Questions For Buell Wesley Frazier

[Martin Weidmann]

Your cherrypick seems to me to be describing Oswald lifting the package from the backseat.

Maybe when Oswald was reaching into the backseat. If so, then Frazier looked forward again ...

Mr. BALL - What did he do about the package in the back seat when he got out of the car?
Mr. FRAZIER - Like I say, I was watching the gauges and watched the car for a few minutes before I cut it off.

Frazier's Nov. 22 affidavit and Shaw trial testimony make no mention of seeing Oswald reach into the car, much less seeing Oswald position the package upright while facing Frazier.

    "I parked the car and sit there awhile and run the motor to charge the battery,
     and while I was doing that, Lee got out and opened the back door and got
     the package out of the back seat and walked behind the car, then I got out
     of the car and started walking toward the building where I work. I noticed
     that Lee had the package in his right hand under his arm, and the package
     was straight up and down, and he had his arm down, and you could not see
     much of the package."

          -- Affidavit

     Q: Did you determine whether it was in his armpit or were you close enough
     to see that?

     A: No, sir, I was not close enough to see. I didn't pay attention to it particularly,
     but as he was walking along in front of me naturally I looked in his direction
     and that is what it appeared to be from what I saw.

          -- Shaw Trial

Time travel hasn't been invented yet.

Time travel hasn't been invented yet.

So, you need time travel to prove your case against Oswald? Can't do it here and now? That's very telling indeed.

[Alan Ford]

     Q: Tell me, how was Lee Harvey Oswald carrying this package you described
          as he was walking in front of you?

     A: Parallel to his side, up and down. Like you stick it up under your armpit and
          the other part cupped in his hand.

     Q: Did you determine whether it was in his armpit or were you close enough to
          see that?

     A: No, sir, I was not close enough to see. I didn't pay attention to it particularly,
          but as he was walking along in front of me naturally I looked in his direction
          and that is what it appeared to be from what I saw.

Q: Where was this package in the automobile?

A: Lying on the back seat on the side he sat on.

Q: How much of the back seat did the package occupy?

A: I would say roughly around two feet, give or take a few inches.

Q: When you say "give or take a few inches," could you approximate how many inches to give or take?

A: Like I said, the package was roughly around two feet.



 

[Martin Weidmann]

What else is there that would help you attain some "beyond a reasonable doubt" pie-in-the-sky bar?

Traditional law/forensics investigation, reasonable sober assessment of evidence, and authoritative inquiries and panels are discarded in favor of Jim Garrison's Mardi Gras, "JFK Revisited" and pseudoscience websites.

What else is there that would help you attain some "beyond a reasonable doubt" pie-in-the-sky bar?

Perhaps you should try to present some actual conclusive evidence and not a load of assumptions and speculations combined with less than convincing claims based on cherry picked and misrepresented evidence.

It's just too bad that you clearly don't have sufficient faith in your own case and the credibility of the evidence, because if you had, you would simply present it without constantly whining about the fact that people don't instantly believe the BS you present to them.

[Bill Chapman]

If any of you nerds have honestly tried a reconstruction you will find that the package is too heavy to carry strictly in the palm.

But tucked under the armpit it would fit perfectly. Go figure!

And how would you even know what the weight of the package was? In addition to being a pseudo "artist" and a wanna be psychoanalyst are you pretending to be a clairvoyant of sorts as well?

It forces one to curve the wrist under the bag as Rather is seen doing here. Not an efficient carry method.

So, if we assume that Rather did have a rifle in that bag, and Frazier said Oswald held the package in the cup of his hand (which you claim can't be done if there is a rifle in there) haven't you just confirmed that there couldn't have been a rifle in the package Oswald carried?

Where did I say it couldn't be done
I said that it would not be as efficient

I'll go with Jerry's drawings as they comport with my own live test

[Martin Weidmann]

Where did I say it couldn't be done
I said that it would not be as efficient

I'll go with Jerry's drawings as they comport with my own live test

Where did I say it couldn't be done
I said that it would not be as efficient

So, efficient or not, it can be done after all? If that's the case what is the point you're making?

I'll go with Jerry's drawings as they comport with my own live test

Which means that your "live test" is just as bogus as Jerry's drawing.

[Bill Chapman]

No 45-degree angle required: In my tests, the 34.8" package is easily held close to the vest chest
You can bet on it..

[Bill Chapman]

Where did I say it couldn't be done
I said that it would not be as efficient

So, efficient or not, it can be done after all? If that's the case what is the point you're making?

I'll go with Jerry's drawings as they comport with my own live test

Which means that your "live test" is just as bogus as Jerry's drawing.

'Bogus' regarding what, exactly?

[Jerry Freeman]

After looking at all of those silly drawings  ~~~~~~
Let's forget about Wes Frazier for a second.

An honest investigation would have inquired of all employees checking in to work at the back entry....
-----Who saw Oswald come in with Frazier? Was Oswald carrying anything?-----
A 6 lb bag of bulky hardware would have been easy to spot.

Second's up.... Who else did Frazier see when he went into work following Oswald?
Simple as that.
I mean if truth was really their only client.