JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => Topic started by: Walt Cakebread on November 13, 2018, 04:08:06 PM
-
The question is: How did that Mannlicher Carcano get into he TSBD??
The prime witness Buell Frazier swore that Lee Oswald carried a brown paper sack that was no longer that 27 inches and it was made from light weight flimsy brown paper. Obviously there was no disassembled, 35 inch, eight pound rifle in that flimsy bag.
But there isn't a shred of doubt that a carcano was found well hidden beneath pallets of books on the sixth floor of the TSBD.
Who smuggled the carcano into the TSBD, and who hid that rifle beneath those pallets of books ?
-
Who smuggled the carcano into the TSBD, and who hid that rifle beneath those pallets of books ?
If only you could find a 55+ year old mouse that could talk [no Mickey jokes please] and was there in that building after hours during the night before :-\
-
If only you could find a 55+ year old mouse that could talk [no Mickey jokes please] and was there in that building after hours during the night before :-\
Jerry, I suspect that the carcano was in the TSBD several days before the coup d e'tat. It's possible that the carcono was in the building at the same time that Mr Caster admitted that he had rifles in the building ( Wed Nov 20 ) Prior to the coup nobody became alarmed by the presence of rifles in the building..... But The question is: WHO brought that carcano into the building? It most definitely was NOT Lee Oswald on the morning of the murder.....
-
It has always struck me as odd that LN'ers insist that the only time and manner of the rifle arriving was that morning.
Whilst it is possible that the witnesses, were all wrong, why does it matter when Oswald brought the rifle in??
-
It has always struck me as odd that LN'ers insist that the only time and manner of the rifle arriving was that morning.
Whilst it is possible that the witnesses, were all wrong, why does it matter when Oswald brought the rifle in??
Unfortunately, If a person accepts that it's possible that Lee did in fact bring the carcano into the TSBD at anytime prior to the coup, then that automatically means that he was guilty of murdering the POTUS. Since I believe that Lee was being set up as the patsy ....I can accept that he brought the carcano into the TSBD at some earlier time. ( Probably after hours when there was nobody around) BUT since the rifle was wiped clean of any prints, then "someone" other than Lee handled that rifle and wiped it clean before hiding it beneath the boxes of books. Who ever that person was they didn't want their prints to be found on that rifle. Lee wouldn't have cared because he was under the impression that he was playing a role very much like the role he played at Walker's. A role in which it appeared that he had ATTEMPTED to shoot JFK but missed.
It's entirely possible that Lee took the rifle into the TSBD days before the shooting..... But That rifle was never fired on 11/22/63 ....
However..... IF Lee was the person who took the carcano into the TSBD it doesn't make sense for him to have left the blanket in a condition that made the blanket appear to have a rifle in it. If Lee had removed that rifle he would likely have simply folded the blanket and stowed it away with his other possessions in that garage.
-
Frazier is a Totally unreliable witness. His story has changed numerous times. His most recent revelation was that he was going to duke-it-out with Fritz. He seems like a nice enough guy, but his eye witness accounts have gotten to the point of mirroring a fish story. There's a degree of truth in there somewhere, but how much is subject to question.
-
Frazier is a Totally unreliable witness. His story has changed numerous times. His most recent revelation was that he was going to duke-it-out with Fritz. He seems like a nice enough guy, but his eye witness accounts have gotten to the point of mirroring a fish story. There's a degree of truth in there somewhere, but how much is subject to question.
But he wasn't unreliable when he was interviewed by FBI Agent James Anderton in November of 1963.....
Frazier clearly told Anderton that Lee was carrying paper sack that was made from flimsy light weight brown paper on the morning of 11 / 22 / 63. and the three or four foot long paper bag that the DPD displayed to him that night DEFINITELY was NOT the bag that Lee carried.
(http://iacoletti.org/jfk/anderton-memo.png)
The opening sentence refers to a "302" for Buell Wesley Frazier on 11/22/63.... Does anybody know where that 302 is?
-
But he wasn't unreliable when he was interviewed by FBI Agent James Anderton in November of 1963.....
The opening sentence refers to a "302" for Buell Wesley Frazier on 11/22/63.... Does anybody know where that 302 is?
A FD-302 form is used by FBI agents to "report or summarize the interviews that they conduct" and contains information from the notes taken during the interview by the non-primary agent. It consists of information taken from the subject, rather than details about the subject themselves.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_FBI_forms
-
The question is: How did that Mannlicher Carcano get into he TSBD??
The prime witness Buell Frazier swore that Lee Oswald carried a brown paper sack that was no longer that 27 inches and it was made from light weight flimsy brown paper. Obviously there was no disassembled, 35 inch, eight pound rifle in that flimsy bag.
But there isn't a shred of doubt that a carcano was found well hidden beneath pallets of books on the sixth floor of the TSBD.
Who smuggled the carcano into the TSBD, and who hid that rifle beneath those pallets of books ?
Someone posted these as possibilities awhile back.
Didn't lead to Ozzie as the LN so never investigated. AFAIN
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/nightcleaning.jpg)
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/smithdetective.jpg)
-
Someone posted these as possibilities awhile back.
Didn't lead to Ozzie as the LN so never investigated. AFAIN
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/nightcleaning.jpg)
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/smithdetective.jpg)
(http://i959.photobucket.com/albums/ae75/garcra/nightcleaning.jpg)
Based on this information, I'd guess that there would be ample opportunity for some person who knew his way around the building and the cleaning schedules to enter the and leave TSBD unnoticed. Particularly while Eddie Piper was there alone.
-
Because of the misaligned scope and
if the rifle were stolen from the Paines garage
then
1. Somebody had to have had prior knowledge the rifle was stored in the garage and exactly where it was stored in the garage. Who knew? Ruth Paine, Michael Paine, or Marina Oswald, are the most probable persons, unless Oswald had one the conspirators as a temporary friend, like maybe George De Mohrenschildt.
2. The rifle must have been stolen that very night of Thursday Nov 21st or in morning hours of Nov 22 probably about 3 am, because stealing it earlier that week, surely the conspirator would have had several days to practice with the rifle, and align the scope and zero it at 100 yds. (note: Also, stealing the rifle earlier that week would have been taking a risk Oswald discovers the rifle is stolen and reports it before Nov 22).
3. The intention was to fire a couple of shots from this MC rifle at the SE window, hoping to get lucky and hit JFK, but to be certain, at least a 2nd shooter was also on the 6th floor at the SW corner window or the immediate nearby West side window, with a 30.06 rifle with large scope to get the kill head shot at Z313.
4. The SE shooter after shooting 1st shot at Z223 and hitting JFK in the back, reloaded and it took about 4 sec before he was able to attempt 2nd shot, which missed, approz Z290., that round probably striking the asphalt or the curb near Tague.
5. The 30.06 shooter was tracking the JFK limo from the time of the 1st shot attempt by the MC rifle shooter, and after the 2nd shot by the MC shooter at Z290, the 30.06 shooter fired his shot at Z313 just about 1 sec aftewards. This combination of MC shooter and 30.06 shooter, produced 3 loud sounds, with a spacing of 4 seconds and then 1 sec apart between 2nd and 3rd shots, just as Lee Bowers and other earwitness heard.
-
Unfortunately, If a person accepts that it's possible that Lee did in fact bring the carcano into the TSBD at anytime prior to the coup, then that automatically means that he was guilty of murdering the POTUS. Since I believe that Lee was being set up as the patsy ....I can accept that he brought the carcano into the TSBD at some earlier time. ( Probably after hours when there was nobody around) BUT since the rifle was wiped clean of any prints, then "someone" other than Lee handled that rifle and wiped it clean before hiding it beneath the boxes of books. Who ever that person was they didn't want their prints to be found on that rifle. Lee wouldn't have cared because he was under the impression that he was playing a role very much like the role he played at Walker's. A role in which it appeared that he had ATTEMPTED to shoot JFK but missed.
It's entirely possible that Lee took the rifle into the TSBD days before the shooting..... But That rifle was never fired on 11/22/63 ....
However..... IF Lee was the person who took the carcano into the TSBD it doesn't make sense for him to have left the blanket in a condition that made the blanket appear to have a rifle in it. If Lee had removed that rifle he would likely have simply folded the blanket and stowed it away with his other possessions in that garage.
BUT since the rifle was wiped clean of any prints, then "someone" other than Lee handled that rifle and wiped it clean before hiding it beneath the boxes of books.
Or Oswald wiped the rifle clean of prints (as quickly and best he could) while making his way across the sixth floor towards the stairs.
But That rifle was never fired on 11/22/63 ....
How do you know that?
-
Or Oswald wiped the rifle clean of prints (as quickly and best he could) while making his way across the sixth floor towards the stairs.
How do you know that?
Or Oswald wiped the rifle clean of prints (as quickly and best he could) while making his way across the sixth floor towards the stairs.
If Lee Had been duped into believing that he was playing the same game he had played at Walker's in April ( a hoax that was supposed to look like Lee had tried to shoot JFK) then he wouldn't have bothered to wipe his prints off the carcano.... After all it was supposed to be his rifle and he knew there was a paper trail that lead to him.....So wiping away any prints would have been silly and unnecessary.
Only someone who knew the plot was to actually murder JFK would not have wanted his prints on the rifle.
-
Or Oswald wiped the rifle clean of prints (as quickly and best he could) while making his way across the sixth floor towards the stairs.
If Lee Had been duped into believing that he was playing the same game he had played at Walker's in April ( a hoax that was supposed to look like Lee had tried to shoot JFK) then he wouldn't have bothered to wipe his prints off the carcano.... After all it was supposed to be his rifle and he knew there was a paper trail that lead to him.....So wiping away any prints would have been silly and unnecessary.
Only someone who knew the plot was to actually murder JFK would not have wanted his prints on the rifle.
If Lee Had been duped into believing that he was playing the same game he had played at Walker's...
Nice fantasy ya got there. Enough said.
Now how about explaining how you know as a fact that the Carcano definitely was not fired on 11/22/63.
-
Or Oswald wiped the rifle clean of prints (as quickly and best he could) while making his way across the sixth floor towards the stairs.
If Lee Had been duped into believing that he was playing the same game he had played at Walker's in April ( a hoax that was supposed to look like Lee had tried to shoot JFK) then he wouldn't have bothered to wipe his prints off the carcano.... After all it was supposed to be his rifle and he knew there was a paper trail that lead to him.....So wiping away any prints would have been silly and unnecessary.
Only someone who knew the plot was to actually murder JFK would not have wanted his prints on the rifle.
If is a big word.
-
The question is: How did that Mannlicher Carcano get into he TSBD??
The prime witness Buell Frazier swore that Lee Oswald carried a brown paper sack that was no longer that 27 inches and it was made from light weight flimsy brown paper. Obviously there was no disassembled, 35 inch, eight pound rifle in that flimsy bag.
But there isn't a shred of doubt that a carcano was found well hidden beneath pallets of books on the sixth floor of the TSBD.
Who smuggled the carcano into the TSBD, and who hid that rifle beneath those pallets of books ?
The original observation made by Frazier of the sack being "cheap, crinkly, thin paper sack" was amended by Frazier on 12/1/1963 https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/html/WH_Vol24_0214a.htm
(https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/html/WH_Vol24_0214a.htm) and discarded by the time he testified in front of the WC. Relying on the flimsy paper bag is an exercise in futility.
-
The original observation made by Frazier of the sack being "cheap, crinkly, thin paper sack" was amended by Frazier on 12/1/1963 https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/html/WH_Vol24_0214a.htm
(https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/html/WH_Vol24_0214a.htm) and discarded by the time he testified in front of the WC. Relying on the flimsy paper bag is an exercise in futility.
By all means, let's just ignore the minor detail that Frazier has rejected the bag found at the TSBD as the one he saw Oswald carry from day 1 until now.
-
By all means, let's just ignore the minor detail that Frazier has rejected the bag found at the TSBD as the one he saw Oswald carry from day 1 until now.
Clever fellow, that Buell..
-
Or Oswald wiped the rifle clean of prints (as quickly and best he could) while making his way across the sixth floor towards the stairs.
How do you know that?
So you are claiming that in the 90 second scenario that the WC created LHO also had time to wipe down the rifle completely?
-
By all means, let's just ignore the minor detail that Frazier has rejected the bag found at the TSBD as the one he saw Oswald carry from day 1 until now.
Let's just conveniently ignore the fact Frazier said he did not pay too much attention to the way Oswald was carrying the bag.
-
Let's just conveniently ignore the fact Frazier said he did not pay too much attention to the way Oswald was carrying the bag.
Nobody is ignoring that. It only means he could have been wrong, not that he was.
-
So you are claiming that in the 90 second scenario that the WC created LHO also had time to wipe down the rifle completely?
Tell us how 'as quickly and [as] best he could' equates with 'completely'
Unlike you, it seems Oswald could walk and chew gum* at the same time.
*for CTers: so-to-speak
-
Nobody is ignoring that. It only means he could have been wrong, not that he was.
Then why didn't Frazier describe the bag as thin and crispy when he was given the opportunity during his testimony before the WC, huh! Because it was like a bag one gets at a grocery store. His words.
-
Then why didn't Frazier describe the bag as thin and crispy when he was given the opportunity during his testimony before the WC, huh! Because it was like a bag one gets at a grocery store. His words.
Frazier described the bag as flimsy during the first DPD interoggation. That's day 1 evidence? You know, the kind of stuff LNs normally prefer! Just because he didn't repeat it every time he was asked later doesn't mean he was wrong. You can spin this every way you like, but, despite all the efforts from the DPD, FBI and the Warren Commission, from day 1 until now, Frazier has always denied that the bag found at the TSBD was the one he had seen Oswald carry.
-
Frazier described the bag as flimsy during the first DPD interoggation. That's day 1 evidence? You know, the kind of stuff LNs normally prefer! Just because he didn't repeat it every time he was asked later doesn't mean he was wrong. You can spin this every way you like, but, despite all the efforts from the DPD, FBI and the Warren Commission, from day 1 until now, Frazier has always denied that the bag found at the TSBD was the one he had seen Oswald carry.
That's day 1 evidence? You know, the kind of stuff LNs normally prefer!
>>> LOL All this time I've seen you lot as the ones clinging to same-day stuff. To wit: Fifty five years later CTers seem to prefer the same-day Dr. Perry presser to his later testimony confirming his lack of knowledge re any back wound that day.
-
Then why didn't Frazier describe the bag as thin and crispy when he was given the opportunity during his testimony before the WC, huh! Because it was like a bag one gets at a grocery store. His words.
Frazier described the bag as flimsy during the first DPD interoggation.
Cherry pick much?
Marina testified in front of the HSCA that no pressure was placed on her to testify a certain way.
Oh well, that settles it then.
-
Then why didn't Frazier describe the bag as thin and crispy when he was given the opportunity during his testimony before the WC, huh! Because it was like a bag one gets at a grocery store. His words.
Is it your claim that the TSBD was wrapping their books in grocery store bags?
Btw earlier in our conversation this was discussed;
There is something I wonder about, though. You seem to have swallowed the WC/HSCA findings hook, line and sinker and are clearly of the opinion that the case against Oswald has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, so what exactly are you doing here? Why are you wasting so much time and energy in discussing and defending a case which you feel has already been solved? And why do you feel does a case proven beyond a reasonable doubt need to be defended?
I have already stated why I'm here.
Another classic LN claim, but I'll play along. Show me please where you stated that??
As expected you overlooked ignored my request, so I'll ask again; Show me please where you stated that.....
-
Is it your claim that the TSBD was wrapping their books in grocery store bags?
Btw earlier in our conversation this was discussed;
As expected you overlooked ignored my request, so I'll ask again; Show me please where you stated that.....
Jr. Member
Posts: 94
Re: At the end of the day it was Oswald's rifle.
? Reply #340 on: November 17, 2018, 01:37:15 AM ?
Reply
Quote
Modify
Remove
Quote from: Jerry Freeman on November 17, 2018, 12:59:14 AM
... a small lunch bag- who would notice that?
Quote from: Oscar Navarro on November 16, 2018, 11:54:08 PM
Then why are we here? And change 'evidence' to circumstantial evidence because that is all there ever was [except for Marina's bogus statements]Sounds are audible to all and any life so yes, it does...make a sound
I'm here because the topic is super interesting. Although I'm convince the Warren Commission got it 96% right there's still much to learn. It's like having an interest in military history. I know who won and what happened but there's a lot more to it than that.
As to the evidence all being circumstantial that's not true. there's a lot of direct evidence in the shooting of Officer Tippitt but circumstantial evidence is good too. Oh, and I believe that Marina's testimony is considered direct evidence as is LMR and BWF.
And yes! It does make a sound. Point being that even though no one except Frazier saw Oswald carrying a paper bag it doesn't mean Oswald didn't carry the paper bag into the TSBD.
Is it your claim that the TSBD was wrapping their books in grocery store bags?
:D I don't believe that even you would treat this as a serious inquiry.
-
Is it your claim that the TSBD was wrapping their books in grocery store bags?
:D I don't believe that even you would treat this as a serious inquiry.
Humor me...
or do you require further explanation why I am asking you this?
-
Bump for Oscar
Is it your claim that the TSBD was wrapping their books in grocery store bags?
:D I don't believe that even you would treat this as a serious inquiry.
Humor me...
or do you require further explanation why I am asking you this?
-
Bump for Oscar
Humor me...
or do you require further explanation why I am asking you this?
Yes, by all means. Explain away.
-
Yes, by all means. Explain away.
You tried to make a big deal out of Frazier saying that the bag he had seen was like a bag one gets at a grocery store as if that had some significant meaning to your claim that Oswald had used the heavy duty bag made from TSBD materials to conceal the rifle.
You basically implied that a bag from a grocery store was the same as the TSBD bag.
Hence the question; Is it your claim that the TSBD was wrapping their books in paper similar to that of grocery store bags?
-
It has always struck me as odd that LN'ers insist that the only time and manner of the rifle arriving was that morning.
Whilst it is possible that the witnesses, were all wrong, why does it matter when Oswald brought the rifle in??
Why do you think that LHO brought it in?
-
Tell us how 'as quickly and [as] best he could' equates with 'completely'
Unlike you, it seems Oswald could walk and chew gum* at the same time.
*for CTers: so-to-speak
Nice attempt, but my question was for Brown. He seems unwilling to answer.
-
Nice attempt, but my question was for Brown. He seems unwilling to answer.
Stop dodging.
You seem unwilling to answer my question. Again, how does 'as best he can' equate with 'completely'?
-
You tried to make a big deal out of Frazier saying that the bag he had seen was like a bag one gets at a grocery store as if that had some significant meaning to your claim that Oswald had used the heavy duty bag made from TSBD materials to conceal the rifle.
You basically implied that a bag from a grocery store was the same as the TSBD bag.
Hence the question; Is it your claim that the TSBD was wrapping their books in paper similar to that of grocery store bags?
Aha! You have amended the question from me claiming that the TSBD was wrapping their books in grocery store bags to the more reasonable claim "similar". Now you understand why I scoffed at your question. My answer is that it has the characteristics of a heavy bag one would get from a grocery store and not a thin and crispy bag as had originally been claimed by Frazier. By his own admission, a claim he made that was later amended and then officially discarded.
-
Aha! You have amended the question from me claiming that the TSBD was wrapping their books in grocery store bags to the more reasonable claim "similar". Now you understand why I scoffed at your question. My answer is that it has the characteristics of a heavy bag one would get from a grocery store and not a thin and crispy bag as had originally been claimed by Frazier. By his own admission, a claim he made that was later amended and then officially discarded.
Frazier didn't "amend" anything. You keep misrepresenting his testimony that the bag was the same color as the heavy-duty bags you get at the grocery store into him saying that the bag he saw was made out of heavy-duty paper.
-
Stop dodging.
You seem unwilling to answer my question. Again, how does 'as best he can' equate with 'completely'?
By the simple fact that NO identifiable prints were found on the rifle on November 22-23, 1963.
-
By the simple fact that NO identifiable prints were found on the rifle on November 22-23, 1963.
Please allow me too emphasize this ... "simple fact that NO identifiable prints were found on the rifle on November 22-23, 1963"
-
If I am not mistaken,there was several rifles found the day of assassination in the TSBD.
-
If I am not mistaken,there was several rifles found the day of assassination in the TSBD.
I believe you are mistaken.... The ONE and only rifle in evidence in any photos taken that day show the rifle to be a model 91/38 Mannlicher Carcano.
-
Thanks,but how can you explain,Mr Frazier saying LHO,had a 24 or 26 inch package under his arm?
-
It wouldn't kill you to do some research on your own
Welcome.
-
I have done plenty,of research,i wanted your opinion. To much has been presented on that day in Dallas.I think the last,by James C Jenkins,is the most credible.
-
Thanks,but how can you explain,Mr Frazier saying LHO,had a 24 or 26 inch package under his arm?
I can't explain that, because I believe you're mistaken about what Frazier said....He said that the flimsy paper sack that lee carried that rainy morning was approximately 27 inches long.....Which is too short to conceal the carcano, but to long to fit between Lee Oswald's cupped hand and his arm pit. And Frazier said that he could see nothing sticking up above Lee's shoulder to the height of his ear....
-
That is my point,it could not be the rifle.
-
Buell Frazier has said as much
He said about the same length as a std long brown shopping bag
The rifle is about 1m long at least - disassembled
no way
-
Disassembled 1m is 39 inches,you would have to have gorilla arms to hold in your hand to arm pit.
-
Buell Wesley Frazier demonstrates Lee Oswald's brown paper bag
you tube search this ^^ and you can skip to the good bits
5.45 - Buell Frazier Demonstrates the size of curtain rod bag
9.00 - He compares it to the Mannlicher rifle length.
11.20 - He compares it to the Mannlicher the police found in the TSBD.
I think 36 inches disassembled
-
No, no no man, don't eat the cheese! Specter and others baited the trap with so much nonsense and you ate it! You ate that nasty cheese and you still don't get it all these years later. The Mannlicher was not the murder weapon unless Oswald materialized a second body to produce a shot from the front. Please pull your head out of the propaganda produced by the government and research what the witnesses at Parkland and Bethesda really said. You are embarrassingly wrong and you are posting your ignorance on a public forum. Again, I implore you: don't eat that nasty cheese! )
-
No, no no man, don't eat the cheese! Specter and others baited the trap with so much nonsense and you ate it! You ate that nasty cheese and you still don't get it all these years later. The Mannlicher was not the murder weapon unless Oswald materialized a second body to produce a shot from the front. Please pull your head out of the propaganda produced by the government and research what the witnesses at Parkland and Bethesda really said. You are embarrassingly wrong and you are posting your ignorance on a public forum. Again, I implore you: don't eat that nasty cheese! )
The Mannlicher was not the murder weapon
Mr Brunsman, you are absolutely right!! The Carcano that was found where it had been well hidden beneath a pallet of book boxes at the top of the stairs on the sixth floor had not been fired that day. The detective who recorded the location of that rifle wrote that it was 15 feet 4 inches from the north wall of the building. It would have been absolutely impossible for Lee Oswald to lay that rifle on the floor over 15 feet from the wall ( About 5 feet from the aisle that the liars said he ran through as he dashed for the stairs)