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

[Thomas Graves]

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

Didn't the undertaker say some guys in suits came late at night, demanded to have private access to Oswald's corpse, and then left about an hour later with ink all over their hands?

-- MWT 

[Martin Weidmann]

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

Actually, no the exhibit doesn't show that. It's a print on an index card which Day said he lifted from the rifle.

And it is relevant how old the print was.... Day's testimony indicates it's wasn't a fresh print at all.

[Charles Collins]

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.

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!

According to Day in his 1996 oral history, he didn't come in the next day (Saturday). The rifle was returned (in a big box) on Sunday, but Day wasn't there when it was returned. Day was directed not to do anything else with it and didn't open the box. And he never did get back to checking the print, they told him not to do anything else with it, and he didn‟t. He felt sure it was Oswald's print when he briefly examined it…that palm print that he got off the barrel.

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.

Wade was going by his memory because the DPD had been advised by the FBI not to release information on the evidence to the media. Here is an abbreviated list that I noted when I watched the video: witnesses, boxes with palmprints, three shells, gun (hidden) purchased via mail, ID card, pictures of LHO with the rifle, neighbor gave ride - package (supposedly curtain rods), breakroom encounter, bus (@Lamar Street), Taxi to Oakcliff, changed clothes, Tippit encounter with shells, Texas Theater - fight & arrest, brought to city jail, fingerprints on rifle on metal underside, parafin test.

One could argue that Wade was referring to the fingerprints near the trigger. However, Day has said those fingerprints were not clear enough to determine if they were a match or not. And he said he "felt sure" the palmprint was Oswald's. It stands to reason that Wade would not have said Oswald's prints were on the rifle if all they had was the fingerprints that Day said were not clear enough for ID. Wade later told Aynesworth he was told about the palmprint on 11/22/63. I contend he was referring to that palmprint at the news conference on 11/24. He was going from memory only, didn't have the cooperation of the police to verify everything, and he made a few misstatements. The use of fingerprints in lieu of palmprint is one of those and understandable under those conditions.

[Martin Weidmann]

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!

According to Day in his 1996 oral history, he didn't come in the next day (Saturday). The rifle was returned (in a big box) on Sunday, but Day wasn't there when it was returned. Day was directed not to do anything else with it and didn't open the box. And he never did get back to checking the print, they told him not to do anything else with it, and he didn‟t. He felt sure it was Oswald's print when he briefly examined it…that palm print that he got off the barrel.

And he never did get back to checking the print, they told him not to do anything else with it, and he didn‟t.

Exactly, on the evening on 11/22/63 he was indeed told to stop processing, which clearly included the palmprint!   

Or would you be arguing that they first told him to stop processing the rifle and only later told him to not examine the palmprint as well? If that is what you are claiming, you need of course also explain why Day did not continue to process such a crucial piece of evidence as the palmprint on the index card on Friday evening.

IMO, Day's actions are beyond belief. If he really thought the palmprint belonged to Oswald, it would have been a smoking gun! He would have had every reason to want to examine the palmprint as soon as possible. Yet, he shows no interest or curiosity in the print and places it in his desk and ignores it completely for four days. He doesn't complain about or question the order not to process the print further.

The biggest crime of the century, Day believes he has crucial and perhaps conclusive evidence to show Oswald did it and he does...….. absolutely nothing! How can that be deembed credible in any way, shape or form?

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.

Wade was going by his memory because the DPD had been advised by the FBI not to release information on the evidence to the media. Here is an abbreviated list that I noted when I watched the video: witnesses, boxes with palmprints, three shells, gun (hidden) purchased via mail, ID card, pictures of LHO with the rifle, neighbor gave ride - package (supposedly curtain rods), breakroom encounter, bus (@Lamar Street), Taxi to Oakcliff, changed clothes, Tippit encounter with shells, Texas Theater - fight & arrest, brought to city jail, fingerprints on rifle on metal underside, parafin test.

One could argue that Wade was referring to the fingerprints near the trigger. However, Day has said those fingerprints were not clear enough to determine if they were a match or not. And he said he "felt sure" the palmprint was Oswald's. It stands to reason that Wade would not have said Oswald's prints were on the rifle if all they had was the fingerprints that Day said were not clear enough for ID. Wade later told Aynesworth he was told about the palmprint on 11/22/63. I contend he was referring to that palmprint at the news conference on 11/24. He was going from memory only, didn't have the cooperation of the police to verify everything, and he made a few misstatements. The use of fingerprints in lieu of palmprint is one of those and understandable under those conditions.

And he said he "felt sure" the palmprint was Oswald's.

Again you are trying to make something out of nothing. The only palmprint Wade talked about was the print on the boxes! Not the rifle, as you incorrectly claimed in your post #250.

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.

It stands to reason that Wade would not have said Oswald's prints were on the rifle if all they had was the fingerprints that Day said were not clear enough for ID.

No it doesn't stand to reason at all. After Oswald was killed Wade was free to say what he wanted in the knowledge that there wouldn't be a trial. In the press conference on 11/24/63 he said several things that we now know simply were not true. He could have added the palmprint allegedly found on the rifle but didn't!

I contend he was referring to that palmprint at the news conference on 11/24. He was going from memory only, didn't have the cooperation of the police to verify everything, and he made a few misstatements. The use of fingerprints in lieu of palmprint is one of those and understandable under those conditions.


So Wade said one thing but really meant something else.... Nice try to rewrite history! You can contend it all you want, but there is just not a shred of evidence for it.

[Charles Collins]

And he never did get back to checking the print, they told him not to do anything else with it, and he didn‟t.

Exactly, on the evening on 11/22/63 he was indeed told to stop processing, which clearly included the palmprint!   

Or would you be arguing that they first told him to stop processing the rifle and only later told him to not examine the palmprint as well? If that is what you are claiming, you need of course also explain why Day did not continue to process the palmprint on Friday evening.

IMO, Day's actions are beyond belief. If he really thought the palmprint belonged to Oswald, it would have been a smoking gun! He would have had every reason to want to examine the palmprint as soon as possible. Yet, he shows no interest or curiosity in the print for four days. He places the index card in his desk and ignores it completely for four days. He doesn't complain about or question the order not to process the print further. The biggest crime of the century, Day believes he has conclusive evidence to show Oswald did it and he does...….. absolutely nothing! How can that be deembed credible in any way, shape or form?

And he said he "felt sure" the palmprint was Oswald's.

Again you are trying to make something out of nothing. The only palmprint Wade talked about was the print on the boxes! Not the rifle, as you incorrectly claimed in your post #250.

It stands to reason that Wade would not have said Oswald's prints were on the rifle if all they had was the fingerprints that Day said were not clear enough for ID.

No it doesn't stand to reason at all. After Oswald was killed Wade was free to say what he wanted in the knowledge that there wouldn't be a trial. In the press conference on 11/24/63 he said several things that we now know simply were not true. He could have added the palmprint allegedly found on the rifle but didn't!

I contend he was referring to that palmprint at the news conference on 11/24. He was going from memory only, didn't have the cooperation of the police to verify everything, and he made a few misstatements. The use of fingerprints in lieu of palmprint is one of those and understandable under those conditions.


So Wade said one thing but really meant something else.... Nice try to rewrite history! You can contend it all you want, but there is just not a shred of evidence for it.

Exactly, on the evening on 11/22/63 he was indeed told to stop processing, which clearly included the palmprint!   

Or would you be arguing that they first told him to stop processing the rifle and only later told him to not examine the palmprint as well? If that is what you are claiming, you need of course also explain why Day did not continue to process the palmprint on Friday evening.

That is what Day said. Your contention is your conjecture.

IMO, Day's actions are beyond belief. If he really thought the palmprint belonged to Oswald, it would have been a smoking gun! He would have had every reason to want to examine the palmprint as soon as possible. Yet, he shows no interest or curiosity in the print for four days. He places the index card in his desk and ignores it completely for four days. He doesn't complain about or question the order not to process the print further. The biggest crime of the century, Day believes he has conclusive evidence to show Oswald did it and he does...….. absolutely nothing! How can that be deembed credible in any way, shape or form?

Thank you for stating all of that is your opinion.

Again you are trying to make something out of nothing. The only palmprint Wade talked about was the print on the boxes! Not the rifle, as you incorrectly claimed in your post #250.

Not in my (already stated) reasoned opinion.

No it doesn't stand to reason at all. After Oswald was killed Wade was free to say what he wanted in the knowledge that there wouldn't be a trial. In the press conference on 11/24/63 he said several things that we now know simply were not true. He could have added the palmprint allegedly found on the rifle but didn't!

Wade knew that the case would continue to be investigated and the facts would come out. He wasn't free to say what he wanted. If he intentionally lied it would come back to bite him. (He did feel a need to outline the evidence to the media to counter the views by some in the media that they might have arrested the wrong man.) Why would he say Oswald's prints were on the rifle if all they had was fingerprints that were not clear enough for ID? You make no sense. Wade was in my (already stated) reasoned opinion referring to the palmprint that Day felt sure was Oswald's. The palmprint was also a big part of the reasons they decided that night, 11/22/63, to charge Oswald with the assassination.

So Wade said one thing but really meant something else.... Nice try to rewrite history! You can contend it all you want, but there is just not a shred of evidence for it.

From wikipedia:
Fingerprint identification, known as dactyloscopy,[8] or hand print identification, is the process of comparing two instances of friction ridge skin impressions (see Minutiae), from human fingers or toes, or even the palm of the hand or sole of the foot, to determine whether these impressions could have come from the same individual.

Palmprints and fingerprints and other prints are all part of fingerprint identification. It is understandable that he would just say fingerprint and it would cover both. Another possibility is: when Wade was told on 11/22/63 they might have just said Oswald's print was found on the rifle and not specified that it was a palmprint.

I have already stated the other reasons to believe he was referring to the palmprint. Those reasons are evidence based on the real circumstances and the words of the people who were there and in a position to know. Not made up out of thin air as you imply.

[John Mytton]

Actually, no the exhibit doesn't show that. It's a print on an index card which Day said he lifted from the rifle.

No, the exhibit shows that the same 5 marks on Day's Index card correspond perfectly with the marks on the actual rifle, proving that at some point Oswald put his palmprint on the barrel of a dismantled C2766, the same rifle that was sent to Oswald's PO Box number.



JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

Exactly, on the evening on 11/22/63 he was indeed told to stop processing, which clearly included the palmprint!   

Or would you be arguing that they first told him to stop processing the rifle and only later told him to not examine the palmprint as well? If that is what you are claiming, you need of course also explain why Day did not continue to process the palmprint on Friday evening.

That is what Day said. Your contention is your conjecture.

No. That's not what Day said. He said in his WC testimony that he was told to stop processing. You were the one who claimed it was only about the rifle, but you can not explain why Day did not process the crucial palmprint further and actually kept it in his desk for four days. That's why you just say it's my conjecture. You always do something like that when you get stuck and have no answers. It's a desperate sign of weakness!

So, again… why did Day not process the palmprint further when - as you incorrectly claim - he was only told to stop processing the rifle?

IMO, Day's actions are beyond belief. If he really thought the palmprint belonged to Oswald, it would have been a smoking gun! He would have had every reason to want to examine the palmprint as soon as possible. Yet, he shows no interest or curiosity in the print for four days. He places the index card in his desk and ignores it completely for four days. He doesn't complain about or question the order not to process the print further. The biggest crime of the century, Day believes he has conclusive evidence to show Oswald did it and he does...….. absolutely nothing! How can that be deembed credible in any way, shape or form?

Thank you for stating all of that is your opinion.

Of course it is my opinion.... and you have nothing to counter it!

Again you are trying to make something out of nothing. The only palmprint Wade talked about was the print on the boxes! Not the rifle, as you incorrectly claimed in your post #250.

Not in my (already stated) reasoned opinion.

Your opinions are not reasoned. They only serve the purpose of defending a predetermined conclusion.

Anybody who listens to the Wade press conference of 11/24/63 will note that Wade only talks about the palmprint found on a box at the TSBD.

No it doesn't stand to reason at all. After Oswald was killed Wade was free to say what he wanted in the knowledge that there wouldn't be a trial. In the press conference on 11/24/63 he said several things that we now know simply were not true. He could have added the palmprint allegedly found on the rifle but didn't!

Wade knew that the case would continue to be investigated and the facts would come out. He wasn't free to say what he wanted. If he intentionally lied it would come back to bite him. (He did feel a need to outline the evidence to the media to counter the views by some in the media that they might have arrested the wrong man.) Why would he say Oswald's prints were on the rifle if all they had was fingerprints that were not clear enough for ID? You make no sense. Wade was in my (already stated) reasoned opinion referring to the palmprint that Day felt sure was Oswald's. The palmprint was also a big part of the reasons they decided that night, 11/22/63, to charge Oswald with the assassination.

Wade knew that the case would continue to be investigated and the facts would come out. He wasn't free to say what he wanted. If he intentionally lied it would come back to bite him.

BS all he would have to say is that he was given erroneous information. It was only a press conference, for crying out loud.

Why would he say Oswald's prints were on the rifle if all they had was fingerprints that were not clear enough for ID? You make no sense.

He made all sorts of claims that later turned out not to be true, and none of them came back "to bite him"

Wade was in my (already stated) reasoned opinion referring to the palmprint that Day felt sure was Oswald's.

BS. If Day felt so sure that the palmprint belonged to Oswald, why did he not make sure by processing it further, rather than doing absolutely nothing with it for four days.

The palmprint was also a big part of the reasons they decided that night, 11/22/63, to charge Oswald with the assassination.

So, they charged Oswald with murder of the President based upon Day's "feeling" and made no effort at all to make sure? Are you for real?

So Wade said one thing but really meant something else.... Nice try to rewrite history! You can contend it all you want, but there is just not a shred of evidence for it.

From wikipedia:
Fingerprint identification, known as dactyloscopy,[8] or hand print identification, is the process of comparing two instances of friction ridge skin impressions (see Minutiae), from human fingers or toes, or even the palm of the hand or sole of the foot, to determine whether these impressions could have come from the same individual.

Palmprints and fingerprints and other prints are all part of fingerprint identification. It is understandable that he would just say fingerprint and it would cover both. Another possibility is: when Wade was told on 11/22/63 they might have just said Oswald's print was found on the rifle and not specified that it was a palmprint.

I have already stated the other reasons to believe he was referring to the palmprint. Those reasons are evidence based on the real circumstances and the words of the people who were there and in a position to know. Not made up out of thin air as you imply.

Your "reasons" are nothing more than conjecture based upon a vague newspaper article and comments made by Wade and Day decades after the events. There is clear and obvious evidence that shows the palmprint on the indexcard did not surface until 11/26/63 and was not processed (by Latona) until 11/29/63.

It is completely hilarious that you argue that Day was not told to stop processing the palmprint on Friday evening, when we know he did in fact not process it at all prior to surrendering it to the FBI on 11/26. It is just as comical that you suggest that Day was in fact also told to stop processing the print, but that he nevertheless somehow made a "tentative match" and it's completely pathetic to claim that Oswald would have been charged with the murder of Kennedy based on that alleged "tentative match" when the DPD had the means and possibility to make absolutely sure there was in fact a match.

[Martin Weidmann]

No, the exhibit shows that the same 5 marks on Day's Index card correspond perfectly with the marks on the actual rifle, proving that at some point Oswald put his palmprint on the barrel of a dismantled C2766, the same rifle that was sent to Oswald's PO Box number.


JohnM

the exhibit shows that the same 5 marks on Day's Index card correspond perfectly with the marks on the actual rifle, proving that at some point Oswald put his palmprint on the barrel of a dismantled C2766

No, the 5 marks match at best only proves that Day's index card touched the rifle at some point.