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

[Martin Weidmann]

Mr. DAY. These are prints or pictures, I should say, of the latent--of the traces of prints on the side of the magazine housing of the gun No. C-2766.
Mr. BELIN. Were those prints in such condition as to be identifiable, if you know?
Mr. DAY. No, sir; I could not make positive identification of these prints.
Mr. BELIN. Did you have enough opportunity to work and get these pictures or not?
Mr. DAY. I worked with them, yes. I could not exclude all possibility as to identification. I thought I knew which they were, but I could not positively identify them.
Mr. BELIN. What was your opinion so far as it went as to whose they were?
Mr. DAY. They appeared to be the right middle and right ring finger of Harvey Lee Oswald, Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr. BELIN. At the time you had this did you have any comparison fingerprints to make with the actual prints of Lee Harvey Oswald?
Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; we had sets in Captain Fritz' office. Oswald was in his custody, we had made palmprints and fingerprints of him.

Brilliant... Chapman jumps in with information about the wrong print. 

Charles Collins claims incorrectly that on 11/22/63 Henry Wade was told about the palmprint on an index card allegedly taken from the rifle, having been tentatively identified as belonging to Oswald.

[Martin Weidmann]

What do you claim is to stop him?

I don't claim anything. Day said in his testimony that he was ordered to stop processing the print just after he had lifted it from the rifle.

[Charles Collins]

I don't claim anything. Day said in his testimony that he was ordered to stop processing the print just after he had lifted it from the rifle.

No he didn’t.

[Charles Collins]

Charles Collins claims incorrectly that on 11/22/63 Henry Wade was told about the palmprint on an index card allegedly taken from the rifle, having been tentatively identified as belonging to Oswald.

This is my claim:

So is there a good reason to believe that it wasn’t? Do you know that Henry Wade reportedly said that he was informed of it on 11/22/63, just before they charged LHO with the JFK assassination?

I have backed it up 100%. Nothing incorrect about it. Stop lying.

[Martin Weidmann]

No he didn’t.

Obviously you can't read…..


Mr. BELIN. The wood. You removed the wood, and then underneath the wood is where you found the print?
Mr. DAY. On the bottom side of the barrel which was covered by the wood, I found traces of a palmprint. I dusted these and tried lifting them, the prints, with scotch tape in the usual manner. A faint palmprint came off. I could still see traces of the print under the barrel and was going to try to use photography to bring off or bring out a better print. About this time I received instructions from the chief's office to go no further with the processing, it was to be released to the FBI for them to complete. I did not process the underside of the barrel under the scopic sight, did not get to this area of the gun.


It's either that or you are just a contrarian with no arguments…….

[Charles Collins]

Obviously you can't read…..


Mr. BELIN. The wood. You removed the wood, and then underneath the wood is where you found the print?
Mr. DAY. On the bottom side of the barrel which was covered by the wood, I found traces of a palmprint. I dusted these and tried lifting them, the prints, with scotch tape in the usual manner. A faint palmprint came off. I could still see traces of the print under the barrel and was going to try to use photography to bring off or bring out a better print. About this time I received instructions from the chief's office to go no further with the processing, it was to be released to the FBI for them to complete. I did not process the underside of the barrel under the scopic sight, did not get to this area of the gun.


It's either that or you are just a contrarian with no arguments…….

I can read. You apparently still don't understand what context means.

[Martin Weidmann]

This is my claim:

I have backed it up 100%. Nothing incorrect about it. Stop lying.

No you haven't backed it up at all.
I'm not lying. The one misrepresenting the facts is you;

John Iacoletti wrote;

I'm implying that there is no good reason to believe that the index card with the partial palmprint on it was lifted from CE139 or even existed on 11/22/63.

and you replied;

So is there a good reason to believe that it wasn’t? Do you know that Henry Wade reportedly said that he was informed of it on 11/22/63, just before they charged LHO with the JFK assassination?

and later in the conversation you added;

No need for psychic abilities. Wade said he was told on 11/22/63  that an expert with DPD had tentatively identified the palm print on the rifle as Oswald's.

So, your claim is exactly what I said it is.

And it's incorrect because the testimony of Day and Latona quoted earlier prove beyond doubt that Wade could not have been told on 11/22/63

[Martin Weidmann]

I can read. You apparently still don't understand what context means.

You preference to go with years old memory and conjecture as well as your unwillingness to look at the actual facts is simply amazing.

It might be better if you never sit on a jury. Since I can't fix stupid, I'm done.