Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?  (Read 41063 times)

Offline John Mytton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4277
Re: Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?
« Reply #128 on: August 12, 2021, 10:16:59 AM »
Advertisement
When Scalise examined differing contrasted photos he confirmed that Oswald's prints were on the trigger guard of Oswald's rifle.


JohnM

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?
« Reply #128 on: August 12, 2021, 10:16:59 AM »


Online Richard Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5290
Re: Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?
« Reply #129 on: August 12, 2021, 04:08:39 PM »
The evidence is used to prove guilt.

Is that why you always come up empty handed?

There is an abundance that links Oswald to this crime.

For close to two weeks you have been trying, and failed, to "link" Oswald to a clipboard -- ROFL

But again, JFK was also the President of the United States.  Not just a person.  Someone with a axe to grind with the US might take that out on its most prominent representative.  So even if LHO did not "hate" JFK he still had an obvious motive for targeting him because Oswald was a political nut job.   And you cannot discount the fact that the opportunity fell into Oswald's lap.  JFK's motorcade literally drove by his place of work affording him the chance.  Oswald did not "target" JFK in the sense that he had to seek him out as most assassins have to do.  JFK came to Dallas and drove right into Oswald's line of sight.

As usual, your psycho-babble goes nowhere, awesome!

Typical Otto rebuttal.  It contains the usual personal insult, deflection from the issue under discussion (with no relevance to that issue), no substance, and adds nothing to the discussion.

Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Re: Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?
« Reply #130 on: August 12, 2021, 05:21:17 PM »
It was only with digital technology that the print photos could be seen under varying contrasts to bring out the detail. Now the process didn't add detail and combining the same print from one photo to another is a perfectly legitimate way of evaluating prints in photographs.

Day said the print was three inches from the forward end of the wooden fore-stock, not three inches from the muzzle. Above that area of the fore-stock, half of the metal barrel remains exposed. That's where the hardworking and sharp-eyed Day saw part of the palm print exposed. ("I could also see a trace of a print on the side of the barrel that extended under the woodstock.")



I have no trouble reconciling where Day found the barrel print.

Even on the day of the assassination, Day thought there was information (but not enough for a legal-standard "match") to tentatively link the prints to those of 'Lil' Lee. Years later, in the PBS-Frontline program, Day's tentative work on the trigger-guard housing fingerprints was re-examined by one of the nation's most prominent Latent Print Examiners, who said they matched positively to Oswald's.

    "As a result of an exacting and detailed examination and comparison under
     varying degrees of magnification and illumination, I have reached the
     conclusion that the developed latent prints are the fingerprints of Lee
     Harvey Oswald's right middle finger (#3) and right ring finger (#4) as
     they appear on the inked fingerprint card [JFK Exhibit F-400 of the HSCA]."


on the day of the assassination, Day thought there was information (but not enough for a legal-standard "match") to tentatively link the prints to those of 'Lil' Lee.

Then please explain how it was possible for Henty Wade on 11- 22-63 to stand in front of reporters and boldly  announce that they had found Lee Oswald's prints on the rifle.  ????

This bold lie from Henry Wade was probably the KEY lie that caused the public to start believing that Lee Oswald was guilty.


JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?
« Reply #130 on: August 12, 2021, 05:21:17 PM »


Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Re: Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?
« Reply #131 on: August 12, 2021, 05:41:29 PM »
Latona (FBI) saw no signs of anyone having even attempted to process the rifle.

Day's prints are utter and total BS.

Your "reconciling" should come as no surprise.


I could also see a trace of a print on the side of the barrel that extended under the woodstock. I started to take the     woodstock off and noted traces of a palmprint near the firing end of the barrel about 3 inches under the wood-stock when I took the  woodstock loose."...DPD detective JC Day



Here are the measurements of that area of the carcano.....

A)  11" from  firing end of the barrel ( muzzle) to the front barrel band

B) 6 1/4" ( not 3 ") to the from the muzzle to the  front of the wooden stock

C)  10 inches from the Muzzle to the front of the upper wooden hand guard

The is the only place where detective Day's description of the place he claimed he had found the "palm print" that is is even remotely similar to Day's description......It's the only place that the wooden stock and the metal barrel join where a human hand could deposit a print......( Day said he saw the print on the metal barrel and it extended back beneath the wooden stock.

Day was simply conjuring up an image of a rifle ......   when he was creating the lie.

LOOK at the photo of the carcano and try to reconcile a location that fits the description that Day invented.

I could also see a trace of a print on the side of the barrel that extended under the woodstock. I started to take the     woodstock off and noted traces of a palmprint near the firing end of the barrel about 3 inches under the wood-stock when I took the  woodstock loose."...DPD detective JC Day
« Last Edit: August 12, 2021, 05:51:42 PM by Walt Cakebread »

Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Re: Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?
« Reply #132 on: August 12, 2021, 05:57:56 PM »
It was only with digital technology that the print photos could be seen under varying contrasts to bring out the detail. Now the process didn't add detail and combining the same print from one photo to another is a perfectly legitimate way of evaluating prints in photographs.

Day said the print was three inches from the forward end of the wooden fore-stock, not three inches from the muzzle. Above that area of the fore-stock, half of the metal barrel remains exposed. That's where the hardworking and sharp-eyed Day saw part of the palm print exposed. ("I could also see a trace of a print on the side of the barrel that extended under the woodstock.")



I have no trouble reconciling where Day found the barrel print.

Even on the day of the assassination, Day thought there was information (but not enough for a legal-standard "match") to tentatively link the prints to those of 'Lil' Lee. Years later, in the PBS-Frontline program, Day's tentative work on the trigger-guard housing fingerprints was re-examined by one of the nation's most prominent Latent Print Examiners, who said they matched positively to Oswald's.

    "As a result of an exacting and detailed examination and comparison under
     varying degrees of magnification and illumination, I have reached the
     conclusion that the developed latent prints are the fingerprints of Lee
     Harvey Oswald's right middle finger (#3) and right ring finger (#4) as
     they appear on the inked fingerprint card [JFK Exhibit F-400 of the HSCA]."

Day said the print was three inches from the forward end of the wooden fore-stock, not three inches from the muzzle. Above that area of the fore-stock, half of the metal barrel remains exposed. That's where the hardworking and sharp-eyed Day saw part of the palm print exposed. ("I could also see a trace of a print on the side of the barrel that extended under the woodstock.")


OK, Mr O..... Please show me where the three inches back is related to?      3 inches from WHERE??  And if the print was on the SIDE of the barrel then why did Day write on the index card,  that it was "Off UNDERSIDE" of gun barrel "
« Last Edit: August 12, 2021, 07:26:03 PM by Walt Cakebread »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?
« Reply #132 on: August 12, 2021, 05:57:56 PM »


Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Re: Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?
« Reply #133 on: August 12, 2021, 06:37:24 PM »
Latona (FBI) saw no signs of anyone having even attempted to process the rifle.

Day's prints are utter and total BS.

Your "reconciling" should come as no surprise.

Day's prints are utter and total BS.

The entire story about the palm prints is nothing but pure fabrication.     But I don't know how to open peoples eyes this fact.

There is ample evidence that Day discovered the so called palm print while examining the rifle in the TSBD just minutes after he lifted the carcano from THE FLOOR where it had been hidden beneath boxes of books  ( there is film footage showing Day lifting the rifle from the FLOOR ( It was NOT jammed between boxes of books as the DPD in situ photos depict it.)

Day spotted what he thought was a palm print on the WOODEN foregrip and he lifted that smudge using cellophane tape.  Tom Alyea watched him as le lifted that " print"    After lifting the "print Day placed that cellophane tape on a white index card and scrawled the pertinent information on that index card.  Day wrote.... " Off underside gun barrel near end of foregrip" on rifle C 2766  He also initialed and dated the card.

That's where the so called "palm print originated....  It was sent to the FBI along with the other evidence at midnight ..... The FBI lab examined the smudge on the cellophane tape and reported that it was useless for identification purposes.

Then they discovered that Henry Wade had proclaimed that they had found Oswald's prints on the rifle.....But the FBI knew that no such incriminating evidence had been sent to them....  That's when the DPD ( JC Day) and the FBI created the whopper about how Day had dismantled the rifle and found the print.    Watta CROCK!!

Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Re: Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?
« Reply #134 on: August 12, 2021, 07:09:25 PM »
It was only with digital technology that the print photos could be seen under varying contrasts to bring out the detail. Now the process didn't add detail and combining the same print from one photo to another is a perfectly legitimate way of evaluating prints in photographs.

Day said the print was three inches from the forward end of the wooden fore-stock, not three inches from the muzzle. Above that area of the fore-stock, half of the metal barrel remains exposed. That's where the hardworking and sharp-eyed Day saw part of the palm print exposed. ("I could also see a trace of a print on the side of the barrel that extended under the woodstock.")



I have no trouble reconciling where Day found the barrel print.

Even on the day of the assassination, Day thought there was information (but not enough for a legal-standard "match") to tentatively link the prints to those of 'Lil' Lee. Years later, in the PBS-Frontline program, Day's tentative work on the trigger-guard housing fingerprints was re-examined by one of the nation's most prominent Latent Print Examiners, who said they matched positively to Oswald's.

    "As a result of an exacting and detailed examination and comparison under
     varying degrees of magnification and illumination, I have reached the
     conclusion that the developed latent prints are the fingerprints of Lee
     Harvey Oswald's right middle finger (#3) and right ring finger (#4) as
     they appear on the inked fingerprint card [JFK Exhibit F-400 of the HSCA]."



I could also see a trace of a print on the side of the barrel that extended under the woodstock. I started to take the     woodstock off and noted traces of a palmprint near the firing end of the barrel about 3 inches under the wood-stock when I took the  woodstock loose."...DPD detective JC Day

I could also see a trace of a print on the side of the barrel

OK ,Mr O..... Would you please point out the location on the rifle where Day said that he saw " a trace of a print ON THE SIDE OF THE BARREL......

Offline Jon Banks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1219
Re: Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?
« Reply #135 on: August 12, 2021, 07:43:02 PM »
Jon: Yes, but he wrote that he disliked the American political and economic systems. He compared them, unfavorably, to the Soviet system. He said both were "slave" systems that needed to be overthrown. Michael Paine said that Oswald told him that the US system was irredeemable and couldn't be changed; that it needed to be replaced.

In 1963, after spending some time in the USSR, Oswald publicly ridiculed the USSR, the American Communist Party, and said he preferred the US over the USSR.

"He still held the ideals of the Soviets, was still a Marxist, but did not like the widespread lack of material goods that the Russians had to endure"


https://jfkassassination.net/parnell/ce2649.htm

"communist U.S.A. have existed for 40 years and they are still a pitiful group of radicals"

http://22november1963.org.uk/lee-oswald-speech-in-alabama


I don't know if his contradictory statements represent growth from his teenage years to becoming an adult. Or if it's evidence that his prior statements weren't sincere and were being used to create a persona that would make it easier for him to get into the USSR (or Cuba).

It's also worth noting that Oswald didn't participate in the American Communist Party and didn't associate with any known Communists.

But again, he did identify as a Marxist and to most Americans in 1963, the "Marxist vs Communist" thing was a difference without distinction.

In other words, if Oswald was being used as a Patsy, the fact that he proclaimed to be a Marxist was bad enough to convince most Americans that he was an anti-American Communist in 1963. With 20/20 hindsight, we can see that his views on politics were complex and sometimes contradictory.

His brother, Robert, said Lee wanted to be an "American" (whatever that means) when he returned from the USSR.


So, whether he disliked America or not he certainly didn't care for our economic and political systems. Whether his belief in Marxism was simply an explanation for the world he disliked - and given his childhood it's understandable that he'd be alienated from it - or not can be debated I guess. I think he had a bit more sophisticated understanding of some of its basic concepts than others think, e.g., his views on surplus value for example were pretty solid.

Most people with Left-wing views are dissatisfied with the Status Quo and want to improve America.

Oswald may very well have been "anti-American" but I don't view his Marxist or anti-capitalist beliefs as evidence of anti-Americanism. After all, capitalism exists lots of other places besides America.

There were very legitimate reasons for criticizing capitalism and racism in Oswald's time.

Recognizing America's flaws and wanting to create a fairer economic and political system shouldn't be mistaken for hatred of the US.

See the quote below from Martin Luther King Jr:


"I am convinced that capitalism has seen its best days in American, and not only in America, but in the entire world. It is a well known fact that no social institution can survive when it has outlived its usefulness. This, capitalism has done. It has failed to meet the needs of the masses."


https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/king-papers/documents/notes-american-capitalism


As to his views on JFK: they are a puzzle, aren't they? If he was pretending to be a Marxist, if this was an act I would think part of it would be to denounce JFK. But if he was a sincere Marxist (as he understood it) and an admirer of Castro I would also think he'd be critical of JFK. But we can't find anything other than the Schmidt story.

Per Marina and others close to Oswald, he liked JFK's stances on Civil Rights. It also seems overlooked that Gen. Edwin Walker's aggressive opposition to Civil Rights, not his views on Cuba, might be what motivated Oswald's hatred of Walker.

Given Oswald's alleged love for Castro, I agree that one would expect him to hate JFK who presided over the Bay of Pigs and Cuban Missile Crisis. But JFK's views on Cuba were pretty much the consensus in the US government at the time so maybe Oswald didn't hold that against him.

He did in fact tell Captain Fritz that he was aware that Lyndon Johnson wouldn't be any different on Cuba policies.

If there was no Conspiracy, maybe Governor Connally was his intended target? If Oswald was a political extremist, he would've been proud to have killed JFK. Most terrorists express pride when they successfully hit their intended target.
« Last Edit: August 12, 2021, 08:14:36 PM by Jon Banks »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?
« Reply #135 on: August 12, 2021, 07:43:02 PM »