The preponderance of the evidence

[Charles Collins]

What is important is that the evidence was processed.

Sure, regardless where it comes from, right?


The delay is understandable, given the circumstances.

So, first day evidence isn't important anymore? You can always manipulate the evidence later and claim it was an error or an understandable delay, right?

More conjecture and innuendo. No evidence to support it.

[Charles Collins]

A claim without evidence is convincing to you?

Oh wait...of course it is.

No, what claim are you referring to?

[John Iacoletti]

No, what claim are you referring to?

The claim about the same ?irregularities? being on the rifle and the magic partial palm print.

[Martin Weidmann]

More conjecture and innuendo. No evidence to support it.

Do you have trouble understanding the words "conjecture" and "innuendo"?

No evidence to support it.

To support what?

Does your "open mind" fail to understand that an investigation is conducted by elimination of possibilities rather than simple outright dismissal?

[Charles Collins]

The claim about the same ?irregularities? being on the rifle and the magic partial palm print.

The evidence and conclusion was independently verified:

Latona testified that this palmprint was the right palmprint of Lee Harvey Oswald.58 At the request of the Commission, Arthur Mandella, fingerprint expert with the New York City Police Department, conducted an independent examination and also determined that this was the right palmprint of Oswald.59 Latona's findings were also confirmed by Ronald G. Wittmus, another FBI fingerprint



I most certainly find this more convincing than anything I have seen that tries to cast doubt on it.

[Martin Weidmann]

The evidence and conclusion was independently verified:

Latona testified that this palmprint was the right palmprint of Lee Harvey Oswald.58 At the request of the Commission, Arthur Mandella, fingerprint expert with the New York City Police Department, conducted an independent examination and also determined that this was the right palmprint of Oswald.59 Latona's findings were also confirmed by Ronald G. Wittmus, another FBI fingerprint


I most certainly find this more convincing than anything I have seen that tries to cast doubt on it.

Whether you find it more convincing or not, it is not the answer to John's question. Who cares that it was Oswald's palm print on the index card when it can not be determined where it came from and when it was created.

[Charles Collins]

Whether you find it more convincing or not, it is not the answer to John's question. Who cares that it was Oswald's palm print on the index card when it can not be determined where it came from and when it was created.

Do you have any evidence whatsoever that the adhesive matter is not as described?

[Martin Weidmann]

Do you have any evidence whatsoever that the adhesive matter is not as described?

On 11/23/63 the FBI lab examined the rifle closely and found no prints on the rifle. They also do not mention finding any adhesive matter.

Only after the rifle was returned to the DPD and Oswald was killed did Day produce the index card.

Can you rule out that after it's return, the rifle wasn't used to create the index card?