(PART 258)


I have studied the photo and offered an argument--a comparison photo matched to the bag in the evidence photos--to show that the bag removed from the [TSBD] building was much more than 8 inches wide. The burden is now on YOU or anyone else claiming that the bag IS just a bit over 8 inches wide in the photo to show us how this could be.


Here we have example #798 of a conspiracy theorist looking sideways at
a piece of verified evidence and claiming that something just doesn't
look quite right, and then demanding that a person from the LN side of
the fence explain things to meet the conspiracy theorist's stiff

And if the LNer's explanation isn't good enough for the CTer in
question (which it can never ever be, of course, since the CTer has
his mind made up to believe in some type of kooky shit with respect to
the particular piece of evidence in question), then the CTer gets to
claim a victory and spike the ball in his "It Was Faked All Along,
Just Like I Said"

But, as Vincent Bugliosi is wont to say in front of a jury (when
confronted with conjecture-based silliness of this nature) -- "It's
not quite that easy!"

Patrick Speer has decided that the following pictures show two
completely different paper bags:

Pat, like many CTers try to do (and always fail), is attempting to
micro-manage the measurements of objects by merely looking at two-
dimensional photographs. Such an exercise is 100% futile and always
has been, as pointed out by esteemed JFK researcher and "With Malice"
author Dale Myers:

"Photogrammetry describes how three-dimensional spatial
relationships can be extracted from two-dimensional photographs or
images. Without taking into account these relationships, accurate
interpretations of two-dimensional images are impossible. In short,
you cannot simply draw or overlay lines on a two-dimensional image (as
[Jack] White and the subject theorist [Bill Miller] have claimed) and
extract three-dimensional information."
-- Dale K. Myers

And Dale told Pat Speer pretty much that very same thing in May 2008
(in this article) when Pat was attempting to undermine and
debunk Myers' placement of John Connally's limousine jump seat in a
2004 TV documentary that Dale appeared in.

Pat, did you apply "photogrammetry" techniques when you attempted to
measure the width of the paper bag in the various photos you examined?
(I'm doubting you did.)

Pat, though, seems to think he can, indeed, come up with exacting
measurements for the width of the paper bag being held by L.D.
Montgomery of the DPD in one of the above photos.

But such exactitude regarding specific measurements of objects while
relying exclusively on two-dimensional photos for those measurements
is just not possible, as Dale Myers has pointed out.

The very same type of argument has been made by conspiracy theorists
in the past with regard to the rifle being held by Lee Harvey Oswald in the
various "backyard photos" that were taken of LHO on March 31, 1963.

I've heard some CTers claim that the rifle that Oswald is seen holding in the
picture below cannot possibly be the same Mannlicher-Carcano rifle that
was labelled CE139 by the Warren Commission:

Many CTers think that some of the specific dimensions of the rifle
seen in the backyard photos don't match the dimensions of CE139. Those
CTers, therefore, think they can extract perfect TO-THE-INCH and/or TO-
THE-MILLIMETER measurements from a two-dimensional photograph (like
the backyard picture shown above) when they compare the picture to
other photos of the gun that were taken from different angles (like
the one below, which has Lt. Carl Day of the DPD holding the rifle
above his head as the picture is snapped):

A 2-D photo comparison might get you pretty close to the exact
measurements, but since so much depends on the precise angles at which
a photo is taken and the distance from the camera, etc., I doubt if an
exact measurement comparison could ever be made.

At best, such measurements based on merely comparing various two-
dimensional images would just be guesswork to a large degree.



Linnie Mae Randle (at 2 H 249) is on the WC record as saying that the
width of the paper bag found in the Sniper's Nest (CE142) was about
the same width as the bag she saw Oswald carrying on the morning of

JOSEPH BALL -- "There is another package here. You remember this was
shown you. It is a discolored bag, which is Exhibit No. 142, and
remember you were asked by the Federal Bureau of Investigation agents
if this looked like the package. Do you remember?"

LINNIE MAE RANDLE -- "Yes, sir."

MR BALL -- "Now, first of all with color, you told them the bag was
not the color?"

MRS. RANDLE -- "Yes."

MR. BALL -- "But they showed you a part of the bag that had not been
discolored, didn't they?"

MRS. RANDLE -- "Yes, sir."

MR. BALL -- "Looking at this part of the bag which has not been
discolored--does that appear similar to the color of the bag you saw
Lee carrying that morning?"

MRS. RANDLE -- "Yes, it is a heavy type of wrapping paper."

MR. BALL -- "Now, with reference to the width of this bag, does that
look about the width of the bag that he [Lee Oswald] was carrying?"

MRS. RANDLE -- "I would say so; yes, sir."


There's also the following WCR passage concerning Linnie Randle's
estimates of the length and width of the paper bag she saw LHO
carrying on the morning of November 22nd:

"Mrs. Randle estimated that the package was approximately 28
inches long and about 8 inches wide." -- WARREN REPORT; PAGE 133*

* Source Note #150 is attached to the above passage from the WCR,
with Note 150 leading to "2 H 249-250 (Randle [testimony])".



Vincent Bugliosi weighs in on the "paper bag" topic in various places
within his 2007 magnum opus, "Reclaiming History". Here's a relevant
excerpt, culled from the CD-ROM's endnotes:

"Both [Buell Wesley] Frazier and his sister [Linnie Mae Randle],
although saying the package found in the sniper’s nest was “similar”
in color to the one they saw Oswald carrying on the morning of the
assassination (2 H 240, WCT Buell Wesley Frazier; 2 H 249, WCT Linnie
Mae Randle), described the package they had seen Oswald carrying as
being shorter than what would have been needed for the disassembled
rifle--a fact that conspiracy critic Sylvia Meagher called “the
central weakness of the Commission’s thesis” that Oswald carried the
murder weapon into the Depository the day of the assassination.

"Linnie Mae Randle, who first saw Oswald with the package from
her kitchen window and then from her kitchen door on the morning of
the assassination, described the package as a “heavy brown bag,
heavier than a grocery bag” that was “more bulky” toward the bottom
(where the butt of the rifle would be) than it was on the top. She
also thought the bag might have been about 27 to 28 inches long--the
bag found in the Depository was actually 38 inches in length, while
the 40-1/5-inch rifle, disassembled, measured 34-4/5 inches.

"When shown the bag found beneath the sixth-floor window, Randle
recalled that the bag she saw Oswald with was around the same width.
(2 H 248–250, WCT Linnie Mae Randle; CE 2008, 24 H 407–408; 34-4/5
inches: 3 H 395, WCT Robert A. Frazier; Meagher, Accessories after the
Fact, p.54–57)

"Wesley Frazier, who first saw the package lying on the backseat
of his car and later in Oswald’s hand as he carried it into the
Depository, recalled the package as being about 2 feet long, “give and
take a few inches” (2 H 226). He showed agents of the FBI how much
space on the backseat of his car the package occupied, and they
measured the length at 27 inches. He also thought Oswald’s package
might have been an inch or two narrower than the dimensions of the
actual bag found on the sixth floor. (CE 2009, 24 H 408–410)

"However, he added that the bag “could have been the sack or
package” he saw in Oswald’s possession but he did not feel he was “in
a position to definitely state” it was. The Warren Commission
concluded that Frazier and Randle probably erred in their
recollections of the length of the bag (WR, p.134), and it was
understandable the two had done so.

"Neither Frazier nor his sister, the only two people who saw
Oswald with the package, suspected that it was of any significance.
They therefore had no reason to note its dimensions for later recall.
Frazier caught only a glimpse of the package on the backseat as he got
behind the wheel of his car.

"After arriving at the Depository, Oswald got out first and
remained ahead of Frazier by from twelve to ultimately fifty feet (by
the time Oswald reached the Book Depository Building) as they walked
toward the building (the first time, he said, that Oswald had ever
walked in front of him into the building)."
-- Vincent Bugliosi; Page 408 of "Reclaiming History" (Endnotes)(c.2007)

David Von Pein
June 23, 2008