Then went inside with the curtain rods

[John Iacoletti]

So, Oswald shows up with a long package.
Later that day the world hears that he's shot the President.
Ruth and Marina tell the police he left that morning to walk half a block to the Randle house with a long package.
One of the neighbours notices a man putting a long package into a car across the street.
But Frazier tells the police there was no long package.

What would the police think in this scenario?
Might they think BWF was lying?

They might if there was anybody who could corroborate that Buell ever saw a package.  But in this proposed scenario none of the people ever saw Buell seeing a package.  He was inside the house at the time.

By shortening the length of the bag BWF can be accused of being 'mistaken', that's not a crime.
But lying about there being no package? That is a crime.

Maybe under oath, but not under interrogation.  If they can't prove that he's lying about the length, they certainly can't prove he ever saw a package either.

[John Iacoletti]

The only thing Drain's report reveals is that it wasn't a real polygraph test.
Frazier isn't being asked specific questions that he answers 'yes' or 'no' to. He's having a conversation - "it's possible it was this, but it could have been that" type of thing.
A good reason to suppose that there will never be a record found of the polygraph test is because it wasn't real.
I don't know a lot about polygraphs but I'm assuming they don't work by having the person being tested just chat away.
The bottom line is, in the scenario I'm proposing Frazier changes one small detail at the beginning  - the length of the bag.

It boggles my mind that you think a police department that arrested a man for murder with zero probable cause would step back and say "oh, we can't accuse this man as being an accessory because he said he saw a different bag that was shorter".  Really?  Even so, they still tried to force him to sign a confession with no evidence.

Everything else he can be completely honest about because he is innocent. He's done nothing wrong.

He could be honest about that too because he's innocent.

It's not unimaginable to assume the authorities already think they know what was in the bag. They are 100% certain what was in the bag Oswald brought to work that day.

Lots of people are 100% certain about things that they have no evidence of.

And to get back to a point John made earlier.
Imagine Frazier hooked up to a polygraph that he thought was real and thinking he could get away with "There was no long package".

But he would think he could get away with "the bag was only 2 feet long"?

[John Iacoletti]

In Frazier's first statement he mentions that Oswald told him about the curtain rods.
How did Frazier know there were curtain rods available in the Paine household?

Hell, how would Oswald know there were extra curtain rods in the Paine household?

[John Iacoletti]

The assumption I'm making - that BWF downplayed the size of the bag Oswald brought to work with him that morning is based on the following evidence:

Oswald broke his usual routine, went to the Paine house the night before the assassination to collect curtain rods - Frazier's testimony
There were two curtain rods in the Paine garage - Ruth Paine's testimony
There was a rifle in a blanket in the garage - Marina's testimony
Oswald showed up at the Randle house with a long package - BWF and LMR testimony
Oswald reminded Frazier they were curtain rods - Frazier testimony
Oswald never mentioned needing curtain rods to Ruth Paine, Marina or Earlene Roberts.
The two curtain rods were still in the garage after the assassination - Ruth Paine testimony
The rifle was missing after the assassination - various police testimonies

Things your scenario doesn't account for:

- you don't know there was a rifle in the garage on Thursday either (much less that rifle).  All you know is that 6 weeks earlier Marina peeked in the end of a rolled up and tied blanket and saw part of a wooden stock that she took to be a rifle.

- Neither Marina or Ruth saw Lee go into the garage that night or the next morning.  And he went to bed before they did.

- Neither Marina or Ruth saw Lee with a homemade paper bag or a long package.

- Marina said that Lee had a small package with his lunch when he left that morning.

Propose a better scenario and change my mind.

Here's a better scenario:  whatever was in the bag that Frazier saw, it wasn't the CE139 rifle.

[Richard Smith]

Of all the dishonest contrarian clams the one that takes the cake is the suggestion that there is any doubt about Marina seeing Oswald's rifle in the Paine's garage.  Marina responds to dozens of WC and HSCA questions relating to the "rifle."  Her answers specify that she is discussing a "rifle."  When the police come on 11.22 and ask about a rifle, Marina directs them to the blanket.  In one answer to a question relating to the "rifle," however, she describes seeing the wooden part of its stock.  Which, of course, Oswald's rifle has.  But CTers cling to this straw in desperation to suggest that she just assumed or thought that the wooden stock of a rifle was attached to a rifle!  And therefore there is somehow doubt that Oswald kept his rifle in the garage.  A completely dishonest distortion of Marina's testimony.  Never once when being asked about the "rifle" does she indicate there is any doubt that the object in the blanket is a rifle.  The questions she is asked refer to a "rifle."  But we are supposed to doubt that Marina confirmed Oswald kept a rifle in that blanket?  And Marina has never said otherwise to correct that impression in 50 plus years?  Unreal.

Mr. McDONALD - And do you recall going in that garage from time to time when you lived with the Paines?
Mrs. PORTER - Yes.
Mr. McDONALD - And do you recall seeing where his rifle was located? In other words, did you know where it was?
Mrs. PORTER - Yes, I did.
Mr. McDONALD - Where was it?
Mrs. PORTER - In the garage.

[Alan Ford]

Of all the dishonest contrarian clams the one that takes the cake is the suggestion that there is any doubt about Marina seeing Oswald's rifle in the Paine's garage.  Marina responds to dozens of WC and HSCA questions relating to the "rifle."  Her answers specify that she is discussing a "rifle."  When the police come on 11.22 and ask about a rifle, Marina directs them to the blanket.  In one answer to a question relating to the "rifle," however, she describes seeing the wooden part of its stock.  Which, of course, Oswald's rifle has.  But CTers cling to this straw in desperation to suggest that she just assumed or thought that the wooden stock of a rifle was attached to a rifle!  And therefore there is somehow doubt that Oswald kept his rifle in the garage.  A completely dishonest distortion of Marina's testimony.  Never once when being asked about the "rifle" does she indicate there is any doubt that the object in the blanket is a rifle.  The questions she is asked refer to a "rifle."  But we are supposed to doubt that Marina confirmed Oswald kept a rifle in that blanket?  And Marina has never said otherwise to correct that impression in 50 plus years?  Unreal.

Mr. McDONALD - And do you recall going in that garage from time to time when you lived with the Paines?
Mrs. PORTER - Yes.
Mr. McDONALD - And do you recall seeing where his rifle was located? In other words, did you know where it was?
Mrs. PORTER - Yes, I did.
Mr. McDONALD - Where was it?
Mrs. PORTER - In the garage.

Friends, a good rule in life is to always ask yourself: What is the LNer leaving out?

Mr. McDONALD - And do you recall going in that garage from time to time when you lived with the Paines?
Mrs. PORTER - Yes.
Mr. McDONALD - And do you recall seeing where his rifle was located? In other words, did you know where it was?
Mrs. PORTER - Yes, I did.
Mr. McDONALD - Where was it?
Mrs. PORTER - In the garage.
Mr. McDONALD - Where in the garage?
Mrs. PORTER - I think it was wrapped in a blanket.
Mr. McDONALD - And where was this blanket? In other words, was it in plain view? Was it in a corner?
Mrs. PORTER - NO, it was between boxes I think. I mean that is how I remember it now.
Mr. McDONALD - Did you ever see it unwrapped? Did you ever see the gun when you were at Ruth Paine's? Did you ever see the rifle taken outside of the blanket?
Mrs. PORTER - No.
Mr. McDONALD - Was it ever exposed?
Mrs. PORTER - No.

[Martin Weidmann]

Things your scenario doesn't account for:

- you don't know there was a rifle in the garage on Thursday either (much less that rifle).  All you know is that 6 weeks earlier Marina peeked in the end of a rolled up and tied blanket and saw part of a wooden stock that she took to be a rifle.

- Neither Marina or Ruth saw Lee go into the garage that night or the next morning.  And he went to bed before they did.

- Neither Marina or Ruth saw Lee with a homemade paper bag or a long package.

- Marina said that Lee had a small package with his lunch when he left that morning.

Here's a better scenario:  whatever was in the bag that Frazier saw, it wasn't the CE139 rifle.

The "scenario" that Dan is proposing is basically the same circumstantial scenario that the WC told us.

He can't explain the DPD identification bureau document, showing SSA Howlett presenting curtain rods for fingerprinting on 03/15/64 and collecting them on the 24th (1 day after 2 sets were recovered in Ruth Paine's garage), which clearly implies a third set, so he dismisses it as "suspicious"

He can't explain, during his polygraph, Frazier dismissing the TSBD bag as not the one he saw Oswald carry, so he simply calls the polygraph fake.

I've said it before, if you make enough assumptions and ignore/dismiss factual evidence, you will always arrive at the conclusion you want to arrive at. It's classic LN!