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

[Martin Weidmann]

Have you read his testimony where he explained why he even went to the DPD?

You don't get any of this, do you?

You place way too much value on the WC testimony. You seem to assume that everybody always tells the whole and complete truth under oath, when in fact they don't. It's human nature to forget things or remember them incorrectly. The WC testimony IMO has very little value indeed, because there was never any cross-examination of any wittness and all testimony was given in the full knowledge that the main suspect had already died. To make matters worse, we know that the WC tampered with testimony and it's pretty obvious to anybody who has half a legal mind that the WC was only asking selective questions and were using just about every prosecutorial trick in the book to get the testimony they needed. 

Wade's statements are after the fact and more importantly after Oswald was dead. Wade can "explain" anything he wants at that point and nobody is going to challenge it. That doesn't automatically make it true! I don't trust the words of a prosecutor who, as it recently has turned out, has a terrible record of unsafe convictions due to prosecturial misconduct and manipulation of evidence. You really don't have a clue who you are defending here, do you? It's either that or you just don't care....

You can't have it both ways, Charles.... Wade was either involved in the investigation from day 1 (as proven by his statements to the media) or he wasn't involved in the investigation in which case Fritz had no reason to tell him anything and he exceeded his authority by telling the media about things he shouldn't have known at that time.

[Charles Collins]

You don't get any of this, do you?

Wade's statements are after the fact and more importantly after Oswald was dead. Wade can "explain" anything he wants at that point and nobody is going to challenge it. That doesn't automatically make it true! I don't trust the words of a prosecutor who, as it recently has turned out, has a terrible record of unsafe convictions due to prosecturial misconduct and manipulation of evidence. You really don't have a clue who you are defending here, do you? It's either that or you just don't care....

You can't have it both ways, Charles.... Wade was either involved in the investigation from day 1 (as proven by his statements to the media) or he wasn't involved in the investigation in which case Fritz had no reason to tell him anything and he exceeded his authority by telling the media about things he shouldn't have known at that time.

Wade was the prosecutor. He didn’t investigate.

After a radio report that the Dallas police, in a court filing, had somehow implicated the Soviets in Oswald’s crimes. And a related call from LBJ aide Cliff Carter in Washington. The DA headed to for police headquarters “to make sure they were filling just a straight murder case.”

Wade would have had to prove anything alleged in an indictment. So he had a legitimate need to know what evidence the investigators had.

[Martin Weidmann]

Wade was the prosecutor. He didn’t investigate.

After a radio report that the Dallas police, in a court filing, had somehow implicated the Soviets in Oswald’s crimes. And a related call from LBJ aide Cliff Carter in Washington. The DA headed to for police headquarters “to make sure they were filling just a straight murder case.”

Wade would have had to prove anything alleged in an indictment. So he had a legitimate need to know what evidence the investigators had.

As I said, you clearly don't get (or want to get) any of it.

Wade would have had to prove anything alleged in an indictment.

Except for the fact that the prime suspect was dead and there would never be a trial

Wade would have had to prove anything alleged in an indictment. So he had a legitimate need to know what evidence the investigators had.

Which means that even if he didn't investigate himself, he was still part of the investigation.

[Charles Collins]

As I said, you clearly don't get (or want to get) any of it.

Wade would have had to prove anything alleged in an indictment. So he had a legitimate need to know what evidence the investigators had.

Which means that even if he didn't investigate himself, he was still part of the investigation.

This is what I said:

“Therefore, it was told to someone outside the investigation team before LHO's death.”

An investigation team investigates. A prosecution team prosecutes. Wade was not investigating. The investigation team was cooperating with him. My point is that the palm print was disclosed to him before the death of LHO.

[Martin Weidmann]

This is what I said:

“Therefore, it was told to someone outside the investigation team before LHO's death.”

An investigation team investigates. A prosecution team prosecutes. Wade was not investigating. The investigation team was cooperating with him. My point is that the palm print was disclosed to him before the death of LHO.

BS... Wade was actively involved from day 1. The idea that the two work completely independently is an illussion. Your remark only shows that you don't know what you are talking about.

You just don't want to accept that.

[John Mytton]

2. The FBI's "match" of the lift to the rifle is equally dubious. A. This "match" was described in a letter, and not sworn testimony. B. This "match" of five points fell far below the number of matching points required to say two prints were a match, and was of questionable scientific value. C. No FBI crime lab report on this match has ever surfaced, and it's quite possible there were a number of marks on the lift or the rifle that were not shared by the other, which would in effect make this "match" a "non-match." D. There is no record the FBI contacted Day and had him specify exactly where the print was on the rifle. As a consequence, the FBI's report is basically that we found five blemishes on the lift that roughly aligned with five blemishes on the rifle, which may or may not be where the print was supposedly found. Worthless.

Thanks for your input, the FBI took a print of the rifle from the same place that Day testified to taking on the 22nd and the FBI lined up these 5 marks. You seem to be applying fingerprint identification to the location of these 5 marks and it's entirely a different kettle of fish, here we have 5 random pock marks of equal size and equally spaced apart which is seen as unique enough to be be considered proof, the chances that those 5 pock marks randomly appeared in the same place and of the same size on another rifle would be extremely remote.

It's like the random gouge on the forestock of the rifle, the unique gouge can be seen in photographs and proves that Oswald's rifle was with him in late March/early April, was found on the 6th floor, was carried out of the building, was later paraded in front of the press and is the same rifle today that is sometimes seen in exhibitions. 

If we had a better copy of the FBI print transfer from the rifle then we could try to make a match, hopefully it will turn up sometime but the rifle still exists and maybe somebody can take a high res photo or maybe even take another print?
Here is the same exhibit overlayed with a better copy of Oswald's palmprint and we can see the 5 pock marks which according to the FBI correspond to the barrel of Oswald's rifle and considering the rifle wasn't destroyed immediately thereafter the marks must still be there which leads to the obvious question why would the FBI invent this evidence?



JohnM

[Charles Collins]

BS... Wade was actively involved from day 1. The idea that the two work completely independently is an illussion. Your remark only shows that you don't know what you are talking about.

You just don't want to accept that.

It is you that just doesn't want to accept this:

Warren Commission Volume V, pages 215 and 216:





Mr. Wade. ...It has never been my policy to make any investigations out of my office of murders or anything else for that matter. We leave that entirely to the police agency.

Mr. Rankin. Do you have a reason for that?

Mr. Wade. That is the way it is set up down there...

Mr. Wade. ... I didn't even know Oswald had been arrested at this time. As a matter of fact, I didn't know it at 5 o'clock when I left the hospital. When I left the hospital, I went home, watched television for a while, had dinner, and a couple, some friends of ours came over there. They were going to Austin with us on the bus, and we had dinner and started out somewhere but I said we better go by the police station.

Mr Wade. ...I went by the Dallas police, just to see what was kind of going on.

Mr. Rankin. Was that unusual for you to do that?

Mr. Wade. It was unusual because I hadn't been in the Dallas Police Department, I won't be in there on the average of once a year actually, I mean on anything.


The above is why I asked you to read Wade's testimony. It clearly shows exactly what I have been saying and you refuse to accept.

[Walt Cakebread]

I honestly have no dog in this hunt, as I would be perfectly willing to believe Oswald, acting alone, killed Kennedy...should that be what the evidence suggests. Unfortunately, however, my attempt to separate fact from fiction in this case led me to conclude BOTH "sides" are full of it.

As to John's list...

1. Day told numerous falsehoods in his testimony, and his claims about the print were dubious, as best. It appears, moreover, that the WC came to believe as much. Day claimed, after all, that he told Curry and Fritz about the print on the evening of the assassination, and neither the FBI or WC made any effort to verify this with Curry or Fritz. While some claim, moreover, that Wade knew about the print and discussed it in his press conference, it's incredibly clear, once one looks at all the evidence, that Wade was speaking about the trigger guard print, which was listed as a possible palm print in memos written days after the press conference.
2. The FBI's "match" of the lift to the rifle is equally dubious. A. This "match" was described in a letter, and not sworn testimony. B. This "match" of five points fell far below the number of matching points required to say two prints were a match, and was of questionable scientific value. C. No FBI crime lab report on this match has ever surfaced, and it's quite possible there were a number of marks on the lift or the rifle that were not shared by the other, which would in effect make this "match" a "non-match." D. There is no record the FBI contacted Day and had him specify exactly where the print was on the rifle. As a consequence, the FBI's report is basically that we found five blemishes on the lift that roughly aligned with five blemishes on the rifle, which may or may not be where the print was supposedly found. Worthless.
3. No argument here. It may very well have been Oswald's rifle in the photos.
4. The FBI dismissed Scalice's use of five photos to match up one print as junk science, and refused to sign off on it. I believe this remains their position. Even worse, fingerprint charts are the cornerstone of ALL print identifications. It's basically showing your work.  Scalice's charts--if they ever existed--have never been published or shared. As a result, his identification of the trigger guard prints as Oswald's prints is near worthless, scientifically speaking. Even worse, he claims he used five photos from Savage to come to his conclusion. Well, this is mighty curious seeing as there were only three photos, and that the NEGATIVES to these photos were provided the FBI, as well as the prints themselves, and the FBI's own photos of the prints. 
5. The fibers on the rifle butt were, per Stombaugh, found on top the fingerprint powder. This led Stombaugh to offer that the fibers were wrapped around the butt plate while someone (Day) was dusting the rifle. Well, this is ludicrous. If there was a clump of fibers adhering to the butt plate while Day was dusting the area, he would have noticed them and removed them, that is, assuming he was remotely competent. Making matters worse is that when asked about it on the 23rd Oswald claimed he'd changed a dirty reddish shirt after work, and that this dirty "reddish"shirt was found among his possessions. The historical record, then, is this. The DPD and FBI had nothing to show Oswald touched the rifle on the 22nd. They then claimed they'd found fibers from his shirt on the rifle. They then found out that--oops--he hadn't been wearing that shirt that day. He was then murdered while in police custody, which essentially saved Fritz and the DPD from a trial in which his defense team would have argued the fibers were planted on the rifle--and would probably have won that argument (seeing as no one at work could identify the dark brown shirt in which he was arrested as a shirt he'd worn to work, and seeing as this shirt was not nearly as dirty as the shirt he claimed he'd been wearing).

It should be very clear that the Warren Commission was simply a cover up, white wash.....  LBJ commissioned the "investigation" .... 

What do these two facts tell you?