Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Et tu, Bonnie?  (Read 73257 times)

Offline Colin Crow

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1860
Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #184 on: April 12, 2021, 01:07:03 PM »
Advertisement
I think when Frazier says "the top of the sack was sort of folded up" he was referring to what we would say was the 'bottom' of the bag where the triangular fold was taped down.
When he says "the rest of the sack had been kind of folded under" he means the open end of the sack is folded at the strong fold and 'folded under' the rest of the sack.

This would make the package (CE 142) about 27" long.
Frazier consistently describes the package being about this long.
In this scenario there is no rifle in the bag,

Agreed

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #184 on: April 12, 2021, 01:07:03 PM »


Offline Dan O'meara

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3163
Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #185 on: April 12, 2021, 01:20:25 PM »
Agreed

I don't think it was curtain rods either.

So what was Oswald carrying?
Maybe it was the bag that was important?

Offline Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7444
Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #186 on: April 12, 2021, 02:12:26 PM »
I don't think it was curtain rods either.

So what was Oswald carrying?
Maybe it was the bag that was important?

I don't think it was curtain rods either.

We will never know, I fear. I've always considered it possible that Oswald simply used the curtain rods story so he wouldn't have to tell a 19 year co-worker that he was really going to make up with his wife.

Once you conclude that the rifle wasn't in the bag, the entire narrative of Oswald storing a rifle in Ruth Paine's garage becomes even more questionable than it already was.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #186 on: April 12, 2021, 02:12:26 PM »


Online Richard Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5289
Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #187 on: April 12, 2021, 02:52:10 PM »
I don't think it was curtain rods either.

We will never know, I fear. I've always considered it possible that Oswald simply used the curtain rods story so he wouldn't have to tell a 19 year co-worker that he was really going to make up with his wife.

Once you conclude that the rifle wasn't in the bag, the entire narrative of Oswald storing a rifle in Ruth Paine's garage becomes even more questionable than it already was.

HA HA HA.  Wow.  Always nice to get a good laugh.  And in this bizarre fantasy Oswald lies to the police when it would be in his own self-interest to tell the truth to avoid being implicated in the assassination of the President?  Wow.   I'm starting to miss Caprio.  One of the dumbest explanations in the history of this forum.  Which is a high bar.

Offline Dan O'meara

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3163
Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #188 on: April 12, 2021, 02:57:31 PM »
I don't think it was curtain rods either.

We will never know, I fear. I've always considered it possible that Oswald simply used the curtain rods story so he wouldn't have to tell a 19 year co-worker that he was really going to make up with his wife.

Once you conclude that the rifle wasn't in the bag, the entire narrative of Oswald storing a rifle in Ruth Paine's garage becomes even more questionable than it already was.

I agree that Oswald wouldn't tell Frazier he was trying to make up with his wife and, certainly judging from Marina's testimony, this appears to be the reason for him to be there.
However, why does he need to do it on the Thursday, why not wait until Friday and spend the weekend with her. Maybe he wanted to leave money with her as he did before the Walker incident.

The same is true about curtain rods - there is no clear reason for him to break his usual routine to collect curtain rods. But it appears Oswald does collect something as he shows up with a long package Friday morning.
If the above analysis of the bag is correct then he cannot be carrying a rifle. To be honest, I think it's too small to carry curtain rods (and I don't see the point of going to the trouble of constructing the bag in order to transport a couple of curtain rods).

As you say, we can never really know what is actually in the bag but I can't even come up with a reasonable guess as to what it might be.
From Marina's testimony and the 'blanket gun-case' in the garage, I feel fairly confident Oswald had a rifle, that he was storing it in the garage and that it was no longer in the garage after the assassination.
I am a lot less confident Oswald carried the rifle (or curtain rods) to work that morning.


« Last Edit: April 12, 2021, 03:09:46 PM by Dan O'meara »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #188 on: April 12, 2021, 02:57:31 PM »


Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6513
Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #189 on: April 12, 2021, 03:00:33 PM »
I think when Frazier says "the top of the sack was sort of folded up" he was referring to what we would say was the 'bottom' of the bag where the triangular fold was taped down.
When he says "the rest of the sack had been kind of folded under" he means the open end of the sack is folded at the strong fold and 'folded under' the rest of the sack.

This would make the package (CE 142) about 27" long.
Frazier consistently describes the package being about this long.
In this scenario there is no rifle in the bag,

'Frazier consistently describes the package being about this long'
Frazier consistently repeats that he wasn't paying attention to the bag.
That fact does not require speculation.

Online Richard Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5289
Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #190 on: April 12, 2021, 03:01:43 PM »
Agreed

You appear to be acknowledging that this was the bag Oswald carried that morning otherwise it is difficult to understand why you are trying to square it with the appearance of the bag Frazier described.  Correct?  I thought you believed the bag was created by the DPD in some bizarre misunderstanding that was never corrected for some inexplicable reason (all the stuff about no situ photos etc).  Has that story changed?  Or was CE 142 the bag Oswald carried that morning?

Offline Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7444
Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #191 on: April 12, 2021, 03:06:54 PM »
HA HA HA.  Wow.  Always nice to get a good laugh.  And in this bizarre fantasy Oswald lies to the police when it would be in his own self-interest to tell the truth to avoid being implicated in the assassination of the President?  Wow.   I'm starting to miss Caprio.  One of the dumbest explanations in the history of this forum.  Which is a high bar.

Your pathetic attempts at ridicule are in sharp contrast with your total inability to have a normal conversation or to answer even the most simple questions.   Thumb1:

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Et tu, Bonnie?
« Reply #191 on: April 12, 2021, 03:06:54 PM »