Rolling Readers & Murdered Leaders

[Gary Craig]

[Gary Craig]

[Martin Weidmann]

If the ONLY evidence found was Oswald's prints on the boxes, then it might alone not be sufficient to prove his guilt.  But taken within the totality of evidence, it is highly probative.  To suggest that his prints being found on the SN boxes is "silly and irrelevant" tells us we are dealing with someone who is just playing defense attorney/devil's advocate and can't be taken seriously.  Not that there was any prior doubt.  When all is said and done, the evidence always points back to one person.   All the more humorous is the notion espoused by these same parties that it is a "strawman" argument to suggest they are implying a conspiracy.  Oswald was apparently just the unluckiest guy in history.  Of all the TSBD employees, he is the only one to touch these particular boxes and the bag.  He decides not to watch the motorcade like nearly every other employee and thus has no credible alibi.  Somehow his rifle magically appears with his prints on it.  He decides to knock off early for a movie and is the only person on planet Earth to be in the TSBD at the time of the assassination to pass the scene of the Tippit murder.  The only Dallas PD officer murdered in a several year period.  What are the odds that Oswald is at the scene of a presidential assassination and police murder within a one hour period?  And he looks so much like the Tippit shooter that several witnesses identify him as the murderer.   And he has a pistol with the same two brands of ammo used by the murderer.  When he goes window shopping for some shoes, he attracts the suspicion a random salesman.  Terrible luck.  Then he decides to duck into the movie without buying a ticket.  More bad luck.  This results in the police being called on him while just wondering about in Mr. Magoo-like bliss.  And instead of just answering their questions he decides to put up a fight.  And on and on.   But this is all "silly and irrelevant."  Nothing to see here.  Just an incredible series of bad luck and random citizens all lying for no apparent reason to implicate him.

To suggest that his prints being found on the SN boxes is "silly and irrelevant"

I did not suggest that. You need to learn to understand what is written!

The remainder of your rant isn't worth any kind of serious discussion.

[Charles Collins]

The sniper's nest boxes were photographed in the position they were found before removing them for fingerprinting.

So, you are basically saying that nobody messed with the crime scene before that photo was taken... Yeah right, so why is the infamous paper bag not in the picture?

You haven't changed your very annoying habit of trying to tell people that they said something that they didn't say. Bill didn't say nobody messed with the crime scene before that picture was taken. He said the boxes were photographed in the position they were found before removing them for fingerprinting.

 Robert Studebaker returned to the southeast corner and continued processing the items as instructed by Day, while Day processed the rifle found in the northwest corner. Here is his testimony along with the related photo exhibits. This explains why the paper bag is not in the picture.

Mr. BALL. Did you take a picture of the window in the southeast corner?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Were there any boxes on the ledge of this window?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes.
Mr. BALL. Did you take some pictures showing those boxes?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes.
Mr. BALL. Was that before any of them were moved?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. That picture right there is the one that shows them, and the other pictures show them before they were moved.
Mr. BALL. You mean Exhibit A and B?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. A and B.





Mr. BALL. Do you have any pictures of the boxes before they were moved other than those you have showed me?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Just these two.
Mr. BALL. Just the two that show the cartons, and those are Exhibits A and B?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. We have probably got one down there I can get you that is a lot better print than that. If you want a better print, I can get it for you.
Mr. BALL. Then, you don't have any pictures taken of the boxes before they were moved?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. No.



Mr. BALL. Now, did you at any time see any paper sack around there?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes sir.
Mr. BALL. Where?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Storage room there - in, the southeast corner of the building folded.
Mr. BALL. In the southeast corner of the building?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. It was a paper - I don't know what it was.
Mr. BALL. And it was folded, you say?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes.
Mr. BALL. Where was it with respect to the three boxes of which the top two were Rolling Readers?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Directly east.
Mr. BALL. There is a corner there, isn't it?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes, sir; in the southeast corner.
Mr. BALL. It was in the southeast corner?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. I drew that box in for somebody over at the FBI that
said you wanted it. It is in one of those pictures - one of the shots after the duplicate shot.
Mr. BALL. Let's mark this picture "Exhibit F."
(Instrument marked by the reporter as "Studebaker Exhibit F," for identification.)
Mr. BALL. Do you know who took that picture?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. No; I don't.
Mr. BALL. Do you recognize the diagram?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Did you draw the diagram?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. I drew a diagram in there for the FBI, somebody from the FBI called me down - I can't think of his name, and he wanted an approximate location of where the paper was found.
Mr. BALL. Does that show the approximate location?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes.
Mr. BALL. Where you have the dotted lines?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes.



Mr. BALL. Now, there is something that looks like steam pipes or water pipes in the corner there?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes.
Mr. BALL. Where was that with reference to those pipes - the paper wrapping?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Laying right beside it - right here.
Mr. BALL. Was it folded over?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. It was doubled - it was a piece of paper about this long and it was doubled over.
Mr. BALL. How long was it, approximately?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. I don't know - I picked it up and dusted it and they took it down there and sent it to Washington and that's the last I have seen of it, and I don't know.
Mr. BALL. Did you take a picture of it before you picked it up?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. No.
Mr. BALL. Does that sack show in any of the pictures you took?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. No; it doesn't show in any of the pictures.
Mr. BALL. Was it near the window?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Which way from the window?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. It was east of the window.
Mr. BALL. Over in the corner?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Over in the corner - in the southeast corner of the building, in the far southeast corner, as far as you can get is where it was


Mr. BALL. Now, did you also lift a print off of the box?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes.
Mr. BALL. You lifted a print off of a box?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes.
Mr. BALL. Where was the box?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. The box was due north of the paper that was found, and it was, I believe, we have it that it was - I can read the measurements off of one of these things - how far it was.
Mr. BALL. Fine, do that.
Mr. STUDEBAKER. It was 16 1/2 inches from the - from this wall over here (Indicating).
Mr. BALL. Which wall are you talking about?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. It was from the south wall of the building.
Mr. BALL. Did you take a picture of that box in place before it was moved?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes.
Mr. BALL. The box from which you lifted the prints?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. This box never was moved.
Mr. BALL. That box never was moved?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. That box never was moved.
Mr. BALL. And you took a picture of it?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. And that was the location of it when you lifted the print of it?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. And may I have that, please, and we will mark it Exhibit G.




Mr. BALL. The picture of the boxes; this is after they were moved?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes, sir; they were moved there. This is exactly the position they were in.
Mr. BALL. It is?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes - not - this was after they were moved, but I put them in the same exact position.
Mr. BALL. Were they that close - that was about the position?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes.
Mr. BALL. Let's take one of these pictures and mark it the next number, which will be "Exhibit J."
(Instrument marked by the reporter as "Studebaker Exhibit J," for identification)
Mr. BALL. After the boxes of Rolling Readers had been moved, you put them in the same position?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes.
Mr. BALL. And took a picture?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. And this is Exhibit J, is it, is that right?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Exhibit J, yes, sir.

[Gary Craig]

Fritz arrives at the alleged sniper's nest within 8 minutes of it's discovery.

He's pictured/filmed virtually standing on top of the homemade paper gun case.

Yet he testifies that he wasn't at the scene when the paper gun case was found.
Mr. DULLES. When was the paper bag covering that apparently he brought the rifle in, was that discovered in the sixth floor about the same time?
Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; that was recovered a little later. I wasn't down there when that was found.
Mr. DULLES. It was recovered on the sixth floor, was it not?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I believe so. We can check here and see. I believe it was. But I wasn't there when that was recovered.

How is that possible?

[Richard Smith]

If there had been a thousand pictures taken of the bag, it wouldn't make one iota of difference to CTers.  They would then claim it was planted there or that it has no probative value in proving Oswald's guilt ("silly and irrelevant").  Some genius would ask if everyone who carried a long bag to work was a presidential assassin (as though there were no context to this bag).  How do we know this?  Because Oswald's rifle was found and photographed and they still go down that rabbit hole clinging to any straw.  No photo was taken.  Great - let's argue despite the assurance of multiple detectives that it wasn't there.  If a photo had been taken, then it's on to plan B without missing a beat and suggest it was planted, Oswald's prints just happened to be on it because he worked there etc.  A photo has no value when taken.  Only when not taken.  Round and round down the rabbit hole.

[Bill Chapman]

So, you're changing the subject rather than explaining your 'silly and irrelevant' charge about Oswald's fingerprints found on boxes in the sniper's nest. Typical CT 'whataboutism'.

Evasive! You brought up the photograph and basically claimed or at least implied it was taken before anybody had messed with the sniper's nest. If that was true then the paper bag should be in the photo and it isn't. My question is a valid one and you seem to lack an answer

One more time: Are you still claiming that my point about Oswald's fingerprints found on the box in a placement that would position the box in a specific direction (thus suggesting a rifle support built for a downrange firing position) somehow silly and irrelevant?


Yes, because you have no way of knowing how the boxes were really placed. Instead you rely on a photograph with questionable validity.

Describe this 'questionable validity' of yours and keep in mind that the angled tip of the front-most box was seen in Dilliard seconds after the final shot.

Re any 'evasiveness' from me, you've just answered that yourself in this comment to Charles:
Martin@Charles: "If I recall correctly, Alyea's film of the area also does not show the paper bag in situ, nor it's removal from the sniper's nest, which either indicates that the bag wasn't there to begin with or it was already removed by somebody"

[Rob Caprio]

In the sniper's nest, there were four boxes used in connection with the shooting.  One large box containing books and then two of the smaller "Rolling Readers" boxes atop the large box of books.  The fourth box was on the floor behind the stack of three,
obviously used as a seat.

On one of the Rolling Readers boxes at the window, Oswald's left palmprint and his right index fingerprint were found.

The employees laying the floor moved the large boxes of books from the west end of the floor over to the east end.  However, the "Rolling Readers" boxes did not need to be moved, i.e. they weren't over on the west end where the new floor was being placed down.  The two "Rolling readers" boxes in the sniper's nest were originally about three aisles over from the sniper's nest window and were taken to that window for the purposes of being used as a gun rest.  The "Rolling Readers" boxes didn't contain books.

On the box on the floor, the one used as a seat, Day, using powder, dusted the box and developed a palmprint.  Latona examined the print and found it to be from Oswald's right palm.  Because Day used a powder to develop the print, Latona stated that not too long a time had passed between the time the print was placed on the box and the time it was developed by Day.  Powder cannot develop prints beyond a certain point in time.

FBI experiments showed that twenty-four hours was a likely maximum time between the print being placed on the box and the time it was developed by the powder.  However, Latona would only state that he could only testify with certainty that the print was less than three days old.

Arthur Mandella (fingerprint expert, NYPD), examined the prints and agreed that they belonged to Oswald.  Mandella was of the opinion that the palmprint developed by Day (using the powder) from the box on the floor (the one used as a seat) was probably made within a day to a day and a half of the examination made on the 22nd.

Oswald could obviously have handled the boxes as part of his normal work duties.  Fingerprints were taken from the twelve Depository employees who may have had cause to handle the boxes (found in the sniper's nest) as part of their normal work duties as well.

Other identifiable prints were developed on the boxes.  These prints were compared with the fingerprints of all other employees as well as law enforcement personnel who handled the boxes.  None of the identifiable prints belonged to any of the other employees.

Point being, the larger box on the sniper's nest floor used as a seat, was moved by the floor laying crew at some point earlier in the week.  Day dusted this box with powder and developed a palmprint, which Latona said belonged to Oswald.  The process of using the powder develops prints based on perspiration and therefore would not find prints older than one to three days (time frame dependent on which fingerprint expert you listen to).

While it's possible to handle the boxes and not leave a print at all, it's also likely as possible that Oswald was the only person to handle that box at any point in time past Tuesday the 19th (per Latona's three days out).  Or, if you go by Mandella of the NYPD, Oswald could have been the only person to handle that box after Wednesday the 20th.  If you go by the FBI's experiments, Oswald was possibly the only person to handle that box after Thursday the 21st.

Oswald's prints on the boxes prove he was in that window, but they can't prove when he was there exactly.

In "the Sniper's Nest"... LOL! There is no evidence supporting that there was a Sniper's Nest at 12:30 p.m. on November 22, 1963, therefore, the rest of your post is nothing but hypothetical.