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

[John Mytton]

Already discussed in the preceding posts, which you apparently didn't bother to read. 

Mr. BELIN. Do you have those photographs, sir? I will mark the two photographs which you have just produced Commission Exhibits 720 and 721. I will ask you to state what these are.
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.

If somebody told a reporter prior to Oswald's death that "We've got a print that matches Oswald's" on the rifle then it was misinformation.

Since to make your point, you're relying on Day's testimony to be truthful, here's another Lt. Day tidbit.

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.

JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

Since to make your point, you're relying on Day's testimony to be truthful, here's another Lt. Day tidbit.

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.

I'm not relying on Day's testimony to be truthful.  I'm pointing out that there is no contemporary corroboration for Aynesworth's 50-year-old double hearsay.  Even from the guy who claimed to have lifted the magic palmprint.

[John Mytton]

I'm not relying on Day's testimony to be truthful. 

Then why bother posting his testimony?

JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

Then why bother posting his testimony?

Already answered in the part you trimmed off.

[John Mytton]

Already answered in the part you trimmed off.

I posted your Day quote in full, is Day your eyewitness or not?

JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

I'm not relying on Day's testimony to be truthful.  I'm pointing out that there is no contemporary corroboration for Aynesworth's 50-year-old double hearsay.  Even from the guy who claimed to have lifted the magic palmprint.

[Charles Collins]

You're accepting a 50-year-old recollection of Aynesworth as being a precise word-for-word quote of Henry Wade on a particular day (with no corroborating evidence) and rejecting (rightly so) Howard Brennan's 20-year-old recollection of seeing the president's head explode.

What "several people"?  You're ignoring what Wade himself said in 1964 (along with Day and Latona) in favor of something Aynesworth claimed 50 years later that Wade said that Fritz said on November 22, 1963.  There's no record of Fritz ever mentioning this alleged print directly.

You're accepting a 50-year-old recollection of Aynesworth as being a precise word-for-word quote of Henry Wade on a particular day (with no corroborating evidence) and rejecting (rightly so) Howard Brennan's 20-year-old recollection of seeing the president's head explode.


Show me where I said that!

Aynesworth confirmed with me on the phone that those quotes in his book which are in parentheses  are from his notes he took at the time the comments were made. I already said this, you must have missed it. And like I said earlier, don't take my word for this, contact Hugh Aynesworth yourself and get it from him. Brennan's book was written with the help of Reverend J. Edward Cherryholmes. The description of the assassination appears to be written by Cherryholmes (the words and phrases are more like what you would expect from him as a clergyman that what you might expect from a construction worker. And the concrete structure appears to be in his line of sight to the President at the time of the head shot. I have said this before. These are all logical reasons why the two are not even close to being similar. And why your opinion that I am being hypocritical is unfounded nonsense.

What "several people"?  You're ignoring what Wade himself said in 1964 (along with Day and Latona) in favor of something Aynesworth claimed 50 years later that Wade said that Fritz said on November 22, 1963.  There's no record of Fritz ever mentioning this alleged print directly.

Wade, Aynesworth, the two newspaper reporters who authored the article. The investigation was on-going and LHO was still alive and in custody. What kind of "missing" record are you referring to?

[John Iacoletti]

Aynesworth confirmed with me on the phone that those quotes in his book which are in parentheses  are from his notes he took at the time the comments were made.

So what it boils down to is that you believe Aynesworth just because you believe him.  Even though there is no contemporary corroboration whatsoever.  What's worse is that even if Anyesworth is 100% accurate, that still doesn't mean that Fritz actually ever said that to Wade.  There's a reason that hearsay isn't admissible.

The description of the assassination appears to be written by Cherryholmes (the words and phrases are more like what you would expect from him as a clergyman that what you might expect from a construction worker.

No only is this pure assumption, but it's a classist assumption.