Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?

[Jerry Organ]

No Jerry, I'm not making things up as we go along......I've been posting this same information for decades.   Check back and find out....

If you'll look directly below JCDay's signature (in the upper left corner of the card ) you see that the tape was not in contact with the surface from which the print was lifted.....  I believe it was that metal barrel band that lifted the tape away from the surface.

1) That's not an impression and certainly not "That band can be seen at the far left of the lift."

2) It's way outside the area of the band if the tape is 1".

3) The corner on the upper-right is also void of dust.

I don't see why Day would press down hard on the corners. Not where the print was and he needed a corner to lift the tape back up.

But nice try.

[Walt Cakebread]

1) That's not an impression and certainly not "That band can be seen at the far left of the lift."

2) It's way outside the area of the band if the tape is 1".

3) The corner on the upper-right is also void of dust.

I don't see why Day would press down hard on the corners. Not where the print was and he needed a corner to lift the tape back up.

But nice try.

I don't see why Day would press down hard on the corners. Not where the print was and he needed a corner to lift the tape back up.

Day would lightly have pressed the tape over the area where he believed there was a print.....He wouldn't have "pressed down hard" and risk distorting the print.... So basically the tape was "floating" and the barrel band would have prevented  the tape from making solid contact  with the surface.

Have you now decided that the tape was 1 inch wide?

[Jerry Organ]

Would it be feasible to determine the relative portion of the palm that is depicted by the latent print lifted by the tape? If so, measuring a palm of someone with a hand size similar to LHO might let you determine the approximate size of the tape and the card.

Here's a first attempt at trying to compare Oswald's palmprint to the one on Day's lift.

(if not to scale on your monitor, check on PC,
Settings > System > Display > Scale & Layout;
I had mine on 125%)

[Charles Collins]

Here's a first attempt at trying to compare Oswald's palmprint to the one on Day's lift.

(if not to scale on your monitor, check on PC,
Settings > System > Display > Scale & Layout;
I had mine on 125%)

Nice work there Jerry, thanks! If I am looking at this correctly, the 2” tape appears to be the closest in relative scale. If that is true, what does that say about the size of the card?

Note, I have to say that it was more than a little bit eerie to put my hand up to the screen to compare the size of my hand to the size of the LHO print. It brought home the fact that he was human better than all the information I have read and the photos that I have seen.

[Jerry Organ]

Nice work there Jerry, thanks! If I am looking at this correctly, the 2” tape appears to be the closest in relative scale. If that is true, what does that say about the size of the card?

If the tape is 2", the card would be 6" x 9 5/8. I think it may be time to rule out Walt's decades-long fabrication that the tape is one-inch and the card 3 X 5. All that time, he didn't do any empirical investigative work; it was all Weisbergian wink-wink, nudge-nudge supposition and overblown preachy innuendo. He seems to think a no-nonsense approach short-changes things.

Note, I have to say that it was more than a little bit eerie to put my hand up to the screen to compare the size of my hand to the size of the LHO print. It brought home the fact that he was human better than all the information I have read and the photos that I have seen.

Are these life-size? Both mages at 75% reduction.




(Check in Windows 10 Settings > System > Display > Scale & Layout- 100%)

[Walt Cakebread]

Nice work there Jerry, thanks! If I am looking at this correctly, the 2” tape appears to be the closest in relative scale. If that is true, what does that say about the size of the card?

Note, I have to say that it was more than a little bit eerie to put my hand up to the screen to compare the size of my hand to the size of the LHO print. It brought home the fact that he was human better than all the information I have read and the photos that I have seen.

If the tape is 2" then the "palm print" would have wrapped completely around the barrel, which has a circumference of 2.03 inches.....

Doe you believe it's possible to wrap your palm ( heel portion ) completely around a 5/8 " tube?   

[Charles Collins]

If the tape is 2", the card would be 6" x 9 5/8. I think it may be time to rule out Walt's decades-long fabrication that the tape is one-inch and the card 3 X 5. All that time, he didn't do any empirical investigative work; it was all Weisbergian wink-wink, nudge-nudge supposition and overblown preachy innuendo. He seems to think a no-nonsense approach short-changes things.

Are these life-size? Both mages at 75% reduction.




(Check in Windows 10 Settings > System > Display > Scale & Layout- 100%)

I used a touch screen and zoomed it to match my palm. The action of putting my palm close to the image of his palm print gave me the eerie feeling.

[Jerry Organ]

If the tape is 2" then the "palm print" would have wrapped completely around the barrel, which has a circumference of 2.03 inches.....

Doe you believe it's possible to wrap your palm ( heel portion ) completely around a 5/8 " tube?

Not all at once. Just did an experiment. Grasped a 5/8" tube as if it were holding a heavy metal barrel. Then eased the grip by lifting the thumb and allowing the palm to relax. All of the fingers still held onto the tube but the tube had rolled on the palm. This added more palm imprinting than the initial grasping.

Although there are print impressions across 3/4 of the tape width (at 2", it would 1 1/2"), the actual print from the palm may only be a portion of that.