THOSE SILLY PATSY-FRAMERS
David Von Pein
>>> "The paper {bag} HAD NO ABRASIONS, which, during all other re-creations, showed it HAD TO LEAVE ABRASION MARKS." <<<
Those silly-willy patsy-framing plotters are at it again, I see ---
They plant a fake paper bag that they want people to think carried Lee
Oswald's rifle, but -- oops! -- they forgot one thing! They forgot to
ACTUALLY PLACE A RIFLE INSIDE THE BAG AT ANY POINT IN TIME, so that
the "abrasions" (as Richard likes to call them) can appear on the bag
and also so that some oil stains will appear on the bag too.
Not to mention the fact that these stupid plotters should have WANTED
to put a rifle in their "fake" bag for another critical reason as well
-- to make sure Oswald's dismantled rifle WOULD FIT INSIDE THE "FAKE"
BAG.
Did the lazy plotters just get lucky when it was later discovered that
Oswald's 34.8-inch weapon (when broken down) would, indeed, fit inside
the 38-inch "fake" bag that was planted in the Nest (which was a bag
that, per CTers, never had a rifle inside of it any any point in
time)?
>>> "Answer this, David: when did he {Oswald} make the bag? I would love to hear this." <<<
Nobody can know the answer to that question with 100% certainty, of
course, since Mr. Oswald wasn't nice enough to tell us that
information before Jack Ruby took care of him on Sunday morning.
But given the SUM TOTAL of the paper-bag evidence, there can be little
doubt that Oswald DID, indeed, construct that makeshift, handmade
paper bag at some point prior to approximately 7:10 AM on Friday
morning, November 22nd, which was the first time anyone noticed Oswald
with a bag (when Linnie Mae Randle watched LHO approach her house in
Irving carrying a bulky paper package).
Vincent Bugliosi, in his JFK book, says something interesting
regarding this "paper bag" subject that I had never heard postulated
before. At one point in the book's "Lee Harvey Oswald" bio chapter, VB
says that when the Oswalds' personal possessions were being moved from
New Orleans to Ruth Paine's garage in Irving, Texas, in late September
1963, the rifle was ALREADY wrapped in brown wrapping paper and then
placed in the blanket roll (where it remained until LHO took it out of
the blanket on November 21st or 22nd).
Quoting from "Reclaiming History":
"Looking back, Ruth {Paine} realized he {LHO} had been
"distinctly" eager to do the packing. He was probably trying to avoid
having her handle, any more than she had to, the Mannlicher-Carcano
rifle, which he had disassembled, wrapped in a brown paper package,
and tied up in a blanket. ....
[Via the footnote at the bottom of page #746:]
"But of course someone had to unpack the package when Ruth
arrived in Texas a few days later, and it was her husband Michael,
whom she had called to help her. He was perplexed by the weight and
feel of the contents of the package, thoughts like "camping equipment"
and "an iron pipe" entering his mind. These guesses didn't seem quite
accurate to him, but being the "polite" Quaker he was, and aware of
Oswald's "rights to privacy," he never snooped. He would later say he
was satisfied it was Oswald's rifle." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi; Page 746
of "Reclaiming History" (c.2007)
================
So, per VB's account, the rifle was ALREADY "disassembled" and it was
ALREADY "wrapped in a brown paper package" when Lee Harvey Oswald
placed the rifle atop Ruth Paine's station wagon in September of '63
in New Orleans, Louisiana.
However, when examining this topic a little further, I really don't
think VB's account can be accurate with respect to the rifle being
wrapped in brown paper when the blanket containing the Mannlicher-
Carcano rifle was moved from New Orleans to the Paine residence in
Irving in September.
I now offer up excerpts from Michael Paine's WC testimony:
WESLEY LIEBELER -- "I now show you Commission Exhibit 364, which is a
replica of a sack which was prepared by authorities in Dallas; and I
also show you another sack, which is Commission Exhibit 142, and ask
you if you have ever seen in or around your garage in Irving, Texas,
any sacks similar to those?"
MICHAEL PAINE -- "No, I haven't."
MR. LIEBELER -- "Have you seen any paper in your garage in Irving
prior to November 22, 1963, or at any other place, at your home in
Irving, Texas, that is similar to the paper of which those sacks are
made?"
MR. PAINE -- "No, I haven't." ....
MR. LIEBELER -- "When you moved the sacks, the blanket, the package
that was wrapped in the blanket in your garage, were you able to
determine whether or not the object inside the sack was also wrapped
in paper?"
MR. PAINE -- "I would have said that it was not. When we practiced
wrapping that rifle yesterday, I would have guessed that any paper
around the barrel in there, which I could feel with some clarity,
would have crinkled."
MR. LIEBELER -- "And to your recollection there was no crinkling in
the package wrapped with the blanket?"
MR. PAINE -- "Yes. It was a very quiet package."
================
But.....
There is also the following testimony from Michael Paine regarding the
length of the object that was inside the blanket roll which was being
stored in Ruth Paine's garage.
This is testimony from Mr. Paine that could very well indicate the
possibility that the rifle WAS, indeed, already disassembled when it
was being stored at the Paine residence, because the overall length of
the paper bag found in the Sniper's Nest on November 22 measured just
one inch longer than the estimate provided by Mr. Paine.
But, then too, it should also be noted, to be perfectly fair, that the
full length of Oswald's rifle when assembled (40.2 inches) was not
really too much longer than this estimate made by Michael Paine:
MR. LIEBELER -- "How long was this package in your estimation?"
MR. PAINE -- "Well, yesterday we measured the distance that I
indicated with my hand; I think it came to 37 inches."
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/paine_m1.htm
================
And then we have this portion of Mrs. Ruth Paine's WC testimony
regarding the length of the blanket roll that she first noticed on the
floor of her garage in late October of 1963 (which is testimony that
would tend to lean toward the probability that the rifle was not
dismantled when Ruth saw it in her garage):
ALBERT JENNER -- "I take it from your testimony that the blanket, when
you first saw it in a garage, was in a configuration in the form of a
package?"
RUTH PAINE -- "It was a long rectangle shape with the ends tucked in."
MR. JENNER -- "Would you be good enough to re-form that blanket so
that it is in the shape and the dimension when you first saw it?"
MRS. PAINE -- "About like so."
MR. JENNER -- "For the record if you please, Mr. Chairman, the length
of the form is just exactly 45 inches, and it is across exactly 12
inches."
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/paine_r2.htm
================
And there's Marina Oswald's testimony, which almost certainly supports
the idea that the rifle was not wrapped in brown paper while being
stored on the floor of Ruth Paine's garage:
MARINA OSWALD -- "I had never examined the rifle in the garage. It was
wrapped in a blanket and was lying on the floor."
J. LEE RANKIN -- "Did you ever check to see whether the rifle was in
the blanket?"
MRS. OSWALD -- "I never checked to see that. There was only once that
I was interested in finding out what was in that blanket, and I saw
that it was a rifle."
MR. RANKIN -- "When was that?"
MRS. OSWALD -- "About a week after I came from New Orleans."
MR. RANKIN -- "And then you found that the rifle was in the blanket,
did you?"
MRS. OSWALD -- "Yes, I saw the wooden part of it....the wooden stock."
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/oswald_m1.htm
================
So, when evaluating and assessing the totality of all of the above
snippets of testimony from the various individuals who saw the rifle
and/or the rolled-up blanket on the floor of the Paine garage, I'm
compelled to think that Mr. Bugliosi is incorrect with respect to his
remarks on page #746 of "Reclaiming History" when VB claims that the
rifle was already wrapped up in brown paper when Lee Harvey Oswald
loaded it into Ruth Paine's car in September 1963.
In the final analysis, I'm convinced beyond any and all reasonable
doubt that Lee Oswald, at some point prior to 7:10 AM on 11/22/63,
constructed a homemade paper bag with which to conceal his Mannlicher-
Carcano rifle.
If I had a gun to my head and was being forced to explain just exactly
WHEN Oswald created his makeshift rifle-carrying bag, I'd say this:
Oswald, IMO, most likely took some wrapping paper and tape from the
Texas School Book Depository's first-floor shipping/mailing area on
Thursday, November 21st (which is the same day he asked Wesley Frazier
for the unusual weeknight ride to Ruth Paine's home in Irving).
Yes, it's true that TSBD "mail wrapper" Troy West testified that he
had never seen Oswald hanging around the wrapping-paper area on the
first floor, but I think it's a fair and reasonable assumption to say
that Oswald, in his quest to gain access to the paper and tape, was
probably wise enough to wait until Mr. West had left his work station
for a few minutes.
Perhaps Oswald waited until West went to use the bathroom, which
everybody has to do a few times every single day of their lives. And
while West was temporarily away from his mailing station, Oswald
swiped some wrapping paper and some tape.
And, undoubtedly, LHO folded up the wrapping paper so he could conceal
the paper more easily during his ride to Irving with Frazier on
Thursday evening.
Oswald probably hid the folded paper and tape under his blue jacket
that he certainly wore to work at least one time shortly before
November 22nd (LHO's blue jacket was found in the first-floor "Domino
Room" in early December 1963).
It's also worth mentioning that the bag found on the sixth floor of
the TSBD after the assassination had symmetrical, evenly-spaced folds
in it....just as if someone had folded it up to make its size much
smaller before using it for stashing a 30-plus-inch object (like, say,
a dismantled Mannlicher-Carcano rifle).....
http://jfkresearch.freehomepage.com/archives.jpg
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/images/bag2.jpg
I'll also add this re. Troy West and his WC testimony.....
West didn't say that a Depository employee positively COULDN'T have
taken some paper and tape from the workbench/mailing area. In fact,
with respect to the tape, Mr. West specifically told the Warren
Commission that employees "could come get it if they wanted to use
it".
More West testimony:
DAVID BELIN -- "Did Lee Harvey Oswald ever help you wrap mail?"
TROY WEST -- "No, sir; he never did."
MR. BELIN -- "Do you know whether or not he ever borrowed or used any
wrapping paper for himself?"
MR. WEST -- "No, sir; I don't."
MR. BELIN -- "You don't know?"
MR. WEST -- "No, I don't."
MR. BELIN -- "Did you ever see him around these wrapper rolls or
wrapper roll machines, or not?"
MR. WEST -- "No, sir; I never noticed him being around."
[Re. the tape dispenser:]
MR. BELIN -- "Could other employees come and pick up some of the tape
for themselves?"
MR. WEST -- "Yes, sir. They could come get it if they wanted to use
it; but all the time it was there where it is supposed to be."
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/m_j_russ/west.htm
David Von Pein
October 15, 2007
mnhay27
> www.amazon.com/forum/Fx2TVHW5I0UEY9A/TxR9QNQTFC20JF/30/ref=cm_cd_et_m...
Your toturous logic does not impress me, David. The fact of the matter
is, it was the duty of the FBI/Warren Commission to prove their
assertion that Oswald had made the paper bag and used it to carry the
rifle and they failed to do so. They even failed to prove that the bag
was found in the so-called "snipers-nest." It's been pointed out
before that the paper bag does not appear in any of the Dallas Police
Department’s crime scene photographs. And the testimony of the three
law enforcement officials who were first on the scene does not support
the notion that the bag was found in the “snipers nest.” Dallas Police
Sergeant Gerald Hill told the commission, “if it was found up there
on the sixth floor, if it was there, I didn't see it.” (7H65) Deputy
Sheriff Roger Dean Craig was asked "Was there any long sack laying in
the floor there that you remember seeing, or not?" Craig’s reply was
simple and direct, "No; I don't remember seeing any." (6H268) Deputy
Sheriff Luke Mooney testified, “No, sir; in my running around up
there, I didn't observe it.”(3H289)
You can dismiss the significance if you like, but the fact remains
that there is no evidence to connect the rifle to the bag. FBI Special
Agent James C. Cadigan examined the paper bag supposedly found at the
depository for any distinguishing marks that might link it to the
rifle. From Cadigan’s testimony:
Mr. EISENBERG: Mr Cadigan, did you notice when you looked at the bag
whether there were - that is the bag found on the sixth floor, Exhibit
142 - whether it had any bulges or unusual creases?
Mr. CADIGAN: I was also requested at that time to examine the bag to
determine if there were any significant markings or scratches or
abrasions or anything by which it could be associated with the rifle,
Commission Exhibit 139, that is, could I find any markings that I
could tie to that rifle?
Mr. EISENBERG: Yes?
Mr. CADIGAN: And I couldn't find any such markings. (4H97)
Whilst the absence of any distinguishing markings doesn’t
automatically prove that the bag was not used to the carry rifle, it
also does not in any way permit the conclusion that it was. The only
other “evidence” the commission offered in an attempt to connect the
bag to the rifle were the fibers found inside the bag that they said
“could have come” from the blanket found in Ruth Paine’s garage. The
Bureau’s hair and fiber expert Paul M. Stombaugh carried out various
examinations of Oswald’s shirt, the blanket and the fibres:
Mr. EISENBERG: Now, what do you think the degree of probability is, if
you can form an opinion, that the fibers from the bag, fibres in the
bag, ultimately came from the blanket?
Mr. STOMBAUGH: When you get into mathematical probabilities, it is
something I stay away from, since in general there are too many
unknown factors. All I would say here is that it is possible that
these fibers could have come. from this blanket, because this blanket
is composed of brown and green woollen fibres, brown and green
delustered viscose fibers, and brown and green cotton fibres. Now
these 3 different types of fibers have 6 different general colors, and
if we would multiply that, say by a minimum of 5 different shades of
each so you would have 30 different shades you are looking for, and 3
different types of fibers. Here we have only found 1 brown viscose
fiber, and 2 or 3 light green cotton fibers. We found no brown cotton
fibers, no green viscose fibers, and no woollen fibers. So if I had
found all of these then I would have been able to say these fibers
probably had come from this blanket. But since I found so few, then I
would say the possibility exists, these fibers could have come from
this blanket. (4H81)
“The possibility exists“? Stombaugh wouldn’t even say that they had
“probably” come from the blanket, merely that “the possibility
exists.” It would be fair to say, then, that the fibers “could have
come” from any number of sources other than the blanket.
I'm sure you beileve that Oswald took the tape and paper from West's
work station and constructed the bag at the Paine household. However,
as West explained, the gummed tape was automatically moistened as it
was dispensed by the machine:
Mr. WEST: Well, we have those machines with the little round ball that
we fill them up with water, and so we set them up. In to other words,
I got a rack that we set them in, and so we put out tape in a machine,
and whenever we pull the tape through, why then the water gets, you
know, it gets water on it as we pull it through. (6H361)
Bearing in mind that the tape bared marks from the dispenser, the
commission wanted to know if the tape could be dispensed without being
moistened:
Mr. BELIN: If I wanted to pull the tape, pull off a piece without
getting water on it, would I just lift it up without going over the
wet roller and get the tape without getting it wet?
Mr. WEST: You would have to take it out. You would have to take it out
of the machine. See, it's put on there and then run through a little
clamp that holds it down, and you pull it, well, then the water, it
gets water on it. (6H361)
How did Oswald manage to do so much without ever being noticed?
Removing the tape from the machine, stealing the materials, sneaking
them back to Irving, constucting the bag and storing the rifle in it,
hiding his package, picking it up in the morning, sneaking it into the
TSBD, storing the package presumably on the sixth floor - all unseen
by TSBD workers, Frazier or anyone at the Paine house? Add to this the
fact that he supposedly managed to assemble the rifle unseen (without
any tools), shoot the President unseen, hide the rifle and run down
four flights of stairs unseen and stroll out the front door of the
TSBD unseen and you've got the makings of one truly invisible man! Or
an officially sanctioned lie. Take your pick.
David Von Pein
Bob Studebaker and Carl Day saw the bag IN THE SNIPER'S NEST. And Day
wrote on the bag.
Studebaker and Day trump all of the "I Didn't See The Bag" witnesses.
To believe otherwise is stupid...because to believe otherwise is to
think that Studebaker and Day had a specific desire to lie about a key
piece of evidence connected to the murder of the President of the
United States.
And, to repeat -- that idea is just plain stupid.
~Mark VII~
mnhay27
This is the same Carl Day who "found" Oswald's palmprint on the rifle
and "forgot" to tell anyone about it? Yeah, he's reliable. Oh, and
Studebaker, the man who's responsibility it was to photograph the
crime scene and FAILED to photograph the paper bag!
"Studebaker and Day trump all of the "I Didn't See The Bag"
witnesses." LOL!!!
Is that because they're believable or because you want to believe them?
David Von Pein
>>> "Is that because they're believable or because you want to believe them?" <<<
It's because they saw the paper bag and testified to seeing it. And
you can't begin to prove they didn't.
mnhay27
And you can't begin to prove they did. And I have the fact that it was
never photographed in the snipers nest on my side.
tomnln
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:18153a3a-cb3f-4523...@v15g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
BOTTOM LINE !
Evidence Tampering !
tomnln
"mnhay27" <mnh...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c43580c9-65ed-4373...@y13g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
THIS explains WHY David V P RAN from the radio debate.
tomnln
The LN's don't stand a chance with people like you who have read the
evidence/testimony.
"mnhay27" <mnh...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:bf3c7edd-f405-4c04...@e21g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
tomnln
that Frazier/Randall testified to ! ! !
SEE>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:ce5d2624-7d22-4e96...@v19g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
robc...@netscape.com
> www.amazon.com/forum/Fx2TVHW5I0UEY9A/TxR9QNQTFC20JF/30/ref=cm_cd_et_m...
>
>
> Those silly-willy patsy-framing plotters are at it again, I see ---
> They plant a fake paper bag that they want people to think carried Lee
> Oswald's rifle, but -- oops! -- they forgot one thing! They forgot to
> ACTUALLY PLACE A RIFLE INSIDE THE BAG AT ANY POINT IN TIME, so that
> the "abrasions" (as Richard likes to call them) can appear on the bag
> and also so that some oil stains will appear on the bag too.
What paper bag are you talking about?? There is NONE in the crime
scene photos, there is NONE listed in the inventory items found at the
crime scene, so I ask again, what paper bag are you talking about?
> Not to mention the fact that these stupid plotters should have WANTED
> to put a rifle in their "fake" bag for another critical reason as well
> -- to make sure Oswald's dismantled rifle WOULD FIT INSIDE THE "FAKE"
> BAG.
What bag? Which rifle? Please be specific as you cannot tie the M-C
found at the TSBD to LHO.
> Did the lazy plotters just get lucky when it was later discovered that
> Oswald's 34.8-inch weapon (when broken down) would, indeed, fit inside
> the 38-inch "fake" bag that was planted in the Nest (which was a bag
> that, per CTers, never had a rifle inside of it any any point in
> time)?
What 34.8" weapon?? The WC gave us evidence showing he would have
ordered a 36" Carbine IF he ordered any weapon.
> >>> "Answer this, David: when did he {Oswald} make the bag? I would love to hear this." <<<
>
> Nobody can know the answer to that question with 100% certainty, of
> course, since Mr. Oswald wasn't nice enough to tell us that
> information before Jack Ruby took care of him on Sunday morning.
LOL!! There is NO certainty about any of your claims. There is NO
evidence showing LHO ever made the bag in the first place, AND there
was NO bag found at the crime scene, so we have NO bag to discuss.
> But given the SUM TOTAL of the paper-bag evidence, there can be little
> doubt that Oswald DID, indeed, construct that makeshift, handmade
> paper bag at some point prior to approximately 7:10 AM on Friday
> morning, November 22nd, which was the first time anyone noticed Oswald
> with a bag (when Linnie Mae Randle watched LHO approach her house in
> Irving carrying a bulky paper package).
Sure, he carried a dismatled rifle in the bag but he ONLY left prints
on TWO spots! I guess he carried it exactly the SAME way all the
time. But wait, didn't Linnie Mae Randle describe how she "saw" LHO
with the bag DIFFERENTLY from how the WC claimed he carried it into
the TSBD? IF my memory serves me correctly I believe she did, so why
are there NO extra prints David? (Again, I have none of my material at
my disposal, but I think I recall her describing him carrying it by
the top, NOT cupped in this palm and under his armpit like the WC
said. Please correct me IF I'm incorrect.)
> Vincent Bugliosi, in his JFK book, says something interesting
> regarding this "paper bag" subject that I had never heard postulated
> before. At one point in the book's "Lee Harvey Oswald" bio chapter, VB
> says that when the Oswalds' personal possessions were being moved from
> New Orleans to Ruth Paine's garage in Irving, Texas, in late September
> 1963, the rifle was ALREADY wrapped in brown wrapping paper and then
> placed in the blanket roll (where it remained until LHO took it out of
> the blanket on November 21st or 22nd).
Where is the evidence LHO removed the rifle on 11/21/63 from the
garage?
> Quoting from "Reclaiming History":
>
> "Looking back, Ruth {Paine} realized he {LHO} had been
> "distinctly" eager to do the packing. He was probably trying to avoid
> having her handle, any more than she had to, the Mannlicher-Carcano
> rifle, which he had disassembled, wrapped in a brown paper package,
> and tied up in a blanket. ....
LOL!!! So he "hid" the rifle from someone who OWNED the garage huh??
Did he tell her to stay out of her OWN garage?
> [Via the footnote at the bottom of page #746:]
>
> "But of course someone had to unpack the package when Ruth
> arrived in Texas a few days later, and it was her husband Michael,
> whom she had called to help her. He was perplexed by the weight and
> feel of the contents of the package, thoughts like "camping equipment"
> and "an iron pipe" entering his mind. These guesses didn't seem quite
> accurate to him, but being the "polite" Quaker he was, and aware of
> Oswald's "rights to privacy," he never snooped. He would later say he
> was satisfied it was Oswald's rifle." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi; Page 746
> of "Reclaiming History" (c.2007)
This guy is better at fiction that Stephen King! He was a Quaker,
therefore he never snooped! This is priceless AND hearsay, and Bugman
should know this stuff is NOT allowed in a court of law!
> ================
>
> So, per VB's account, the rifle was ALREADY "disassembled" and it was
> ALREADY "wrapped in a brown paper package" when Lee Harvey Oswald
> placed the rifle atop Ruth Paine's station wagon in September of '63
> in New Orleans, Louisiana.
What evidence did Bugman use to arrive at his "account"? You seem to
have left that part out of the equasion for us. Do you care to share?
> However, when examining this topic a little further, I really don't
> think VB's account can be accurate with respect to the rifle being
> wrapped in brown paper when the blanket containing the Mannlicher-
> Carcano rifle was moved from New Orleans to the Paine residence in
> Irving in September.
OMG, DVP diagrees with Bugman! NOT the day and time for posterity!
> I now offer up excerpts from Michael Paine's WC testimony:
>
> WESLEY LIEBELER -- "I now show you Commission Exhibit 364, which is a
> replica of a sack which was prepared by authorities in Dallas; and I
> also show you another sack, which is Commission Exhibit 142, and ask
> you if you have ever seen in or around your garage in Irving, Texas,
> any sacks similar to those?"
NOTE the word "replica"! Why are they NOT showing him the ORIGINAL??
Oh, that is right, the FBI "spilled chemicals" on it! So we have nary
a hair of evidence for its existence and they use a replica to show
the witnesses but we are supposed to say "I believe you!" LOL!!
Do we have anything beyond your guessing for this claim?
> But, then too, it should also be noted, to be perfectly fair, that the
> full length of Oswald's rifle when assembled (40.2 inches) was not
> really too much longer than this estimate made by Michael Paine:
>
> MR. LIEBELER -- "How long was this package in your estimation?"
>
> MR. PAINE -- "Well, yesterday we measured the distance that I
> indicated with my hand; I think it came to 37 inches."
LOL!! That is like saying your cat beat you only 2 out of 3 times at
checkers!! (Remember the famous line from "JFK"?) The "bag" was ONLY
two feet (24") to 27" according to your TWO STAR WITNESSES in this
area (Wes Frazier and Linnie Mae Randle) so there is NO way the rifle
could be concealed even when disassembled. The "bag" was NOT 37"
either by the way.
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/paine_m1.htm
>
> ================
>
> And then we have this portion of Mrs. Ruth Paine's WC testimony
> regarding the length of the blanket roll that she first noticed on the
> floor of her garage in late October of 1963 (which is testimony that
> would tend to lean toward the probability that the rifle was not
> dismantled when Ruth saw it in her garage):
Dave can't prove a bag ever existed, and he can't prove a rifle LHO
never ordered was ever in it, and he can't prove the "bag" that never
was laid inside the blanket, so we are left with "blanket talk."
> ALBERT JENNER -- "I take it from your testimony that the blanket, when
> you first saw it in a garage, was in a configuration in the form of a
> package?"
>
> RUTH PAINE -- "It was a long rectangle shape with the ends tucked in."
>
> MR. JENNER -- "Would you be good enough to re-form that blanket so
> that it is in the shape and the dimension when you first saw it?"
>
> MRS. PAINE -- "About like so."
>
> MR. JENNER -- "For the record if you please, Mr. Chairman, the length
> of the form is just exactly 45 inches, and it is across exactly 12
> inches."
>
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/paine_r2.htm
>
> ================
>
> And there's Marina Oswald's testimony, which almost certainly supports
> the idea that the rifle was not wrapped in brown paper while being
> stored on the floor of Ruth Paine's garage:
OF course it was NOT since there was NEVER any paper package with a
rifle in the first place!
> MARINA OSWALD -- "I had never examined the rifle in the garage. It was
> wrapped in a blanket and was lying on the floor."
>
> J. LEE RANKIN -- "Did you ever check to see whether the rifle was in
> the blanket?"
>
> MRS. OSWALD -- "I never checked to see that. There was only once that
> I was interested in finding out what was in that blanket, and I saw
> that it was a rifle."
>
> MR. RANKIN -- "When was that?"
>
> MRS. OSWALD -- "About a week after I came from New Orleans."
>
> MR. RANKIN -- "And then you found that the rifle was in the blanket,
> did you?"
>
> MRS. OSWALD -- "Yes, I saw the wooden part of it....the wooden stock."
>
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/oswald_m1.htm
>
> ================
>
> So, when evaluating and assessing the totality of all of the above
> snippets of testimony from the various individuals who saw the rifle
> and/or the rolled-up blanket on the floor of the Paine garage, I'm
> compelled to think that Mr. Bugliosi is incorrect with respect to his
> remarks on page #746 of "Reclaiming History" when VB claims that the
> rifle was already wrapped up in brown paper when Lee Harvey Oswald
> loaded it into Ruth Paine's car in September 1963.
NOW, will DVP ever prove LHO ordered a 40.2" Carcano for us?
> In the final analysis, I'm convinced beyond any and all reasonable
> doubt that Lee Oswald, at some point prior to 7:10 AM on 11/22/63,
> constructed a homemade paper bag with which to conceal his Mannlicher-
> Carcano rifle.
Good for you, NOW how about showing us some evidence that supports
this belief of yours?
> If I had a gun to my head and was being forced to explain just exactly
> WHEN Oswald created his makeshift rifle-carrying bag, I'd say this:
IF only that was possible! :-)
> Oswald, IMO, most likely took some wrapping paper and tape from the
> Texas School Book Depository's first-floor shipping/mailing area on
> Thursday, November 21st (which is the same day he asked Wesley Frazier
> for the unusual weeknight ride to Ruth Paine's home in Irving).
Yeah, this is the same ASSUMPTION the WC made, but UNFORTUNATELY FOR
YOU, they NEVER COULD PROVE IT!
> Yes, it's true that TSBD "mail wrapper" Troy West testified that he
> had never seen Oswald hanging around the wrapping-paper area on the
> first floor, but I think it's a fair and reasonable assumption to say
> that Oswald, in his quest to gain access to the paper and tape, was
> probably wise enough to wait until Mr. West had left his work station
> for a few minutes.
See, IF there was really a bag, which there was NOT based on the crime
scene evidence, we could just compare it to the materials at the TSBD,
but alas, there is NO bag to compare.
> Perhaps Oswald waited until West went to use the bathroom, which
> everybody has to do a few times every single day of their lives. And
> while West was temporarily away from his mailing station, Oswald
> swiped some wrapping paper and some tape.
NOT according to Harold Weisberg who looked into this as he found Mr.
West NEVER left his area during the day. Nice try, but NO cigar.
> And, undoubtedly, LHO folded up the wrapping paper so he could conceal
> the paper more easily during his ride to Irving with Frazier on
> Thursday evening.
But the bag presented lacked any folding lines that would suggest this
is what happened if I recall correctly. How do you explain this?
> Oswald probably hid the folded paper and tape under his blue jacket
> that he certainly wore to work at least one time shortly before
> November 22nd (LHO's blue jacket was found in the first-floor "Domino
> Room" in early December 1963).
Do you have anything beyond SPECULATION?
> It's also worth mentioning that the bag found on the sixth floor of
> the TSBD after the assassination had symmetrical, evenly-spaced folds
> in it....just as if someone had folded it up to make its size much
> smaller before using it for stashing a 30-plus-inch object (like, say,
> a dismantled Mannlicher-Carcano rifle).....
What bag?? Why is NO bag listed in any crime scene evidence log or why
are there NO pictures of the bag? Does a "dotted line" count in
court?
> http://jfkresearch.freehomepage.com/archives.jpg
>
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/images/bag2.jpg
>
> I'll also add this re. Troy West and his WC testimony.....
>
> West didn't say that a Depository employee positively COULDN'T have
> taken some paper and tape from the workbench/mailing area. In fact,
> with respect to the tape, Mr. West specifically told the Warren
> Commission that employees "could come get it if they wanted to use
> it".
NOTICE how he can SPLIT hairs, but CTers aren't allowed to do this.
We have to go by what the man said, and he said he NEVER saw LHO near
his work area. NOW, IF you can produce evidence that shoots that down
fine, otherwise, move on!
> More West testimony:
>
> DAVID BELIN -- "Did Lee Harvey Oswald ever help you wrap mail?"
>
> TROY WEST -- "No, sir; he never did."
>
> MR. BELIN -- "Do you know whether or not he ever borrowed or used any
> wrapping paper for himself?"
>
> MR. WEST -- "No, sir; I don't."
>
> MR. BELIN -- "You don't know?"
>
> MR. WEST -- "No, I don't."
>
> MR. BELIN -- "Did you ever see him around these wrapper rolls or
> wrapper roll machines, or not?"
>
> MR. WEST -- "No, sir; I never noticed him being around."
>
> [Re. the tape dispenser:]
>
> MR. BELIN -- "Could other employees come and pick up some of the tape
> for themselves?"
>
> MR. WEST -- "Yes, sir. They could come get it if they wanted to use
> it; but all the time it was there where it is supposed to be."
>
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/m_j_russ/west.htm
Why NOT just compare the "bag" with the materials at the TSBD to see
for sure? Oh, that is right, there is NO bag to compare! LOL!!