Buell Wesley Frazier

[Richard Smith]

Oswald's prints being on a bag somehow equates to it being the same bag in your mind?  Not suprising, given your usual process of "logic".

"his rifle".  LOL.  What evidence do you have that CE142 was "next to bullet casings"?

What evidence do you have that there was a rifle in the bag that Oswald carried.  Or in CE142 for that matter?

You're like a broken record.  For the umpteenth time, when was there ever a search done for a bag matching the size estimate of Frazier?

Please cite.

It's amusing that you consider assumptions to be evidence.

It amuses me no end that you claim Oswald carried a bag the size estimated by Frazier into the TSBD but then dismiss as unimportant that no such bag was ever found or accounted for in any manner as though that is not important.  Dismissing this on the basis that there is no evidence that anyone search for it.  LOL.  Don't you believe the DPD searched that building?  The most logical explanation for such a bag never being found is that it wasn't there because - as Oswald himself confirmed - he never carried a bag the size estimated by Frazier.  Why would Oswald lie if he carried some shorter bag that contained a non-incriminatory item like curtain rods?  He would seemingly have every incentive not only to admit that but direct the DPD to it to exonerate himself.  But here we are supposed to believe he lied against his own self interest. 

Mr. BALL. Now, did you tell him what Frazier had told you?
Mr. FRITZ. I don't know that I told him what Frazier had told me but I told him someone had told me.
Mr. BALL. What did you tell him?
Mr. FRITZ. I told him he had a package and put it in the back seat and it was a package about that long and it was curtain rods. He said he didn't have any kind of a package but his lunch. He said he had his lunch and that is all he had, and Mr. Frazier told me that he got out of the car with that package, he saw him go toward the building with this long package.
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."

There is further confirmation in Fritz's notes (which I assume you believe are the product of lies and fakery like all evidence against Oswald).

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=29103#relPageId=7&tab=page

[Walt Cakebread]

Frazier was given the choice of being charged as an accomplice of LHO or conveying a

recollection that tended to put a Carcano in a sack in a dead man's hands on 11/22/63.

His story was full of holes. Once Ozzie was murdered by Ruby it didn't matter.  Frazier's story

gave LE and the WC what they needed at the time. IMO of course

Frazier was given the choice of being charged as an accomplice of LHO or conveying a
recollection that tended to put a Carcano in a sack in a dead man's hands on 11/22/63.

On Friday 11/22/63 Buell Frazier told the DPD that he had seen a paper sack on the back seat of his car that Lee had placed there.  Frazier said that Lee told him the sack contained curtain rods.

About 14 hours later on Saturday afternoon, 11/23/63, Lee was asked if he has placed a long paper sack on the rear seat of Frazier's car and told Frazier that the package contained curtain rods. Lee denied that he ever said anything to Frazier about curtain rods.   

Since the DPD said that Frazier told them that Lee had carried a long paper sack and Lee had stated that the sack contained curtain rods on Friday evening ( about 9:00pm) why wasn't Lee confronted with Frazier's statement until Saturday afternoon? 

Did either Linnie Randle or Frazier say anything about curtain rods in their affidavits?

Lee had been asked if he told anybody that the sack he carried that morning contained curtain rods..... 

[Richard Smith]

Frazier was given the choice of being charged as an accomplice of LHO or conveying a

recollection that tended to put a Carcano in a sack in a dead man's hands on 11/22/63.

His story was full of holes. Once Ozzie was murdered by Ruby it didn't matter.  Frazier's story

gave LE and the WC what they needed at the time. IMO of course

Good grief.  Do you not see the enormous flaw in that absurd narrative which has been pointed out several times?  If Frazier were somehow coerced to lie about the long bag, then he would obviously be told to estimate its size as long enough to carry the rifle.  That being the entire objective of such a lie to put the rifle in Oswald's hands that morning.   It would make absolutely no sense for the fantasy conspirators to coerce Frazier into lying about a bag that he would claim is too short to contain the rifle.  Whew. 

[Gary Craig]

Good grief.  Do you not see the enormous flaw in that absurd narrative which has been pointed out several times?  If Frazier were somehow coerced to lie about the long bag, then he would obviously be told to estimate its size as long enough to carry the rifle.  That being the entire objective of such a lie to put the rifle in Oswald's hands that morning.   It would make absolutely no sense for the fantasy conspirators to coerce Frazier into lying about a bag that he would claim is too short to contain the rifle.  Whew.

They tried!

FBI Report, 11/23/63
by Special Agent James Bookhout

"RANDLE stated that about 7:15 a.m., November 22, 1963, she looked out of a window of her residence and observed LEE HARVEY OSWALD walking up her driveway and saw him put a long brown package, approximately 3 feet by 6 inches, in the back seat area of WESLEY FRAZIER's 1954 black Chevrolet four door automobile."

Once Ozzie was murdered by Ruby, since there would be no trial, the details weren't important.

2 witnesses saw the perp with a bag that the cops said he used to carry the rifle to work on

11/22/63. And we all know cops don't lie or fudge evidence.

[Richard Smith]

They tried!

FBI Report, 11/23/63
by Special Agent James Bookhout

"RANDLE stated that about 7:15 a.m., November 22, 1963, she looked out of a window of her residence and observed LEE HARVEY OSWALD walking up her driveway and saw him put a long brown package, approximately 3 feet by 6 inches, in the back seat area of WESLEY FRAZIER's 1954 black Chevrolet four door automobile."

Once Ozzie was murdered by Ruby, since there would be no trial, the details weren't important.

2 witnesses saw the perp with a bag that the cops said he used to carry the rifle to work on

11/22/63. And we all know cops don't lie or fudge evidence.

Try to follow along.  If the fantasy conspirators had some power over Frazier to coerce him to lie about the long bag, then they would force him to say it was long enough to carry the rifle.  That would be the entire point of such a lie.  Having him claim the bag was too short to carry the rifle would actually be counter-productive to that objective as shown by decades of CTers who cite this as evidence that Oswald did not carry the rifle that morning.  Frazier's testimony, therefore, makes absolutely no sense as the product of a lie to frame Oswald as you imply.  Oswald carried a long bag that morning and it was either the size estimated by Frazier or he was honestly but erroneously off in his estimate and it was the bag found on the 6th floor.

[John Iacoletti]

It amuses me no end that you claim Oswald carried a bag the size estimated by Frazier into the TSBD but then dismiss as unimportant that no such bag was ever found or accounted for in any manner as though that is not important.

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

  Dismissing this on the basis that there is no evidence that anyone search for it.  LOL.  Don't you believe the DPD searched that building?

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

  The most logical explanation for such a bag never being found is that it wasn't there

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

because - as Oswald himself confirmed - he never carried a bag the size estimated by Frazier.

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.

  Why would Oswald lie if he carried some shorter bag that contained a non-incriminatory item like curtain rods?  He would seemingly have every incentive not only to admit that but direct the DPD to it to exonerate himself.  But here we are supposed to believe he lied against his own self interest. 

On what basis do you assume he lied?

There is further confirmation in Fritz's notes

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...

[John Iacoletti]

Good grief.  Do you not see the enormous flaw in that absurd narrative which has been pointed out several times?  If Frazier were somehow coerced to lie about the long bag, then he would obviously be told to estimate its size as long enough to carry the rifle.

When did Gary ever say anything about Frazier being "coerced to lie about the long bag", Mr. Strawman?