None of this explains the fact that CE 163 was the jacket found in the Domino room at the TSBD, after Kennedy was killed.
Oswald never returned to the TSBD, so how did that jacket get there?
At no point have I put this analysis forward as an explanation of why CE 163 was found in the TSBD.
The only way it relates to that aspect of the case is that Frazier is unequivocal that CE 163 is not the jacket Oswald was wearing that morning. He couldn't be any clearer. Frazier is completely unfamiliar with this jacket, as far as he is concerned he's never even seen Oswald wearing it before, let alone on the morning of the assassination.
To dismiss Frazier's testimony on this point just because it doesn't agree with your explanation of how CE 163 ended up in the TSBD is unwarranted.
If Frazier's testimony regarding CE 163 means anything, it means there has to be another explanation as to how CE 163 ended up there. No other reasonable conclusion can be drawn if Frazier's testimony is accepted.
And that's the conudrum. According to Marina, Oswald had only two jackets, yet Frazier dismisses both CE 162 and CE 163 as the jacket he saw Oswald wear that Friday morning. It most certainly doesn't justify the conclusion that Oswald was wearing CE 162 that morning. In fact, with CE 163 being found at the TSBD the most likely jacket, despite Frazier's failure to identify it, is in fact CE 163
And yet they must both have been in the room, because how else could Frazier dismiss them both as the jacket he had seen?
The conundrum is that CE 162 is never introduced into the hearing. It is never mentioned. Frazier is never asked to look at it so he never gets a chance to dismiss it. CE 163
is introduced, this is in the transcript of the hearing, and Frazier dismisses it out of hand as the jacket wore that morning.
We can assume and speculate all we want - maybe Ball misspoke - but the fact remains, at no point is CE 162 mentioned during Frazier's questioning. That is a fact.
There can be little doubt what jacket Oswald wore to work that morning and it most certainly was not the dark blue jacket subsequently found at the TSBD.
And this is where fact becomes opinion and speculation.
You've taken this out of context.
It is clearly referring to Frazier's testimony, which is unequivocal - Oswald wore a light gray, long-sleeved zipper jacket to work that morning. This cannot be denied. Frazier's testimony is emphatic on this point. To sweep away all of his testimony, his multiple references to knowing this jacket, is tantamount to saying he is perjuring himself. He could not be any clearer. There is no ambiguity, no ambivalence, no doubt. His testimony is clear.
That's one hell of an assumption. How do you know that the grey jacket wasn't found during the first search of the Paine house?
The answer is that you only assume it. The backyard photos were officially not found until the second search of the Paine house, the one with the warrant, yet on Friday evening Michael Paine was shown a BT photo by an FBI agent and Fritz confronted Oswald with a photo on Saturday morning, hours before the photos were allegedly found.
Is that the sound of metallic headgear being donned I hear.
What are you saying? You have some kind of proof the jacket was found at the Paine house? Oh, you don't? You're suggesting the evidence was (drum roll) planted?
Here's why it's not an assumption - Frazier testifies that Oswald was wearing the same jacket on Friday morning that he was wearing on Thursday when he dropped him off. He is certain of it. He qualifies it by saying, for the third time, how familiar he is with the jacket.
Unless Frazier was part of the (drum roll) conspiracy to frame Oswald's jacket
Your inability to accept straight-forward testimony in favour of Tinfoil
speaks volumes.
I find it somewhat remarkable that the white jacket that was found at the parking lot, somehow became a grey jacket with initials on it from officers who were not in the chain of custody (and no initials of the unidentified officers that were) would end up only being submitted to the Identification Bureau after the officers had returned of their first search of the Paine house.
I've heard you say this before. What is it about the initials you find so objective?
It is something I'm genuinely interested in.
What are you rambling on about? His jacket was in fact found at the TSBD. It just wasn't CE 162.
Again, you're taking things out of context.
When I say "this jacket" I am clearly referring to the light gray, long-sleeved, zippered jacket Frazier identified, this was never found in the TSBD.
It's a really desperate move on your behalf.
This is where your concocted story goes off the rails. You have Oswald going to the TSBD on Friday morning wearing a grey jacket (CE 162), you then have him leaving the TSBD wearing the same jacket, despite witness testimony that he wasn't wearing a jacket, yet at the TSBD another jacket (CE 163) is later found. Does this make sense to you?
"You have Oswald going to the TSBD on Friday morning wearing a grey jacket..."Frazier has Oswald going into work wearing a light grey jacket. He is emphatic about it. There can be no doubt about it.
"...you then have him leaving the TSBD wearing the same jacket, despite witness testimony that he wasn't wearing a jacket..."Please cite the witness who saw Oswald leaving the TSBD without a jacket.
Does it make sense to you that Frazier emphatically denies Oswald was wearing CE 163 that morning, that he emphatically identifies a light grey, long-sleeved, zippered jacket, that he identifies this same light grey, long-sleeved, zippered jacket as the one Oswald was wearing on Thursday night and that this is the jacket found in the TSBD??
Does Frazier lying about it make sense? That the authorities discovered it at the Paine's then planted it, does that make sense?