Buell Wesley Frazier

[Bill Brown]

I never claimed that Bookhout was lying.  What is it with Nutters and their strawman arguments?

You can either prove that Randle told Bookhout that the bag she saw was "approximately 3 feet by 6 inches" or you cannot.  Bookhout's account is in direct conflict with Randle's testimony.

I've not stated that you claimed Bookhout was lying.  I have not made a straw man argument; you simply misunderstood what you read.

I wonder why you always feel the need to point out the very obvious.  I asked if anyone can show that Bookhout was lying when he stated (in his report) that Randle told him the bag was three feet long.

All you did was chime in with something insignificant to my question and then later point out what everyone already knows, that Randle's testimony differs with what Bookhout stated she told him.

Bookhout's report states that Randle told him the bag was three feet long.  I'll ask again, can anyone prove that Bookhout was lying in his report about what he says Randle told him?

[John Iacoletti]

I've not stated that you claimed Bookhout was lying.  I have not made a straw man argument; you simply misunderstood what you read.

I wonder why you always feel the need to point out the very obvious.  I asked if anyone can show that Bookhout was lying when he stated (in his report) that Randle told him the bag was three feet long.

Why are you asking for "anyone" to prove a claim that nobody made?  That's exactly what a strawman is, whether you understand it or not.

[Richard Smith]

It amuses me no end that you think that it's significant that a bag that was never looked for was never found.

They searched the upper floors for a rifle.  Do you have some reason to believe that they searched anywhere for a bag?

Only in Richard-land where handwaving is called "logic".

You still haven't substantiated this.  Nowhere in your excerpt of Fritz's testimony does he say that Oswald denied carrying a bag the size estimated by Frazier.

On what basis do you assume he lied?

You're a hoot.  If Oswald really "denied bringing a package to work" then that would include a lunch package.  So what did Oswald actually say?  The notes don't say "size estimated by Frazier".  Maybe writing one's interrogation notes several days later isn't the best way to ensure accuracy...

You truly can't be for real.  How do I know that they searched the TSBD and would have found any such bag?  Wait for it...keep waiting...because they found such a bag.  Only it was a bit longer than the one estimated by Frazier.  LOL.  How about you explain to us why Oswald would not have directed them to any such bag had it existed.  It's not being found is not evidence it was there as you stupidly imply but the opposite.  Only a CTer would make that insane suggestion. 

Nowhere in Fritz's testimony does he say that Oswald denied carrying a bag the size estimated by Frazier?  Huh.  He very clearly says that Oswald denied carrying a long bag and that he only carried his lunch. Are you claiming Oswald carried a two-foot plus sized lunch bag?

I asked him, I said, "Did you go toward the building carrying a long package?"
He said, "No. I didn't carry anything but my lunch."

[John Iacoletti]

You truly can't be for real.  How do I know that they searched the TSBD and would have found any such bag?  Wait for it...keep waiting...because they found such a bag.

It's truly sad and scary what you think passes for logic.  You assume that "they" didn't find any other bag than CE142 (even though there's no evidence that they ever looked for one and even though there is no crime scene photo showing such a bag on the 6th floor in the SE corner and even though the first 5 or 6 officers on the scene didn't see such a bag there), so therefore CE142 must have been the bag that Oswald carried, even though the only two people to see the bag that Oswald carried said that it was not.

Nowhere in Fritz's testimony does he say that Oswald denied carrying a bag the size estimated by Frazier?  Huh.  He very clearly says that Oswald denied carrying a long bag and that he only carried his lunch. Are you claiming Oswald carried a two-foot plus sized lunch bag?

I asked him, I said, "Did you go toward the building carrying a long package?"
He said, "No. I didn't carry anything but my lunch."

Thank you for demonstrating that when you said "Oswald denied carrying a bag the size estimated by Frazier", you just made that part up.  You don't know what was in the bag that Frazier saw.  You don't even know what if anything was ever in CE142.  You just pretend like you do.

[Richard Smith]

It's truly sad and scary what you think passes for logic.  You assume that "they" didn't find any other bag than CE142 (even though there's no evidence that they ever looked for one and even though there is no crime scene photo showing such a bag on the 6th floor in the SE corner and even though the first 5 or 6 officers on the scene didn't see such a bag there), so therefore CE142 must have been the bag that Oswald carried, even though the only two people to see the bag that Oswald carried said that it was not.

Thank you for demonstrating that when you said "Oswald denied carrying a bag the size estimated by Frazier", you just made that part up.  You don't know what was in the bag that Frazier saw.  You don't even know what if anything was ever in CE142.  You just pretend like you do.

How exactly am I making that up?  You are either dishonest or a complete loon.  According to Fritz, Oswald said he did not carry a long package but only his lunch sack.  There is no way to interpret that in any way to be consist with Frazier's two-foot long package,  In fact, Frazier himself indicated that he asked Oswald about his lunch because he noticed that he was not carrying a lunch bag.  You should be ashamed for peddling this nonsense. 

[John Mytton]

Oswald lied Frazier about what was in the sack and Oswald lied about where is package was in Fraziers car.





JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

How exactly am I making that up?  You are either dishonest or a complete loon.  According to Fritz, Oswald said he did not carry a long package but only his lunch sack.

I thought the bold type would clue you in, but apparently not.

"Oswald denied carrying a bag THE SIZE ESTIMATED BY FRAZIER"

The part you made up was "THE SIZE ESTIMATED BY FRAZIER".  Fritz never said that.

Once again:

The part you made up was "THE SIZE ESTIMATED BY FRAZIER"

I hope that clears it up for you.

There is no way to interpret that in any way to be consist with Frazier's two-foot long package

You're a hoot.  It's somehow impossible to carry a lunch in a two-foot long package, so therefore it was a rifle?  The twisted logic never ends.