Oswald's sack in the Sniper's nest.

[Ross Lidell]

If it isn't a key to anything...why is the last couple of pages spent on trying to make it fit?
It is clear that Frazier could have discerned the difference between a 6-7 lb bag of hardware and a 6 oz package with curtain rods.
Wes Frazier was arrested and charged as an accessory to murder...or he could go on home if he could just "come clean" about Oswald. What was Oswald to him and his sister? The cops were in on it. Why is this so hard to believe?

What's the motive for the Dallas Cops to "be in on it"?

So ordinary law enforcement officers agree to be part of a conspiracy--to kill President Kennedy--within minutes of the crime being committed? So they are willing to become accessories after the fact to murder which carried the death penalty in Texas.

Some law enforcement officers must have been "in on it" before the crime occurred: Accessories before the fact to murder.

A lot of police are willing to risk being prosecuted and convicted and to "die in the electric chair"--for what reason? Hard to believe indeed!

[Steve M. Galbraith]

What's the motive for the Dallas Cops to "be in on it"?

So ordinary law enforcement officers agree to be part of a conspiracy--to kill President Kennedy--within minutes of the crime being committed? So they are willing to become accessories after the fact to murder which carried the death penalty in Texas.

Some law enforcement officers must have been "in on it" before the crime occurred: Accessories before the fact to murder.

A lot of police are willing to risk being prosecuted and convicted and to "die in the electric chair"--for what reason? Hard to believe indeed!

And this did all before knowing - with any idea at all - where Oswald was at the time of the shooting. Was he on the steps (as some still believe)? Was he on the street? Was he with co-workers having lunch or watching the motorcade?

They are framing a person without having any idea as to whether he would have an alibi. And everyone went along - pre-assassination, assassination, and post-assassination - with not only the acts but of covering up those acts. And remained silent about it for the rest of their lives.

This would be and has been the most studied event in American history. Reporters, investigators, "citizen" journalists, would be studying it for decades. It's impossible - in my considered view - to keep this conspiracy silent. Too many moving parts, too many people involved, too much time would pass.

There are several ways of looking at these conspiracy ideas. One is viewing it as historian hobbyists looking at a past event in a non-serious way. If so, then I guess it's "fun" to discuss it. But some of these people are serious. They truly believe in a secret cabal that killed JFK. This is, well, I'll bite my tongue.

[Martin Weidmann]

What's the motive for the Dallas Cops to "be in on it"?

So ordinary law enforcement officers agree to be part of a conspiracy--to kill President Kennedy--within minutes of the crime being committed? So they are willing to become accessories after the fact to murder which carried the death penalty in Texas.

Some law enforcement officers must have been "in on it" before the crime occurred: Accessories before the fact to murder.

A lot of police are willing to risk being prosecuted and convicted and to "die in the electric chair"--for what reason? Hard to believe indeed!

And this did all before knowing - with any idea at all - where Oswald was at the time of the shooting. Was he on the steps (as some still believe)? Was he on the street? Was he with co-workers having lunch or watching the motorcade?

They are framing a person without having any idea as to whether he would have an alibi. And everyone went along - pre-assassination, assassination, and post-assassination - with not only the acts but of covering up those acts. And remained silent about it for the rest of their lives.

This would be and has been the most studied event in American history. Reporters, investigators, "citizen" journalists, would be studying it for decades. It's impossible - in my considered view - to keep this conspiracy silent. Too many moving parts, too many people involved, too much time would pass.

There are several ways of looking at these conspiracy ideas. One is viewing it as historian hobbyists looking at a past event in a non-serious way. If so, then I guess it's "fun" to discuss it. But some of these people are serious. They truly believe in a secret cabal that killed JFK. This is, well, I'll bite my tongue.

The two of you seem to be missing an important point; the story that we all know through the Warren Report isn't necessarily what actually happened!

[Ross Lidell]

The two of you seem to be missing an important point; the story that we all know through the Warren Report isn't necessarily what actually happened!

You failed to respond to the specific point about the implausibility of "Dallas cops" being accessories before, during and after the fact to the murder of John F. Kennedy. Texas had the death penalty. It would have been the punishment for all of those who "were in on it". Unless of course you think all judges and all potential jurors were "in on it" too.

You raised the issue of  "in on it". So... motive please?

[Jack Nessan]

So you have no corroboration of Biffle seeing the bag before the gun was found. No one said there was a reporter there and Biffle did not name anyone. An unconfirmed, uncorroborated anecdote not offered as an official statement or under oath. Who knows could have been a dream.

And as for using Johnson.....

Mr. BELIN. Your testimony then is that all the sack would have been east of the pipes. Is that correct?
Mr. JOHNSON. I would say that the sack was folded up here and it was east of the pipes in the corner. To the best of my memory, that is where my partner picked it up. I was standing there when he picked it up.
Mr. BELIN. You were standing there when he picked it up?
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, because the Crime Lab was already finished where I was, and I had already walked off to where he was.

Johnson gives us the best indication when this occurred. He was assigned an area west of the SN, essentially guarding the chicken lunch remnants, outside the arranged boxes. Once Studebaker returned following the departure of Day with the rifle, Studebaker processed the bottle and lunch sack. Johnson then moved to where Montgomery was inside the SN. This is when Montgomery "discovered" the bag.

You wanted corroboration that they stood around and talked about the bag and you got it.

Studebaker did not first pick up the bag Montgomery did.

Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, sir. We found this brown paper sack or case. It was made out of heavy wrapping paper. Actually, it looked similar to the paper that those books was wrapped in. It was just a long narrow paper bag.
Mr. BELIN. Where was this found?
Mr. JOHNSON. Right in the corner of the building.
Mr. BELIN. On what floor?
Mr. JOHNSON. Sixth floor.
Mr. BELIN. Which corner?
Mr. JOHNSON. Southeast corner.
Mr. BELIN. Do you know who found it?
Mr. JOHNSON. I know that the first I saw of it, L. D. Montgomery, my partner, picked it up off the floor, and it was folded up, and he unfolded it.
Mr. BELIN. When it was folded up, was it folded once or refolded?
Mr. JOHNSON. It was folded and then refolded. It was a fairly small package.

Mr. JOHNSON. No; other than like I said, my partner picked it up and we unfolded it and it appeared to be about the same shape as a rifle case would be. In other words, we made the remark that that is what he probably brought it in.
That is why, the reason we saved it.

It is not quite that simple. Patrick Jackson solved the mystery of why the bag was not photographed . They had picked it up and moved it. Biffle confirms the event.

No mention of Studebaker doing anything first.

[Jack Nessan]

Day said he left the bag with Hicks and Studebaker. Hicks did not arrive until after 3pm. The bag had departed by then.

The officer who collected the samples of paper was Studebaker. Studebaker had just assisted Day at the scene of the rifle discovery. He too left the sixth floor. I propose that this occurred at the time Day descended to take the rifle to the TSBD.

. Truly does not see the bag until it is "taken into possesion", he never sees the bag on the 6th floor. He only sees the bag at 3PM when it is leaving the building and he helps Studebaker take the paper and tape samples. This coincides with Day stating " I took the bag over and tried it,". Day too was on the first floor, having just returned from the station, to have used the term "over" instead of "down."

[Martin Weidmann]

You failed to respond to the specific point about the implausibility of "Dallas cops" being accessories before, during and after the fact to the murder of John F. Kennedy. Texas had the death penalty. It would have been the punishment for all of those who "were in on it". Unless of course you think all judges and all potential jurors were "in on it" too.

You raised the issue of  "in on it". So... motive please?

Huh? I didn't raise anything of the kind.... You seem to be talking to the wrong guy.

And, for what it is worth, I don't think that Dallas cops were in on the assassination before, during or after the fact. What I do believe is possible is that they didn't have to be "in on it" for the WC narrative to be construed.

[Walt Cakebread]

Huh? I didn't raise anything of the kind.... You seem to be talking to the wrong guy.

And, for what it is worth, I don't think that Dallas cops were in on the assassination before, during or after the fact. What I do believe is possible is that they didn't have to be "in on it" for the WC narrative to be construed.

I don't think that Dallas cops were in on the assassination before, during or after the fact.

Aha!....  Thank you, Martin,  for solving a mystery for me.     I've often wondered why you seem so intelligent, and you can see that the official tale is utter nonsense,  but you keep struggling to find the truth.    Your statement above solves the mystery.