This is how the rifle was gotten into the building

[Gerry Down]

Linnie Mae Randle poses the real problem here. She got a clearer view of the package than Frazier and her description of a package is closer to the 27 inches she remembers. I dont know why this is and opens the possibility the rifle got in to the TSBD some other way:

Mr. BALL. Was he carrying any package?
Mrs. RANDLE. Yes; he was.
Mr. BALL. What was he carrying?
Mrs. RANDLE. He was carrying a package in a sort of a heavy brown bag, heavier than a grocery bag it looked to me. It was about, if I might measure, about this long, I suppose, and he carried it in his right hand, had the top sort of folded down and had a grip like this, and the bottom, he carried it this way, you know, and it almost touched the ground as he carried it.
Mr. BALL. Let me see. He carried it in his right hand, did he?
Mrs. RANDLE. That is right.
Mr. BALL. And where was his hand gripping the middle of the package?
Mrs. RANDLE. No, sir; the top with just a little bit sticking up. You know just like you grab something like that.
Mr. BALL. And he was grabbing it with his right hand at the top of the package and the package almost touched the ground?
Mrs. RANDLE. Yes, sir.

[Ross Lidell]

Linnie Mae Randle poses the real problem here. She got a clearer view of the package than Frazier and her description of a package is closer to the 27 inches she remembers. I dont know why this is and opens the possibility the rifle got in to the TSBD some other way:

Mr. BALL. Was he carrying any package?
Mrs. RANDLE. Yes; he was.
Mr. BALL. What was he carrying?
Mrs. RANDLE. He was carrying a package in a sort of a heavy brown bag, heavier than a grocery bag it looked to me. It was about, if I might measure, about this long, I suppose, and he carried it in his right hand, had the top sort of folded down and had a grip like this, and the bottom, he carried it this way, you know, and it almost touched the ground as he carried it.
Mr. BALL. Let me see. He carried it in his right hand, did he?
Mrs. RANDLE. That is right.
Mr. BALL. And where was his hand gripping the middle of the package?
Mrs. RANDLE. No, sir; the top with just a little bit sticking up. You know just like you grab something like that.
Mr. BALL. And he was grabbing it with his right hand at the top of the package and the package almost touched the ground?
Mrs. RANDLE. Yes, sir.

The above does not describe the precise alignment of Oswald's hand. Was it essentially perpendicular to the ground or was the portion between the elbow and the wrist more close to parallel to the ground?

Linnie May Randle "guessed" the length (and width) of Oswald's package. It was an E S T I M A T E.

[Gerry Down]

Linnie May Randle "guessed" the length (and width) of Oswald's package. It was an E S T I M A T E.

I know. But her estimate was the same as Fraziers. That was always a problem for the WC. There was and is something uncomfortable about it.

[Ross Lidell]

I know. But her estimate was the same as Fraziers. That was always a problem for the WC. There was and is something uncomfortable about it.

There is no "rule-book of the Universe" that says "2 estimates must be accurate if they are the same". The 2 estimates could both be inaccurate.

[Bill Chapman]

I know. But her estimate was the same as Fraziers. That was always a problem for the WC. There was and is something uncomfortable about it.

Randle's estimate kept shrinking in tandem with Buell's nut sack, it seems.
CYA seemed the smart move for the pair.

[Martin Weidmann]

Frazier said Oswald carried the package under his armpit and in his cupped hand, which makes it about as long as Oswald's arm and thus impossible to have been long enough to conceal a broken down MC rifle.

There are two (2) ways for the package to be carried "in his cupped hand" and "under his armpit".

I think you're confused. You meant to imply "IN" his armpit; which would mean the package was snug in that recess where the top of the arm meets the torso. That's only one (1) way the package could be carried "under the armpit": with the package length perpendicular to the ground.

The second way is most likely how Oswald carried his "Carcano" package. Yes, the bottom of the package rested in Oswald's cupped right hand. The package was held parallel to the body but not perpendicular to the ground. The package was angled forward slightly protruding in front of Oswald's body. To stabilize the package when walking: Oswald placed his left arm across his chest holding the package "towards its top" with his left hand. This would permit the package to be obscured by Oswald's neck and face: It would not be long enough to block his eyesight. This perfectly reasonable (and possible) option explains why Frazier--looking from behind--did not see the top of the 35" long package which extended above Oswald's shoulder line. It explains why Frazier could have thought the top of the package was "in" Oswald's armpit.

And that I believe "is" CHECKMATE.

The second way is most likely how Oswald carried his "Carcano" package

And there is your wishful thinking again..... speculative and worthless as always and only designed to not deal with what the witness actually said.

This perfectly reasonable (and possible) option explains why Frazier-

Only an unreasonable person considers his own conclusions to be reasonable.

And that I believe "is" CHECKMATE.

Which is exactly why you should not play chess.... you haven't got a clue how to...


It's pretty pathetic to ignore what Frazier said and make up your own story instead, for which there is not a shred of evidence, and then call the conclusion reasonable.

[Martin Weidmann]

What an idiotic reply.

Your Ad hominem attack reveals your desperation to reply: Though you have nothing of substance to include in your attempted rebuttal.

Have you seen Jerry Organ's splendid graphic that is a representation of how Lee Harvey Oswald could have carried the long package to the Book Depository? That convinced me it's eminently plausible that Oswald could have carried the package as described above.

Though you have nothing of substance to include in your attempted rebuttal.

Oh boy, not this stupid game again!  There is no reason for a rebuttal to an invented story for which there is not a shred of evidence

Have you seen Jerry Organ's splendid graphic that is a representation of how Lee Harvey Oswald could have carried the long package to the Book Depository? That convinced me it's eminently plausible that Oswald could have carried the package as described above.

"could have" are the two most significant words in that hypocritical BS....

[Martin Weidmann]

There is no "rule-book of the Universe" that says "2 estimates must be accurate if they are the same". The 2 estimates could both be inaccurate.

There is also no rule-book that says your opinion is always the right one, yet here you are again acting as if it is.