Ugh. So many wasted words. You have suggested that Frazier must be correct in his estimate of the bag's length citing the polygraph that he did not indicate lie. As though the polygraph is the hand of God determining the truth. This is simple. Pay attention for once. If Frazier truly believed the bag he was shown was not the bag, then the polygraph would indicate he was not lying EVEN if he was wrong. It determines - when accurate - whether a person is lying not whether what they are saying is accurate. Thus, if Frazier believed it, then it would not register as a "lie" in the polygraph even if he was wrong. A person can testify honestly but erroneously. So if you believe that little green men are visiting you and take a polygraph test to that effect it will show that you are not lying. That does not mean that little green mean are visiting you though. Can you comprehend that obvious distinction? I have never disputed that Frazier believed it was a shorter bag. That is his testimony. But the totality of evidence proves he is wrong.
Frazier that being threatened with being charged with being an accessory to the murder. By transporting the assassin and the rifle contained within a bag. This went on for many hours and was still going on at 11:30 pm.Given this pressure, it is natural that Frazier would:1. State the bag he saw with Oswald was too short to hold the rifle.
I don't need to prove anything. He took it in and he used it.
We know he was incorrect on its length because the actual bag was found and measured.
If he was worried about being pegged as an accomplice, why would he mention the bag at all?
Well duh, if somebody else saw Oswald carrying an excessively large bag and Buell failed to mention the obviously excessive large bag then even Frazier would realize that would be suspicious.
