Free Book Now Available -- Hasty Judgment: Why the JFK Case Is Not Closed

[John Iacoletti]

Photographing a print before you lift it may be standard procedure but it's got nothing to do with chain of custody. Day did not lie about anything. He was very busy all day. When Doughty came and told him to get the items of evidence packed up to be handed over to the FBI, Day had yet to around to photographing the print. He was rushed.

Yeah, that was the excuse, but Day's testimony belies that excuse.

Mr. BELIN. At what time did these same photographs which are the same as Commission Exhibit 720 and 721 of this print----
Mr. DAY. About 8 o'clock, somewhere around 8 o'clock, in that neighborhood.

So he took the photos of the trigger guard prints around 8 PM....

When was he instructed by Curry to turn over the evidence to the FBI?  Shortly before midnight. (CE 3145, p. 832)

[John Mytton]

Knickers has tried to get away with this nonsense for years.

Good to know.

"Wrong" -- LOL

Day was very specific about the reason ridges were left on the barrel:

Mr. BELIN. When you lift a print is it then harder to make a photograph of that print after it is lifted or doesn't it make any difference?
Mr. DAY. It depends. If it is a fresh print, and by fresh I mean hadn't been there very long and dried, practically all the print will come off and there will be nothing left. If it is an old print, that is pretty well dried, many times you can still see it after the lift. In this case I could still see traces of print on that barrel.

Mr. BELIN. You mean the remaining traces of the powder you had when you got the lift, Exhibit 637, is that what you mean by the lift of the remaining print on the gun?
Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. Actually it was dried ridges on there. There were traces of ridges still on the gun barrel.

Yet clean as a whistle when Latona, your expert(!) witness, received it. Game over.

Wow, where did Day hide it for four days?

From my post above, there is absolutely no doubt that Oswald's prints came directly from C2766, therefore Oswald touched the rifle.

JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

From my post above, there is absolutely no doubt that Oswald's prints came directly from C2766, therefore Oswald touched the rifle.

LOLOLOL

"Mytton" is a legend in his own mind.

[John Mytton]

There's no such post above.

ROFL!

JohnM

[Tim Nickerson]

Knickers has tried to get away with this nonsense for years.

Good to know.

"Wrong" -- LOL

Day was very specific about the reason ridges were left on the barrel:

Mr. BELIN. When you lift a print is it then harder to make a photograph of that print after it is lifted or doesn't it make any difference?
Mr. DAY. It depends. If it is a fresh print, and by fresh I mean hadn't been there very long and dried, practically all the print will come off and there will be nothing left. If it is an old print, that is pretty well dried, many times you can still see it after the lift. In this case I could still see traces of print on that barrel.

Mr. BELIN. You mean the remaining traces of the powder you had when you got the lift, Exhibit 637, is that what you mean by the lift of the remaining print on the gun?
Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. Actually it was dried ridges on there. There were traces of ridges still on the gun barrel.

Yet clean as a whistle when Latona, your expert(!) witness, received it. Game over.

Wow, where did Day hide it for four days?

It seems that Day remembered it wrong. Many months had passed. Or he was in such a hurry reassembling the rifle that he inadvertently removed any traces of the print left on the barrel.  He was careless. Who knows for sure. I'm going with the former. He kept the lift locked up in his office.

[Tim Nickerson]

There's no such post above.

Did you just lie or were you just mistaken?

[John Mytton]

Did you just lie or were you just mistaken?

Otto's not the sharpest tool in the shed. ROFL!

JohnM

[John Mytton]

I checked twice.

There's no evidence of a November 22 lift.

From that rifle.

OK, no worries.

JohnM