Buell Wesley Frazier

[Martin Weidmann]

All I am saying is there are other possibilities. Anyone who thinks that LHO had to have taken the rifle apart just hasn’t thought about the other possibilities. I am not saying that I know exactly how he did these things. I am only pointing out some other possibilities.

Yeah, that was obvious. Let me give you another possibility.

Oswald went to Irving on Thursday to make up with his wife and there was no rifle in Ruth Paine's garage.

That's all I need to eliminate all your assumptions

[Charles Collins]

You are being taken down the contrarian rabbit hole by our resident CTers.  The bag exists.  It has Oswald's prints on it.  It was left next to the SN (where Oswald also left his prints).  It had no apparent work-related purpose for being there.  No other employee in the TSBD ever indicated that the bag belonged to them or otherwise explained its presence.  Oswald carried a long bag that morning that no one ever accounted for in any way other than the bag left on the 6th floor.  Based on those facts, no one has to confirm beyond all doubt how and when Oswald constructed the bag to conclude that the bag found on the 6th floor was the same one he carried that morning and that it contained his rifle.

I agree with everything you said. Reasonable inferences from the totality of the evidence tell us what happened. Discussing the possibilities for all the little details (that will never be known with any certainty) is about all there is left.

[Charles Collins]

Yeah, that was obvious. Let me give you another possibility.

Oswald went to Irving on Thursday to make up with his wife and there was no rifle in Ruth Paine's garage.

That's all I need to eliminate all your assumptions

Isn’t it nice that you can make up your own story?

[Martin Weidmann]

Isn’t it nice that you can make up your own story?

Of course, but, unlike you, I would never claim that my story (= assumptions) are "Reasonable inferences from the totality of the evidence" that "tell us what happened".

[Charles Collins]

Of course, but, unlike you, I would never claim that my story (= assumptions) are "Reasonable inferences from the totality of the evidence" that "tell us what happened".

The little details that will never be known with any certainty are not a part of what the inferences from the totality of the evidence tell us. I was just making a point that there are some alternate possibilities to taking the rifle apart and re-assembling it. That’s all.

[Richard Smith]

I agree with everything you said. Reasonable inferences from the totality of the evidence tell us what happened. Discussing the possibilities for all the little details (that will never be known with any certainty) is about all there is left.

CTers try to frame the evidence in this case as to have a similar effect as looking into the wrong end of telescope.  Just because we do not have a time machine that allows us to witness Oswald obtaining the materials and constructing the bag, that does not negate the bags existence, its connection to Oswald, its presence on the 6th floor next to the SN, and the obvious conclusions that can be drawn from this evidence. 

[Michael Capasse]

The prints match with Linnie May’s description of how LHO carried the bag...

How do u prove that?

...the rifle did not have to be broken down to be carried in the bag without being seen. 

Really? Rifle is 40 inches long - how long is the bag?

Mr. BALL - When you cupped the bottom of your package in the hands, will you stand up, again, please,
and the upper part of the package is not under the armpit, the top of the package extends almost up to the level of your ear.

Mr. FRAZIER - Right