Questions For Buell Wesley Frazier

[Martin Weidmann]

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.

This implies that he knows that he might be mistaken about his description of the length of the bag.

No it doesn't imply that at all. If you interview a person often enough, you're always going to find a comment that raises a question, especially if you are biased. Knowing the man, if he really had the slightest doubt about the size of the package he wouldn't have spent all his life maintaining his description of the bag. You are simply blowing one honest comment, about not knowing if a rifle was in the bag, into something it isn't.

[Charles Collins]

This implies that he knows that he might be mistaken about his description of the length of the bag.

No it doesn't imply that at all. If you interview a person often enough, you're always going to find a comment that raises a question, especially if you are biased. Knowing the man, if he really had the slightest doubt about the size of the package he wouldn't have spent all his life maintaining his description of the bag. You are simply blowing one honest comment, about not knowing if a rifle was in the bag, into something it isn't.

If Frazier was sure that his estimate was not possibly mistaken (as many CTers claim) then he should have answered his own question about whether or not the rifle was in the bag with an unqualified negative. The fact that he said that he doesn’t know means he isn’t sure at all. But if he ever directly admits that he intentionally misled the investigation, he could be criticized or worse.

[Martin Weidmann]

If Frazier was sure that his estimate was not possibly mistaken (as many CTers claim) then he should have answered his own question about whether or not the rifle was in the bag with an unqualified negative. The fact that he said that he doesn’t know means he isn’t sure at all. But if he ever directly admits that he intentionally misled the investigation, he could be criticized or worse.

Amazing what an LN will do to twist and turn something to benefit his case.

Frazier is (and has always been) adamant about his description of the bag and he doesn't know if there was a rifle in it or not.

It is a simple as that. Everything else is just your bias at work.

It's 58 years after the fact and an LN is still struggling to somehow increase the size of the bag so that a rifle can fit in it.   

[Gary Craig]

[Charles Collins]

Amazing what an LN will do to twist and turn something to benefit his case.

Frazier is (and has always been) adamant about his description of the bag and he doesn't know if there was a rifle in it or not.

It is a simple as that. Everything else is just your bias at work.

It's 58 years after the fact and an LN is still struggling to somehow increase the size of the bag so that a rifle can fit in it.   

Frazier certainly wasn’t being adamant about his estimate of the size of the bag when he stated that he didn’t know whether or not the rifle was in it shortly after being reminded about the conflicting lengths.

[David Von Pein]

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.

Please provide some documents/links for this claim about the window strips. I cannot find anything in the WC testimonies of Detective Montgomery or Detective Johnson or Captain Fritz or Lieutenant J.C. Day concerning the removal of any "window strips" or "window sills" from the Book Depository Building.

And I can find nothing about that topic in the many documents that are available at the Dallas Municipal Archives site or the Portal To Texas History site.

These pieces were entered into evidence by Montgomery and Johnson.

Links please. After multiple searches today, I can find no links or documents relating to such items. So your assistance in finding them would be appreciated.

Montgomery had the larger piece in the bag and Johnson the smaller piece in the bottle.

I seriously doubt that was the case. If it had been, why didn't Montgomery or Johnson say anything about transporting these pieces of the window sill in their WC testimony or in their DPD reports? No such thing is mentioned by either officer.

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339549/m1/1/?q=marvin%20johnson

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth337898/m1/3/?q=l.d.%20montgomery

The record indicates that L.D. Montgomery carried ONLY the long paper bag (which became CE142) out of the building, while his partner, Detective Marvin Johnson, carried Bonnie Ray Williams' Dr. Pepper bottle and Bonnie Ray's lunch sack (plus, as we can see in the first photo below, Johnson also has with him an empty cigarette package).

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth184773/m1/1/

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth184770/m1/1/

When Day returned around 3pm he realised the wrong strip had been removed. .... When Day returned he organised the left hand window strip removed. It was intact and also appears in the documentation.

Can you provide any link/document? Thanks.

[Bill Brown]

I always thought Johnson was using a screw driver to carry the bottle.  To me, that looks like a screw driver.

[Alan Ford]

Or March 24.

Ah, I see.

You started with this explanation:

"the "3-15-64" date is obviously an error. It should say March 23rd"

Now your explanation is:

the "3-15-64" date is obviously an error. It should say either March 23rd or March 24th

So your position has matured into the following:

The curtain rods were submitted by Agent Howlett to Lt. Day
-----------EITHER a good half a day BEFORE Agent Howlett extracted them from the Paine garage (=the 23 March option)
-----------OR nearly two hours AFTER they were released by Lt. Day back to Agent Howlett (=the 24 March option)

Is this really the best you can do, Mr Von Pein?