Questions For Buell Wesley Frazier

[Martin Weidmann]

What else is there that would help you attain some "beyond a reasonable doubt" pie-in-the-sky bar?

Traditional law/forensics investigation, reasonable sober assessment of evidence, and authoritative inquiries and panels are discarded in favor of Jim Garrison's Mardi Gras, "JFK Revisited" and pseudoscience websites.

What else is there that would help you attain some "beyond a reasonable doubt" pie-in-the-sky bar?

Perhaps you should try to present some actual conclusive evidence and not a load of assumptions and speculations combined with less than convincing claims based on cherry picked and misrepresented evidence.

It's just too bad that you clearly don't have sufficient faith in your own case and the credibility of the evidence, because if you had, you would simply present it without constantly whining about the fact that people don't instantly believe the BS you present to them.

[Bill Chapman]

If any of you nerds have honestly tried a reconstruction you will find that the package is too heavy to carry strictly in the palm.

But tucked under the armpit it would fit perfectly. Go figure!

And how would you even know what the weight of the package was? In addition to being a pseudo "artist" and a wanna be psychoanalyst are you pretending to be a clairvoyant of sorts as well?

It forces one to curve the wrist under the bag as Rather is seen doing here. Not an efficient carry method.

So, if we assume that Rather did have a rifle in that bag, and Frazier said Oswald held the package in the cup of his hand (which you claim can't be done if there is a rifle in there) haven't you just confirmed that there couldn't have been a rifle in the package Oswald carried?

Where did I say it couldn't be done
I said that it would not be as efficient

I'll go with Jerry's drawings as they comport with my own live test

[Martin Weidmann]

Where did I say it couldn't be done
I said that it would not be as efficient

I'll go with Jerry's drawings as they comport with my own live test

Where did I say it couldn't be done
I said that it would not be as efficient

So, efficient or not, it can be done after all? If that's the case what is the point you're making?

I'll go with Jerry's drawings as they comport with my own live test

Which means that your "live test" is just as bogus as Jerry's drawing.

[Bill Chapman]

No 45-degree angle required: In my tests, the 34.8" package is easily held close to the vest chest
You can bet on it..

[Bill Chapman]

Where did I say it couldn't be done
I said that it would not be as efficient

So, efficient or not, it can be done after all? If that's the case what is the point you're making?

I'll go with Jerry's drawings as they comport with my own live test

Which means that your "live test" is just as bogus as Jerry's drawing.

'Bogus' regarding what, exactly?

[Jerry Freeman]

After looking at all of those silly drawings  ~~~~~~
Let's forget about Wes Frazier for a second.

An honest investigation would have inquired of all employees checking in to work at the back entry....
-----Who saw Oswald come in with Frazier? Was Oswald carrying anything?-----
A 6 lb bag of bulky hardware would have been easy to spot.

Second's up.... Who else did Frazier see when he went into work following Oswald?
Simple as that.
I mean if truth was really their only client.

[Martin Weidmann]

The bulk of the Warren Commission and HSCA are compelling LN evidence to reasonable people. Check out:

• Case Closed (1993 book)
• Reclaiming History (2007 book)
• PBS TV shows about the assassination issues: Frontline, 1993; NOVA 2013
• McAdams website ( Link )

Hilarious

A person who declares himself to be reasonable is probably one of the most unreasonable of them all.