Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Buell Wesley Frazier  (Read 106964 times)

Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: Buell Wesley Frazier
« Reply #64 on: January 09, 2018, 05:25:37 PM »
Advertisement
Can anyone provide any sort of proof that Bookhout lied about what Randle told him?

Can anyone provide any sort of proof that Randle actually said that?

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Buell Wesley Frazier
« Reply #64 on: January 09, 2018, 05:25:37 PM »


Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: Buell Wesley Frazier
« Reply #65 on: January 09, 2018, 05:32:45 PM »
Again with wildly overstating your nutty claims - "no evidence whatsover"!  LOL  Well, except for Oswald's prints being found on that bag.

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".

Quote
  The location of the bag next to bullet casings fired from his rifle.

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

Quote
No accounting for this bag except as the bag Oswald carried the rifle in that morning.

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

Quote
  No other bag matching the size estimate of Frazier ever being found or accounted for in any way.

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?

Quote
  And Oswald himself denying he carried any bag as described by Frazier.

Please cite.

Quote
  It's amusing that you dismiss all evidence against Oswald as the product of "assumptions"

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

Offline Gary Craig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 907
Re: Buell Wesley Frazier
« Reply #66 on: January 09, 2018, 05:42:25 PM »
Recently a poster mentioned a book entitled The Assassination Tapes by George O'Toole  ....I had read that book several years ago but after i was reminded of the book I read it again.    The book is based on subjecting taped conversation to a machine that can detect when a speaker voice is stressed due to lying....

O'Toole used tape recordings from radio and TV broadcasts and presented the sound of the speaker's voice to stress analysis....   It probably sounds like witch craft to some .....but I believe that PSE is a real way to detect stress in the voice of a speaker.   

O'Toole subjected a TV interview of Buell Frazier telling a newsman about the morning of 11/22/63 and what Frazier had seen and heard that morning. 

When Frazier talked about going to the car and starting it .....O'Toole reported that Frazier's voice revealed little stress as would be expected....But when Frazier told the newsman about seeing a paper sack on the rear seat of the car....The stress in Frazier's voice went to maximum.....  Which indicates that Frazier probably was lying about some aspect of that paper sack.   


"He stated that he only glanced at this package, at the time, over his shoulder, and said something to Oswald about the package, and Oswald explained that it was curtain rods"

In some reports Frazier says that when he saw the paper sack he simply asked..."What's that?"

But in other versions Frazier says he asked "What's in the sack, Lee?" ...

But no matter which version was subjected to PSE evaluation Frazier's voice  indicated severe stress .....

At one point O'Toole wanted to get a second opinion about Frazier's recorded casual conversation with newsmen ao he sent the tape recording to an expert for his opinion ..... 

After evaluating the tape the expert reported that Frazier's chart was a text book example of a person lying...He said that on a scale of one to ten.... Frazier was at eleven.....

 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

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Buell Wesley Frazier
« Reply #66 on: January 09, 2018, 05:42:25 PM »


Offline Gary Craig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 907
Re: Buell Wesley Frazier
« Reply #67 on: January 09, 2018, 05:50:47 PM »

Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: Buell Wesley Frazier
« Reply #68 on: January 09, 2018, 07:08:16 PM »
O'Toole used tape recordings from radio and TV broadcasts and presented the sound of the speaker's voice to stress analysis....   It probably sounds like witch craft to some .....but I believe that PSE is a real way to detect stress in the voice of a speaker. 

Not any more witchy than handwriting "analysis" and identifying unique rifle gouges via moon craters.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Buell Wesley Frazier
« Reply #68 on: January 09, 2018, 07:08:16 PM »


Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: Buell Wesley Frazier
« Reply #69 on: January 09, 2018, 07:12:58 PM »
At around the 1 hour and 20 second mark Weisburg makes a statement that the reason that the DPD gave Frazier a polygraph test was to see if Frazier was, as Weisburg puts it, laying Marina Oswald.

Interesting.  What is Weisberg's source for this?

Online Richard Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5014
Re: Buell Wesley Frazier
« Reply #70 on: January 09, 2018, 07:19:05 PM »
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


JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Buell Wesley Frazier
« Reply #70 on: January 09, 2018, 07:19:05 PM »


Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Re: Buell Wesley Frazier
« Reply #71 on: January 09, 2018, 07:24:27 PM »
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..... 
« Last Edit: January 09, 2018, 08:26:42 PM by Walt Cakebread »