Then went inside with the curtain rods

[Bill Chapman]

Now tell us why the top of the bag carried by Oswald would have to be seen poking over the shoulder, rather than angled over (using his left hand) to a position a few inches in front of his face and out of sight from Buell.

HUH??    I can't understand you?....  Would you please explain WHY Lee would want to hide the paper sack from Buell Frazier's view?   Frazier had seen the sack when he climbed into the drivers seat of his car, and he saw Lee take the sack out of the car when Lee got out to walk to the TSBD.    Since Frazier knew that Lee was carrying a paper sack.....WHY would Lee want to carry it in a manner that you believe was meant to hide it from  Frazier's view.

That's a good point. But only if Oswald was indeed carrying said curtain rods, and not a broken-down Carcano. Oswald's behaviour, and the angles available in carrying a 34.8" package in a manner required to fool an onlooker walking behind and at a distance, favours the latter.

[Walt Cakebread]

That's a good point. But only if Oswald was indeed carrying said curtain rods, and not a broken-down Carcano. Oswald's behaviour, and the angles available in carrying a 34.8" package in a manner required to fool an onlooker walking behind and at a distance, favours the latter.

That's a good point. But only if Oswald was indeed carrying said curtain rods, and not a broken-down Carcano.

Buell Frazier swore that the flimsy paper sack that he saw was only "about two feet long, give or take a couple of inches"

So are you now arguing with the man who actually saw the paper sack?   

[Martin Weidmann]

That's a good point. But only if Oswald was indeed carrying said curtain rods, and not a broken-down Carcano. Oswald's behaviour, and the angles available in carrying a 34.8" package in a manner required to fool an onlooker walking behind and at a distance, favours the latter.

Hilarious. It only favors the latter if you assume there was a broken down rifle in the package. The problem is that you don't get to assume that. You need to prove it.... you know; provide actual evidence and not just speculation.

[Bill Chapman]

Hilarious. It only favors the latter if you assume there was a broken down rifle in the package. The problem is that you don't get to assume that. You need to prove it.... you know; provide actual evidence and not just speculation.

Have you tested what I'm suggesting?

[Martin Weidmann]

Have you tested what I'm suggesting?

Must have missed you suggestion. What was it?

[Alan Ford]

VERSUS


 

[Bill Chapman]

Hilarious. It only favors the latter if you assume there was a broken down rifle in the package. The problem is that you don't get to assume that. You need to prove it.... you know; provide actual evidence and not just speculation.

One assumes there were curtain rods in the bag. Buell did.
Oswald told him, so it must be true.

[Bill Chapman]

Must have missed you suggestion. What was it?

It's a feasibility study involving Oswald using his left hand to pull the top of the bag to his left—in front of his head— to reduce the bag profile to anyone behind him. Kind of like carrying the bag at his side earlier when nobody was behind him.