Buell Wesley Frazier

[Tim Nickerson]

Ok, I'll give you two simple examples.

The jacket that was found in a parking lot (described on DPD radio as being white) was handled, according to Captain Westbrook by himself and two unidentified officers. So, how come there are markings of seven officers on the grey jacket now in evidence?

Another example is the paper bag and the blanket. The claim is that fibers of the blanket were found in the paper bag, but there is photographic evidence that shows the blanket and the bag lying next to eachother. One is a DPD photo showing the items before they were sent to Washington and the other was taken in the FBI lab showing the two items lying next to eachother.

The jacket and paper bag are non-fungible items. They were readily identifiable or had been made readily identifiable. Those items, along with the blanket were of little importance to the case against Oswald. The jacket itself would not have had much value to a prosecutor in a court of law because Marina would not be allowed to testify against Lee.  No one else would have positively identified it as belonging to Oswald. Sam Guinyard's positive identification would be heard by a jury but it wouldn't have the value that Marina's identification of it would. The seven markings on the jacket were not needed but most of those who handled it marked on it anyway. The jacket is seen to be white under certain lighting conditions. Of course, you know that already.

[Tim Nickerson]

He identified Oswald in a lineup but declined to say positively that he was the one who he saw firing a rifle from the Southeast window of the sixth floot of the depository.

Exactly. And later he changed his story....

And not only that, he also misrepresented where he was sitting on the wall and he made a false statement about seeing the shooter firing his rifle, when video evidence shows that he was actually looking at the motorcade at that time.

If you call that reliable, there isn't much I can tell you, except that I would have loved to see him testify under oath at a trial and being destroyed by the defense.

Carolyn Arnold told four different stories.

And was never given the opportunity to testify under oath. Go figure!

Brennan cannot be seen in film footage at the times of the second and third shots. He would not have been destroyed by a defence lawyer when testifying under oath.

How exactly do you think Carolyn Arnold's testimony would go, in light of her Nov 26 statement to the FBI?

[Martin Weidmann]

The jacket and paper bag are non-fungible items. They were readily identifiable or had been made readily identifiable. Those items, along with the blanket were of little importance to the case against Oswald. The jacket itself would not have had much value to a prosecutor in a court of law because Marina would not be allowed to testify against Lee.  No one else would have positively identified it as belonging to Oswald. Sam Guinyard's positive identification would be heard by a jury but it wouldn't have the value that Marina's identification of it would. The seven markings on the jacket were not needed but most of those who handled it marked on it anyway. The jacket is seen to be white under certain lighting conditions. Of course, you know that already.

Who said anything about how a jury would weigh the evidence.

You asked for examples of items of evidence that were mishandled by the DPD. And the list of items is massive!

The seven markings on the jacket were not needed but most of those who handled it marked on it anyway.

That's actually not true. The two unidentified officers who actually handled the jacket did not mark it. Only Captain Westbrook did.

The other six people who marked it never handled it.

The jacket is seen to be white under certain lighting conditions. Of course, you know that already.

Sure, but the radio traffic came from the officers who actually saw it at the parking lot. Were they so color blind that they couldn't determine the actual color of the jacket?

[John Mytton]

Oh boy,

If Carolyn Arnold said she saw Oswald in the first floor lunchroom (which is the Domino room) it does fit with the Norman/Jarman sighting" on the first floor, because that's where the shipping department and elevators were.

It was Tim who claimed she said she saw Oswald in the first floor lunchroom.

I, on the other hand, was very much aware that she had said she had seen him in the second floor lunchroom, just prior to the shooting. And that would fit nicely with Baker seeing him there just after the shooting.

It's so easy to get you rattled! 

I admit earlier I was using the Australian/British meaning of ground floor and the first floor instead of the American first floor and second floor but it doesn't change the fact that Carolyn Arnold saw Oswald in her lunchroom on the second floor and your claim that it was an alibi for Oswald's sighting by Jnr and Norman on the first floor was seriously flawed. Sorry bout that.

Arnold told author Anthony Summers that “Arnold told author Anthony Summers that “she went into the lunchroom on the second floor for a moment” (she was pregnant at the time and had a craving for a glass of water) and saw Oswald there, alone and having lunch.”

It was Tim who claimed she said she saw Oswald in the first floor lunchroom.

If so, then I think Tim is Canadian and probably did the same thing as me, but there is no doubt Arnold was referring to her 2nd floor lunchroom.

I, on the other hand, was very much aware that she had said she had seen him in the second floor lunchroom, just prior to the shooting. And that would fit nicely with Baker seeing him there just after the shooting.

Too bad that Baker saw Oswald leaving the hallway and therefore was entering the 2nd floor lunchroom. Oops!

JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

Brennan cannot be seen in film footage at the times of the second and third shots. He would not have been destroyed by a defence lawyer when testifying under oath.

How exactly do you think Carolyn Arnold's testimony would go, in light of her Nov 26 statement to the FBI?

Brennan cannot be seen in film footage at the times of the second and third shots. He would not have been destroyed by a defence lawyer when testifying under oath.

Thank you for your opinion.

How exactly do you think Carolyn Arnold's testimony would go, in light of her Nov 26 statement to the FBI?

I have no idea. She was ignored from the beginning (which is extremely telling) and I'm not sure if an internal FBI document would actually be allowed to be introduced into evidence at a trial.

[John Mytton]

Brennan cannot be seen in film footage at the times of the second and third shots. He would not have been destroyed by a defence lawyer when testifying under oath.

How exactly do you think Carolyn Arnold's testimony would go, in light of her Nov 26 statement to the FBI?

Brennan's first day description of Oswald was very close and considering that the majority of the people at the TSBD windows were either black or women then Brennan most certainly saw Oswald, you know the guy who left his prints covering the Sniper's nest and the guy who owned the rifle on the very same floor.

JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

I admit earlier I was using the Australian/British meaning of ground floor and the first floor instead of the American first floor and second floor but it doesn't change the fact that Carolyn Arnold saw Oswald in her lunchroom on the second floor and your claim that it was an alibi for Oswald's sighting by Jnr and Norman on the first floor was seriously flawed. Sorry bout that.

Arnold told author Anthony Summers that “Arnold told author Anthony Summers that “she went into the lunchroom on the second floor for a moment” (she was pregnant at the time and had a craving for a glass of water) and saw Oswald there, alone and having lunch.”

If so, then I think Tim is Canadian and probably did the same thing as me, but there is no doubt Arnold was referring to her 2nd floor lunchroom.

Too bad that Baker saw Oswald leaving the hallway and therefore was entering the 2nd floor lunchroom. Oops!

JohnM

I admit earlier I was using the Australian/British meaning of ground floor and the first floor instead of the American first floor and second floor but it doesn't change the fact that Carolyn Arnold saw Oswald in her lunchroom on the second floor and your claim that it was an alibi for Oswald's sighting by Jnr and Norman on the first floor was seriously flawed. Sorry bout that.

It wasn't "seriously flawed". It was intended to show you just how foolish you were. Sorry bout that.

Too bad that Baker saw Oswald leaving the hallway and therefore was entering the 2nd floor lunchroom. Oops!

Yeah, I know what Baker said, but having been in the TSBD I am 100% sure that there is no way that Baker could have seen Oswald in the way he described it.

[Tim Nickerson]

Who said anything about how a jury would weigh the evidence.

You asked for examples of items of evidence that were mishandled by the DPD. And the list of items is massive!

I asked you for examples of fungible items of evidence and for you to describe how were they mishandled by the DPD?

The only item you named was the blanket, and you never described how it was mishandled by the DPD.

The seven markings on the jacket were not needed but most of those who handled it marked on it anyway.

That's actually not true. The two unidentified officers who actually handled the jacket did not mark it. Only Captain Westbrook did.

The other six people who marked it never handled it.

If they never handled it, how could they have marked it?

The jacket is seen to be white under certain lighting conditions. Of course, you know that already.

Sure, but the radio traffic came from the officers who actually saw it at the parking lot. Were they so color blind that they couldn't determine the actual color of the jacket?

The officer who reported that it was white never handled the jacket. He saw it at a distance. it appeared to be white.