(PART 26)

Conspiracy theorist James DiEugenio, in Part 6 of his conjecture-laden
review of Vincent Bugliosi's terrific book "Reclaiming History", states
that he now is leaning toward the idea that Lee Harvey Oswald carried
no large paper bag with him to work AT ALL on the morning of
November 22, 1963.

DiEugenio evidently wants to believe that Buell Wesley Frazier and his
sister, Linnie Mae Randle, were lying through their individual and
collective teeth when they each said (on multiple occasions after the
assassination) that they saw Oswald carrying a long brown bag on the
morning of JFK's murder.

DiEugenio says:

"Sylvia Meagher...and Mark Lane did not argue about who was telling the truth, Frazier or Oswald."

To anyone who possesses even a modicum of sense, it's quite obvious as
to which of those two persons (Wesley Frazier or Lee Oswald) was
telling the truth with respect to the subject of the large paper bag.
Frazier had absolutely no reason under the moon to lie about seeing
Oswald with a paper bag on November 22.

But, incredibly, DiEugenio would rather believe that the accused
assassin (a man who had just killed TWO people with the two weapons
that were provably traced to him) was telling the gospel truth when he
told the police that he never carried any large bag into the Texas
School Book Depository on 11/22/63.

And DiEugenio evidently also thinks Oswald was speaking the truth when
LHO also told the authorities the bald-faced lie about having never
uttered the words "curtain rods" to Wes Frazier on either November
21st or November 22nd.

I ask -- Who, at that point in time in November 1963, had more of a
reason to tell some lies -- Lee Harvey Oswald or Buell Wesley Frazier?

Again, incredibly, apparently DiEugenio thinks the answer to my last
question is: Buell Wesley Frazier.

DiEugenio also said this in his Bugliosi review:

"The story of this (these) paper bag(s), Wesley Frazier, his sister, and the curtain rods can be challenged every single step of the way. .... By the early evening of [November] 22nd [1963], the DPD [Dallas Police Department] had very little besides the notorious Howard Brennan. Shaky eye witness Howard Brennan couldn't be relied upon to put Oswald on the sixth floor. As Police Chief Jesse Curry later admited [sic], they had no one who put Oswald in the building with a gun in his hand. Therefore, they needed Frazier and his "Oswald carrying a package" story."

The above nonsense written by DiEugenio is just that....total
nonsense. And it's really stupid-sounding nonsense too. And that's
because the Dallas Police Department actually had TONS of physical and
circumstantial evidence against Lee Oswald by the end of the day on
November 22nd (besides just Howard Brennan and Wesley Frazier's
"Oswald carrying a package" story).

The DPD had all of the following things by the end of the day on
11/22/63 (not even counting Brennan or the paper bag):

1.) OSWALD'S rifle, which was found on the sixth floor of the Book
Depository 52 minutes after President Kennedy was murdered by rifle
fire. The rifle had a palmprint of OSWALD'S on it, lifted off of the
weapon by J.C. Day of the Dallas Police Department shortly before the
rifle was turned over to the FBI on November 22nd.

And regardless of whether conspiracy theorists want to believe J.C.
Day or not, Day's sworn Warren Commission testimony is still going to
be there--and Day said he lifted Oswald's palmprint (CE637) off of
Mannlicher-Carcano Rifle #C2766 on November 22, 1963:

"Your Number 637 is the right palm of Oswald." -- Lieutenant J.C. Day;
April 22, 1964 [4 H 262]

2.) Three bullet shells found in the Sniper's Nest of the Book
Depository, which were shells that came out of OSWALD'S rifle.

3.) Eyewitnesses who saw OSWALD either murder Officer J.D. Tippit or
saw OSWALD flee the scene of the murder with a gun in his hands.

4.) OSWALD'S Smith & Wesson revolver (taken off of OSWALD when he
was arrested), which was proven to be the gun that killed Officer Tippit.

5.) Four bullet shells [CE594] from OSWALD'S revolver that OSWALD
himself was seen ejecting from his revolver on Tenth Street just seconds
after the Tippit murder.

6.) OSWALD resists arrest in the Texas Theater and attempts to kill
more policemen inside the theater just 35 minutes after Tippit was
murdered nearby.

7.) And the DPD also has the first day's worth of provable lies told
by OSWALD regarding several crucial issues connected to the murders of
both President Kennedy and Officer Tippit.

But, according to conspiracy nuts like James DiEugenio, I guess the
above batch of evidence just wasn't nearly enough FIRST-DAY EVIDENCE
against Mr. Oswald (even though the above batch of stuff is easily
enough to convict Lee Harvey six times over, unless the jury box at
Oswald's trial is filled with nothing but conspiracy-happy idiots and

No, no, per DiEugenio, the cops needed still MORE stuff to hang their
poor "patsy", so the police decided to invent a story about the "paper
bag" (with the cops, somehow, able to get both Buell Wesley Frazier
AND Linnie Mae Randle to lie their asses off in their official affidavit
[Frazier] and FBI report [Randle].

[DECEMBER 2011 EDIT: There is also an affidavit that was written by Linnie Randle on the day of the assassination, in which Randle talks about seeing Lee Oswald "carrying a long brown package" on the morning of 11/22/63.]

And then, according to DiEugenio, Frazier and Randle continued their
deception by lying their asses off some more in their respective sessions
in front of the Warren Commission a few months later.

I wonder WHY a person like DiEugenio actually wants to believe that
innocent bystanders like 19-year-old Frazier and his sister Randle
would want to invent a story about seeing Oswald with a large bag?

Does DiEugenio REALLY think that Frazier and Randle wanted to frame
Lee Oswald for the murder of the President? (Because why ELSE would
these two witnesses want to fabricate such a story from whole cloth?
Just for the fun of doing it? Or were the cops forcing these witnesses,
at gunpoint, to tell one lie after another?)


I wonder what a person like Mr. DiEugenio wants to do with Wesley Frazier's original affidavit [and Randle's November 22nd affidavit too], which are signed documents that were filled out in Frazier's and Randle's own words on the VERY DAY OF THE ASSASSINATION ITSELF, which, of course, was seven days before the Warren Commission was even created? (So DiEugenio certainly can't drag out the common excuse of "The Warren Commission covered up everything about a conspiracy" in this particular "paper bag" instance as it relates to Frazier's and Randle's 11/22/63 signed affidavits.)

In his November 22nd affidavit, Frazier specifically talks about the
"big sack" and "the package" numerous times. Here are some excerpts:

"I glanced in the back seat, and saw a big sack."

"I asked Lee [Oswald] what was in the sack, and he said "curtain rods", and I remembered that he had told me the day before that he was going to bring some curtain rods."

"Lee got out and opened the back door and got the package out of the back seat and walked behind the car."

"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."

"I saw him go in the back door at the Loading Dock of the building that we work in, and he still had the package under his arm."


In addition, there is still more corroboration of Frazier's account of
having seen LHO with a large paper bag, via an FBI report of an
interview with Frazier that took place on the day of the assassination,
which can be seen on page 317 of Warren Commission Document #5,
right HERE.

Now, given the above-linked detailed affidavit that was written by
Buell Wesley Frazier HIMSELF within literally hours of the President's
assassination, plus the FBI interview of Frazier (also on November
22), I ask Jim DiEugenio this -- Do you still really want to believe
that Lee Oswald carried NO large brown paper bag with him into the
Texas School Book Depository on November 22nd?

Does DiEugenio think that the Dallas Sheriff's office and/or the
Dallas Police Department were FORCING Frazier to write the words I
excerpted above concerning the paper bag?

And was the FBI also forcing Frazier to tell a tall tale about a
"bulky brown paper sack" [CD 5; p.317] during the FBI's interview of

Just how many law-enforcement agencies does Mr. DiEugenio think were
involved in twisting Wes Frazier's arm (and words) ON THE DAY OF THE

A better question would be -- Just how far down "Paranoid Boulevard"
does James DiEugenio expect reasonable people to travel in order to
continue to buy into his insane delusions about Lee Harvey Oswald's
paper bag?

And as if Frazier's 11/22/63 affidavit weren't enough to know that
DiEugenio is full of shit regarding this subject, we can also turn to
Linnie Mae Randle's own words FROM THE DAY OF THE ASSASSINATION as

The FBI filed a report on Mrs. Randle's observations within
approximately 24 hours of the assassination (the official FBI report
concerning Randle was dictated on 11/23/63, but the interview with
Randle occurred on the day of JFK's murder itself, 11/22/63).

The FBI report in question can be found on page 320 of Warren
Commission Document #5, linked HERE. Here's a portion of that FBI

"[Linnie Mae] RANDLE stated that about 7:15 a.m., November 22, 1963, she looked out of a window of her residence and observed LEE HARVEY OSWALD walking up her driveway and saw him put a long brown package, approximately 3 feet by 6 inches, in the back seat area of WESLEY FRAZIER's...automobile."

"RANDLE stated while at the Dallas Police Department on the evening of November 22, 1963, officers of the Dallas Police Department had exhibited to her some brown package paper, however she had not been able to positively identify it as being identical with the above-mentioned brown package, due to the fact she had only observed the brown package from her residence window at a distance."


Please also take note of Mrs. Randle's estimate as to the dimensions
of the paper package that she saw Oswald carrying -- "approximately 3
feet by 6 inches".

So Randle told the FBI on November 22nd (the SAME DAY she had observed
Oswald with the bag) that the paper bag she saw Lee Harvey Oswald
carrying was about THIRTY-SIX INCHES long.

The bag Oswald took to work was 38 inches long, just two inches longer
than the estimate Randle provided the FBI on 11/22/63.

So, does DiEugenio think that the FBI (in conjunction with the Dallas
County Sheriff's Office, for Frazier's affidavit) was ALSO involved in
coercing or forcing Linnie Randle and Wesley Frazier (on the day of
the assassination!) to say the things they each said about the paper

If not, then Randle and Frazier must certainly have seen Lee Oswald
with a large paper package on November 22.



When it comes to the topic of the assassination of President John F.
Kennedy, Jim DiEugenio, like most other hardcore conspiracy theorists,
seems to enjoy his own imaginative tall tales much more than he enjoys
the REAL evidence associated with the case.

And apparently the following two words are totally foreign ones to
conspiracy seekers like Mr. DiEugenio:

Common sense.

Because if Jim were to possess more of those two words, he most
certainly wouldn't have written these asinine things that he did write
in Part 6 of his Bugliosi book review (and these are only representative
samples of the idiotic things that reside within Part 6 of DiEugenio's
review/tome; there are many, many other examples besides just these):

"Sylvia Meagher...and Mark Lane did not argue about who was telling the truth, [Wesley] Frazier or [Lee] Oswald."

"This story about the long paper bag had to wait for decades to be seriously challenged. But challenged it is."

"I have minimized the testimony of Linnie Mae [Randle]. I do so because in my view it is highly questionable."

"If you can believe it, there was a fourth bag."

"The story of this (these) paper bag(s), Wesley Frazier, his sister, and the curtain rods can be challenged every single step of the way."

"They [the DPD] needed Frazier and his "Oswald carrying a package" story."



I'm sure glad I'm not a JFK conspiracy theorist. Because if I were,
I'd probably be tempted to actually believe a lot of the very silly
things that come from the mouth (and the keyboard) of a person
named James DiEugenio.

And, I ask, what reasonable and reasoned-thinking person would
EVER want to do a thing like that?

David Von Pein
September 20, 2009