanted to apprise the police who were at the Paine's house.

Why would Frazier exaggerate the size of Oswald's lunch sack but still insist it was too short to contain the rifle?  What purpose does that serve?   That seems to be a pointless lie from either the perspective of exonerating Oswald or framing him.  If Frazier was under coercion to implicate Oswald, the most obvious thing he confirms is that Oswald carried a bag long enough to contain the rifle.   Good grief.  And Frazier has indicated that he does not believe Oswald was the assassin or at least that he entertains serious doubt.  I believe that is what he said at the Sixth Floor museum a few years ago. 

If Frazier has any incentive to not be entirely forthcoming, it is to distance himself from any conclusion that he has any cause to suspect that the person he was driving that morning was the assassin.  Thus, he indicates there was no discussion with Oswald of the upcoming motorcade that morning that is going to pass their workplace (the top local news event of the week), or cause to be suspicious of Oswald taking an unscheduled to trip and bringing to work that morning a long, narrow package that a more observant person might suspect is a rifle.  So his story is that he is just a good old boy not taking much notice that morning.  Driving in blissful silence while listening to the radio (apparently a station not reporting on the motorcade).  Probably true but if he has cause to slant the story it is to make himself look as unlikely as possible to have any cause to suspect Oswald was up to something that morning.

[Jerry Freeman]

  So his story is that he is just a good old boy not taking much notice that morning.

And that is still his story. But it comes to mind...how did the cops find out so quickly that Frazier was Oswald's ride to work?
Perhaps they knew in advance?

[Walt Cakebread]

Why would Frazier exaggerate the size of Oswald's lunch sack but still insist it was too short to contain the rifle?  What purpose does that serve?   That seems to be a pointless lie from either the perspective of exonerating Oswald or framing him.  If Frazier was under coercion to implicate Oswald, the most obvious thing he confirms is that Oswald carried a bag long enough to contain the rifle.   Good grief.  And Frazier has indicated that he does not believe Oswald was the assassin or at least that he entertains serious doubt.  I believe that is what he said at the Sixth Floor museum a few years ago. 

If Frazier has any incentive to not be entirely forthcoming, it is to distance himself from any conclusion that he has any cause to suspect that the person he was driving that morning was the assassin.  Thus, he indicates there was no discussion with Oswald of the upcoming motorcade that morning that is going to pass their workplace (the top local news event of the week), or cause to be suspicious of Oswald taking an unscheduled to trip and bringing to work that morning a long, narrow package that a more observant person might suspect is a rifle.  So his story is that he is just a good old boy not taking much notice that morning.  Driving in blissful silence while listening to the radio (apparently a station not reporting on the motorcade).  Probably true but if he has cause to slant the story it is to make himself look as unlikely as possible to have any cause to suspect Oswald was up to something that morning.

Frazier was badgered and threatened with being charged as an accessory that night at the police station.  He was told that Lee had said that the sack that he carried that morning did not conceal a gun.   Frazier saw no harm in verifying Lee's statement that the cops were telling him...... But in reality Frazier was confirming that Lee was carrying a long paper sack.   Then the cops forced him to take a phony lie detector test, and after wards they said that he had passed and the test verified that Lee was carrying a long paper sack. The lie detector test was completely worthless because a test can't be administered to a person who is agitated or distraught.    But Frazier didn't know that ( and I doubt that he knows it today)  As far as The naive Frazier was concerned he had helped Lee Oswald and freed himself from the accessory charge.

[Richard Smith]

Frazier was badgered and threatened with being charged as an accessory that night at the police station.  He was told that Lee had said that the sack that he carried that morning did not conceal a gun.   Frazier saw no harm in verifying Lee's statement that the cops were telling him...... But in reality Frazier was confirming that Lee was carrying a long paper sack.   Then the cops forced him to take a phony lie detector test, and after wards they said that he had passed and the test verified that Lee was carrying a long paper sack. The lie detector test was completely worthless because a test can't be administered to a person who is agitated or distraught.    But Frazier didn't know that ( and I doubt that he knows it today)  As far as The naive Frazier was concerned he had helped Lee Oswald and freed himself from the accessory charge.

You should take up fiction writing.  That is quite a yarn.  Frazier is coerced into lying but not the lie the police need!  The only relevant lie they need him to tell is that Oswald carried a bag long enough to contain the rifle.  Instead he is adament both then and now that the bag was not long enough to contain the rifle.  A fact that CTers harp upon to cast doubt on Oswald's guilt.  And they don't really need him to confirm that Oswald carried that rifle at all that morning.  If the police and fantasy conspirators are writing the script, why take the risk to coerce a witness.  Oswald could just as easily have smuggled the rifle into the building the day before.  His rifle is found in the building.  That is the important fact.  They just change the narrative to have Oswald bring the rifle from his boardinghouse on the day before and hide it somewhere.