(PART 872)


The combination of the late sunrise and the dismal weather conditions made it unlikely that he [Buell Wesley Frazier] saw any package on the back seat of his car. It also explains why he could be so wrong in his description of HOW Oswald carried the package into the building, something that has been debunked time and time again.

Not only is Frazier's description not supported by the physical evidence, it was physically impossible.

I believe that it was too dark that morning for Frazier to have seen any package on his back seat.


So, what are you saying here, Gil? Are you saying that you want to pretend that Oswald had NO LARGE PACKAGE AT ALL with him on November 22nd? Is that what you're implying?

Because even if we were to assume that your retarded theory is correct when you said this (and probably without even having the decency to blush a little when you wrote it)....

"It [is] unlikely that he saw any package on the back seat of his car."

....There's still the fact that Frazier said he saw Oswald pick up the package out of the back seat and then carry it into the Book Depository Building:

"I saw him [Oswald] 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."
-- Buell Wesley Frazier; 11/22/63 Affidavit

Plus: There is Linnie Mae Randle. She saw Oswald carrying a large-ish package too. And she even said she saw Oswald put the package into the back seat of her brother's [Wesley's] car. [CLICK HERE]

As for the debate about whether Randle could have physically seen Oswald place the package in Frazier's car, that is a subject that came up as recently as October of 2009, when I offered up this possibility:

"I certainly think it's possible [that Linnie Mae could have seen LHO put the bag in the car], given the amount of space between the slats in the carport (as seen in this photo).

I certainly don't think Linnie Mae was lying at all. She possibly HEARD more than she SAW. I.E., She peeks out the kitchen door and HEARS the person who she just saw walk toward her brother's car (Lee Oswald). It's obvious that the person at Frazier's car at that point in time was the person Randle just saw cross the street (Oswald).

Randle then HEARS the door of Frazier's car being opened. It's also possible that she gets enough of a glimpse of Oswald through the slats of the carport to see at least a portion of Oswald as he places the bag in the car.

So, the combination of HEARING what Oswald was doing at the car and very likely SEEING a little bit of Oswald through the slats was certainly enough information, IMO, for Mrs. Linnie Mae Randle to reasonably testify in the following manner [quoting Randle]: "He opened the right back door and I just saw that he was laying the package down, so I closed the door." "

-- DVP; 10/21/2009

It's very strange to have a conspiracy theorist say something like this:

"I believe that it was too dark that morning for Frazier to have seen any package on his back seat." -- Gil J. Jesus; 02/16/2010

It's not only strange because of the obvious fact that such a statement is completely wrong, but it's also strange from the standpoint that now Gil Jesus has no choice but to toss in the trash one of the things that so many conspiracy theorists have loved to prop up as definitive "proof" to show that Lee Harvey Oswald could not possibly have carried his Mannlicher-Carcano rifle into the TSBD on the morning of November 22, 1963 -- with that so-called "proof" being Frazier's estimated length of the brown paper bag that was resting on the back seat of Wesley's car, which is a paper bag that Gil Jesus has now decided that Wesley Frazier could not possibly have seen as it laid on the back seat.

I have a feeling that Gil Jesus now has a desire to crawl into bed with James DiEugenio on this "paper bag" topic. Jim D., as you may already know, has recently voiced his belief that Lee Oswald didn't have ANY large bag with him at all on the morning of November 22nd.

Jim thinks that both Wesley Frazier and Linnie Randle were coerced and strong-armed by the evil DPD and FBI into making up their respective stories about having seen Oswald carrying a large paper bag that morning. (Even though the cops/FBI were apparently too stupid to "coerce" Frazier and Randle into saying that the size of the make-believe bag was big enough to hold Oswald's Carcano.)

Go figure the idiocy and internal illogic of this silly theory --- The authorities intimidate BOTH Wes Frazier and Linnie Randle into making up a false story about seeing Oswald with a large paper sack. But those same authorities then apparently wanted BOTH Frazier and Randle to say that the MAKE-BELIEVE BAG was TOO SMALL to contain the item that the cops need to have placed inside that make-believe bag!


But, as you may also know by now, James DiEugenio has gone completely off the deep end regarding several matters dealing with the JFK assassination (and this "Frazier/Randle/Paper Bag" topic is certainly one of them).

Also keep in mind that DiEugenio is a member of the kooky "Anybody But Oswald" fraternity too (he thinks Oswald was totally innocent of shooting both JFK and J.D. Tippit), which certainly doesn't aid his reputation as a "reasonable" researcher regarding President Kennedy's murder.

Are you trying to follow in DiEugenio's "There Was No Bag At All" footsteps, Gil?


Here's something else for Gil to consider:

Even if it was still fairly dark outside, why couldn't the overhead (dome) light in Wesley Frazier's car have illuminated the interior of the vehicle enough for Frazier to have gotten a glimpse of the paper bag that Oswald had placed in the back seat?

I'll admit, I haven't done any specific research on Frazier's 1953 [or 1954] Chevrolet four-door sedan that he owned on 11/22/63, and I'll also admit that I could be completely wrong about this "overhead light" issue, but if I were to guess, I'd say that it is certainly quite likely that that particular car was equipped with some kind of an interior light, which, of course, would have been illuminated when either one of the front doors was open (if the bulb wasn't burned out, of course). Almost all cars have such a light in them, even older models, right?

In David Wolper's 1964 documentary, "Four Days In November", Frazier re-enacted his November 22nd movements for the movie camera, as well as providing some voice-over narration for a few scenes in the film [see the video below]. Frazier said: "As we were getting in the car, I saw the package."

DVP inference being: The interior light could have been on when Frazier saw the package, making it easier to see anything that was lying on the back seat.


If Gil listens to a few more of Jim DiEugenio's frequent appearances on Black Op Radio, I'm sure we'll be seeing a thread authored by Gil pretty soon which suggests that both Marrion Baker and Roy Truly were spineless liars and cover-up agents who were merely being manipulated by the evil United States Government. (DiEugenio, you see, thinks there's something fishy and suspicious about the stories of both Baker and Truly regarding their lunchroom encounter with Oswald on 11/22/63.)

In other words -- If a conspiracy kook mangles and distorts the evidence long enough, those distortions and misrepresentations are bound to rub off on a few more conspiracy kooks.

Right, Gil?

David Von Pein
February 16, 2010