ON NOVEMBER 22, 1963


When President John F. Kennedy's assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, told news
reporters "I didn't shoot anybody", it marked one of numerous lies told
by the 24-year-old former Marine during his two-day detention at Dallas
Police Headquarters.

Another very important lie that came out of Oswald's mouth (twice) was
when he told a co-worker (Wesley Frazier) that he was going to pick up
some curtain rods at the home of Mrs. Ruth Paine (with whom Lee's wife,
Marina, was temporarily living at the time in November 1963).

But here's something I don't think I've ever heard anybody talk about
when it comes to the "curtain rods" topic (something that most certainly
does not logically "fit" with Oswald's "rods" fairy tale):

We know, through Marina's testimony, that Lee Oswald, on 11/21/63, was
trying to make up with Marina after they had quarrelled earlier in the

Lee told Marina that he was lonely and that he was tired of living by
himself. He wanted to get back together with her (i.e., start living
together again after having been separated for more than five weeks,
except on most weekends) and that he would start looking for an
apartment in Dallas for the four of them (Lee, Marina, and their two
infant daughters).

Marina's exact words to the Warren Commission on this subject were:

"He said that he was lonely because he hadn't come the preceding weekend, and he wanted to make his peace with me. .... On that day [11/21/63], he suggested that we rent an apartment in Dallas. He said that he was tired of living alone and perhaps the reason for my being so angry was the fact that we were not living together. That if I want to he would rent an apartment in Dallas tomorrow--that he didn't want me to remain with Ruth any longer, but wanted me to live with him in Dallas. He repeated this not once but several times, but I refused. And he said that once again I was preferring my friends to him, and that I didn't need him." -- Marina Oswald; February 3, 1964 [1 H 65-66]


I think it's safe to assume that Lee had no intention of bringing his
family back to live with him at his closet-sized cubbyhole of a room on
Beckley Avenue. And it's also interesting to note that Lee told Marina
he would rent a new apartment "tomorrow" (November 22).

Marina turned down Lee's offer to rent an apartment the very next
day....but she did add this:

"I said it would be better if I remained with Ruth until the holidays." [1 H 66]

Therefore, even though Marina had said no to Lee about renting an
apartment right away, it was quite clear that Marina was willing to
re-join her husband in Dallas sometime after "the holidays". Which
would mean that Lee would probably be vacating his Beckley room within
a short time period.

Therefore, given all of the above info, the logical question to ask
next is:

Why would Lee Oswald want to put up new curtain rods at his Beckley
room if he had every intention of moving to a new residence very soon

The curtain-rod story of Oswald's just doesn't come together from any
point-of-view. A brief review of why this is the case:

1.) Oswald's room at Beckley already had curtain rods and curtains in
place [as can be seen in this photograph, which is a picture that was
taken on the afternoon of the assassination].

2.) Lee's unusual Thursday trip to Irving, if it were to ONLY retrieve
curtain rods, doesn't make much sense, since he'd probably be going
there the very next day anyway to visit his wife at the Paine house.

3.) Lee said absolutely nothing to his wife or to Ruth Paine about
wanting to get some curtain rods at any time on November 21st,
or at any other time for that matter.

4.) Lee lied to the police after his arrest when he told them he never
said anything to Wesley Frazier about curtain rods, and he also lied
when he said he had not carried a bulky package into work with him
on Nov. 22nd. (It's more logical to believe that Frazier was being
truthful in this regard rather than to believe the man who had just
been arrested and wanted to distance himself from that mysterious
brown paper package.)

5.) No curtain rods were found in the TSBD in the days and weeks after
the assassination. (Warren Commission Exhibit #2640 verifies this fact
via Roy Truly's statement in a September 2, 1964, FBI report.)

6.) Oswald did not take any curtain rods out of the TSBD when he left
that building on 11/22/63. (If he did, he disposed of them somewhere
between the Depository Building on Elm Street and his roominghouse at
1026 N. Beckley Avenue in Oak Cliff, because he definitely did not
enter the roominghouse with any sort of package. If he had, the package
would have been discovered by police.)

7.) From comments he made to his wife on 11/21/63, there is at least
some indication that Oswald was planning to move away from his Beckley
room soon after 11/21/63. If this was in Oswald's mind on the evening
of November 21st, then the act of obtaining curtain rods for a room he
would soon be vacating makes no sense whatsoever.

8.) The two lightweight curtain rods that Mrs. Ruth Paine had stored in
her garage in Irving were still in her garage in the days following
President Kennedy's assassination. Mrs. Paine verified this fact in 1986:

VINCENT BUGLIOSI -- "Now you, in fact, DID have some curtain rods in
the garage, is that correct?"

MRS. PAINE -- "In the garage...yes."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "After the assassination, they were still there."

MRS. PAINE -- "Yes, that's right."


Numbers 1 through 8 above strongly suggest that Lee Harvey Oswald's
"curtain rod" story was a complete fabrication from the beginning, used
as a device with which to avoid suspicion when he carried his dismantled
Mannlicher-Carcano rifle into the Depository Building on the same morning
of President Kennedy's visit to Dallas, Texas.

A couple of additional loose ends concerning the curtain rods:

I suppose, when my #7 item listed above is given a certain twist,
conspiracy theorists could possibly try to use that particular point to
their own advantage, by claiming that Oswald wanted the curtain rods
for some OTHER apartment that he was planning to rent when he and
Marina got back together. Although that theory won't fly very
far....because how could Oswald have possibly known whether this
"other" apartment would be in need of curtains or rods? And even if it
did need such adornments, how would he know precisely what size of rods
to acquire as of November 21st, 1963?

For that matter, how would LHO have known what type and size of rods
Mrs. Paine had in her garage (the ones that he purportedly went to
Irving to get on November 21st), since he never once brought up the
subject of "curtain rods" to Mrs. Paine at ANY time? Did he just assume
that the Paine rods would fit perfectly in his Oak Cliff room?

"Curtain Rod" food for thought indeed.

David Von Pein
November 2006




The date of CE 2640 is the most incriminating feature. The Warren Commission had long ago finished their "investigation" -- and was only wrapping up 'loose ends' at this point.

The very idea that it would be "customary" to notify Mr. Truly if curtain rods were found is so ridiculous, I'm quite amazed that someone would put that in a report.

You have to be foolish indeed to rely on a document like CE 2640 -- and DVP has clearly placed himself in that category.

What you WON'T hear from DVP is an admission that there ARE curtain rods that were found, and fingerprinted in this case... (or a credible explanation for that fact).


The curtain rods that Ben Holmes seems to believe were found in the TSBD were actually the two lightweight curtain rods that were found wrapped up in paper in Ruth Paine's garage (Ruth Paine Exhibits No. 275 & 276).

No curtain rods were ever found inside the Book Depository and Ben Holmes knows it.

Also see Ruth Paine's testimony (at my webpage here) concerning the curtain rods (as they were being unwrapped--on the record--during her Warren Commission session which was taking place in her very own garage).


You're lying again, Davey...

For YEARS believers have hammered critics with the false story that no curtain rods had ever been found -- yet now we have PROOF that it's been a lie.

Ruth Paine was very much involved in framing Oswald. She's on a level of trustworthiness not very far from Marina.


And can you offer any credible explanation for why curtain rods owned by Ruth Paine needed to be fingerprinted?

Or why the Warren Commission was so desperate to get it on the record that no curtain rods were found at the TSBD?


I've never denied that some curtain rods were found in Ruth Paine's garage. Why would I deny that FACT? It's a fact.

But by laughing and ridiculing Commission Exhibit No. 2640, you are implying that some rods were found IN THE DEPOSITORY. And that's just not so.

You wouldn't be gilding the lily just a touch, would you now, Ben?

As for fingerprinting Paine's rods --- big deal. If that is, indeed, true (and I've never been interested enough to verify whether it is true or not, but maybe it is), the authorities no doubt wanted to see if Oswald's prints might show up on those curtain rods (seeing as how the rods WERE in Ruth Paine's garage, and Lee Oswald did spend his last night of freedom in Ruth's house and had access to those rods the same day that he told fellow worker Buell Wesley Frazier the "curtain rod" story).

So it makes perfect sense to me for the police (or the FBI) to want to fingerprint those rods. If they hadn't done so, I can hear the conspiracy theorists balking about how lax the authorities were. (The cops can't win for losing, can they, Ben?)

Maybe you'd better move on to your next paper-thin argument to try and make Lee Harvey Oswald blameless for all 11/22/63 murders in Dallas, Ben. Because this "curtain rod" thing is getting embarrassing for you.

David Von Pein
August 29-30, 2015




Later that morning [November 22, 1963], Lee Oswald was observed on the elevator, going upstairs, and passed a witness (and her supervisor) and they both saw him carrying a long package. "What'cha got there?" he was asked. And Lee responded that it was a "fishing pole."


The witnesses who saw Oswald with the longer package (that he explained as "fishing rods") did not make their statements to the FBI, but certainly did talk about it years later. It was first published in 1988 in American History Illustrated. I communicated with the author--Ed Oxford--and found his research and interviews to be quite credible. (But that's a whole other story.)


I've never heard that fairy tale before in my life. Who is the female witness, David? And who's the "supervisor"?

I'd love it if that story could somehow be proven to be true, though, because such a "fishing pole" lie being uttered by Lee Harvey Oswald would be just that much more of a solid indication that the package he was carrying on November 22nd contained his Carcano rifle.

Such a "fishing pole" tale, if true, would mean that Oswald told different lies to different people throughout the day on 11/22/63 -- with Lee telling Buell Wesley Frazier that the package contained "curtain rods", while (allegedly) telling someone else later in the day that the (presumably) very same package had a "fishing pole" in it.

You'd then have to ask yourself this question:

Why didn't Oswald just stick with the same story about curtain rods that he started the day with when he drove to work with Frazier? Because the more nonexistent things he tries to cram into that brown paper package, the more obvious (and provable) his lies become.

But I doubt any such "fishing pole" or "fishing rods" encounter ever happened in the first place, much the same way Robert Groden's bombshell "I Was Giving LHO Change At The Time Of The Assassination When We Heard The Shots" witness, Mrs. Reid, was a hoax too, with that wholly unbelievable story being invented many years later.

Because if that story allegedly told by Mrs. Reid had even a grain of truth in it, we would have heard it coming from the mouth of Lee Oswald himself after his arrest — "Hey, why am I being accused of shooting the President?! I was in the office on the second floor at that time, getting change for the Coke machine! Just ask Mrs. Reid. She was right there with me!" (Oswald, of course, never said anything of the kind to the police after he was arrested.)



I'm not going to go further at this point in time. But the witness(es) exist and--from your post--you clearly understand the implications.


Well, then, what are the names of those two TSBD witnesses, David? I asked, but you failed to answer me. Or didn't Edward Oxford mention their names in his November 1988 American History Illustrated article concerning the alleged "fishing pole/rods" statement?


You make a serious error when you refer to it as "that fairy tale" and I find it telling that you were unaware of the witness.

Saying "I've never heard that fairy tale before in my life" is revealing.

Surely you do understand that just because you are unaware of something does not mean it is non-existent.


Well, I'm certainly not alone, David. In fact, I'm in very good company when it comes to my ignorance on that topic. Because the late Vincent Bugliosi had apparently never heard the "fishing pole" tale either. No such information, at any rate, can be found on any of the 2800+ pages of "Reclaiming History", because I looked it up (via a word search in the PDF version of Bugliosi's book) and there are zero references to "fishing pole" or "fishing rods" relating to any kind of a story told by any Book Depository witnesses. So, like me, I guess Vince was in the dark about that particular story too.


Proving something like that to be true is important for the very reasons you stated: if true--i.e., if Oswald provided two separate (and different) explanations for the package would imply that Oswald was involved in deception; and of course, the ultimate implication was that what was in the package was neither curtain rods nor fishing rods.

I'll pursue this matter further in the future.


To close again with your own quote: "Such a "fishing pole" tale, if true, would mean that Oswald told different lies to different people throughout the day on 11/22/63 -- with Lee telling Buell Wesley Frazier that the package contained "curtain rods", while (allegedly) telling someone else later in the morning that the (presumably) very same package had a "fishing pole" in it." Agreed. That is exactly the case; only I would not say "throughout the day." That [is] an inaccurate characterization of the situation. There are only two points on the time line. Two separate times when he spoke to the issue of what was in the package.

Regarding the question you posed: it's a reasonable one. And I don't have a great answer. But one possibility does occur to me: that when Frazier saw him with the package (early in the morning of 11/22) the rifle was "disassembled", whereas when the "elevator" witness saw him with it, it had been completely assembled and was "thinner" and somewhat longer; consequently, "curtain rods" would not be an adequate explanation for the second observer (or observers).


But via the scenario that you just outlined, David, the completely assembled 40.2-inch rifle would have been too long for the 38-inch brown paper bag Oswald was carrying it in [CE142], and, hence, part of the gun would likely have been sticking out of the top (or bottom) of the bag when the two TSBD witnesses (allegedly) saw Oswald carrying it in the elevator on 11/22/63. Unless the gun could have been placed into the bag at a slight angle, which might have made it possible for a 40-inch object to be completely hidden within a 38-inch paper bag. But I've never done any experiments on this before, so I'm not sure if the 2.2-inch differential in the lengths could be completely compensated for by putting the rifle into the bag at an angle.

Now, I suppose any of the above speculative scenarios are possible, I don't deny that. But allowing part of the weapon to protrude out of the bag (if, in fact, the gun could not be put into the bag in a way to conceal the entire length of the C2766 Mannlicher-Carcano carbine) would have been a risky thing for Oswald to do.

But, I guess under such a circumstance, Lee wouldn't have had too many choices either. He probably wouldn't want to construct a whole new bag from Troy West's TSBD wrapping table just for the purpose of transporting the rifle up to the sixth floor from a lower floor. So, as an alternative, he could possibly have placed his hand over the end of the bag (where the rifle was protruding), in order to temporarily hide the gun from any prying eyes that might want to gaze upon it as Lee ascended to the sixth floor. Such a "fly by the seat of your pants" plan would certainly be possible and doable, IMO.

I still have great doubts about the "fishing pole" / "fishing rods" story, however. But I will readily admit that I could be wrong when it comes to my deep skepticism on this matter. In fact, as I said earlier....

"I'd love it if that story could somehow be proven to be true...because such a "fishing pole" lie being uttered by Lee Harvey Oswald would be just that much more of a solid indication that the package he was carrying on November 22nd contained his Carcano rifle."


To recap (and this is just speculation): "curtain rods" would be a reasonable explanation for the way he described the package to BWF [Buell Wesley Frazier] (early on Friday morning) but not the way it appeared when seen on the elevator sometime later. Just a thought. Without a time machine, or modern day security cameras, perhaps we'll never know.

Re your final comment: "But I doubt any such "fishing pole" or "fishing rods" encounter ever happened in the first place" is quite incorrect; and there is no comparison between the situation to which I'm referring and the sort of nonsense promulgated by Robert Groden re Mrs. Reid. Mrs Reid--as you well know--was interviewed by the FBI and Secret Service, and then testified to the WC. From the standpoint of valid historiography, she cannot "amend" her account a half century later, and be credible. Assuming her late arriving account is the truth, I can only say this: If she indeed had "made change" for Oswald, then she would have to have stated that from the beginning. That's not something that can be added to a story a half century later. Once she doesn't say it when originally interviewed, then she cannot expect that account to be believed.

4/6/16 - 5:50 a.m. PDT
Los Angeles, California


Thank you, David S. Lifton, for your detailed reply of Wednesday morning, April 6th, 2016 AD, written from the great western city of Los Angeles, California, home of the Los Angeles Dodgers, long-time rivals of my favorite baseball team, the Cincinnati Reds, Riverfront Stadium, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA, Western Hemisphere, Earth, Milky Way.

4/6/16 - 6:59 p.m. EDT
Mooresville, Indiana

David Von Pein
April 3-6, 2016




I can't prove anything about the package, but I can GUESS. .... The package held a pair of curtain rods, because he [Lee Oswald] wanted to put up room darkening curtains instead of the flimsy curtains he had in his rooming house. I had to do the same thing when I moved into a rooming house and my room was right under the street light.


Then what happened to those "curtain rods" after the assassination, Tony? Why weren't they found ANYWHERE?

You're not going to theorize that the cops deep-sixed the rods, are you Anthony? That would be pure speculation and wishful thinking on your part, wouldn't it?

I guess you could create a brand-new theory --- i.e., Oswald had the curtain rods with him when he left the Book Depository Building at approximately 12:33 PM on November 22nd, but somebody stole them from him before LHO could reach his roominghouse on Beckley Avenue. And then Oswald just decided to keep quiet about this theft after he was arrested, because he didn't want to get the poor thief in trouble.

How 'bout that one, Tony? Great new twist, eh?


The conspirators took his rifle out of the garage while Oswald slept. One of them carried it up to the sixth floor and shot the President.


It's fun to just invent unsupportable theories out of thin air, isn't it Tony?

But, Tony, why would you choose to believe the wholly unsupportable scenario you just put on the table above instead of simply believing what the evidence (coupled with Lee Harvey Oswald's own actions and LIES) clearly indicates is the truth --- which is: Lee Oswald himself took his own rifle to work with him on 11/22/63 and used that gun to shoot President John F. Kennedy.

Why would you go with an extraordinary theory about "conspirators" sneaking into Ruth Paine's garage and stealing Oswald's rifle when a perfectly reasonable ordinary explanation is available for the choosing?


You [Anthony Marsh] implied on July 16th, 2016 (in this post), that curtain rods that YOU SAID were taken into the TSBD in "the package" by Lee Oswald were "in the National Archives".

So, Tony, link to a picture of those curtain rods please. I want to see those rods.

Here's what Marsh said previously....

ANTHONY MARSH -- "The package held a pair of curtain rods."

DAVID VON PEIN -- "Then what happened to those "curtain rods" after the assassination, Tony? Why weren't they found ANYWHERE?"

ANTHONY MARSH -- "They're in the National Archives."


I already posted the link to the National Archives. Others have too.


You think you've linked to a National Archives webpage that shows curtain rods that were owned and handled by Lee Harvey Oswald -- (quoting Tony Marsh) -- "because he [Oswald] wanted to put up room darkening curtains instead of the flimsy curtains he had in his rooming house"?

I want to see those curtain rods, Tony.


YOU can't.


When do you plan to show us those rods, Tony?


I don't have them.


Didn't think so. Which means that the quote below was just another misrepresentation of the evidence uttered by W. Anthony Marsh. ~yawn~

"They're in the National Archives." -- A. Marsh; 7/16/16


I didn't steal them from the National Archives. Don't blame me.


Oh, so you're now going to pretend that someone STOLE Oswald's curtain rods from the National Archives building, is that it?


But even THAT hunk of conjecture is still totally contradictory to what you said on 7/16/16....which was:

"They're in the National Archives." [A. Marsh]

You said on July 16 that LHO's rods are now IN the National Archives. But now, 11 days later, they've been stolen from NARA.

David Von Pein
July 14, 2016
July 20-27, 2016