Oswald's Fingerprint Evidence

[Jack Trojan]

Since when were you an expert on fingerprinting?

Obviously, I'm not cuz I didn't read a book. So is this all you LNers got? Sad.

[Alan Hardaker]

You mean LHO wore gloves and scored 2 hits using a wonky scope on a cheap rifle he had never practiced with before? Why would any military marksman/assassin do that?

ps. The Magic Gloves?

I wasn't commenting on the quality of the weapon or the accuracy of the gunman, I was merely speculating that Oswald wore gloves, that would go some way to explain the lack of fingerprint evidence. I also pointed out that many warehouse workers do wear gloves because cardboard dries out the skin and gloves may have been readily available. It is a perfectly logical explanation for the lack of dabs.

Even by some strange quirk of fate that Oswald was not the gunmen then whoever it was wore gloves. Why would somebody leave their prints all over the alleged snipers nest and the weapon. And could easily have been thin cotton gloves that would not hinder the operation of the weapon.

[Mitch Todd]

Mitch Todd: Since when were you an expert on fingerprinting?

Obviously, I'm not cuz I didn't read a book. So is this all you LNers got? Sad.

You got it the wrong way 'round. It's all 'bout what little you got.

You have no idea how many identifiable finger and palm prints Oswald would have left, but you still feel entitled to tell us. And then you resort to putting words into Groody's mouth. All because you have nothing to begin with, and want to trumpet it loudly.

[Bill Chapman]

Given that CT's routinely question every tiny discrepancy regarding evidence against Oswald and exaggerate the importance of such discrepancy, it's entirely acceptable to speculate on Oswald wearing gloves.

In fact in a tradition that CT's will recognise I say Oswald did wear gloves and disposed of them sometime after leaving the TSBD. It makes sense. Obviously Oswald being a cunning shrewd operator gloves would've been one of the first things he thought about in preparation for his act of barbarity.

That's why his dabs are not all over the rifle. He left the SN in close to clean pristine condition.

Re fingerprints in gun crimes, the rule of thumb (see what I did there?) for professionals is to remember to wear their turtle doves. Only opportunists or amateurs would be likely to forget to do so, apparently.

Given lack of proof that the shooter was wearing gloves (including no mention of same by Euins nor Brennan), one can reasonably argue that the shooter was more of an opportunist rather than an experienced hitman.

[Bill Brown]

The man shooting a rifle out the window was described as wearing a light-colored shirt.  Oswald could have been wearing only the white t-shirt during the shooting, with the brown arrest shirt laying on a nearby box.  After the shooting, while making his way across the sixth floor towards the stairs, Oswald uses the brown arrest shirt to wipe down the rifle in an attempt to clear it of prints.

[Jack Trojan]

You got it the wrong way 'round. It's all 'bout what little you got.

You have no idea how many identifiable finger and palm prints Oswald would have left, but you still feel entitled to tell us. And then you resort to putting words into Groody's mouth. All because you have nothing to begin with, and want to trumpet it loudly.

No, as usual, you got it wrong. As a layman, I am just stating the obvious and hoping an expert can set me straight. All you LNers got is to discredit, dismiss, ignore, move on. Logisticians you ain't.

[Jack Trojan]

I wasn't commenting on the quality of the weapon or the accuracy of the gunman, I was merely speculating that Oswald wore gloves, that would go some way to explain the lack of fingerprint evidence. I also pointed out that many warehouse workers do wear gloves because cardboard dries out the skin and gloves may have been readily available. It is a perfectly logical explanation for the lack of dabs.

Even by some strange quirk of fate that Oswald was not the gunmen then whoever it was wore gloves. Why would somebody leave their prints all over the alleged snipers nest and the weapon. And could easily have been thin cotton gloves that would not hinder the operation of the weapon.

Good points. Oswald must have worn gloves to  produce so few prints. So are we now looking for Oswald's gloves?

[Mitch Todd]

No, as usual, you got it wrong. As a layman, I am just stating the obvious and hoping an expert can set me straight. All you LNers got is to discredit, dismiss, ignore, move on. Logisticians you ain't.

A layman looking for expert advice doesn't start a thread like this:

The fingerprint evidence against Oswald is a joke. But it is more than that, it is evidence of conspiracy. In all 3 cases where Oswald's prints showed up, they were sorely lacking in frequency considering how much he had supposedly handled those items. The FBI, SS and Dallas Police really dropped the ball on their sheep-dipping of Oswald. They got him to pose for pics in his backyard with the murder weapons but they didn't sight in his scope or get more of his prints on the rifle, the bag and the boxes.

Nor does someone looking advice from a fingerprint expert start their search on a JFK forum.