BWF and LMR may not have been the only ones who saw LHO with a bag on 11/22/1963

[John Iacoletti]

We don't need to know exactly what he said to know that he denied bringing curtain rods to work that morning. At least four people reported hearing his denial.

That is a misrepresentation of what the interrogation reports say.

[Colin Crow]

With the "March 15 entry being in error" scenario the rods were submitted at 9:45 pm on March 23 and then released at 7:50 the next morning.

So in this scenario Howlett contacted Day, who worked on the night of the 23rd, processed the rods and Howlett returned at 7.50 the next morning to retrieve them?

Likely?

[Alan Ford]

Still waiting for your reasonable explanation. Having trouble coming up with one are ya? I can't wait to see Ford's reasoning for why Oswald denied the curtain rods. Should be a real doozy.   Possibly the silliest speculation we've ever seen on any aspect of the case. Unless you can undo him.

 

Your resort to absurd hyperbole, Mr Nickerson, tells us how uncomfortable you are with the present discussion--------and with your own wild and rather desperate pleading! 

Now!

As I suspect you already know full well, I have already on multiple occasions in this thread responded to the question, 'Why then did Oswald deny having brought curtain rods to work?'

But I'll lay out my response one more time for you, because you've put me in such a good mood. The response comes in two parts....

Part I!
We don't know for sure that Mr Oswald made this denial. We now know that he told Captain Fritz & Company he "went outside to watch the P. parade". There was some documentation on this missing for five-and-a-half decades, but thankfully it came to light on 19 February 2019
---------i.e. Captain Fritz & Company suppressed Mr Oswald's claim as to his whereabouts at the time of the shooting.
Therefore! It is perfectly possible that
a)----------------Mr Oswald confirmed that he had indeed brought curtain rods into the building
b)----------------Captain Fritz, knowing that 2 curtain rods were indeed missing from the Paine garage, and understanding the significance of this, suppressed Mr Oswald's claim.

Part II!
However! If---------if!---------Mr Oswald did indeed lie to Captain Fritz by denying he'd brought curtain rods to work, then there's a simple explanation:
a)--------------Shortly after the assassination, Mr Oswald discovered that the curtain rods were gone from the place he had left them (= 1st fl storage room?); he very quickly put 2 and 2 together (i.e. he had been tricked into bringing a long package to work in order to tie him to a rifle); he left the scene
b)--------------In custody, when asked about the curtain rods, which he knew to be missing and therefore of no material help to his cause, he made a calculated decision to deny having brought any long package to work that morning.
A good judgment call on Mr Oswald's part? Perhaps, perhaps not. But------given that the curtain rods were gone anyway, and given the way he was being railroaded------an understandable one from a man who found himself framed for a capital crime!

Now back over to you, Mr Nickerson:

Why would 2 curtain rods taken from the Paine garage four months after the assassination be sent for testing for Mr Oswald's fingerprints?

[Alan Ford]

So in this scenario Howlett contacted Day, who worked on the night of the 23rd, processed the rods and Howlett returned at 7.50 the next morning to retrieve them?

Likely?

Not just likely-----it's the obvious explanation. Along with Lieutenant Day's getting the date wildly wrong, and notating the time incorrectly for good measure. And Agent Howlett's not noticing. And neither of them stopping to ask the other, 'Hey, remind me again why exactly we're printing these rods found in the Paine garage?' And Lieutenant Day's deciding, just for a lark, to write a different release date on a copy of the same form a couple of days later.

I mean, it's not like these two guys were trained professionals or anything. Only a kook would consider a Crime Scene Search Section form an official record of chain of evidence. 

Now that I think of it, Lieutenant Day drank heavily on the job and was suffering from dementia from October '62 on. Can I prove any of this, no? But what I can prove is that there must obviously be some missing documentation on it somewhere nowhere.

 

[Tim Nickerson]

So in this scenario Howlett contacted Day, who worked on the night of the 23rd, processed the rods and Howlett returned at 7.50 the next morning to retrieve them?

Likely?

How about we change the 7.50a to 7.50p? Better?

[Alan Ford]

How about we change the 7.50a to 7.50p? Better?

 

How about we just change any evidence we don't like? And then cite 'obviously' 'missing' 'documentation' to fill out the remaining gaps? That's the Nickerson Research Methodology, folks!

Perhaps Mr Nickerson might further oblige us by changing the empty window in the Hughes film through the addition of a crayon sketch of Mr Oswald holding a rifle?

 

[Tim Nickerson]

The response comes in two parts....

Part I!
We don't know for sure that Mr Oswald made this denial. We now know that he told Captain Fritz & Company he "went outside to watch the P. parade". There was some documentation on this missing for five-and-a-half decades, but thankfully it came to light on 19 February 2019
---------i.e. Captain Fritz & Company suppressed Mr Oswald's claim as to his whereabouts at the time of the shooting.
Therefore! It is perfectly possible that
a)----------------Mr Oswald confirmed that he had indeed brought curtain rods into the building
b)----------------Captain Fritz, knowing that 2 curtain rods were indeed missing from the Paine garage, and understanding the significance of this, suppressed Mr Oswald's claim.

Part I needs to be dealt with before we look at Part II.

He denied that he brought a package to work on that day and he denied that he had ever had any conversation about curtain rods with the boy named Weesley who drove him to his employment. --Secret Service Agent Thomas Kelley report on one of the Nov 23 interviews of Oswald that he sat in on.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=29105
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. FRITZ. And I asked him about that and he denied having anything to do with any curtain rods. It is possible that I could have asked him that on one of those other times, too, but I know I asked him that question the last morning. -- Capt. Will Fritz
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/fritz1.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------------

He denied bringing any package to work on the morning of November 22, 1963. He stated that he was not in the process of fixing up his apartment and denied telling Wesley Frazier that the purpose of his visit to Irving , Texas , on the night of November 21, 1963, was to obtain some curtain rods from Mrs. Ruth Paine. -- FBI Agent James Bookhout
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=57697&relPageId=108
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. BELIN. What was that about curtain rods?
Mr. HOLMES. Asked him if he brought a sack out when he got in the car with this young fellow that hauled him and he said, "Yes."
"What was in the sack?"
"Well, my lunch."
"What size sack did you have?"
He said, "Oh, I don't know what size sack. You don't always get a sack that fits your sandwiches. It might be a big sack."
"Was it a long sack?''
"Well, it could have been"
"What did you do with it?"
"Carried it in my lap."
"You didn't put it over in the back seat?"
"No." He said he wouldn't have done that.
"Well, someone said the fellow that hauled you said you had a long package which you said was curtain rods you were taking to somebody at work and you laid it over on the back seat."
He said, "Well, they was just mistaken. That must have been some other time he picked me up."
That is all he said about it. --US Postal Inspector Harry Holmes
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/holmes1.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fritz was the head of the DPD Homicide Department. Bookhout, Kelley and Holmes were not under his authority or control. Were all four of those people lying when they stated that Oswald denied the curtain rods?

[Alan Ford]

Fritz was the head of the DPD Homicide Department. Bookhout, Kelley and Holmes were not under his authority or control. Were all four of those people lying when they stated that Oswald denied the curtain rods?

Quite possibly. We already know that Fritz, Bookhout and Kelley suppressed Mr Oswald's claim to have gone outside to watch the Presidential parade. Hardly a stretch that they would have lied here too.

It's also---------as I have acknowledged----------perfectly possible that Mr Oswald really did deny having brought a long package containing curtain rods to work that morning. And I have offered a straightforward and logical explanation for that scenario too.