(PART 103)


The FBI and the Rifle: the final story:


Note I did not head this "Oswald and the Rifle". Because after this, I don't think Oswald had anything to do with the rifle transaction.

This is the most complete and detailed look at this whole imbroglio you will likely find anywhere.

After all is said and done, the whole transaction as listed in the WC is specious.

I will post the time line on the creation of the money order, which is fascinating.

Here is the time line on that phony money order:



Here's a real doozy of a conspiracy myth/fantasy [article linked below]:

And also see the video (audio) below....

1964 Rifle Debate (Mark Lane vs. Joe Ball):

The complete 2.5-hour debate can be heard HERE.


LOL, what does a 1964 debate between Lane and Ball have to do with all this new evidence?

Oh, you don't want to deal with new evidence which shows the rifle was never ordered or picked up. Just like Vince [Bugliosi] did not.


Complete garbage. There is no "new" evidence that proves your goofy "No Rifle Was Ordered" theory, Jimmy. Only the CT INTERPRETATION of the Klein's evidence. And it's an interpretation that's about as believable as the "No Airplanes Hit The World Trade Center" theory that many moonbats seem to endorse. It's THAT ridiculous. You should be thoroughly embarrassed at having written the following words -- "I don't think Oswald had anything to do with the rifle transaction." [J. DiEugenio; 8/5/15]

But evidently no theory is too fringe-like for Mr. DiEugenio. He's proven that fact over and over again ----> 22 Stupid Things James DiEugenio Believes

Joe Ball's 1964 retort to Mark Lane concerning Oswald's rifle purchase is just as true today as it was then. It's a great quote, and completely accurate:

"I've never heard such a major distortion of what is actually a conclusive fact." -- Joseph A. Ball; 12/4/64


The curtain rods story did not originate with Oswald.

That is pure hearsay through Frazier.


Great tactic, Jim. Make Buell Wesley Frazier the villain, instead of accepting the truth about Oswald's curtain rod lie.

That's exactly the type of argument that only a truly desperate conspiracy theorist would even consider making. A conspiracy theorist like, say, James DiEugenio, who admitted on July 26, 2015, that he considers himself to be "part of the defense team".


Oswald did not order or pick up that rifle.


More pure fantasy on DiEugenio's behalf. Or--to be more accurate--pure wishful thinking.

No reasonable person thinks Oswald never ordered the rifle. And, once again, the preposterous "Oswald Never Ordered The Rifle" myth is precisely the kind of claptrap that you'd expect to come from a person who said --- "It's not my job to say what really happened. I am part of the defense team."

Who's leading with their chin now, Jimmy?


Fantasy? Doesn't Von Pein know that Oswald himself denied anything about curtain rods?


I love it! Jimmy is relying on the statements made by the accused assassin himself when it comes to the critically important topic of the alleged curtain rods.

Yeah, Jim, the assassin himself would certainly have no reason to lie about the contents of that brown paper bag, would he?


Ask Davey how many people saw Oswald carry a long, bulky package inside the TSBD?


Buell Frazier saw it. He was the only one. But, so what?

My question would be: Why isn't Buell Frazier's testimony on this point good enough for many of the conspiracy theorists? But since Jim D. has decided to paint Frazier as a big fat liar, without a stitch of proof to back up such a vile allegation, it means Jim now thinks it's okay to totally dismiss Frazier's unwavering testimony about seeing Oswald walk into the back door of the Depository carrying a long brown paper bag, which is testimony that Frazier has maintained since Day 1 on November 22, 1963, via his first-day affidavit.

And Buell never backtracked on the "curtain rods" part of his testimony and statements either, as we can also tell by looking at that same 11/22/63 affidavit, in which he mentions the "curtain rods" three separate times. (Buell was sure fast at making up a bunch of lies, wasn't he Jim?)

Earlier this year, I posted the following comments about this subject:

"Jack Dougherty said he only saw Oswald enter the back door "out of the corner of my eye" [6 H 377].

Therefore, why would Dougherty have been expected to notice anything in Oswald's hands? He could have easily missed seeing the package because he wasn't really LOOKING at Oswald at all.

And yet, to hear conspiracy theorists tell it, Dougherty is a rock-solid witness whose testimony positively PROVES Oswald never had any package with him on 11/22/63.

Once again, in my opinion, CTers fail to properly evaluate the sum total of JFK evidence. (Do they ever?)


Given the circumstances, why would you expect anybody else [other than Frazier and Randle] to necessarily have seen Oswald with the package?

It's early in the morning on Nov. 22. Lee walks toward the Frazier house. Linnie Mae happens to be looking out the window and sees LHO with the package. Then the only other person that I would have completely EXPECTED to see the package---Buell Wesley Frazier---sees the paper bag on the back seat (and sees LHO carry it into the TSBD Building).

And...it's quite possible that Oswald might have stashed the bag/rifle in the Loading Dock area BEFORE he ever entered the inner door that led to the TSBD's first floor (where Jack Dougherty was). But we also know that Dougherty said he only saw LHO that morning out of the "corner" of his eye. So why would you expect him to have necessarily seen any package even if Lee had it with him at that time?

So, IMO, the argument about "Only Two People Saw Him With The Package" is a very weak argument given the time of day and the conditions of Oswald putting the package in the back seat of Frazier's car (where nobody BUT Frazier and Oswald himself could possibly see it on the way to work). Therefore, I wouldn't necessarily expect anyone else to see that brown bag. And, quite obviously (given the overall evidence and testimony), I'm right---nobody else did see it."

-- DVP; March/April 2015

Now let's ask Jim how many people saw somebody with a gun behind the fence on the Grassy Knoll?

The answer to that question, as Jim knows full well, is ZERO. And yet Jim still thinks there was a gunman on that Knoll.

Go figure.


Ask him why Ruth Paine never saw any rods.


Huh? You're kidding, right?

You think Ruth should have seen the curtain rods that Lee Oswald just made up out of thin air?!

Earth to Jimmy D. --- Lee Harvey Oswald's curtain rods never existed. Therefore, nobody (including Ruth Paine) could have seen Oswald's make-believe rods.



Ask him why neither Ruth nor Marina saw any packing material left at the Paine household?


I only wish the police had searched through all of Ruth Paine's trash cans right after the assassination. If they had, I think they just might have found some scraps of TSBD paper and tape that might have been discarded by Oswald after he constructed his homemade 38-inch brown paper bag. But, as far as I am aware, no such "trash can search" occurred at Ruth's house. (Did it, Jim?) So, that could be the answer to your question right there.


Ask Davey about Troy West and his testimony on this point.


I tackled the Troy West "problem" in 2007 with these remarks:

"If I had a gun to my head and was being forced to explain just exactly WHEN Oswald created his makeshift rifle-carrying bag, I'd say this:

Oswald, IMO, most likely took some wrapping paper and tape from the Texas School Book Depository's first-floor shipping/mailing area on Thursday, November 21st (which is the same day he asked Wesley Frazier for the unusual weeknight ride to Ruth Paine's home in Irving).

Yes, it's true that TSBD "mail wrapper" Troy West testified that he had never seen Oswald hanging around the wrapping-paper area on the first floor, but I think it's a fair and reasonable assumption to say that Oswald, in his quest to gain access to the paper and tape, was probably wise enough to wait until Mr. West had left his work station for a few minutes.

Perhaps Oswald waited until West went to use the bathroom, which everybody has to do a few times every single day of their lives. And while West was temporarily away from his mailing station, Oswald swiped some wrapping paper and some tape.

And, undoubtedly, LHO folded up the wrapping paper so he could conceal the paper more easily during his ride to Irving with Frazier on Thursday evening.

Oswald probably hid the folded paper and tape under his blue jacket that he certainly wore to work at least one time shortly before November 22nd (LHO's blue jacket was found in the first-floor "Domino Room" in early December 1963).

It's also worth mentioning that the bag found on the sixth floor of the TSBD after the assassination had symmetrical, evenly-spaced folds in it....just as if someone had folded it up to make its size much smaller before using it for stashing a 30-plus-inch object (like, say, a dismantled Mannlicher-Carcano rifle)....

I'll also add this concerning Troy West and his Warren Commission testimony:

West didn't say that a Depository employee positively COULDN'T have taken some paper and tape from the workbench/mailing area. In fact, with respect to the tape, Mr. West specifically told the Warren Commission that employees "could come get it if they wanted to use it" [6 H 361]."
-- DVP; Oct. 2007


Ask Davey how many people saw Oswald carry home a roll of long brown paper from the TSBD.


I'll repeat something I said above, which seems to fit in nicely here:

"Undoubtedly, LHO folded up the wrapping paper so he could conceal the paper more easily during his ride to Irving with Frazier on Thursday evening. Oswald probably hid the folded paper and tape under his blue jacket that he certainly wore to work at least one time shortly before November 22nd (LHO's blue jacket was found in the first-floor Domino Room in early December 1963)."


Ask Davey about Cadigan's testimony about the lack of any oil or grease on the sack. Yet the rifle had been soaked in Cosmoline.


"Soaked"? (Hilarious.)

Anyway, common sense should tell us that the OUTSIDE portions of a rifle (any rifle) probably won't be dripping (or "soaked") with oil or grease at any point in time. It's the INTERIOR portions of a rifle that get oiled. So why should we expect to see any oil or grease on the outer parts of the weapon? And if no grease or oil gets on the outer portions of the gun, then why would anybody expect to see any greasy substances on a paper bag that that gun was transported in?


Ask Davey to show you the picture of the sack lying in situ at the TSBD.


In hindsight, that was, indeed, a mistake made by the DPD photographers (J.C. Day and Robert Studebaker). The bag should have been photographed before it was picked up by the police. But....

"Even though no picture of the bag was taken by the DPD that shows the bag in the Sniper's Nest, there were multiple police officers who testified that they DID see a paper bag lying on the floor in the southeast corner window on the sixth floor before the bag was picked up. Four of those officers are:

J.C. Day [4 H 267]
L.D. Montgomery [7 H 97]
Robert Studebaker [7 H 143-144]
Marvin Johnson [7 H 103]

It's fairly obvious, of course, why conspiracy clowns like DiEugenio feel the need to distance themselves from the reality concerning that brown paper bag. Because if those conspiracists were to actually face the stubborn truth about the bag (with that truth being: it was Lee Harvey Oswald's homemade bag and Oswald carried his rifle, inside that bag, into the Book Depository Building), then those conspiracists would be forced to admit that their precious "patsy" had probably taken that gun to work in order to shoot somebody with it on the day President Kennedy came to town.

What other reasonable and logical conclusion could anyone come to after they've admitted to themselves the obvious truth -- that Lee Oswald did, in fact, walk into the Texas School Book Depository on November 22, 1963, with a rifle wrapped in brown paper?"
-- DVP; October 3, 2012


But most of all, ask him about Hoover's two differing memos on the paper used to construct the gun sack.


I've covered "Hoover's two differing memos" in great detail in
this October 21, 2014, Internet discussion.

David Von Pein
August 5, 2015
August 5-6, 2015