WAS LEE HARVEY OSWALD'S RIFLE
STOLEN BY CONSPIRATORS?
STOLEN BY CONSPIRATORS?
A CONSPIRACY THEORIST SAID:
If someone steals my rifle and then kills someone, my fingerprints are
on it, but does that prove that *I* was the killer?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
If a rifle YOU own is used in a crime, the odds are certainly in favor
of YOU, the owner of said weapon, being the killer. You're certainly
the #1 prime suspect, that's for sure. Why wouldn't you be?
Mere ownership of a rifle doesn't prove you killed a person with said
weapon, true. But nobody can possibly deny that the sheer ODDS are
in favor of you (the weapon's rightful owner) being the actual killer.
And you'll need to do a lot more work to establish the FACT that your
rifle was stolen. An accused killer saying to the cops (or to a jury)
that he thinks his rifle was stolen by some unknown person or persons
isn't gonna cut it. And I think the "Stolen Rifle" defense is even a
tougher road to hoe in the JFK murder case than most conspiracy
theorists seem to want to admit.
The known storage location of Lee Harvey Oswald's one and only rifle in
the weeks leading up to President Kennedy's assassination on 11/22/63
was Ruth Paine's garage in Irving, Texas. There were no signs of any
"theft" or "break in" at the Paine house at any time in the weeks prior
to November 22.
Now, I suppose it's true that some clever thief could have slipped in
and out of Mrs. Paine's garage, totally undetected, and made off with
the rifle. But there is absolutely no hard evidence at all to indicate
that such a theft took place at the Paine house in late 1963.
The totality of circumstantial "rifle" evidence in the JFK case
certainly does not indicate a "theft" carried out by conspirators
wishing to frame Oswald -- but, instead, this evidence tells a
reasonable person that Lee Oswald, himself, took that rifle from a
rolled-up blanket in the Paine garage either on the night of Nov. 21 or
the early morning of Nov. 22.
Oswald's OWN LIES that he told later about the "package" and his
rifle-ownership status are telling a reasonable person that Oswald
desired to distance himself from any "long, bulky package" and ANY
rifle that he owned whenever he was questioned about those items
by the authorities.
And why would Oswald NEED to distance himself from EITHER of those
items if he merely was hauling innocent "curtain rods" to work on the
morning of Nov. 22nd (as he twice told fellow Book Depository worker
The answer is, of course, quite an obvious one.
Heck, Oswald himself didn't even bother to use the "Somebody Stole
My Rifle" alibi....which actually would have been a far better alibi for
him to try to use instead of denying ownership of a weapon that he has
got to KNOW will be traced to him very quickly. For Pete's sake, he
knows he had the gun shipped to a P.O. Box where he received mail.
But, instead, Oswald denied having owned ANY rifle, ever...and he
denied telling Frazier anything about curtain rods...and claimed the
only "package" he carried to work on November 22 was his "lunch".
On top of these lies, we know that Oswald killed policeman J.D. Tippit
without a sliver of a doubt, which is devastating evidence that tells a
reasonable person that LHO also killed JFK less than one hour earlier--
due to the fact that JFK just happened to be killed while driving by
the place where Tippit's killer worked, and which was also a building
that contained scads of "Oswald Was Here At 12:30 Shooting At The
President" type of evidence (not even counting the eyewitnesses who
placed an Oswald-like shooter on the sixth floor of the TSBD).
1.) Oswald's gun was found on the 6th Floor.
2.) Bullet shells from LHO's gun were found in the Sniper's Nest.
3.) Oswald's fingerprints and palmprints were found on multiple boxes
DEEP WITHIN the Sniper's Nest.
4.) An empty paper bag with Oswald's prints on it was found near the
sniper's window....including a right palmprint of LHO's on the closed
end of the bag which perfectly aligns with the testimony given by Wes
Frazier about how Oswald carried a bag that day. If that bag was a
"plant" and was "manufactured" after the fact by the police, then those
cops deserve an award for such outstanding work, given that perfect job
of "planting" that RIGHT PALMPRINT OF LEE OSWALD'S ON THE CLOSED
END OF THE BAG.
Plus -- Oswald leaves the Book Depository just minutes after all the
commotion has just begun around his workplace. And LHO lies about why
he left. He and Bill Shelley never talked after the shooting. This was
just one of dozens of post-12:30 lies that LHO told the police. Another
being his "I had lunch with Junior" alibi attempt.
Plus -- There is Oswald's not being the least bit surprised or startled
or scared when confronted in the second-floor lunchroom at gunpoint
by policeman Marrion Baker (per Baker's and Roy Truly's testimony
regarding Oswald's behavior).
And there's a logical "He's Guilty" reason for this non-reaction of
Oswald's too (IMO) -- i.e., he no doubt EXPECTED the building to be
filled with cops very shortly after he fired three highly-audible rifle
shots from an open window that he knew would be heard by a lot of
people in Dealey Plaza.
How could Oswald NOT have expected the police to race into that very
building within minutes of the shooting? Of course he expected that to
happen. Hence, his rush to get off of the "Floor Of Death" (Floor #6)
and at least down to a lower floor where the shooting did not occur.
Unfortunately for him, he had to peel off at the second floor when he
no doubt heard the heavy bootsteps of Baker (plus Truly too) coming
up the stairs.
But fortunately for Oswald, he worked there, and was cleared by Truly
as just another employee of the TSBD. If Lee had not been employed
there, J.D. Tippit would probably still be alive, because Oswald would
have likely been detained by Officer Baker due to his "unknown" status
in the eyes of Superintendent Roy Truly.
After the Baker encounter, Oswald can no doubt breathe a tad
easier....because he's just passed a major hurdle in slipping through
any early post-shooting dragnet. So, he pauses at the Coke machine for
just a moment or two and purchases a soft drink.*
* Whether it was a "Coca-Cola" (in the trademark "hourglass"-shaped
bottle) or Oswald's favorite soft drink, Dr. Pepper, is something that
I do not believe has ever been officially established.
[EDIT -- Since writing this article in late 2006, more information has
surfaced about the soft-drink machines located in the Texas School
Book Depository (via Vincent Bugliosi's 2007 book, "Reclaiming History").
I think it now can be established that Oswald had a "Coke" in his hands
(and not a Dr. Pepper) while he was on the second floor of the TSBD
on 11/22/63. More details HERE.]
But, regardless of flavor, LHO buys a soft drink and walks through the
Depository's second-floor offices, where Mrs. Robert A. Reid sees
Oswald and even speaks to him, telling him "The President has been
shot, but maybe they didn't hit him."
Oswald then exhibits another perfectly reasonable reaction from his own
point-of-view, seeing as how he already KNOWS the information being
told to him by Mrs. Reid -- that reaction being (like with Officer
Baker) another "non-reaction" for the most part, as he brushes by Reid
without saying anything that Reid could understand (she said he
"mumbled something to me"), and without displaying the slightest bit of
shock, surprise, or concern. According to Mrs. Reid, Oswald was "very
** A grain of salt needs to be taken here concerning Reid's testimony.
This salt is needed because we know that Reid herself was somewhat
upset about the President being shot and she would have had no particular
reason at all to pay very much attention to Lee Oswald as he passed by
her, a trip which took no more than a few fleeting seconds, quite obviously.
Mrs. Reid said to the Warren Commission that a major reason why she
recalls seeing LHO that day is due to the fact that it was somewhat
unusual to see any of the "warehouse boys" in the office area except
when they needed change for the soda machine. But since Reid could see
that Oswald already had a "full" bottle of a soft drink, she knew he
probably wasn't in the office to get change.
Oswald then departs the TSBD at approx. 12:33 PM and goes home in a
very unusual way (for him)....via bus AND taxicab. Being the miser that
he was, the 95-cent cab ride ($1.00 including the tip for driver
William Whaley) was definitely out of character for the frugal Mr.
So, a logical question needs to be asked here as well -- Why doesn't
Oswald just take the bus home (like usual), instead of asking for a bus
transfer from driver Cecil McWatters and then walking to the Greyhound
taxi stand to get into a cab? Why is Oswald in such a hurry to get to
his roominghouse at 1026 N. Beckley Avenue on this particular November
day....only minutes after a U.S. President has been shot from right in
front of the building that Oswald just vacated?
Another question that needs to be asked is -- Why does Oswald leave
work at midday in the first place if he was totally innocent of any
wrong-doing that day?
That last question is a valid one, since we KNOW that Oswald lied when
he gave his own explanation for leaving work when he did on Nov. 22.
That lie being: He said that he assumed there would be no more work
done that day due to the fact the President had been shot.
Via at least one official account of Oswald's story, LHO said he had
confirmed with his boss, Bill Shelley, that he (LHO) could leave the
building and knock off for the rest of the day. That was positively
a lie, and here's why (via the Warren Commission witness transcripts):
MR. BALL -- "Did you, at any time after the President was shot, tell
Oswald to go home?"
MR. SHELLEY -- "No, sir."
So, when all of the above things are assembled together, a pretty clear
picture begins to form. There's so much evidence to show that Lee
Oswald is a double-murderer, it's staggering. There is so much, in
fact, that the idea that ALL of this stuff (including impossible-to-control
circumstantial evidence) could possibly have been manipulated so
perfectly and so swiftly (by the DPD, the FBI, or whoever) is a foolhardy
There's just too much stuff here....stuff that couldn't have been
perfectly "controlled" by anyone attempting to frame Oswald for two
murders. And the biggest reason to know that this is true is by taking
a look at Oswald's own incriminating, guilty-like actions after 12:30
on November 22. Does an innocent "patsy" act like Oswald acted in the
hours following JFK's murder (a murder that LHO said he had nothing to
Or, to quote an excellent passage uttered by Larry Sturdivan in his
book "The JFK Myths":
"While one of the pieces of physical evidence could conceivably have
been faked by an expert, there is no possibility that an expert, or
team of super-experts, could have fabricated the perfectly coordinated
whole....with superhuman abilities to fake physical evidence that is
in complete agreement with all the other faked evidence." -- Page 246
of "The JFK Myths"
Vincent Bugliosi also provides a good capsule account of assassination
events, via the following remarks, spoken in 1986:
"So we KNOW, not just beyond a reasonable doubt, we know beyond
ALL doubt that OSWALD'S RIFLE WAS THE MURDER WEAPON!!
"And it's obvious that Oswald carried that rifle into the building that
day in that large brown paper bag. It couldn't be more obvious. As far
as Mr. Frazier's testimony about Oswald carrying the bag under his
armpit...he conceded he never paid close attention to just how Oswald
was carrying that bag. He didn't have any reason to.
"At this point if we had nothing else...nothing else...how much do you
need?...if we had NOTHING else...this would be enough to prove Oswald's
guilt beyond all REASONABLE doubt." -- Vince Bugliosi
Given the facts previously discussed (and several more not touched
upon), I'd say, yes, it's a pretty safe bet that the owner of that
Mannlicher-Carcano rifle found on the 6th Floor, a Mr. Lee Harvey
Oswald (alias "A.J. Hidell"; alias "D.F. Drittal"), was indeed the
person who actually used it to shoot and kill John F. Kennedy on
November 22, 1963.
Regarding Wesley Frazier's observations specifically, there are these
often-overlooked words spoken by Frazier himself during the 1986
television Docu-Trial, "On Trial: Lee Harvey Oswald":
VINCENT BUGLIOSI -- "Did you recall how he [Oswald] was carrying
BUELL WESLEY FRAZIER -- "Yes sir. He was carrying it parallel to
BUGLIOSI -- "Okay, so he carried the bag right next to his body....on
the right side?"
FRAZIER -- "Yes sir. On the right side."
BUGLIOSI -- "Was it cupped in his hand and under his armpit? I think
you've said that in the past."
FRAZIER -- "Yes sir."
BUGLIOSI -- "Mr. Frazier, is it true that you paid hardly any attention
to this bag?"
FRAZIER -- "That is true."
BUGLIOSI -- "So the bag could have been protruding out in front of
his body, and you wouldn't have been able to see it, is that correct?"
FRAZIER -- "That is true."
David Von Pein
LINK TO ORIGINAL POST (DECEMBER 14, 2006)
Posted By: David Von Pein