Et tu, Bonnie?

[Dan O'meara]

12:22 pm 1 (Curry/Decker) Escort drop back, go real slow speed now
approaching Main.

I was going from memory Dan, but yeah the motorcade reached Main about 12.24. Interesting how this differs from the "official" story. The assassin likely taking position just minutes before the shooting.

Don Thomas has an interesting article on the Mary Ferrell site-
[https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Essay_-_Rewriting_History_-_Bugliosi_Parses_the_Testimony.html]
In it he makes the following point:

"Thus, Williams was not certain about just where he left the remains of his lunch. But it is certain that he left the scraps of his lunch in the sniper’s nest window, exactly where Arnold Rowland saw him, in spite of the fact that the scraps wound up two aisles over. One clue as to what had happened is that when the crime scene detectives found them, the chicken bones were inside the lunch sack, suggesting that someone had tidied up the crime scene. By inference this person most likely would have been the hapless Captain Fritz, who arrived shortly before the crime scene detectives. The witnesses who arrived after Fritz saw the chicken lunch and pop bottle on the third aisle. All those witnesses who arrived ahead of Fritz saw the chicken bones scattered on the boxes in the sniper's nest."

Fritz was still convinced at the time of his WC testimony that the lunch remains were of no significance.
It appears that Bonnie Ray Williams was in the sniper's nest eating his lunch until 12:25 if not later.
I think we differ slightly in our opinion of what he was doing there. I get the impression you look at him in a more innocent light than I do. I find his actions after leaving the SN are more in accord with someone up to no good but it's a subjective opinion (that may say more about me than anything)

[Colin Crow]

Don Thomas has an interesting article on the Mary Ferrell site-
[https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Essay_-_Rewriting_History_-_Bugliosi_Parses_the_Testimony.html]
In it he makes the following point:

"Thus, Williams was not certain about just where he left the remains of his lunch. But it is certain that he left the scraps of his lunch in the sniper’s nest window, exactly where Arnold Rowland saw him, in spite of the fact that the scraps wound up two aisles over. One clue as to what had happened is that when the crime scene detectives found them, the chicken bones were inside the lunch sack, suggesting that someone had tidied up the crime scene. By inference this person most likely would have been the hapless Captain Fritz, who arrived shortly before the crime scene detectives. The witnesses who arrived after Fritz saw the chicken lunch and pop bottle on the third aisle. All those witnesses who arrived ahead of Fritz saw the chicken bones scattered on the boxes in the sniper's nest."

Fritz was still convinced at the time of his WC testimony that the lunch remains were of no significance.
It appears that Bonnie Ray Williams was in the sniper's nest eating his lunch until 12:25 if not later.
I think we differ slightly in our opinion of what he was doing there. I get the impression you look at him in a more innocent light than I do. I find his actions after leaving the SN are more in accord with someone up to no good but it's a subjective opinion (that may say more about me than anything)

Dan, some time back I researched the chicken lunch issue. This was independent of Don Thomas. You would have noticed the snide remarks about my research from Richard the regurgitator and Bill the comic relief in this thread. The following officers described remnants on the lunch in the SN prior to the arrival of Fritz, Mooney, McCurley, Boone, Faulkner, Craig, Hill, Brewer, Haywood and Weatherford.

Jim Ewell, a news reporter who had travelled to the TSBD with Jerry Hill, later related in No More Silence that Hill held up the chicken bone and hollered to those below that the fried chicken was what the assassin had been eating.

Richard and Bill won’t engage in discussion of the evidence because they know where it leads.

[Bill Chapman]

If it is really so obvious that you've got nothing to argue about, what exactly are you doing here?

[Oswald killed Tippit/rosetta-stoned Kennedy)

That's your flawed opinion and thus something to argue about. Unless of course you can only claim it but not prove it. 

Take it up with the Tippit-scene (and environs) witnesses, Mr Pretend-Lawyer.

[Richard Smith]

In a perfect world, with people having instant total recall and the ability to communicate all the details in such a perfect way that one can rely on a single statement as being 100% accurate, the WC testimony might be considered as conclusive.

Unfortunately, we don't live in a perfect world. How often have you attended an interview or meeting, for which you prepared but, after leaving, nevertheless remembering that you forgot to mention a particular detail?

You mean like, for example, someone estimating the size of a package that they had little cause to notice or describing how it was carried as they walked from a distance behind the person?

[Martin Weidmann]

You mean like, for example, someone estimating the size of a package that they had little cause to notice or describing how it was carried as they walked from a distance behind the person?

Who might that be? It couldn't be Frazier because he clearly saw Oswald put the package in the cup of his hand and under the armpit and that didn't happen when he was walking behind him.

I actually mean a woman who claims to identify Oswald because of a hole in his arrest shirt, that wasn't there when he was arrested and another woman who was paying attention to the television and claimed to have seen Oswald leaving wearing a jacket which the actual evidence shows actually was in Irving.

[Richard Smith]

Who might that be? It couldn't be Frazier because he clearly saw Oswald put the package in the cup of his hand and under the armpit and that didn't happen when he was walking behind him.

I actually mean a woman who claims to identify Oswald because of a hole in his arrest shirt, that wasn't there when he was arrested and another woman who was paying attention to the television and claimed to have seen Oswald leaving wearing a jacket which the actual evidence shows actually was in Irving.

In this thread I've learned that a 34.8 inch long object will not fit into a 38 inch long bag, that estimates of an objects length are more reliable than confirming that someone was seen at a certain location by a person who knew them, that the presence of a chicken sandwich holds the key to the JFK assassination, that measuring Oswald's arm pits is somehow relevant to how he carried the package.  So much knowledge to be gained here!

[Martin Weidmann]

In this thread I've learned that a 34.8 inch long object will not fit into a 38 inch long bag, that estimates of an objects length are more reliable than confirming that someone was seen at a certain location by a person who knew them, that the presence of a chicken sandwich holds the key to the JFK assassination, that measuring Oswald's arm pits is somehow relevant to how he carried the package.  So much knowledge to be gained here!

Good for you. I, on the other hand, still haven't learned anything from you since my first day on the forum.

[John Iacoletti]

I don't know what you're getting at John. Frazier says he goes back into the TSBD after a few minutes.

Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; I would say by the time, you know some of us went back in, and it wasn't just a few minutes,

But that's not the point. The post you responded to was this:

"In his affidavit or WC testimony, it is clear Frazier doesn't leave the front steps.
What is it in these statements that makes you believe he does?"

There is nothing in his affidavit or WC testimony that suggests he left the front steps at any point. You can have Frazier standing there all day if you want but he doesn't leave the steps.

If there's something to suggest he did leave the steps please point it out.

No, you're asking me to prove a negative.  There is nothing is his statements that say that he remained on the steps the entire time.  That's just an assumption you're making because he didn't specifically mention leaving the steps.  But he did in later interviews.  What I'm saying is that his initial statements do not directly contradict his later statements.