Rolling Readers & Murdered Leaders

[John Iacoletti]

Unfortunately the appearance of the bag nor palm print on the bag does not seem to support Frazier's statement.

Why would you assume that CE 142 is the same bag?

It looks like Jerry Organ's excellent sketch seems to negate the whole question anyway and renders it a moot point. Jerry has been able to show how Frazier's odd observation is possible.

Well that and 50 cents will get you a cup of coffee.

[Bill Brown]

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.

[John Mytton]

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.

Thanks Bill, this thread was becoming yet another "paper bag" thread, because it seems that the CTs can't deal with your powerful evidence that places Oswald directly in the middle of the sniper's nest.

JohnM

[Colin Crow]

Thanks Bill, this thread was becoming yet another "paper bag" thread, because it seems that the CTs can't deal with your powerful evidence that places Oswald directly in the middle of the sniper's nest.

JohnM

Exactly John. No evidence to show the CE142 was originally in the SN. Unlike the lunch sack and chicken  .

[John Mytton]

Exactly John. No evidence to show the CE142 was originally in the SN. Unlike the lunch sack and chicken  .

Too bad Oswald's rifle was found on the same floor but why worry about the actual Murder Weapon when Colin wants to run away and endlessly debate insignificant objects?
How about Bill's thread topic, any thoughts?

JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

Too bad Oswald's rifle was found on the same floor but why worry about the actual Murder Weapon when Colin wants to run away and endlessly debate insignificant objects?
How about Bill's thread topic, any thoughts?

JohnM

Too bad Oswald's rifle was found on the same floor

You mean the rifle with questionable documentation, which you can not show was ever in Ruth Paine's garage and which Marina, according to her first day affidavit, couldn't identify? Is that the rifle you mean?

the actual Murder Weapon

And you know this, how?

[Colin Crow]

How about Bill's thread topic, any thoughts?

JohnM

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

Sounds reasonable. Maybe, Oswald's prints on the boxes prove he handled the boxes but they can't prove when he handled them exactly.

[John Mytton]

Getting back on topic, the Rolling Reader boxes that were moved, were moved to the window ledge and were angled down Elm street as were Oswald's prints.



The following photos of Oswald's sniper's nest can be triangulated to show that the corner of the rolling reader box sat on the window ledge.



Latona testifies that the prints were no older than 3 days and he later goes on to say in the lab that they put prints on boxes and that they only lasted 24 hours.

Mr. EISENBERG. You testified before concerning the aging of fingerprints. Considering the material on which this print was developed, 649, do you think you could form an opinion, any opinion at all, concerning the freshness or staleness of this print?
Mr. LATONA. Bearing in mind the fact that this is an absorbent material, and realizing, of course, that a print when it is left on a material of this type it starts to soak in. Now, the reason that we in the FBI do not use powder is because of the fact that in a short period of time the print will soak in so completely that there won't be any moisture left. Accordingly when you brush powder across there won't be anything developed. Under circumstances, bearing in mind that here the box was powdered, and a print was developed with powder, the conclusion is that this is comparatively a fresh print. Otherwise, it would not have developed. We know, too, that we developed two other fingerprints on this by chemicals. How long a time had elapsed since the time this print was placed on there until the time that it would have soaked in so that the resulting examination would have been negative I don't know, but that could not have been too long.
Mr. EISENBERG. When you say "not too long," would you say not 3 weeks, or not 3 days, or not 3 hours?
Mr. LATONA. Very definitely I'd say not 3 days. I'd say not 3 weeks.
Mr. EISENBERG. And not 3 days, either?
Mr. LATONA. No; I don't believe so, because I don't think that the print on here that is touched on a piece of cardboard will stay on a piece of cardboard for 3 days.
Mr. EISENBERG. Would you bring that any closer?
Mr. LATONA. I am afraid I couldn't come any closer.
Mr. EISENBERG. 3 days?
Mr. LATONA. That is right.

Mr. LATONA. We have conducted tests with various types of materials as to how long it could be before we would not develop a latent print.
Mr. EISENBERG. Yes?
Mr. LATONA. Assuming that the same print was left on an object or a series of similar prints were left on an object, and powdering them, say, at intervals of every 4 hours or so, we would fail to develop a latent print of that particular type on that particular surface, say, within a 24-hour period.
Mr. EISENBERG. So that is a maximum of 24 hours?
Mr. LATONA. That is right.

Before anything was moved, the sniper's nest was photographed and the original positions of the shells and the Rolling Reader box on the window ledge can be determined.



JohnM