Drew Phipps Wrote:And yet, after all that, the stalwart defense of his buddy, defying the government authorities, testifying under oath 2 times, claiming he knows Oswald's being framed, and after 50 years of opportunities to come clean, Frazier still doesn't say, "Oswald was right there in the doorway with me." I wonder why that is.

Albert Doyle Wrote:

Alan Ford Wrote:Sidebar A: Mr. Doyle, should you venture in and the spirit moves you to post, by all means feel free to do so; however, out of respect for this Forum, and the sentiments expressed by Mr. DiEugenio in the now closed thread "Heads Up", and subsequently locked by Magda Hassan, let's try to refrain from straying off topic here, setting our focus more upon what Mr. Frazier shares than adding any conjecture, speculation, etc. to his remarks as it may or may not apply to Prayer Man. In fairness, I'll hold myself to the same standard.

I'm not sure I would dare venture another round of your serious approach towards the evidence and 'sentiments' again after your last showing.

You should warn Drew too because of the firm trigonometry 'conjecture and speculation' he added that Jim saved us from addressing due to the mathematical "politicizing" Jim was protesting.

Quote:In fairness, I'll hold myself to the same standard.

You don't have to feel guilty over your trolling Alan. It succeeded at what it intended.

LR Trotter Wrote:

Drew Phipps Wrote:And yet, after all that, the stalwart defense of his buddy, defying the government authorities, testifying under oath 2 times, claiming he knows Oswald's being framed, and after 50 years of opportunities to come clean, Frazier still doesn't say, "Oswald was right there in the doorway with me." I wonder why that is.

Reading this post Mr Phipps, it is definitely not off topic! It is in reference to Mr Frazier's testimony! ​ JMO. FWIW.

Jim DiEugenio Wrote:Brian, if you think that for five seconds I was only referring to Ford and David, you are dead wrong.

It was you who dragged that whole "PM is a woman" over here and took Duncan's bait: hook, line and sinker.

When you got everyone pissed off at you to the point you became so obnoxious it was intolerable, you then went over into the Belly of the Beast, Duncan's forum, and started trashing me.

Then you come over here, and start doing the same thing over again--and you call Alan a troll? In all this time, you have gotten one person to even half buy into your self-proclaimed Newtonian science proclamations, which according to you, should be inscribed with the sacredness of E=mc 2. Maybe they buy that at Duncan's nest, but not here.

And BTW, the other stuff of metaphysical certitude, like Fratini, or whatever his name is, has been attacked vociferously at ROKC. But see that is not serious for you, right? Everyone at ROKC is sub human. But not Fratini or Duncan right?

So stop calling people trolls--and ignoring the fact that this debate has been politicized, and you were a big part of it.

LET US DROP IT RIGHT NOW BRIAN. Now please go over to Duncan's and tell them how I stopped you from proving with utter mathematical certainty your latest ideas about the pixel picture.

Which I am convinced now we will never know the truth about until we get the original. Which they are trying to do at ROKC.

Can we now get back to Wesley Frazier? Who I think is a very complex and compromised witness.

Jim DiEugenio Wrote:Wesley Frazier is curious because of more than one thing.

First, he insists that Oswald brought the long paper bag into the TSBD that day. But, as Sylvia Meagher said, no one else at the TSBD saw it. No one. And if you find the claim about the Dallas Police failing to photograph the gun sack in situ dubious, then this becomes a real problem for Frazier.

Second, is the story about following Oswald into the building that day as Oswald skipped a bit ahead of him. Yet, accordion to Ed Shields, Frazier stayed behind and gunned his engine while Oswald had been dropped off already.

Third, how on earth could Linnie Mae Randle have seen the gun sack from the position she said she was in at the house that day? That photo is in the WC. When this fell apart, the story was that she saw him through the wood slats in the garage approach the car. Two problems: she did not say that in her WC deposition. Second, it is hard to believe she saw through those slats to see what was in Oswald's hands on the far side of the car.

Fourth, as I said previously, Frazier's interview with Moriarty about locking his care very night--except that night-- is weird.

(I won't comment on the whole PM imbroglio. Like I said, that will not be decided until we see the original or the first generation.)

I have always thought that Frazier is one of the key witnesses who should be called if there is a reopening of the case.

I could go on and on, and I did in my two most recent books.

Michael Cross Wrote:

LR Trotter Wrote:

Drew Phipps Wrote:And yet, after all that, the stalwart defense of his buddy, defying the government authorities, testifying under oath 2 times, claiming he knows Oswald's being framed, and after 50 years of opportunities to come clean, Frazier still doesn't say, "Oswald was right there in the doorway with me." I wonder why that is.

Reading this post Mr Phipps, it is definitely not off topic! It is in reference to Mr Frazier's testimony! ​ JMO. FWIW.

Perhaps because he wasn't. Perhaps because Frazier feared for his life if he said he was. There were a couple of untimely deaths just as people were about to testify before the HSCA (pulling that from memory - correct me if I have the wrong investigation). Perhaps whoever PM was wasn't there long enough for Frazier to see. All possible IMO.