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

Mon 22 Aug 2016, 2:19 pm

First topic message reminder :

Alan

I asked before but got no response, so here goes again - is there any evidence that Buell came into money after the assassination? It has been raised before in situations like this that where someone who appears to be involved in a cover-up seems to come into a lot of money. Was there some carrot or was it all stick that is keeping him silent?

Sun 28 May 2017, 10:24 am

Thanks so much Stan for making a video of this thread by Mick.

Linnie Mae I noted had Lee carrying the "sack" in right hand with a little bit sticking up.

Lee could not both be carrying a sack from the folded over top of this sack as Linnie claims some of the top was sticking up.
And her description of grabbing it are suggestive of gripping the bag as one might if a rifle was inside by gripping the barrel, this would never allow Lee to walk with it almost touching the ground.

Try it.
Grip at the very top folded portion with ones fingers and top rolled up into ones hand can dangle.
But grip a 28" pole near the top and make it nearly touch the ground... you'll look foolish so try in private setting

Sun 28 May 2017, 12:02 pm

Ed. Ledoux wrote:Thanks so much Stan for making a video of this thread by Mick.

Linnie Mae I noted had Lee carrying the "sack" in right hand with a little bit sticking up.

Lee could not both be carrying a sack from the folded over top of this sack as Linnie claims some of the top was sticking up.
And her description of grabbing it are suggestive of gripping the bag as one might if a rifle was inside by gripping the barrel, this would never allow Lee to walk with it almost touching the ground.

Try it.
Grip at the very top folded portion with ones fingers and top rolled up into ones hand can dangle.
But grip a 28" pole near the top and make it nearly touch the ground... you'll look foolish so try in private setting

Not to mention, the damn rifle was supposedly disassembled to boot. (FFS, what dumb shit would dissemble a rifle that's a mere 40.12 inches long when, taken apart, you save only 5 inches! Jiminy Christmas, just make the paper bag a skoch bigger, then when you carry it, it won't make a sound and you won't have to put it all back together later when time may be critical!)

So Linnie May would have us believe Oswald is carrying this brown paper bag full of clanking metal parts, holding it like he's carrying a stringer of fish, and even though eagle eye Linnie "just saw him from the waist up," she could tell it was almost dragging along the ground.

Tue 30 May 2017, 1:11 pm

Come on with the Polygraph NARA,

We want to question it while we are alive , let alone Buell.

Tue 30 May 2017, 5:19 pm

Buell Wesley Frazier: "Where’s your Rider?" Part B - Page 3 Img_0910

I am 6 5" so my arms are a tad longer and the damn Carcano woodwork is still way too long....
cupping that rifle my arse

Tue 30 May 2017, 6:29 pm

Could you imagine what it would have been like if there had been a proper trial with serious cross examination? Where the Oswald defense attorney actually disassembles a Carcano carbine, places in in a paper sack, and then tries various ways of holding it while asking Linne May "Did it look like this?" When he then tries cupping it in his hand while the top of the package extends past his ear, he asks Wesley "How big did you say the bag was again?"

Tue 30 May 2017, 7:57 pm

If the glove don't fit you have to acquit afro

Fri 02 Jun 2017, 7:14 am

Stan Dane wrote:

Ed. Ledoux wrote:Thanks so much Stan for making a video of this thread by Mick.

Linnie Mae I noted had Lee carrying the "sack" in right hand with a little bit sticking up.

Lee could not both be carrying a sack from the folded over top of this sack as Linnie claims some of the top was sticking up.
And her description of grabbing it are suggestive of gripping the bag as one might if a rifle was inside by gripping the barrel, this would never allow Lee to walk with it almost touching the ground.

Try it.
Grip at the very top folded portion with ones fingers and top rolled up into ones hand can dangle.
But grip a 28" pole near the top and make it nearly touch the ground... you'll look foolish so try in private setting

Not to mention, the damn rifle was supposedly disassembled to boot. (FFS, what dumb shit would dissemble a rifle that's a mere 40.12 inches long when, taken apart, you save only 5 inches! Jiminy Christmas, just make the paper bag a skoch bigger, then when you carry it, it won't make a sound and you won't have to put it all back together later when time may be critical!)

So Linnie May would have us believe Oswald is carrying this brown paper bag full of clanking metal parts, holding it like he's carrying a stringer of fish, and even though eagle eye Linnie "just saw him from the waist up," she could tell it was almost dragging along the ground.

ianlloyd wrote:Hi Greg,

Yes, I've considered this previously - Assuming the bag was made to carry the rifle (still a big assumption IMO!), my thoughts initially were that a 36" rifle was ordered and expected to be delivered and the bag was made for such a weapon. I don't suppose whoever received the 40" weapon realised it was 40", not 36" long (I doubt they would have measured it and the difference between a 36" and 40" weapon isn't quite so obvious) perhaps until trying to fit it into the bag ("Holy sh*t!! My rifle doesn't fit in the bag!!!"???). This is where the WC becomes seriously unravelled then, having to get the rifle to have to be dimantled to fit into the bag. IIRC, the bag is 38" long, so it seems a 36" rifle would fit into it fairly comfortably.

Regarding the 40" weapon only being available from June - I've read quite a lot about this on other forums (Ed & JFKassassination). Some arguments seem compelling, some not so.

Regards,

Ian

Based on my thoughts above on the sheer stupidity of disassembling a rifle to save a few inches of length in a bag, this old comment by Ian from another thread caught my eye.

Might this be a case of the bag coming before the rifle?

Fri 02 Jun 2017, 8:44 am

All I know is, after really studying the evidence from Murphy, Kamp, et. al, I find Frazier's talks and presence almost frustrating to endure he knows he's lying....At the same time, I cannot imagine the intense pressure he must be under, which also shows how relevant this cold case still is...

Sat 10 Jun 2017, 12:16 am

BC_II wrote:All I know is, after really studying the evidence from Murphy, Kamp, et. al, I find Frazier's talks and presence almost frustrating to endure he knows he's lying....At the same time, I cannot imagine the intense pressure he must be under, which also shows how relevant this cold case still is...

Yes,he must be under a lot of pressure. The fact that he refuses to directly identify PM shows that.

Sat 10 Jun 2017, 12:22 am

From his testimony during the Clay Shaw trial.

Q: Where did you go after the noise, if anywhere?
A: I didn't go anywhere. I just stayed right where I was.
Q: Did you ever see Lee Harvey Oswald during that time that you were on the steps in front of the Texas School Book Depository?
A: No, sir, I did not.
Q: Did you go back into the building after the presidential motorcade went under the triple underpass? Did you go back into the Texas School Book Depository?
A: After the shots were fired?
Q: Right.
Q: Yes. I stayed there at first and talked to several of the people who worked there in the building. Then some of them started going back inside so I went back inside with some of the others.
Q: Prior to you going back inside, did you see where any of the crowd that was viewing the presidential motorcade may have gone at the time the shots were fired?
A: Quite a few people ran down, like I stated, in the direction of the triple underpass.
Q: Did you see any policemen there?
A: At the triple underpass, yes, sir, there were some just like regular policemen. At that time, when I said previously people were running and screaming and hollering, some were running in that direction towards where the President's motorcade was.
Q: After going back into the Texas School Book Depository Building did you have occasion to see Lee Harvey Oswald?
A: No, sir, I did not.

Sat 10 Jun 2017, 3:21 pm

How did Kleins ship its rifles?

Why make a sack for a rifle already in packaging?

Cheers, Ed

Sun 11 Jun 2017, 1:56 am

Vinny wrote:

BC_II wrote:All I know is, after really studying the evidence from Murphy, Kamp, et. al, I find Frazier's talks and presence almost frustrating to endure he knows he's lying....At the same time, I cannot imagine the intense pressure he must be under, which also shows how relevant this cold case still is...

Yes,he must be under a lot of pressure. The fact that he refuses to directly identify PM shows that.

Buell Wesley Frazier: "Where’s your Rider?" Part B - Page 3 Pressure

Sun 11 Jun 2017, 2:21 am

Ed. Ledoux wrote:How did Kleins ship its rifles?

Why make a sack for a rifle already in packaging?

Cheers, Ed

Prior to 1964, rifles were as easy to ship as a Texas fruitcake. I would imagine Kleins shipped their merchandize in boxes similar to this 1960 Remington:

Buell Wesley Frazier: "Where’s your Rider?" Part B - Page 3 1960%20Remington%20Ad

Buell Wesley Frazier: "Where’s your Rider?" Part B - Page 3 1960%20Remington%20Ad

Buell Wesley Frazier: "Where’s your Rider?" Part B - Page 3 1960%20Remington%20Ad%201

Buell Wesley Frazier: "Where’s your Rider?" Part B - Page 3 1960%20Remington%20Ad%202

Sun 11 Jun 2017, 5:48 pm

That's the ticket Wink

The reason I bring it up Stan is no one ever has.

Where is the testimony or examples of a shipping carton.

Why was this line of questioning avoided?
Seems important as to how the killer got his weapon.

When checking testimony and statements some slip up and include a carton description, like Linnie Mae,.

The Italian Manlicher Carcano WITH SCOPE
would have to be shipped in a carton.
Possibly carton was wrapped in paper. But sans paper covering the shipping box would be plain brown or with Kleins stamps etc.
and a firearms notice to shipper.
So it could be carried incognito and I guess you might imagine its a curtain rod package.
If you must

Sun 11 Jun 2017, 6:24 pm

What length container did Kleins ship.
What different size containers did they have?

Did no one order a rifle from Kleins as soon as it was know they shipped /sold a rifle to Oswald
No souvenir speculation???

There should be examples of their shipping habits.

I find this intriguing

Sun 11 Jun 2017, 6:33 pm

. BELIN. Mr. Waldman, do your records show whether or not the rifle was shipped with the scope mounted on it or is there any way that you know whether or not it was?
Mr. WALDMAN. Our catalog No. C20-T750, which was the number indicated on the coupon prepared by A. Hidell, designates a rifle with scope attached. And we would have so shipped it unless the customer specifically specified that he did not wish to have it attached. There is nothing in our records to indicate that there was any request made by the customer, and therefore we would have every reason to believe that it was shipped as a rifle with scope-mounted.
Mr. BELIN. Do you know whether or not the rifle would have been broken down in shipment or whether or not it would have been shipped fully assembled?
Mr. WALDMAN. It was customary for us to ship all of these rifles and scopes fully assembled, and I would have no reason to believe that this particular one would have been shipped otherwise.

Mr. BELIN. And do you know in what kind of a container it would have been shipped?

Mr. WALDMAN. It was customary for us to ship these rifles with scopes attached in a corrugated cardboard carton made for us by the Rudd Container Corporation of Chicago.

Mr. BELIN. About how long would that carton be in size, if you know?

Mr. WALDMAN. Approximately 60 inches.
Mr. BELIN. Did you ever furnish any samples of this carton or any wrapping paper or tape to the FBI?

Mr. WALDMAN. Yes; we did furnish a sample of the carton together with the type of sealing tape that was generally used and such craft paper that may have been used for inner cushioning packing.
Mr. BELIN. Mr. Waldman, when we testified upstairs in front of the microfilm machine, was the microfilm itself more clear or less clear than the photostats or prints that have been made from it?
Mr. WALDMAN. More clear.
Mr. BELIN. So it would be possible to read items on the microfilm itself that might not come out clear on the printed copies?
Mr. WALDMAN. That's correct.
Mr. BELIN. Mr. Waldman, the President's Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy appreciates all the cooperation which your company, and in particular you, have given to this situation. And we know that it's not a happy situation to you, and that the gun could have been purchased anywhere. As it happens, this particular gun was purchased with your company, and we want to thank you very much for your cooperation.
Mr. WALDMAN. Thank you.

Sun 11 Jun 2017, 7:15 pm

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10746&relPageId=37&search=kleins_carton

Mon 12 Jun 2017, 2:34 am

I adjusted the size of the image of the disassembled Carcano with bag found in the TSBD to closely match the size of the image of the fully assembled carbine, and then did an overlay of the bag on the assembled Carcano.

Buell Wesley Frazier: "Where’s your Rider?" Part B - Page 3 Carcano%20Bag%20Overlay

Buell Wesley Frazier: "Where’s your Rider?" Part B - Page 3 Carcano%20Bag%20Overlay

I find it ludicrous that someone would disassemble the Carcano to save space. I might buy it if it reduced the size of the package significantly, say 40-50%, but to go to all that trouble to save a few fricken inches? Bullshit.

And you mean to tell me that Oswald carefully packaged all those loose parts so they weren't clanking and waking up the neighbors as he carried that son of bitch over to the Randle's that morning? Then, like assembling something from IKEA, he has to put all that shit together in a span of minutes, incognito? Yeah, right.

The stupid shit people believe amazes me. It's almost like we're living in the Dark Ages II.

Mon 12 Jun 2017, 9:00 am

Not only is that ludicrous Stan, but Linnie May's description of LHO grasping what would be the larger stock end of the gun, inside the bag, with the rest of the bag dangling down from his hand is also ludicrous. (sorry for not having the quote from testimony, but that is what she describes).

With the end of the stock in hand, all that other hardware, including the heavy, small ended barrel must then gather at the bottom of the bag and strain against the tensile limits of the paper sack prior to tearing and/or the glue/tape (whichever it was) failing, depending on which way the rifle was oriented in the bag. The realistic result is that as he strides along swinging the sack even slightly and adding centrifugal force to the already substantial load of the steel gun parts, the bag would burst and the parts would spill onto the sidewalk, street, driveway, or lawn, as the case may have been if this was in fact the situation as described. If it didn't burst then the bag would show evidence of stress and strain on the paper in the form of creases, embossing, and the like.

The pressure required by the hand squeezing on the stock would also crease and crinkle the paper around where the necessarily tight grasping of the stock occurred, yet we see a bag that shows only evidence of having been neatly folded, never creased, crinkled, nor showing evidence of the barrel straining against one end or the other through embossing or disfigurement.

If the bag is inconsistent, the defendant must be innocent.

Mon 12 Jun 2017, 9:26 am

Firstly, whether or not I end up agreeing with Ed or not (it's all still sinking in), his latest here is another example of his outstanding detective work.

To the bag... Rose described the baby blanky as rifle shaped...(an outright lie no matter what because if it was so obvious, the Paines must have known what it was) while a number of others stated the same about the sack. Maybe those were lies, too...but maybe not.

Marvin Johnson for example testified that "my partner picked it up and we unfolded it and it appeared to be about the same shape as a rifle case would be."

That rules out that it carried a disassembled rifle because a bag containing a disassembled rifle would not resemble a rifle case.

This bag, as we know, was also too small to have contained an assembled rifle.

The question for me now (bringing in Ed's recent posts) is whether the bag found was the original packaging from Klein's, but then substituted for this other bag, and if so, why?

If the Klein's bag was not there, then there is a fair bit of collusion to lie about the shape of the bag "found".

Mon 12 Jun 2017, 10:10 am

If the bag is inconsistent, the defendant must be innocent.

Jakie Cochran in the house. Nice.
This whole case is inconsistent and 100% circumstantial. That has been proven time and time again. There is a reason this didn't go to trial.

Mon 12 Jun 2017, 11:21 am

greg parker wrote:Firstly, whether or not I end up agreeing with Ed or not (it's all still sinking in), his latest here is another example of his outstanding detective work.

Ed is as good as they come. I have become so accustomed to this level of work here at ROKC that I too often take it for granted.

Mon 12 Jun 2017, 12:10 pm

Yes it is fun hitching up to Ed's boat. Pulls you right along fast he does.

Tue 13 Jun 2017, 7:52 pm

Thank you all

Here is another description of the shipping container by Rudd Container Corp, by Waldman
and the samples sent:

Buell Wesley Frazier: "Where’s your Rider?" Part B - Page 3 Rudd10

Cheers My Friends!!
Ed

Tue 13 Jun 2017, 8:36 pm

Apparently the rifle in the garage was wrapped in corrugated paper in a carton inside the baby blanky....

Mr. JENNER. Would you measure off 45 inches on that-we have taken a piece
of corrugated box board, measured off 43 inches in length, and I will ask Mrs.
Paine to take that piece of corrugated box board and place it in the position in
which the blanket-wrapped package was.
Mrs. PAINE. Tha’t’s it.
(,4t this point the witness, Mrs. Paine, complied with the request of Counsel
Jenner.)
Mr. JESNER. Sow, may I describe for the record, Mrs. Paine has placed that
43.inch corrugated box board in the position she recalls it was when you first saw
it, Mrs. Paine?
Mrs. PRIDE. So; that’s the second timeit’s where it was on Sorember 22.
Mr. JENSER. This is where it was on November 22d and one end is how many
inches from the base of the band saw, Mr. Howlett?
dgent HOWLETT. It’s 8 feet from the base of the band saw.
Nr. JENNER. Is that correct, Mrs. Paine?
Mrs. PAINE. As I recall-yes.
Mr. JENXER. And, it extends in a northerly direction 45 inches and ends up
how many inches north of the south edge of the work bench, Mr. Howlett?
Agent HOWLETT. One foot eight inches.
Mr. JEJSER. And Mrs. Paine has placed...

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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