Dallas Police Crime Lab

[John Iacoletti]

Wow, "LOL" is such a witty response, I'm absolutely shattered.

Who cares if you’re shattered? LOL is the only response your baseless claims deserve.

No worries.

Your morph of two photos of the same lift proves exactly nothing about the rifle. Try again.

[John Mytton]

Your morph of two photos of the same lift proves exactly nothing about the rifle. Try again.

Wrong, the Day print is being directly compared to the FBI print, check it yourself, you lose. But i am happy that you thought its the same print. 
Btw you are really getting your ass kicked in this thread, but keep trying! LOL.

JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

You're trying to hard Iacoletti, all of the above can be true, Day was still releasing evidence to Drain at 11:45 PM and it's possible that Day gathered the rifle and gave C2766 to Drain a little after midnight which means that Day was not lying when he said that he only told Fritz and Curry about the palm print on that night and then on the next day he told Drain about the rifle, and Livingston obviously heard what was being said to Drain, so everyone is clean, job done!

Now who’s being desperate?

Cite?

Also in CE3145:

"Lt. Day stated he made a written report on January 8, 1964, to Mr. G. L. Lumpkin. Deputy of Police, Service Division of the Dallas Police Department. This report is set forth as requested of Lt. Day, and a copy of such report was furnished for transmittal to the President's Commission investigating the assassination pf President Kennedy. Lt. Day stated he preferred to let the written report speak for itself and would rather elaborate orally on the lifting of the palm print from the underside of the rifle, which palm print was found when he examined the rifle on November 22, 1963, rather than to make a written signed statement."

[John Mytton]

Also in CE3145:

"Lt. Day stated he made a written report on January 8, 1964, to Mr. G. L. Lumpkin. Deputy of Police, Service Division of the Dallas Police Department. This report is set forth as requested of Lt. Day, and a copy of such report was furnished for transmittal to the President's Commission investigating the assassination pf President Kennedy. Lt. Day stated he preferred to let the written report speak for itself and would rather elaborate orally on the lifting of the palm print from the underside of the rifle, which palm print was found when he examined the rifle on November 22, 1963, rather than to make a written signed statement."

So what, Day wasnt trying to hide anything, its just another worthless accusation.

JohnM

[Charles Collins]

Now who’s being desperate?

Also in CE3145:

"Lt. Day stated he made a written report on January 8, 1964, to Mr. G. L. Lumpkin. Deputy of Police, Service Division of the Dallas Police Department. This report is set forth as requested of Lt. Day, and a copy of such report was furnished for transmittal to the President's Commission investigating the assassination pf President Kennedy. Lt. Day stated he preferred to let the written report speak for itself and would rather elaborate orally on the lifting of the palm print from the underside of the rifle, which palm print was found when he examined the rifle on November 22, 1963, rather than to make a written signed statement."

You are trying to make what the document actually said into something that is obviously untrue. When did "he preferred to let the written report speak for itself and would rather elaborate orally" become "he refused to sign a statement"?

[John Iacoletti]

Savage writes that not only Rusty, but Pete Barnes, H. R. Williams, and Bobby Brown also saw and compared the palm print that weekend. And it was front page news on 11/24/63.

Not only does that article say nothing about a print in a rifle, but even if it did it would tell you nothing about who saw what on 11/22.

And how did Livingston, Barnes, Williams, and Brown see something that Day didn’t tell anybody about?

The key words are: "that he had made the tentative identification." Nothing in that statement precludes Day telling Drain about a palm print on the rifle (and Livingston overhearing the conversation).

So we’re to believe that Day tentatively identified the only print evidence they had that connected Oswald to the rifle on the 22nd and didn’t bother to mention that detail to the “distracted” Drain (distracted by what, a heart attack?) or to anybody else, but that somehow 4 other guys in the office came to the same conclusion without Day telling them?

And then somehow when the rifle was in transit, it lost any evidence that it had been processed with fingerprint powder, as well as losing the traces of print that Day claimed were still there.

Seems legit.

[John Iacoletti]

Thanks John, yes the FBI had to have been satisfied with that evidence which indicates that the palm print came from the rifle.

All we know is that Hoover was satisfied. You know, the guy whose stated objective was to convince the public that Oswald was the real assassin?

[John Mytton]

All we know is that Hoover was satisfied. You know, they guy whose stated objective was to convince the public that Oswald was the real assassin?

Wrong again, Hoover was satisfied because he had the evidence of the two prints showing a perfect match. Hahaha!

JohnM