CT's, how did Oswald's rifle end up on the 6th floor?

[Charles Collins]

The words "appeared to be" are indicative of a tentative match.

No they are not. You are trying to make something out of nothing. Day never matched the palmprint he allegedly took from the rifle with Oswald. In order to make a match you need to compare the prints and Day never did that. He never got around to it.

In this instance "appeared to be" was at best indicative of a guess about which palm print it was.

As to your original claim that Henry Wade was told on 11/22/63 about a tentative match with a palmprint you seem to ignore that Day clearly said;

Mr. DAY. Well, actually in fingerprinting it either is or is not the man. So I wouldn't say those were his prints.

So, even if he had made a "tentative" match (quod non) Day would not have said it until he knew for sure. Just one more reason why Wade could not have been told about a matching palmprint on 11/22/63

Day would not have said it appeared to be Oswald’s palm print unless he had made a brief comparison. If he only had determined that it was a right palm print, that is what he would have said.

In the quote you included, he is talking about a positive match, to the exclusion of all others.

Wade was told that they had a tentative match. Those words were from Fritz and Curry. Day probably told them in similar words to the ones he used in his testimony.

[Martin Weidmann]

Day would not have said it appeared to be Oswald’s palm print unless he had made a brief comparison. If he only had determined that it was a right palm print, that is what he would have said.

In the quote you included, he is talking about a positive match, to the exclusion of all others.

Wade was told that they had a tentative match. Those words were from Fritz and Curry. Day probably told them in similar words to the ones he used in his testimony.

Wade was told that they had a tentative match. Those words were from Fritz and Curry. Day probably told them in similar words to the ones he used in his testimony.

And so we are back to square one and getting nowhere…

In my opinion, you are trying to construct a highly speculative narrative based on a vague newspaper article, some decades old memories and a highly questionable interpretation of Day's testimony, whilst at the same time ignoring actual evidence that shows Wade could not have been told about a print matching to Oswald on 11/22/63 as there was none.

The record shows that the palmprint on the index card was not documented or added to the evidence until 11/26/63 when the FBI collected it all from the DPD. Day and Wade may have tried to spin it later on but that does not alter the basic fact that there is no official record about the palmprint on the index card until 4 days after the murders.

[Charles Collins]

Wade was told that they had a tentative match. Those words were from Fritz and Curry. Day probably told them in similar words to the ones he used in his testimony.

And so we are back to square one and getting nowhere…

In my opinion, you are trying to construct a highly speculative narrative based on a vague newspaper article, some decades old memories and a highly questionable interpretation of Day's testimony, whilst at the same time ignoring actual evidence that shows Wade could not have been told about a print matching to Oswald on 11/22/63 as there was none.

The record shows that the palmprint on the index card was not documented or added to the evidence until 11/26/63 when the FBI collected it all from the DPD. Day and Wade may have tried to spin it later on but that does not alter the basic fact that there is no official record about the palmprint on the index card until 4 days after the murders.

And so we are back to square one and getting nowhere…

No we are not. I can imagine that Day would be cautious when the word match comes up. It appears he only uses that word when he has a positive match that he has properly documented. He might not want to use the term tentative match due to potential misunderstandings. If someone (WC) asks him about a match he responds as if they are asking about a positive match. And when he had a tentative match that he needs further work, he apparently used language that didn't include the word match. What it boils down to is semantics. Wade, and probably Fritz and Curry, apparently preferred the term tentative match. It is a term used in the profession, I showed that in the article earlier in this thread.

In my opinion, you are trying to construct a highly speculative narrative based on a vague newspaper article, some decades old memories and a highly questionable interpretation of Day's testimony, whilst at the same time ignoring actual evidence that shows Wade could not have been told about a print matching to Oswald on 11/22/63 as there was none.

Thank you for saying that all of that is your opinion.

The record shows that the palmprint on the index card was not documented or added to the evidence until 11/26/63 when the FBI collected it all from the DPD. Day and Wade may have tried to spin it later on but that does not alter the basic fact that there is no official record about the palmprint on the index card until 4 days after the murders

DPD had jurisdiction at the time. Their official fingerprint expert (Day) lifted the print off the rifle on 11/22/63. He placed it on the index card and identified what it was and where it came from. Signed and dated the card. And later testified to that effect. If that isn't a documented official record, then what the heck is it? Just because it was in the hands of the DPD (who had jurisdiction at the time) instead of the FBI doesn't mean it didn't exist. He turned the rifle over to the FBI when instructed to do so (even though he was in the middle of processing the palmprint). He turned the palmprint over to the FBI when he was instructed to do so. Once Oswald had been declared dead, Wade apparently realized that there would be no trial and listed the palmprint as part of the evidence against Oswald in the television news statement on Sunday 11/24/63. How the heck did he know about it if it "didn't exist'? He later told Aynesworth he learned about it the evening of 11/22/63.

[John Mytton]

the basic fact that there is no official record about the palmprint on the index card until 4 days after the murders.

Yawn, it doesn't matter if it was a minute or a year, the only relevant fact is that Oswald touched the barrel of C2766, you know the rifle he bought through mail order, the rifle he was photographed with, the rifle which was discovered with fibers which matched his arrest shirt, yeah that rifle!



JohnM

[Charles Collins]

Yawn, it doesn't matter if it was a minute or a year, the only relevant fact is that Oswald touched the barrel of C2766, you know the rifle he bought through mail order, the rifle he was photographed with, the rifle which was discovered with fibers which matched his arrest shirt, yeah that rifle!



JohnM

You’re exactly right John. IIRC, my first question in this thread was why they thought the delay was relevant. 🤔

[Martin Weidmann]

And so we are back to square one and getting nowhere…

No we are not. I can imagine that Day would be cautious when the word match comes up. It appears he only uses that word when he has a positive match that he has properly documented. He might not want to use the term tentative match due to potential misunderstandings. If someone (WC) asks him about a match he responds as if they are asking about a positive match. And when he had a tentative match that he needs further work, he apparently used language that didn't include the word match. What it boils down to is semantics. Wade, and probably Fritz and Curry, apparently preferred the term tentative match. It is a term used in the profession, I showed that in the article earlier in this thread.

In my opinion, you are trying to construct a highly speculative narrative based on a vague newspaper article, some decades old memories and a highly questionable interpretation of Day's testimony, whilst at the same time ignoring actual evidence that shows Wade could not have been told about a print matching to Oswald on 11/22/63 as there was none.

Thank you for saying that all of that is your opinion.

The record shows that the palmprint on the index card was not documented or added to the evidence until 11/26/63 when the FBI collected it all from the DPD. Day and Wade may have tried to spin it later on but that does not alter the basic fact that there is no official record about the palmprint on the index card until 4 days after the murders

DPD had jurisdiction at the time. Their official fingerprint expert (Day) lifted the print off the rifle on 11/22/63. He placed it on the index card and identified what it was and where it came from. Signed and dated the card. And later testified to that effect. If that isn't a documented official record, then what the heck is it? Just because it was in the hands of the DPD (who had jurisdiction at the time) instead of the FBI doesn't mean it didn't exist. He turned the rifle over to the FBI when instructed to do so (even though he was in the middle of processing the palmprint). He turned the palmprint over to the FBI when he was instructed to do so. Once Oswald had been declared dead, Wade apparently realized that there would be no trial and listed the palmprint as part of the evidence against Oswald in the television news statement on Sunday 11/24/63. How the heck did he know about it if it "didn't exist'? He later told Aynesworth he learned about it the evening of 11/22/63.

DPD had jurisdiction at the time. Their official fingerprint expert (Day) lifted the print off the rifle on 11/22/63. He placed it on the index card and identified what it was and where it came from. Signed and dated the card.

And this is exactly where your special "logic" breaks down and falls apart. If DPD had jurisdiction and Day still having the lifted print wasn't a problem and if Day was "tentatively" sure there would be a match, why in the world did he not use the four days until 11/26 when the FBI collected the evidence to closely examine the print on the index card with the prints taken from Oswald? Why did he leave it up to the FBI to make the match?

It doesn't add up!

Wade apparently realized that there would be no trial and listed the palmprint as part of the evidence against Oswald in the television news statement on Sunday 11/24/63.

In his press conference on 11/24/63, which I just listened to again, I only heard Wade talk about a palmprint found on one of the TSBD boxes that matched to Oswald. I have not heard him say a word about the palmprint that was allegedly taken from the rifle.

Btw I also did hear him say several things that we now know were not true, like for instance that, at that time, ballastics had already linked the MC rifle to the bullets recovered from the car.

[Martin Weidmann]

Yawn, it doesn't matter if it was a minute or a year, the only relevant fact is that Oswald touched the barrel of C2766, you know the rifle he bought through mail order, the rifle he was photographed with, the rifle which was discovered with fibers which matched his arrest shirt, yeah that rifle!



JohnM

the only relevant fact is that Oswald touched the barrel of C2766

Really? When did he touch it?

Mr. BELIN. Do you know what Commission Exhibit No. 637 is?
Mr. DAY. This is the trace of palmprint I lifted off of the barrel of the gun after I had removed the wood.
Mr. BELIN. Does it have your name on it or your handwriting?
Mr. DAY. It has the name "J. C. Day," and also "11/22/63" written on it in my writing off the underside gun barrel near the end of foregrip, C-2766.
Mr. BELIN. When you lift a print is it then harder to make a photograph of that print after it is lifted or doesn't it make any difference?
Mr. DAY. It depends. If it is a fresh print, and by fresh I mean hadn't been there very long and dried, practically all the print will come off and there will be nothing left. If it is an old print, that is pretty well dried, many times you can still see it after the lift. In this case I could still see traces of print on that barrel.

[John Mytton]

the only relevant fact is that Oswald touched the barrel of C2766

Really? When did he touch it?

Focus Martin, we are discussing if Day lifted Oswald's palmprint from C2766 and the following exhibit shows that Oswald's palmprint came from Oswald's rifle.



JohnM