So your (second-hand) conjecture is better than mine? That's really all you've got?
OK, Mr I-Don't-Use-Theory-But-Facts, let's see what you're really made of, shall we?
Let's take a fact:
How does your conjecture account for the fact that two curtain rods were submitted to Lieutenant J. C. Day for fingerprinting on 15 March 1964?
And how does your conjecture account for the fact that the rods were specifically tested for Mr Oswald's fingerprints?
Over to you!
If it were me submitting this as evidence of something I would first place the document within the context that it was created thus reducing the need to rely on conjecture. Since no context has been provided (a favorite CTer tactic) what's left is to read the document and interpret it's content.
1) The SS requested the DPD to fingerprint the curtain rods on 3/15/1964 "Request for prints".
2) Lt. JC Day received the specimen
3) Specimen released to SSA Howlett on 3/24/1964 with the notation "1 legible print- does not belong to Oswald"., JC Day
The document does not say look for Oswald's prints so your wrong in speculating that it only request to test for Oswald's prints.