Buell Wesley Frazier: "Where’s your Rider?" Part A

First topic message reminder :

This is full rebuild of the hugely popular thread created by Mick Purdy at the Webs forum in February 2015. – Stan

Mick Purdy

I believe Buell Wesley Frazier lied about seeing Lee Oswald with a package, a package two feet long on the morning of Friday November 22nd 1963.

I believe Linnie Mae Randle lied about seeing Oswald with a package, a package 27 inches long on the Morning of 22nd Nov 1963.

I believe both Linnie Mae Randle and Buell Wesley Frazier fabricated the curtain rod story.

I think there is ample evidence in their WC testimonies, affidavits and FBI interviews to support each of these contentions.

I have also come to the conclusion (after having a closer look at the testimonies and the various reports), that Buell Wesley Frazier lied about another crucially important matter that day. In my opinion the totality of the evidence suggests Frazier lied with regards to driving Lee Harvey Oswald to work that fateful morning.

Take a moment to reflect upon the importance of that drive to the case against Oswald before reading on.

The story was very likely fabricated not merely to have Oswald appear to carry a sack into work – but also to create the illusion of Oswald carrying a rifle. This conclusion is drawn from a study of the WC testimonies of both Randle and Frazier regarding Oswald, the package and his alleged arrival at the Randle residence that morning. Ten or more neighbours considered to be best placed to spot pedestrian movement in the vicinity were interviewed by the FBI as to whether they saw Oswald carrying a package from the Paine’s home to the Randle home. To a person, they stated they had not seen Oswald that morning – with or without any suspicious package which the police on more than one occasion, described as being similar in size and shape to a rifle case.

Frazier’s WC and Shaw trial testimony regarding the journey into work with Oswald appears rehearsed. Any questions relating to the “sack” or what was said in the car on the way in is met with what sounds very much like scripted answers that have become Frazier’s Lore. The sack, the curtain rods, the weather, and my favourite, Oswald’s kids, are IMO all part of the charade. Away from the small talk and banter about kids, he constantly flip flopped on testimony in a manner redolent with patterns of deceit.

Frazier’s WC testimony with regard to his arrival at work is at complete odds with the HSCA interview of Edward Shields. Though it could be argued Shields, unlike Frazier, was not under oath, and therefore is a witness of lesser value, the fact is that Shields was as close as you can get to a disinterested party merely reporting for the first what he had heard. Sadly, it took well over a decade for him to receive any relevant questions. In any event, it is highly unlikely he ever realized the import of his information.
  
From the HSCA interview of Shields
 

SHIELDS: I think Charles Givens hollered out there and asked Frazier where was his rider and he told him: "I dropped him off at the building." Yeah, that was it...Well, I was down on the floor when they hollered out and said and the answer he gave them, I don't know, I think he said: "I dropped him off at the building." Now, whoever it was hollering asked him, I don't know.
DAY: This is the morning of the assassination?
SHIELDS: Mm-hmm.
DAY: Somebody hollered out the window and say: "Where is your rider?" And to your recollection, Frazier says, "I dropped him off at the building."
SHIELDS: Yes.
DAY: Alright. The day of the assassination, did you see Oswald come to work with Frazier?
SHIELDS: No I didn’t.

 
To summarize what we have so far… no one claimed to see Lee Harvey Oswald walk to the Frazier residence that morning. No one claimed to see Lee Harvey Oswald in Frazier’s car that morning – except Frazier himself. No one saw Lee Harvey Oswald that morning with any package except Wes and Linnie Mae.

Frazier also testified that he let Oswald get well ahead on the walk from the car park to the loading dock entrance. But in the form of Edward Shields, we have a potential reason for Frazier to construct that story.

In the above two short paragraphs alone, we have three “firsts” – firsts that are needed for the official story to hold. Oswald had never walked to the Randle residence for his lift before. He was always picked up at the Paine house. Oswald had never taken a long package to work before. Oswald had never neglected to take a packed lunch before. Oswald had never even needed a lift on a Friday morning before. Frazier had never let Oswald walk ahead of him from the car park before. They had always walked in together. That is a lot of “firsts” – all reliant on a very tight little knit of witnesses outside of which, no corroboration exists. Nobody else, not one person can verify Frazier’s version of events in Irving except for his sister. At the other end of the journey at the TSBD parking lot, we rely solely on Frazier. It beggars belief that there are no other witnesses. That walk was at least 2 and 1/2 blocks long. Shields and Givens smash his fairy-tale apart.

This “story” IMO has the same stench wafting around it, like the rest of the days fables contain.

The bus trip, the cab ride, the sack, the run, the walk, the ducking, the escape, the 2nd floor, the first floor, the sixth floor, the lunch bag, the rifle case, the back seat, the front seat, the white jacket the grey jacket, the gun, the revolver ……………
 
An alternative scenario

Postal Inspectors interviewed Mr and Mrs CP Schneider at 2707 West Fifth St in the early evening of November 22. Mr Schneider confirmed he had seen Lee Oswald in front of the 2515 residence at approximately 6:00pm of the previous evening. He also stated that a neighbour, Mrs Ed Roberts of 2519 West Fifth St had told him that Willie Randle, 2439 West Fifth St, had driven Oswald to work on the morning of November 22, and that Oswald was carrying a package large enough to have contained a rifle. (CD 296)

What sort of investigation is it that receives hearsay evidence such as the above and fails to follow up to confirm or refute it with the parties involved? WE are indeed, expected to believe that no follow up was done, because there is no evidence any follow up was done. Yet, there is actually circumstantial evidence that the authorities did believe that Randle was the man who gave the lift because that same night, the FBI was attempting to trace the origins of the scope in the names of Lee Oswald OR Willie Randall [sic]. (CD 87) It is virtually impossible to believe that the FBI would act on hearsay alone, when a few houses from where the hearsay was received, lived the person who had passed on that hearsay. You would almost have to believe that this “Willie Randle” lead was followed up and that it checked out given the ease with which such a lead could be checked out. To further complicate matters, the DPD already had Oswald’s alleged driver in custody. If Frazier truly was the driver, there would no reason at all to be checking on “Willy Randle/Randall” as a co-conspirator!

Randle had arrived in Austin at about 7:00pm on what was said to be work-related business in company with co-worker named Berry Caster. (FBI 105-82555 Oswald HQ File, Section 32, p44) It is between a 3 and 4 hour drive from Irving to Austin, so it is far from impossible that “Willie” drove Lee to work that morning on the basis that Frazier had already left.

Because of the holes in the official investigation, some conjecture is needed if we are to try understand the mess we have been left. What follows is some of my conjecture.

Frazier left that morning on his own – with the throwdown M-C rifle. The call from Givens of “where’s your rider?” was code giving Frazier the all clear to bring “the package” in, or was code for simply it’s clear to come inside.

Since Lee had missed his ride, Willie Randle offered to give him one, but needed to borrow Ruth’s car since his own was full of work gear for the trip to Austin later on. This leads to Oswald’s statement in front of Roger Craig concerning Craig’s description of a certain station wagon that "That station wagon belongs to Mrs. Paine. Don't try to tie her into this. She had nothing to do with it."

Doesn’t that sound like someone talking about a car that was being driven by someone else?

I’d like to thank Greg Parker for his enormous support and encouragement.

Stan Dane wrote:Mick Purdy

I'm not sure I'm buying into the sloppiness of the Time Clock. I understand the TSBD might not have run one for the warehouse workers, but, really its still a business.....there had to be some form of accountability.

Greg Parker
 
Mick, someone else suggested that such an arrangement could be used in all sorts of ways. That's about the only answer that makes sense outside of just slack business practices. The TSBD may not have been exactly what we are told it was.

Stan Dane wrote:Greg Parker
 
Mrs. PAINE - When I awoke I felt the house was extremely quiet and the thought occurred to me that Lee might have overslept. I wondered if he had gotten up in time to get off around 7 o'clock because I knew he had to go to meet Wesley Frazier to catch his ride. I looked about and found a plastic coffee cup in the sink that had clearly been used and judged he had had a cup of coffee and left.
 
He had to go and MEET Frazier to catch his ride??? Frazier did not pick him up outside the Paine residence????
 
And he normally left at 7 for a 15 minute ride to a job that didn't commence until 8???? This is BULLSHIT.

WTF is going on with these people??? If he was NOT picked up at the Paine residence and going up to the Randle residence had never happened previously, where the fuck did he normally get picked up, and how did he and Wes kill three quarters of an hour???

Mick Purdy
 
I think Greg, you sublimely underlined the explanation.
BULLSHIT ALL OF IT!!!!
 
The Defence rests your honour!

Stan Dane wrote:

Stan Dane wrote:Mick Purdy

I'm not sure I'm buying into the sloppiness of the Time Clock. I understand the TSBD might not have run one for the warehouse workers, but, really its still a business.....there had to be some form of accountability.

Greg Parker
 
Mick, someone else suggested that such an arrangement could be used in all sorts of ways. That's about the only answer that makes sense outside of just slack business practices. The TSBD may not have been exactly what we are told it was.

Mick Purdy
 
I know Greg, but as with everything else here, I have a nagging feeling. Who is it that confirms no time clock, punch on, or paper log...Truly, Shelley and Aiken?????

Nobody else?

It's just a nagging feeling.

Stan Dane wrote:

Stan Dane wrote:Mick Purdy

I'm not sure I'm buying into the sloppiness of the Time Clock. I understand the TSBD might not have run one for the warehouse workers, but, really its still a business.....there had to be some form of accountability.

Greg Parker
 
Mick, someone else suggested that such an arrangement could be used in all sorts of ways. That's about the only answer that makes sense outside of just slack business practices. The TSBD may not have been exactly what we are told it was.

Terry Martin

"The TSBD may not have been exactly what we are told it was." 

And that, I believe, is at the crux of the entire matter. Everything about the TSBD and the case against Oswald is a charade, a facade, a false front. If we could figure that one out, I think we might make a little more headway. But, of course, that feeling might be wrong...

I worked for a place once upon a time that had very sloppy systems for keeping track of the employees. One of the reasons was so a supervisor could send one of the gang out "on errands" that had nothing to do with the business. So long as the work was done and a profit was made, no one thought much about the issue.

The owner turned a blind eye - who knows if he was even suspicious - the supervisor made a bit on the side and the employees sent on the errands were able to draw a steady paycheck as well as bonuses from the "side work". I don't know if this is anything similar to what was going on at the TSBD.

Stan Dane wrote:

Stan Dane wrote:

Stan Dane wrote:Mick Purdy

I'm not sure I'm buying into the sloppiness of the Time Clock. I understand the TSBD might not have run one for the warehouse workers, but, really its still a business.....there had to be some form of accountability.

Greg Parker
 
Mick, someone else suggested that such an arrangement could be used in all sorts of ways. That's about the only answer that makes sense outside of just slack business practices. The TSBD may not have been exactly what we are told it was.

Mick Purdy
 
I know Greg, but as with everything else here, I have a nagging feeling. Who is it that confirms no time clock, punch on, or paper log...Truly, Shelley and Aiken?????

Nobody else?

It's just a nagging feeling.

Stan Dane
 
I think that a factory/warehouse operation not having a time clock for its workers in 1963 is most unusual. In a reference I cited earlier, it said by the 1920's most factories and offices were using time recorder machines as a replacement for handwritten logs. I know what Truly and Shelley said they did, but do I believe them? Can I believe anything they say? Can I believe that the TSBD didn't follow standard industry time accounting practices back then just because some shady fucks say otherwise?
 
If they had telephones and other standard business systems, they sure as hell should have had a time clock. This is just another thing that doesn't fit with me unless independently proven otherwise.

Steely Dan

How are the wages of hourly paid staff calculated without a timing device?. The Warehouse I work in issues all members of staff with an electronic fob. At the start and finish of each shift you are required to swipe in and out (also at break time). It's really just a modern day version of a punch clock. Where the TSBD employees wages paid on the basis of whether Shelley saw them or not? That's a little difficult to swallow.

Greg Parker
 
Jarman confirmed to the HSCA that there was no clock punching. But there was no further exploration on that except that they entered and prepared for work.

Then you had Dougherty starting at 7 am and Piper starting at 10 am but by his own admission finishing any time between 7 and 8. So I guess they just took their word on the exact times?

Stan Dane wrote:Greg Parker
 
Jarman confirmed to the HSCA that there was no clock punching. But there was no further exploration on that except that they entered and prepared for work.

Then you had Dougherty starting at 7 am and Piper starting at 10 am but by his own admission finishing any time between 7 and 8. So I guess they just took their word on the exact times?

Paul Francisco Paso
 
It looks like they didn't Greg. This is the timesheet for the week of the assassination:
 
 

Seems to have been filled out in one go and by the same person who I assume is Shelley.
 
I use to work in a factory some time ago and there was no punch clock or real system but I was getting paid under the table. No tax and no real documentation.

Lee Farley

Greg, 

Haven't we have some discussion about Don Felts Truett before?  Wasn't his "termination" from the TSBD the week before the assassination?

Greg Parker
 
Don't know if we have. Possible.
 
He is no doubt the person mentioned here:
 
    Mr. TRULY. No, sir; I don't recall hiring anyone else other than Oswald for that building the same day that I hired Oswald. I believe, if I am not mistaken, I hired another boy for a temporary job, and put him in the other warehouse at 1917 North Houston.
 
    Mr. DULLES. At a different warehouse?
 
    Mr. TRULY. At a different warehouse. He was laid off November 15th, I believe November 15th, or something like that.

Lee Farley

There's the mention of "lay offs" again. Hiring new people while your experienced employees are laying floor? Yeah, right.

Stan Dane wrote:Lee Farley

There's the mention of "lay offs" again. Hiring new people while your experienced employees are laying floor? Yeah, right.

Greg Parker
 
Exactly my reaction.
 
And at the same time you're paying Oswald to fill orders, one of your experienced order fillers is spending his time up "shooting the breeze" with the floor layers—with the supervisor right there, apparently okay with that.
 
The TSBD was one amazingly relaxed employer.
 
Except if your name is Oswald.
 
Then you will have the Vice President complaining to the press that "Of course he [Oswald] and the others were on their lunch hour but he did not have permission to leave the building..."
 
Take that Oswald! You president killer, you! You had no permission to leave the building during your lunch hour, you rotten commie fink!

Mick Purdy
 
Randle and his whereabouts Friday morning:
 

 
This report was not followed up until January 21 when Randle was interviewed by Special Agent Warren de Brueys. 
 

 
Notably absent in the report is what time he left Irving that day to drive to Austin, (it is about a 3 hour drive, so the latest he could have left to arrive at 7:00pm is about 4:00pm).
 
Whether he had business to conduct that day in Austin and whom that business was with.
 
A more elaborate reason for having telephoned his brother in Irving (more so than "Business reasons") and what they specifically spoke about
 
And finally what time he arrived home after his flight from Austin.
 
There's just no accounting for Randles movements in any serious way until 7.00 pm Friday evening 22/11/63

That means in reality, there is no accounting for his movements Thursday evening, Thursday night and all of Friday up until 7.00 pm.

Mick Purdy

Q: Did Jack Dougherty "open up" in the mornings as part of his "extra chores" ?

Q: And if so would this have meant he had access to the buildings keys outside of normal business hours.

Mick Purdy

We know very little about William Randle... but let's put together what little we have.
 
He was born in Dallas to a British couple.
 
He was a deacon in the First Baptist Church from 1955 (http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=131275226)
 
He worked for his brother Marvin's company "Irving Table Top"
 
Marvin was involved in Dixicrat politics and had a stint as mayor of Irving in the 1970s. A second tilt at that office was derailed by a concerted campaign accusing him of racism and fraud when last in public office
 
On the day of the assassination, William Randle and fellow employee, Berry Caster, drove to Austin and booked into their hotel room at 700 pm.
 
Mrs John O Thompson who managed the hotel with her husband, phoned the Austin FBI office on November 23 due to things William Randle had said to them, including that (1) his wife worked at the same building as Oswald (causing Linnie's name to be added to Revill's list temporarily); that (2) he was acquainted with Oswald and; (3) that there had been rumors circulating in Dallas that Kennedy would be shot"on account of the Veteran's Administration Offices being moved out of Dallas".
 
Looking at those things individually:
 
I believe number one was simply Mrs Thompson misremembering what she had been told. What William no doubt told her was that his wife's BROTHER worked at the same building... not that his wife did...
 
Number two IMO, is unlikely to have been the result of any similar misunderstanding.
 
It is very hard to imagine how number three could not have been any sort of misunderstanding. The fact is that such rumors did circulate. The DPD had specific intelligence about it. I know this because back when I first started on this case and had more time, I immersed myself in the evidence as much as I could - and that included opening and reading every single DPD file here. http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/index.html After reading what Randle had allegedly said, I returned to the DPD files to locate the relevant document--only to find that the whole friggin folder has gone walkabout and is currently MIA.

When you go to it - it ain't there. Folder 2 has disappeared! http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/box8.htm
 
Aug, 1963.
Dallas: The Dallas Real Estate board said it was “unalterably opposed” to the proposed move of the Veterans Administration regional office to Waco. The VA said it was moving the office because its Dallas landlord would not guarantee to abide by all federal anti-discrimination regulations.

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/jfk50/this-week-1963/20130810-aug.-11-17-bootleggers-get-boot-from-feds-in-east-texas.ece
 
You have to ask yourself why Randle would deny mentioning a harmless rumor...

Stan Dane wrote:Mick Purdy
 
Randle and his whereabouts Friday morning:
 

 
This report was not followed up until January 21 when Randle was interviewed by Special Agent Warren de Brueys. 
 

 
Notably absent in the report is what time he left Irving that day to drive to Austin, (it is about a 3 hour drive, so the latest he could have left to arrive at 7:00pm is about 4:00pm).
 
Whether he had business to conduct that day in Austin and whom that business was with.
 
A more elaborate reason for having telephoned his brother in Irving (more so than "Business reasons") and what they specifically spoke about
 
And finally what time he arrived home after his flight from Austin.
 
There's just no accounting for Randles movements in any serious way until 7.00 pm Friday evening 22/11/63

That means in reality, there is no accounting for his movements Thursday evening, Thursday night and all of Friday up until 7.00 pm.

Mick Purdy

Where the hell was Willie/Bill/William Randle from Thursday 21/11 evening until Saturday morning 23/11.
Its starting to do my head in

Mick Purdy
 
So what we have so far is:

• No way of knowing what time Oswald awoke Friday morning,
  
• Ruth Paine the only person, who tells us Lee has left the house before 7.30am
  
• Not a single eye witness other than Randle who saw Oswald walk with a package from Paine’s house to the Randle home.
  
• Randle telling us what time Lee arrived at the house
  
• Randle alone watching Lee with a package walk up to the house
  
• Randle alone seeing a package long enough to almost touch the ground
  
• Randle alone only watching Lee from the waist up as he made the walk across the Street
  
• Randle not being able to identify who was walking up to her carport
  
• Randle having to open the back door and look to see who was fixing to come to her back door
  
• Randle not seeing Oswald at the window
  
• Randle seeing Oswald at the window
  
• Randle watching Lee at the window staring at her
  
• Randle opening the back door
  
• Randle moving to the door and looking at Oswald
  
• Randle seeing Oswald first at the window as he came up to the house and then moving to the carport area to put the package in the car
  
• Randle seeing Oswald at the window after he has placed the package in the car
  
• Randle not watching the two drive off to work
  
• Wes catching a glimpse of Oswald in the window
  
• Wes catching a glimpse of Oswald before he places the package in the car
  
• Wes catching a glimpse of Oswald after he’s been to the car
  
• Wes walking together with Lee to his car
  
• Lee waiting outside at the carport area
  
• Lee staring in through the window
  
• Lee at the window for a moment
  
• Lee at the window for second
  
• Lee not at the window
  
• Wes observing the package for the first time on the back seat of the car as they walked to the car
  
• Wes observing the package for the first time when he gets into the car and happens to glance over his shoulder
  
• Wes being the only person who can verify Oswald is with him on the drive to work
  
• Wes is the only person who claims to have seen Oswald take a package from back seat of his car in the TSBD car park
  
• Wes is the only witness to see Oswald in his car with a package
  
• Wes is the only person who places Wes in his car Friday morning
  
• Wes is the only person who placed Oswald with him in the parking lot with a package
  
• Wes is the only person to observe Lee walking through the parking lot with a package
  
• Wes is the only person who sees Oswald enter the building from outside the building with a package
  

Lots of contradictions in this lot

Stan Dane wrote:Colin Crow

I have thought for some time that the package story was a concoction developed by Randle and Frazier (maybe the stepfather) in response to the predicament Buell realized he was in after leaving the TSBD. The bag removed from the TSBD by Montgomery was constructed by someone in the DPD to cover the (broken) wooden strip from the SN window. It was later used as "evidence" in response to the LMR revelation around 3pm to the cops in Irving. It was nothing more than a convenient prop.

Mick Purdy

Colin are you in a position to elaborate on the "wooden strip"?

Mick Purdy
 
Veterans Administration  08 02 007
 
When you go to it, it is not there. Folder 2 has disappeared!  http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/box8.htm

Stan Dane wrote:

Stan Dane wrote:Colin Crow

I have thought for some time that the package story was a concoction developed by Randle and Frazier (maybe the stepfather) in response to the predicament Buell realized he was in after leaving the TSBD. The bag removed from the TSBD by Montgomery was constructed by someone in the DPD to cover the (broken) wooden strip from the SN window. It was later used as "evidence" in response to the LMR revelation around 3pm to the cops in Irving. It was nothing more than a convenient prop.

Mick Purdy

Colin are you in a position to elaborate on the "wooden strip"?

Colin Crow

Basically the police removed a 30 odd incn wooden weather strip from the SN window sill that day. Presumably to take to the labe and check for fingerprints. It seems to have "disappeared". We speculated that the bag was made to protect the strip during transport. The strip was broken upon removal and accounts for the bag as seen in the shots with Montgomery.....it is the something inside the bag. After LMR related a story to the cops that afternoon the discovery of a bag in the SN became much more important and evolved into a key piece of evidence.

A place to start is here, http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,11622.924.html

Tony and I are talking about the strip here.......I imagine we were discussing it in previous pages too. Lots of good stuff in that 85 page thread about the origins of the bag. Tony has done a great job showing how the bag "evolved".

Mick Purdy

I wonder if Frazier while he's still alive could ever be hauled in to answer questions regarding perjury which may have resulted from his Shaw trial testimony.
I realise Edward Shields died some time back (1984 heart attack).

Just a thought, maybe a very silly thought at that

Stan Dane wrote:Mick Purdy

I wonder if Frazier while he's still alive could ever be hauled in to answer questions regarding perjury which may have resulted from his Shaw trial testimony.
I realise Edward Shields died some time back (1984 heart attack).

Just a thought, maybe a very silly thought at that

Greg Parker

Mick, I think there may be a statute of limitations on perjury. I could be wrong.

Stan Dane wrote:

Stan Dane wrote:Mick Purdy

I wonder if Frazier while he's still alive could ever be hauled in to answer questions regarding perjury which may have resulted from his Shaw trial testimony.
I realise Edward Shields died some time back (1984 heart attack).

Just a thought, maybe a very silly thought at that

Greg Parker

Mick, I think there may be a statute of limitations on perjury. I could be wrong.

Mick Purdy

I'm sure you're right Greg, just thinking out loud. I mean the fact that Shields is dead is a huge blow I'd imagine for anyone seeking to address Frazier's testimony at the Shaw trial against what Shields had said with regards to the parking lot walk anyways.

I guess the trial was not a murder trial as such also, from memory the charge was conspiracy to assassinate JFK with the help of others (Oswald Ferrie etc etc) so probably does have limitations applied.

It was just a thought, I believe Frazier did perjure himself.

Mick Purdy

Oswald left handed or right. I'm dizzy. So many differnt answers. Who to believe?