Questions For Buell Wesley Frazier

[David Von Pein]

So, Mr Von Pein, you believe the curtain rods were submitted at 9.45 a.m. on March 23?

Or March 24.

[Charles Collins]

That's not a new revelation, Charles. Buell said the same thing in his interview with Gary Mack 20 years ago in 2002. Go to 29:45 in this video to hear it:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/07/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-979.html

Thanks!

[Colin Crow]

There were two window strips removed for potential fingerprint analysis. Initially it was the one on the right of the "sniper window". It was removed during Day's absence sometime between 2 and 3pm. It was broken into a larger piece and smaller piece at the weak point near a nail hole. These pieces were entered into evidence by Montgomery and Johnson. Montgomery had the larger piece in the bag and Johnson the smaller piece in the bottle. I believe a hammer can be seen on the sill in early photos that may have been used to remove it.

When Day returned around 3pm he realised the wrong strip had been removed. The initial feeling was that the shooter had shot facing JFK along Houston. When Day returned he organised the left hand window strip removed. It was intact and also appears in the documentation.

[Colin Crow]

Questions for Buell Frazier.


JFK - Assassination : Buell Wesley Frazier ( 2002 )
Approximate times in the clip indicated.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNq-y_NLv

28.30 Frazier didn’t know time of parade passing......says someone asked Shelley, but later it’s him that asks. Who did?
30:00 Marina had made curtains – When had he picked them up?
33:00 No talk of JFK visit on the way home.
36:20 Lee looking in window, sister said who’s that, I said Oh ’that’s Lee. She had seen him previous day being dropped off by Frazier according to WC testimony. Why the failed recognition?
56:50 Got on the steps late...after 12.25 – he didn’t see the Belknap ambulance. What was he doing the previous 30 minutes?

https://www.c-span.org/video/?287933-101/kennedy-assassination-buell-wesley-frazier-part-2

21.20 nothing was made of Oswalds absence at first at roll call....Frazier claimed to have seen him leave.....yet said nothing? Truly saw Norman, Jarman and Givens leave. How did he know Givens had not returned like the other two when reporting Oswald the only employee missing?

23.00 Frazier learned JFK dead on way home. So he went home first before visiting his Step- father?


At the hospital was he counting drops or monitoring Oxygen?
Why does he think Rose and Stovall arrived about 2.30pm? A three hour gap.

32.00 Thinks he called LMR from hospital. When and where did their first contact occur after he left the TSBD.

39.00 He claimed to have heard Oswald was a suspect on the way to the hospital. When was this?

Frazier's Interview Full-HSCA

14.00 Told to take the rest of the day off, maybe Shelley? This is the same as Oswald's story.
‪14:20 Left for Irving and turned on Radio – JFK being worked on at Parkland. He must have left after headcount and before the Senkel was told by Fritz to gather everyone up who was on 6th floor that day for questioning....between 1.15 and 1.30? When was JFK pronounced dead on radio? Julia Postal heard on radio KLIF about time of Oswald's arrest. ‬
14:51 Went to sisters house and Mother was there – then went to hospital – Irving Professional Center –giving step father oxygen
“Sister said, she was there” she had to go somewhere. I can give him oxygen.
Got a phone call after oxygen – two detectives tried to grab him  - he ran to exit  – they said stop or shoot – frisk and shake down occurred – Rose and Stovall – they thought it was strange he ran - took to Irving PS – then took to Dallas

Why the large disparity in timeline and arrest details? Nothing like documentation.

23:10 Police trying to whitewash – lax security procedures. Does he still believe in whitewash?

24:00 Found out Oswald was in custody while he was Irving PD or about time he left for Dallas with Rose and Stovall?

25:21 Did not see LHO leave building – only found out was not there at head count – Shelley said he could go home between 1 and 1.30pm – but Shelley goes to city hall with other 6th floor workers – must have been before request by Fritz to Senkel. Why was he allowed to leave TSBD when others on 6th floor that day were taken to city hall for questioning? Did he tell them he had been there?

26:30 He did not notice police leave for Tippit shooting.

27.00 He knew Oswald was missing when he left building.

27:20 Got home (not hospital) and it was on TV – sister knew what had happened (
at the TSBD) – "we both said it was bad thing" ------there was an 8 sec pause ----- “she said”……..I went to the house and mother was there. Asked where sister was and she was at hospital. She had been there a while, he went to relieve her. Please clarify what happened after you arrived at home. What discussions occurred?

29:20 Knew Oswald had been arrested. What were his thoughts?

30:50 He wondered if he did it while driving – to where and when? After missing or arrested?

31:10 Only thought of curtain rods when questioned – was told its been reported he had a package with him – what did it look like? Did they raise package with him first?

32:30 "cops went to my sisters house first – asked my mother  -  was up at hospital with sister". Another inconsistency. Please clarify.

34:30 Frazier mentioned the motorcade to Oswald on the way to work. Differs from WC testimony.

39:10 Again he did not see the Belknap ambulance. Must have gone outside late. What was he doing before?

1:00:30 What time did you get to the hospital? Didn’t know. Went home a short time then to hospital. Thinks mother had news on TV and knew Tippit shot. At the hospital remembers someone being arrested at Texas Theater. Did not know it was Oswald.

1:06:40 We made package together? “the one that we made” Did they make a common package first?
1:08:30 He knew Oswald was missing, only one... Bill did the count.
‪1:09: When he knew Tippit was shot and Oswald arrested did he get scared? He was scared before, but had never been in trouble before. Was when at hospital with step father he thought Oswald was involved. Did anyone call to say it was Oswald (LMR?) Repeated did not know for sure at that time. Did not know it was Oswald while at the hospital.‬

1:24:40 DPD searched the Randle home – before or after they came to hospital –he can’t remember

1:26:30 Was going to need lawyer until Rose and Stovall convinced cops he was telling truth. Assume this was after polygraph?

1:27:10 LMR and minister came to Irving PS.

1:29:50 Can’t remember what mother/cops said before the search....took his .303 and double gauge shotgun....mother was  not happy.

1:30:10 No one tried to call him at the hospital. Not LMR, or mother?

3:29:30 LMR at kitchen sink "says must be late because here comes Lee". But previously said LMR didn’t know who it was. What is the truth?

‪3:32:00 Conversation with Lee about battery charging – this is new‬. Why was it not mentioned before?

3:36:00 Parade was  closer to lunch hour end  – why hadn’t he hadn’t eaten his lunch?

3:40:10 How did Oswald know about the broken lock on rear door to car? "He figured that one out!" "I guess he had"…..LOL

His "story" from the time of the shooting until his arrest is a total concoction.

[Martin Weidmann]

I was talking about the need to discard some things relating to the case (e.g., witness testimony that is obviously inaccurate), not necessarily physical evidence. Since there is no "non-Oswald" physical evidence, then there is none of that material to discard -- although most CTers have decided to discard all of it by way of calling all of it fake. But, then too, that's the only way they can pretend Oswald was a patsy. So they're pretty much forced to toss all the evidence in the dumpster.

You're not making sense, David.

There is no physical evidence for or against Oswald. There is only physical evidence that is being interpreted for or against Oswald. Take for instance the order coupon for the rifle. In one interpretation it could be against Oswald, because his P.O. Box was used and he potentially wrote the form. On the other hand it could be interpreted for Oswald, because it was A. Hidell who ordered the rifle and not Oswald.

Now let's get back to the paper bag found at the TSBD.

We have two witnesses who both say that the bag found at the TSBD is not the bag they saw Oswald carry. Frazier told the investigators, the bag fitted between the cup of Oswald's hand and his armpit and he also showed FBI agents to where the bag reached on the backseat of his car and the FBI agents measured the distance as being 27''.

Linnie Mae Randle told FBI against Odum and McNeely she saw Oswald holding a bag at the (folded up) top and carry it next to his leg. If that bag contained a wooden stock of a rifle it would have had to have been at least 34" long, which means it would have hit the ground, as Oswald's legs, measured from his hip, were not not 34" long. As the package didn't hit the ground it is reasonable to assume that the bag was shorter than 34". In fact, the bag that Oswald could have carried in the way Linnie Mae Randle described could not have been much larger than 27".

So, estimates aside, we have two measurements of the package compared to (1) the backseat of Frazier's car and (2) the size of Oswald's leg and a visual comparison of the size of the package in relation to the length of Oswald's arm. That seems pretty definitive to me. But that's not all. On Friday evening, only hours after the event and while he was being polygraphed, Frazier was shown the bag found at the TSBD and he rejected it as the bag he had seen Oswald carry. He described the latter as being "a thin, flimsy sack like the one purchased at a dime store".

As far as the bag is concerned that's the evidence interpretation for Oswald. Now, what exactly is there against Oswald?

The bag was (allegedly) found in the sniper's nest. It turned out to be made of materials that are common to the TSBD. Several prints are on the bag, but the only ones that could be identified belong to Oswald, which is somewhat remarkable as we know that at least Detective Montgomery handled the bag also (he unfolded it and carried it out of the building). It was never established that the bag found at the TSBD ever left the building, nor that it ever contained a rifle. So what we are left with is a bag, made from TSBD material, found inside the TSBD with prints of an employee of the TSBD on it.

Now, can you tell me, what plausible reason (other than circular logic) the investigators had to ignore the witness evidence as "mistaken" in favor of the TSBD bag being the one that Oswald carried after all?

[Charles Collins]

The 2002 Sixth Floor video is illuminating for me. And here are a few items that I take away from it.

1. Frazier heard three shots from above his location. Frazier says that there was no more that 15-seconds between the first and last shots. He says that he estimates that there was 8 to 10-seconds between the first two shots, and no more than 5-seconds between the second and third shots.

2. Frazier says that the limo hadn’t gone very far from the time it disappeared from his sight (due to the corner of the front stairs alcove). The fact that he associates that time of disappearance with the first shot suggests to me that the time of the first shot was close to that point in time. A preliminary look at Roberdeau’s map suggests that this was a little before the Z133 timeframe.

3. Frazier only saw the package out of the corner of his eye during a quick glance into the back seat as he was sitting down in the driver’s seat. And he didn’t think any more about it after that.

4. Frazier says the package was made out of brown wrapping paper and tape similar to what they used at the TSBD.

5. After discussing the description of the length of the package vs the length of the rifle controversy with Gary Mack, Frazier asks himself if the rifle was in the bag. His answer is “I don’t know.” I find this particularly interesting after hearing the claims from many CTers that the bag coudn’t have contained the rifle. Here is the man who saw the package and provided the length estimate (that the CT crowd clings so closely to) saying he doesn’t know if the rifle was in the bag. In my opinion, BWF is admitting (in a round about way) that his estimate of the length of the bag might be mistaken. Frazier will most likely never admit this directly, but he certainly leaves that possibility open to interpretation.

6. Frazier’s main reason for not believing LHO was guilty appears to be that LHO liked playing with kids. (Not because the package was too short.)

7. It is very obvious that Frazier became upset with the DPD and how they treated him during questioning on 11/22/63. My opinion is that when they showed him the bag, he was determined to be of no help to the DPD (due to his anger at them). So it appears to me that he probably said the bag was longer than the one he saw in his back seat for potentially two reasons. 1. He didn’t want to willingly accept any possible responsibility for transporting the murder weapon (even though he had no way of knowing what was in the bag). 2. He wanted to be uncooperative due to his anger at the DPD for their treatment of him.

[Martin Weidmann]

The 2002 Sixth Floor video is illuminating for me. And here are a few items that I take away from it.

1. Frazier heard three shots from above his location. Frazier says that there was no more that 15-seconds between the first and last shots. He says that he estimates that there was 8 to 10-seconds between the first two shots, and no more than 5-seconds between the second and third shots.

2. Frazier says that the limo hadn’t gone very far from the time it disappeared from his sight (due to the corner of the front stairs alcove). The fact that he associates that time of disappearance with the first shot suggests to me that the time of the first shot was close to that point in time. A preliminary look at Roberdeau’s map suggests that this was a little before the Z133 timeframe.

3. Frazier only saw the package out of the corner of his eye during a quick glance into the back seat as he was sitting down in the driver’s seat. And he didn’t think any more about it after that.

4. Frazier says the package was made out of brown wrapping paper and tape similar to what they used at the TSBD.

5. After discussing the description of the length of the package vs the length of the rifle controversy with Gary Mack, Frazier asks himself if the rifle was in the bag. His answer is “I don’t know.” I find this particularly interesting after hearing the claims from many CTers that the bag coudn’t have contained the rifle. Here is the man who saw the package and provided the length estimate (that the CT crowd clings so closely to) saying he doesn’t know if the rifle was in the bag. In my opinion, BWF is admitting (in a round about way) that his estimate of the length of the bag might be mistaken. Frazier will most likely never admit this directly, but he certainly leaves that possibility open to interpretation.

6. Frazier’s main reason for not believing LHO was guilty appears to be that LHO liked playing with kids. (Not because the package was too short.)

7. It is very obvious that Frazier became upset with the DPD and how they treated him during questioning on 11/22/63. My opinion is that when they showed him the bag, he was determined to be of no help to the DPD (due to his anger at them). So it appears to me that he probably said the bag was longer than the one he saw in his back seat for potentially two reasons. 1. He didn’t want to willingly accept any possible responsibility for transporting the murder weapon (even though he had no way of knowing what was in the bag). 2. He wanted to be uncooperative due to his anger at the DPD for their treatment of him.

5. After discussing the description of the length of the package vs the length of the rifle controversy with Gary Mack, Frazier asks himself if the rifle was in the bag. His answer is “I don’t know.” I find this particularly interesting after hearing the claims from many CTers that the bag coudn’t have contained the rifle. Here is the man who saw the package and provided the length estimate (that the CT crowd clings so closely to) saying he doesn’t know if the rifle was in the bag. In my opinion, BWF is admitting (in a round about way) that his estimate of the length of the bag might be mistaken. Frazier will most likely never admit this directly, but he certainly leaves that possibility open to interpretation.

There is nothing illuminating here. Just like Frazier answered Bugs, during the mock trial, that he wouldn't have seen the rifle stick out over Oswald's should if it was protruding outward, he honestly states that he doesn't know if the rifle was in the bag or not. It's not up to Frazier to make a determination about what was in the bag or not. He just described the bag he had seen and simply isn't about to make any kind of firm claim about what was in it. That doesn't imply in any way that he somehow admits that his estimate of the size of the bag might be mistaken. That's just your bias interpretation.

7. It is very obvious that Frazier became upset with the DPD and how they treated him during questioning on 11/22/63. My opinion is that when they showed him the bag, he was determined to be of no help to the DPD (due to his anger at them). So it appears to me that he probably said the bag was longer than the one he saw in his back seat for potentially two reasons. 1. He didn’t want to willingly accept any possible responsibility for transporting the murder weapon (even though he had no way of knowing what was in the bag). 2. He wanted to be uncooperative due to his anger at the DPD for their treatment of him.


This is just silly. Frazier was still considered a suspect when they polygraphed him. Not cooperating with the investigators could result in an obstruction of justice charge. Highly unlikely if you haven't done anything wrong.

And he never said the bag was longer than the one he saw Oswald carry. He actually told Lewis and Day that the bag he had seen was a "thin, flimsy sack like the one purchased at a dime store". And, according to Lewis, who took the polygraph, Day believed him, because he instantly started to theorize that Oswald might have had the TSBD bag inside another flimsy bag. Frazier vented his anger after Fritz put before him a pre-typed confession that he wanted him to sign.

[Charles Collins]

5. After discussing the description of the length of the package vs the length of the rifle controversy with Gary Mack, Frazier asks himself if the rifle was in the bag. His answer is “I don’t know.” I find this particularly interesting after hearing the claims from many CTers that the bag coudn’t have contained the rifle. Here is the man who saw the package and provided the length estimate (that the CT crowd clings so closely to) saying he doesn’t know if the rifle was in the bag. In my opinion, BWF is admitting (in a round about way) that his estimate of the length of the bag might be mistaken. Frazier will most likely never admit this directly, but he certainly leaves that possibility open to interpretation.

There is nothing illuminating here. Just like Frazier answered Bugs, during the mock trial, that he wouldn't have seen the rifle stick out over Oswald's should if it was protruding outward, he honestly states that he doesn't know if the rifle was in the bag or not. It's not up to Frazier to make a determination about what was in the bag or not. He just described the bag he had seen and simply isn't about to make any kind of firm claim about what was in it. That doesn't imply in any way that he somehow admits that his estimate of the size of the bag might be mistaken. That's just your bias interpretation.

7. It is very obvious that Frazier became upset with the DPD and how they treated him during questioning on 11/22/63. My opinion is that when they showed him the bag, he was determined to be of no help to the DPD (due to his anger at them). So it appears to me that he probably said the bag was longer than the one he saw in his back seat for potentially two reasons. 1. He didn’t want to willingly accept any possible responsibility for transporting the murder weapon (even though he had no way of knowing what was in the bag). 2. He wanted to be uncooperative due to his anger at the DPD for their treatment of him.


This is just silly. Frazier was still considered a suspect when they polygraphed him. Not cooperating with the investigators could result in an obstruction of justice charge. Highly unlikely if you haven't done anything wrong.

And he never said the bag was longer than the one he saw Oswald carry. He actually told Lewis and Day that the bag he had seen was a "thin, flimsy sack like the one purchased at a dime store". And, according to Lewis, who took the polygraph, Day believed him, because he instantly started to theorize that Oswald might have had the TSBD bag inside another flimsy bag. Frazier vented his anger after Fritz put before him a pre-typed confession that he wanted him to sign.

Frazier is reminded by Gary Mack about the incompatibility of the actual length of the rifle with Frazier’s description of his estimate of the length of the bag. Then shortly thereafter Frazier (the one who actually saw the bag) voluntarily verbally asks himself if the rifle was in the bag. And says that he doesn’t know. This implies that he knows that he might be mistaken about his description of the length of the bag. No biased (or unbiased) interpretation is needed. It is what Frazier himself said on a video recording in 2002.