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.

Mick Purdy

Mick Purdy
Terry Martin at December 15, 2015 at 11:57 AM
A lot of people surmise that Oswald was blind-sided by what happened. He was involved in something else at the TSBD and expected his handlers to pull some strings or whatever.
 
Perhaps Wes was in the same predicament. He was there for something else and when the sky fell, he was grasping at straws to save his skin. Since everyone knew he was close to Ozzie, he had to devise a distraction.
 
Devising a carry-on for Oswald almost makes me think HE had a carry-on and was trying to re-associate it in everyone's mind to Oswald. "No that wasn't ME you saw carrying anything, it was Lee." (even if no one recalled either carrying anything)
 
If we keep examining all the various angles, something's going to fall into place... for someone.
 
Terry you know you're right, and that leads to something else which is of importance too.
 
It's not just the Randle's who should be looked at more closely, but Wes's trip down to the big smoke and why.
I don't subscribe not for one nano-second he found that job in at the TSBD a mere 3 or so weeks ahead of Lee and just happened to pair up with Lee in at work by chance. How convenient it as Wes was hand to teach Oz the ropes in at work and how amazingly helpful it was that Wes could drive Lee to work.
Wrong place wrong time?
 
Maybe maybe not!
 
Paul McGurkenfarklein
Wes may have been used. I don't discount that Terry. That is a real possibility if Ruth Paine is your neighbour.
 
Mick Purdy
Wes may have been used. I don't discount that Terry. That is a real possibility if Ruth Paine is your neighbour.
Or as Greg has pointed out, the brother in-law of William Randle. Brother of Marvin the Dixiecrat, whom was as corrupt as they come.
 
Mick Purdy
Paul McGurkenfarklein at December 15, 2015 at 12:35 PM
Wes may have been used. I don't discount that Terry. That is a real possibility if Ruth Paine is your neighbour.
Too true, there is always the distinct possibility that Wesley was blackmailed! I have never discounted that.
His recollections altering over the years especially in the past few may have something to do with people in his life with important information passing away.
 
Who knows?

Jake
As a devised distraction, he should likely have had input from someone somehow, which is entirely possible since a bag was part of the game plan from well before the 22nd. Recall the dead letter mail to LHO that contained a bag constructed just like the one in evidence. Somebody wanted a bag involved. We may not have two Oswalds, but we definitely have two bags.
 
Just a thought while writing this; did LHO mail himself the bag as a precautionary measure before the shooting similar to speculation that he might have passed something off to Frazier once he knew his rug was out from under him after the shooting. As a precautionary device before the assassination, it may have needed to be subtle, like the dead letter bag approach is, so that if everything went off without a hitch, then a clue such as that could just fade away not noticed. It almost did anyway, but there it sits to this day. Why? A bread crumb from LHO?
 
This is all in the spirit that Terry suggests of speculating on angles in the hope that someone will twig.

Vinny

Frazier's current residence on Google Maps.

Barto

Linnie Mae Randle.

Mick Purdy

If a glance could talk what would it say?

Stan Dane wrote:Mick Purdy

If a glance could talk what would it say?

Paul Francisco Paso

It would say 'curtain rods', Mick. About so long. And then her nose would grow.

Mick Purdy

LOL! Yeah too true.

Mick Purdy

Lets uncomplicate things for those who drop in here from time to time shall we. Those who spend the vast majority of their time at other forums discussing dead issues which have been investigated and talked about ad nauseum.

PM is the real deal, everybody here knows it, and the rest of the world has some catching up to do.

Stan's work and Barto's presentation along with the efforts of almost everyone else here have nailed shut the conclusion PM = Oswald.

For those who who have not studied Stan's book or have only brushed over it fleetingly they should pause and have a re-read. I mean read it study it and only then draw a conclusion.

For if you bother to do that, there is only one conclusion to reach.

Mick Purdy



Credit Stan:

Just had to repost this classic.

Now tell us again Buell, how you didn't eyeball PM. And you have no clue to who it was. Just one more time, humour us all.

Jake

Five feet apart at the most Mick. About the distance from me on one end of the sofa to someone else at the other end of the sofa. If we both stand up at the same time, we might even look at each other.

Stan Dane wrote:Jake

Five feet apart at the most Mick. About the distance from me on one end of the sofa to someone else at the other end of the sofa. If we both stand up at the same time, we might even look at each other.

Mick Purdy

Absolutely Jake.

I'm excited! this is as good as it gets when realising Frazier either unwittingly or wittingly has taken us to the mountain top, the light on the hill is well alight now. Using Stan's image it is in my opinion proof positive He knows who PM was. I can say after looking at this photo with absolute confidence He has lied when he has claimed not to know PM's identity.

Mick Purdy

From 1968 by Dick Barnabei:

Goban Saor

That’s interesting, Mick. If only Sprague had not been shafted as HSCA Chief Counsel we wouldn’t be left with the maze of monkey puzzles we are trying to find our way through today. In particular Frazier wouldn’t have got the easy ride he has got to date.

The photo of Frazier’s current abode posted by Vinny is also interesting – a well-appointed detached residence in a leafy suburb, as they might say in a property supplement. Frazier seems to have done well for himself despite some inauspicious beginnings. How did he manage that?

Beowulf

Goban, there are two different Spragues. The one mentioned above wasn't the one who later became HSCA counsel. As for Wes's house, he's an Army veteran so he qualified for a GI bill mortgage (low interest, no down payment). Also, though it's less the case now because of the fracked oil boom over the last decade, but you can buy a lot of house for the money in Texas with its wide open space and lax zoning laws.

Goban Saor

Thanks for that information, Beowulf.

Greg Parker

Having said all that, one has to ask why it was that Frazier was called back after being released by the DPD supposedly to take the lie detector test at 9.00 pm.

Police tactic. Let you think you're in the clear, then yank you back. Have come across a similar incident in another case I've been looking at and it was not a sudden decision to yank that person back. It was, in context, planned that way in advance.

Stan Dane wrote:Greg Parker

Having said all that, one has to ask why it was that Frazier was called back after being released by the DPD supposedly to take the lie detector test at 9.00 pm.

Police tactic. Let you think you're in the clear, then yank you back. Have come across a similar incident in another case I've been looking at and it was not a sudden decision to yank that person back. It was, in context, planned that way in advance.

Mick Purdy

I agree Greg,  the police probably used certain tactics. But in this case I wouldn't write anything as off limits. Just as there appears to be between 4-5 versions of his arrest, its quite possible the lie detector test could be a piece of fiction.

Stan Dane wrote:Beowulf

Goban, there are two different Spragues. The one mentioned above wasn't the one who later became HSCA counsel. As for Wes's house, he's an Army veteran so he qualified for a GI bill mortgage (low interest, no down payment). Also, though it's less the case now because of the fracked oil boom over the last decade, but you can buy a lot of house for the money in Texas with its wide open space and lax zoning laws.

Mick Purdy

Thanks mate, I was aware of that but still find it interesting these things were being discussed way back when.

Stan Dane wrote:Mick Purdy

Jake,

I'm not going mad and neither are you.............

CSPAN.

http://www.c-span.org/video/?287933-101/kennedy-assassination-buell-wesley-frazier-part-2

Watch from 12-40 through to 15-52. My goodness Wesley is full of it. He can't help himself. It borders on some form of compulsive behaviour disorder. I wonder what has triggered such story telling.

Linda Giovanna Zambanini

Mick, that's the same CSPAN interview in which Buell has the grammar meltdowns and nervous ticks as Mack repeatedly questions him about the people standing near him and cameras being used by people on the steps or around the steps. Just rewatched the segment you suggested and beyond that point. In it he lies repeatedly.

He says he saw Oswald walk down the Houston side of the TSBD and cross over Houston then over to Elm. Mack asks him when this was and he says 5-10 minutes after the shots. But his 11/22 police affidavit he says after the shots: "I stood there, then people started running by and i turned and went back in the building and got my lunch and eat it." (In later accounts he says in the basement). So this sounds like he went back in almost immediately because he says in his WC testimony people were running and screaming as soon as the shots were fired. However, in his WC testimony he says he doesn't go in for a few mins. until others were going in then he stood around talking a few minutes before going to eat his lunch in the basement. Those 2 accounts don't jive with each other and neither one jives with this 2002 CSPAN account that he saw LHO go down Houston and cross to the south side of Elm 5-10 minutes after the shots. How could he see Oswald 5-10 mins after the shots if he went inside the TSBD basement to eat his lunch much sooner than that? He also said he was 10-12 feet from Oswald when he saw him. This means he would have to have left the steps and been over near Houston. None of his official statements to the DPD or FBI or WC say he left the steps (other than to go inside). Another thing - there is absolutely no mention of a roll call in his WC testimony. He says they lined up and showed ID, explained where they were at the time of the shots and gave a phone number where they could be contacted - then they were released between 1 and 2 pm. 

Another lie...he says in his 3/18/64 FBI Statement when he was released between 1 and 2 pm he "went directly home". Buell is a very, very, bad liar. 

Also...in reading over and comparing his FBI statements and WC testimony with his CSPAN accounts i came across this interesting comment i had never noticed before. Could this be an early effort to establish a cover story in case evidence of Oswald as PM surfaced via the Darnell film or via loose lips of other witnesses on the steps?

Stan Dane wrote:Mick Purdy

Barto

Mick, not a bad job. But can you resize the image again, you did not allow the pic to grow from increasing it to 400 px
Plz make sure scale styles/constrain proportions/resample image are all ticked when you upres it. Thx.

In your version I have discovered the outline of the lady who has her leg poking out in front of PM and she is talking so it seems to the white haired fella in front of PM.

THX and merry x-mas.

Ed Ledoux

When you draw a line across the heads of those on that step its more clear where the dark lady's head is. (approximately)

Barto

Right click and open in new tab and Duncan MacRae's shopping bag becomes a nice lil coiffure..........

Ed Ledoux

Don't know what your talking about Bart, that woman is using that head as a clutch. No really Duncan MacRae and Albert Doyle said so.

Ed Ledoux

The empty skull that responds to MacRae is now lying outright. He took the image and swapped his painted side for the original. Shows how desperate he really has become.
 
Hasan, feel free to check his internet connection next available opening.

Hasan Yusuf

Hasan, feel free to check his internet connection next available opening.

Will do, Ed. Just as soon as I have bought one of these:

http://www.dupont.com/products-and-services/personal-protective-equipment/chemical-protective-garments/uses-and-applications/biological-hazard-protection.html