This year’s Lancer conference promises to be an outstanding event. The speaker line up has really come together and we have a great mix of well known names and individuals such as Gary Murr and Ian Griggs who have been doing very deep historical research but who are just now able to begin sharing their most recent work. You can find most of the speakers listed on the conference site at:

In addition, we will have presentations from Buell Frazier who has only recently begin to talk about certain of his experiences including the heavy handed effort by Will Fritz the night of the assassination – an effort to force him to sign a confession of involvement in the attack.  Michael Mercades, Rose Cheremie’s son will also be appearing – for those who have followed her story, he was the toddler in Dallas at the time of her experiences on her trip back from Miami to Houston.

We expect to have a number of the Parkland Doctors at the conference, in support of the upcoming movie – The Parkland Doctors.  We are also very pleased to have Robert Tannenbaum at the conference on Saturday afternoon, in support of that project.  Peter Dale Scott and other long time researchers will also be coming by the conference Saturday afternoon for an authors round table and “meet and greet”.

….as much as I hate it, we have just been advised that Tannenbaum now has someplace else he has to be at that time and it looks like he will not make it after all…on the other hand, we are working on a special session with some late breaking research related to the CIA and its control of documents….he would probably have enjoyed what we will be discussing…

As for myself, I will be speaking – evaluating LBJ’s actions, events on Air Force One and the general national security response. The question of whether those activities are so unique as to be suspicious or if they represent the “norm” when compared to national crises such as the shooting of President Reagan and the attacks of 9/11 is a large part of Surprise Attack and I think the book answers that question in considerable detail so I will be speaking to that Saturday evening of the conference.

If you have the opportunity please join us and if you have questions, as always, email me at


About Larry Hancock

Larry Hancock is a leading historian-researcher in the JFK assassination. Co-author with Connie Kritzberg of November Patriots and author of the 2003 research analysis publication titled also Someone Would Have Talked. In addition, Hancock has published several document collections addressing the 112th Army Intelligence Group, John Martino, and Richard Case Nagell. In 2000, Hancock received the prestigious Mary Ferrell New Frontier Award for the contribution of new evidence in the Kennedy assassination case. In 2001, he was also awarded the Mary Ferrell Legacy Award for his contributions of documents released under the JFK Act.

22 responses »

  1. Mark Groubert says:

    Larry: As we now know, Mr. Frazier was in with or working for the plotters. Turning off the electricity in the basement during his “lunch” in the TSBD or being flipped with the aggressive lie detector test by DPD and being threatened with the electric chair in his hometown. He was as you know the only other man officially charged with the murder of the President. Good guy to flip. Ask him if he ever got his British Enfield rifle (same as the one removed from the roof of the TSBD) back from DPD. Ask him why his mother contradicted him telling FBI that Oswald carried nothing to the car that morning. Also ask him why the TSBD foreman said the same thing upon their arrival to TSBD that morning. It seems that each year more and more of these operatives – who seem to live the longest by the way – end up in a JFK conference. See JVB.

    • Mark, I certainly don’t know for a fact Frazier was working for the plotters. I’ve looked into the electricity thing in some detail, even tracing certain old circuits to the elevators. I do know that the comments about the phone system have nothing to with the electrical system but rather the way the PABX worked. The elevator stories are still unclear to me but a far as I know nobody ever actually said that building lights went out. I do know that Frazier and his sister were royal pain in the rear for the official story because of their insistence about the bag. I also know that the polygraph had be discarded because of Frazier’s adamant statement…proved by polygraph…that the bag he had seen with Oswald that morning was not the bag officially taken into evidence because they brought that bag and showed it to him that night. If that had been entered into the official record or into a trial it would have blown away a major piece of the case against Oswald. I do know that Frazier was brought in, threatened with charges and forcibly asked to sign a confession. I have never seen anything showing that legal charges were actually placed on his record…or pursued. I do think that there are questions that we need to continue asking him and I think he may well know things he has not stated to this point. But to factually state that he was an accessory is a stretch in my opinion and to liken him to JVB is way over the edge. Instead, I think we need to pursue every opportunity to talk with him and to continue to evaluate what he is willing to say to the best of our ability. That may not take us any further but not talking to him certainly won’t. And I do know several folks who have lot of questions for him; lots were asked last year and will be again this year.

      • Mark Groubert says:

        Larry: Flipping a witness or a suspect is and was not unusual. When threatened with the electric chair I’m sure I would have said anything they wanted. The point is that his statements framed an innocent man. So to treat him as simply another speaker at a wonderful convention of ideas is an insult to those who worked so hard for so many years. If that be the case, I can hook you up with Michael Paine and Ruth Paine. I’m sure they would love to speak at the convention as well. Michael is on the library board in upstate California. if someone from the convention wants to reach out to him I’m sure he too has interesting tales to tell as does his ex-wife. I think at a minimum Frazier was flipped. His mother was telling the truth as was the foreman at the TSBD, both of whom claimed Oswald carried nothing. Keep in mind, only two people say otherwise. Buell and his sister. In there lies the frame. IMHO. Keep up your good work, my friend.

      • Mark, still can’t follow you. He has consistently said that Oswald’s package was not the right size to carry on a rifle and that he didn’t think he did carry in a rifle. His statements were a real obstacle for the WC, you can see that in the way they had to deal with his testimony. And as far as I know he has never under oath or otherwise stated he felt Oswald was the shooter. As to flipping, he told the truth about the bag under polygraph – that the bag he saw that morning was not the bag in evidence – he never flipped on that and they literally had to obfuscate the fact that he had said that by keeping the polygraph out of evidence and obfuscating that whole session – with several DPD officers actually telling lies about it. We only know of it because of an FBI memo recording it – the whole DPD paper trail was made to disappear.

        Your position is noted, I can’t say that I follow it and as I said I do believe Frazier has further things he could tell us; whether he does so is another story. For all I know he may be afraid to say something that would totally take Oswald out of the picture for the shooting period. Its likely if he does I can’t give any odds that he will ever feel like going that far but of course but it certainly won’t happen if nobody ever tries to talk to him.

  2. Mark Groubert says:

    The only thing I would want to hear from Frazier was that he was under incredible pressure from the DPD to say Oswald had a package. The size and length of it is meaningless. 2 feet or three feet. it makes him seem like a more credible witness that simply agreeing to every detail of the DPD. Surely, you can see that. Oswald has a sandwich and a fruit stuffed into his jacket pocket. Frazier’s mother and the foreman at the TSBD both gave statements to the FBI that Oswald’s hands were empty. NOW if Frazier was to say they intimidated me into doing their bidding that would be a breakthrough. But I assume he still lives in fear and has led a long meaningless life with many of his problems taken care of by the PTB. It is unlikely he will shed any light on the case other than to perpetuate the lone gunman theory – which is why he is doing the circuit. Starting with the 50th Anniversary. They have pushed him out there IMHO to perpetuate the needle pushing against conspiracy. Allowing him/them to do this in JFK conferences is outrageous. Same with JVB. I interviewed her briefly awhile back on line and revealed to her that I was an investigative reporter for the Village Voice Media. Since 1994. She then told me she too was a reporter for the Village Voice and had covered the Vietnam War for them in the Seventies! Just to make sure I checked the archives. Of course, there was nothing. The point is there have to be some gate keepers to prevent disinformation from freely being distributed through the JFK research community. I have found that many in your world are simply naive when it comes to this area. Great researchers. Bad judges of character. LOL. I hope Buell Buckles and Big Bad stuff tumbles out of his mouth, Keep me posted.

    • Well Mark, all I can say is that he is increasingly talking about the amount of pressure he was under from the DPD, in particular from Fritz. He certainly spoke about intimidation including physical threats in a manner I had never heard before and I think his description of having a confession put in front of him and being harangued to sign it at the police station is revealing. We are certainly learning that the police were far more aggressive in pursuing a conspiracy well after Oswald was in custody than in the original story – and not just with Frazier. Putting that together with a the ADA’s initial conspiracy charges tells us a far different story than was being initially told. You begin to understand how upset Hoover became over the weekend about the DPD talking. About all I can say is that we are hearing things from him that are new, and there are a good number of folks interested so I’m not personally going to step in and censor him if he wants to begin talking.

  3. Greg Parker says:

    Buell seemingly was protected for many years by certain individuals. It is a bit surprising he is suddenly free to talk.

    I’m happy for him to be there and to talk to his heart’s content. I’d just keep the salt handy and be ready to ambush him at the first available opportunity.

    I fully understand where both of you are coming from. One thing that has stymied this case over the years is witnesses not getting the right questions thrown at them, or simply being given an easy ride. Buell, the Randles, the Paines, depository workers, including management, and the Mexican bus witnesses chief among them.

    Larry, I hope someone will once again ask Buell about the PM image. Sooner or later we are going to get a better scan that will refresh his memory any way. You could also ask about his story to Gary Mack about seeing Lee leaving the building after the assassination, about why he ate alone in the basement that day against usual practice, why he told Manchester he left straight away because he thought there’d be no more work, why another worker told the HSCA investigator that when asked where his rider was that morning, Buell had replied he’d dropped him off at the front entrance, why Linnie Mae told the cops she was suspicious of the bag even though Buell had already allegedly told her that Lee was going to be taking curtain rods to work. You could also ask for his best memory of his actions after the assassination, because by my estimate, there is time unaccounted for. And then there is also Linnie sending the cops looking for him at the wrong hospital. And ask how long Linnie had had x-ray vision being able to see through carports and cars to see what Lee was doing outside her house.

    Supplementals: ask why he even came to Irving to live when his step-father was there. According to one FBI report, Frazier avoided him like the plague in Huntsville because of his violence and alcoholism. Just the person you want to visit in hospital on such an auspicious occasion. Addionally, ask why one neighbor told the Postal Inspectors that Willie Randle drove Oswald to work that day.

    To be clear, I believe Frazier was used as either a trojan horse to give an explanation for getting Oswald into the building, or he himself was being set up as a patsy or co-conspirator – possibly for no other reason than to gain his cooperation. There does not appear to have been much love lost between brother and sister judging by some catty remarks she made in testimony.

    On the lie detector… you could argue as you do, Larry, that he had one and passed it, and that as the reason it was deep-sixed. But there are other possibilities.

    Cops would later disagree during various interviews with various authors about the numbers present (from a couple to a crowded room), about Buell’s demeanor – some saying he was hysterical, others saying he was cool and a real straight-up guy. During those later interviews with authors, the person who allegedly conducted it, claimed not to recall it at all, and those other cops claimed he passed it – which wouldn’t be the case if that was the very reason they deep-sixed the reports.

    I believe if he took a real one and passed it, it was because he told the truth about the size of the bag, I bet it was never specified who HAD the bag though. I’m not even convinced Oswald rode to work with him. The other alternative is that they gave him a mock lie detector test to scare him into confessing.

    Time is too short. It’s time the kid gloves came off for all of the protected species.

    • Greg, as you say it has been pretty clear that he has been somewhat in the control of local “minders” for some time, I know a bit about that myself. That seems to be changing to some extent, something that has happened with witnesses before this – sometimes it gives us something new, sometimes they get scared back into silence. Certainly I’ll approach him as I do any other source and I have my own list of questions – we talked briefly last year after he spoke and I do know that he has been asked about “prayer man”, that is a dialog that will continue. Putting forth the right questions is really important and I will add a couple of yours to my list. Some of those were asked last year but I need to be more through in recording his answers….frankly I was so surprised about some of his statements about timing issues and what was going on with the police that I sort of lost track. There are some real issues with the timing as he describes it, not nearly like what is in the official record. The police got to him at the hospital way too early it seems to me. The questions about Linnie are already ones that Debra has been asking. As to the lie detector test, unless I could see the transcript I’m not sure what it really means….the FBI report says he was shown the bag in evidence and denied it. For all I know he may have denied there was a bag entirely. Last year he did tell us that Oswald could have easily gotten his lunch sandwich from a food truck that routinely came to the building right before lunch…that was new to me.

      In any event, there are a number of questions that still need to be asked, no idea what we might learn…might be nothing. I’ll jot yours down again before Dallas. And yes, I know a couple of folks who are very intent on examining the set up of Frazier as a possible conspirator, I consider that a possibility. Given the wide variations in police statements – which I am aware of – even years later, there was something fishy going on. I know that much, exactly what it was as with many other things needs to be our attention.

    • Mark Groubert says:

      Thanks Greg. Well said. Great questions. Frazier, IMHO, was a patsy-in-waiting. British Enfield found on roof. They could have easily said it was his. Mauser becomes Mannlicher lets not forget. Oswald went into some detail about making his lunch as I recall. Book is still out on Frazier. Thanks for the specifics. A lot of these JFK conference attendees seem to turn into groupies with anyone who comes out of the assassination shadows. They seem to be treated as rock stars rather than suspects. I hope Larry can grill the guy on tape and on video for once and for all.

      • I’ve got all of Greg’s questions copied down – plus a couple of my own – will do my best. I will say he was asked and went into considerable detail on where and when he was after he left work
        and there are some real issues with that compared to the police report. Honestly this is no longer my area of expertise but even I could tell there were problems with it as could others who have studied that in more depth recently. I’ll see if I can get that documented. Of course I’m not at all willing to use the DPD reports as a benchmark because I’m not satisfied with them and even less with what some of the officers said later…one conflict after another…sigh.

      • Greg Parker says:

        Two more things I have suspicions about: his timing in arriving from Huntsville coincided with when plans for the motorcade were firmed up. The other thing is, family usually looks out for each other – especially in rural places like Texas. Why then did Linnie have to list all (as she put it) the places where a person with not much education could get work? Why didn’t willy get him a job with Irving Table Tops which was owned and operated by his brother Marvin? The business must have been doing okay if they were doing jobs as far afield as Austin, and tradesmen do have assistants who do not require any particular skill except to understand the difference between a screw driver and a wrench and be able to do a bit of heavy lifting.

        Actually that brings up another issue… Willy was working with a guy called Berry Caster… why did investigators not look at any possible relationship to Warren Caster who had been showing off his new rifles (including a Mauser, from memory) a couple of days before at the TSBD?

        I realize some of my questions may not have any answer other than genuine coincidence being involved and others may have perfectly legitimate and innocent answers, but I won’t accept any of that until his responses can be thoroughly evaluated.

        In the end though, it may not matter. If/when better Darnell frames become available, and they confirm PM is Oswald, no amount of explanations from Buell will get him off the hook. For his sake, I hope he opens up before then.

      • Greg as you say, some of those last questions are pretty difficult. I can say from personal experience, having grown up in a rural community fairly similar…well even country families often have issues and here at least its not at all unusual to find younger family members either off on their own or wanting to be off on their own. Even when they get away and move in with relatives there is often some desire for “distance”. I’ll see if we can get some more background on the move. And I can’t say more than I very eagerly await a better view of PM, either though other frames or some sort of enhancement. We have mentioned the ongoing efforts to identify that person to him, I’ll try to work that into some additional conversation this year.

  4. Greg Parker says:

    Thanks Larry. Good luck with it all.

  5. Bart Kamp says:

    Hi Larry, could you ask BWF if Joe Molina stood to his left just after the shooting as captured in Darnell? Oh and while you are at it, can you ask him to state categorically that the man he was interacting with to his right in the same clip is NOT Lee Harvey Oswald aka the Prayer Man? Thanks and good luck!!!

    • Bart, Frazier spoke for almost an hour last year and you might want to get the conference tape from Lancer. He does describe the location of a couple of people on the steps but those would have been down in front of him and he only recalled them because he decided to stand up at the top so he could look over people. He definitely said that he did not see Oswald on the steps at the time the President was passing in front. I know he has also been asked if there was someone behind him or to his right side and he stated he did not really remember; when shown the doorway photo (separately not during his presentation of course) he stated it was to blurry for him to identify who it might have been and he did not remember being aware of anyone there at the time. I know those questions will be brought up again this year since PM is a continuing topic – I certainly wish we had an enhanced version of the photo. In any event, I plan to try and get a copy of the photo in front of him and see if he can actually mark and name those folks he can identity.

      • Bart Kamp says:

        Hi Larry thanks for getting back to me, I will see if I can find that tape and will check it out. The 6th floor museum has a first generation Darnell film according to Gary Mack in March this year. The museum as of a month or so ago has denied having it. My search for it continues.
        Best wishes,

      • You are most welcome Bart, we are going to try and get a marked up photo from Frazier to tie down who he does recall in front of the building. One thing that he has been adamant about is that the
        fellow in the plaid shirt down in front of him on the steps is most certainly Lovelady.

  6. Avinash says:

    Did you get to ask him about Prayer Man,Larry?

    • Yes and actually he has been asked that before. We submitted a fairly long set of other questions to him and hope to actually get answers in writing, not just by way of his presentation
      remarks. As to prayer man, Frazier has been asked that several times during the last year as well as being shown photos, although possibly not the best available.

      Frazier says that he went out on the steps and was intent on looking out and down, he can identify folks in front of him such as Lovelady but he does not recall ever turning around and looking to his side
      or behind him so he has no direct recollection of anyone at all standing where PM appears to be located. He can’t make any identification from the photo…which is no big surprise. He also has no
      idea of whether that person had been there for a time or might have come out when everyone else was on the steps. I did get the impression that the steps filled up with people from the building and
      that it was unlikely any outsider had pushed through to the top of the steps so whoever it was somebody from inside the building. The CD’s from the conference should be available in January and if
      I manage to get the Q&A list I will share it but I don’t see that happening during the holidays. Debra is pursuing that.

  7. […] Larry Hancock made a blogpost about Buell Wesley Frazier’s appearance there, at Lancer. In the comment section at the bottom and I quote “Frazier says that he went out on the steps and was intent on looking out and down, he can identify folks in front of him such as Lovelady but he does not recall ever turning around and looking to his side or behind him so he has no direct recollection of anyone at all standing where PM appears to be located. He can’t make any identification from the photo…which is no big surprise. He also has no idea of whether that person had been there for a time or might have come out when everyone else was on the steps. I did get the impression that the steps filled up with people from the building and that it was unlikely any outsider had pushed through to the top of the steps so whoever it was somebody from inside the building.” […]

    • I suppose I need to make the qualification that my quoted comment is only my impression of what Frazier was saying – beyond the point that he definitely could not identify
      the person designated as prayer man. He stated that personally and separately to a specific question. As to the rest, that’s a composite of remarks he made
      and responses to various questions from the audience. He spoke at some length as to why he had decided to stay at the top of the steps and let everybody else
      go out and down…so he would have the best view of the street. He also said he was focused on the street and motorcade and not generally looking around himself at the time,
      much less behind him. That’s the best I can give on the subject at this point; we certainly hope and anticipate comments on other questions that Deb has submitted
      to him to be forthcoming.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s