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

[Walt Cakebread]

If you look at the shape of the palm print relative to the length of the tape (or the lift if you prefer) it appears to me that LHO was holding the barrel of the rifle at an angle similar to the natural way that I would pick it up. Here is a photo of a 5/8” diameter wooden dowel in my hand for an illustration:



As can be seen in my photo, the relevant meaty part of the hand wraps about half-way around the dowel. Half of the circumference of a 5/8” dowel is about 1”. However when the tape was applied to the barrel of the rifle, I would assume that the length of the tape was parallel to the length of the barrel. Therefore relative to the palm print, the lift was at that same angle as the barrel was when the latent print was left on the barrel. And because of that angle, the palm doesn’t need to wrap all the way around the barrel to span the width of the tape. We are just eyeballing the images to get a rough idea of the width of the tape. I am sure there is a more scientific way to measure these things. The tape might be closer to 1-1/2” wide than 2” wide. But I don’t believe that the reason for your theory of 1” wide is accurate.

As can be seen in my photo, the relevant meaty part of the hand wraps about half-way around the dowel. Half of the circumference of a 5/8” dowel is about 1”. However when the tape was applied to the barrel of the rifle, I would assume that the length of the tape was parallel to the length of the barrel. Therefore relative to the palm print, the lift was at that same angle as the barrel was when the latent print was left on the barrel. And because of that angle, the palm doesn’t need to wrap all the


Looking at the photo that you've posted, I'd say the heel of your hand is in contact with about 1/3 of the 5/8 " dowel.....

1/3 of 2 =  .66 "   or about 5/8 of an inch......   Which means the tape is about 1" wide......

[Charles Collins]

As can be seen in my photo, the relevant meaty part of the hand wraps about half-way around the dowel. Half of the circumference of a 5/8” dowel is about 1”. However when the tape was applied to the barrel of the rifle, I would assume that the length of the tape was parallel to the length of the barrel. Therefore relative to the palm print, the lift was at that same angle as the barrel was when the latent print was left on the barrel. And because of that angle, the palm doesn’t need to wrap all the


Looking at the photo that you've posted, I'd say the heel of your hand is in contact with about 1/3 of the 5/8 " dowel.....

1/3 of 2 =  .66 "   or about 5/8 of an inch......   Which means the tape is about 1" wide......

Here's a photo that is more on axis with the rod. It is close to 1/2 the circumference.



However, what you still are not taking into account is the angle of the tape and barrel relative to this wrap. Think of a candy cane or barber pole and their stripes as the go halfway around the circumference at an angle. Measure the stripe at two locations that are opposite from each other (but one will be further along the length). Because of the additional distance along the length, the stripe will measure longer than a stripe that is perpendicular to the length of the barrel.

[John Mytton]

Awesome to watch the Nutters twist and turn.

Mr. LATONA. We had no personal knowledge of any palmprint having been developed on the rifle. The only prints that we knew of were the fragmentary prints which I previously pointed out had been indicated by the cellophane on the trigger guard. There was no indication on this rifle as to the existence of any other prints. This print which indicates it came from the underside of the gun barrel, evidently the lifting had been so complete that there was nothing left to show any marking on the gun itself as to the existence of such even an attempt on the part of anyone else to process the rifle.

But Day claimed there were still VISIBLE TRACES of the print:

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.

Sorry Otto, but there is irrefutable proof that the random pitting and imperfections that Day took from Oswald's rifle on the 22nd is a perfect match to a later imprint taken by the FBI and thus conclusively proves that Day's print taken on the 22nd  shows beyond all doubt that Oswald touched C2766's barrel! See Otto, when you rely on Science and advanced forensic techniques you can't go wrong!

When we have 1 dot we can't really say that the dot is unique, now when we have 2 dots in 2 random locations we have a stronger connection and the chances that 2 random flaws are in the same place becomes a lot less probable, then as you go up the number of connections between these random points increases, for example point 1's position is directly proportional to points 2, 3 4 and 5 and point 2 is directly proportional to 1, 3, 4 and 5, and so on. And another match is the relative sizes of each of the imperfections which independently dramatically increases the odds.
Btw I only used the FBI points, if you look closely there is more matching points, it's a slam dunk.





JohnM

[Walt Cakebread]

Must have faded away, or Latona thought they were "fragmentary". The print was second-hand (ahem) by time the FBI received the rifle.

Mr. LATONA: This print which indicates it came from the underside of the gun barrel, evidently the lifting had been so complete that there was nothing left to show any marking on the gun itself as to the existence of such even an attempt on the part of anyone else to process the rifle.
Mr. DULLES. Do I understand then that if there is a lifting of this kind, that it may obliterate----
Mr. LATONA. Completely.

The circled area is the place from Lee's hand where the speculators imagined had been in contact with the 5/8 inch metal barrel....

That circled area is about 1.5 inches in diameter.......

Charles Collins photos show that the heel of his hand is in contact with about 1/3 of the circumference ( 2. 02 in) of the barrel . IOW is hand is in contact with on area  of about 5/8 of an inch.  And since the print did not completely span the lifting tape we can know that the tape was NOT 2 inches wide.....It was probably ONE inch wide.....

If the tape was 1 inch wide then the two parallel lines at the right hand side of the photo are 3/16 of in inch apart....  And 3/16" just happens to be the width of the bayonet slot that was cut into the wooden foregrip....


Mr. LATONA: This print which indicates it came from the underside of the gun barrel, evidently the lifting had been so complete that there was nothing left to show any marking on the gun itself as to the existence of such even an attempt on the part of anyone else to process the rifle.

Latona stated clearly that there was no print on the metal barrel....And what's more.....Latona said there was no evidence that a lift had been made from that metal barrel.....

[John Mytton]

You need to put a new battery in your calculator.....

If the tape is 2", the card would be 6" x 9 5/8.......Wrong!

If the tape is 2 inches wide.......Then the card is 6.7 inches wide and 10 inches long.... Is there any manufacturer who produces paper this size?

Mr. BELIN. I am also going to introduce 735 and 736. These are the Xerox copies of those cards, of those palmprint cards, that I believe you had, sir. Am I correct in that, and according to my records, the next number for introduction of exhibits is 737.





JohnM

[Walt Cakebread]

Charles just demonstrated the heel can encompass half of the circumference, and more if the print on the barrel ran along the length of contact. When are you going to start demonstrating things.

And since your print is on the fore stock, shouldn't the print be complete, that is, run edge-to-edge on one-inch tape?

Mr. LATONA. No. First of all the weapon itself is a cheap one as you can see. It is one that----
Representative BOGGS. Is what?
Mr. LATONA. A cheap old weapon. The wood is to the point where it won't take a good print to begin with hardly. The metal isn't of the best, and not readily susceptible to a latent print.

Sounds like Latona assumed there would be no prints of any value, and that the trigger-guard housing (that had been wrapped by Day) was his best bet. I think Latona might have figured that if it wasn't a large-area print visible to the naked eye, it wasn't worth attempting a lift.

Charles just demonstrated the heel can encompass half of the circumference, and more if the print on the barrel ran along the length of contact. When are you going to start demonstrating things.

Here's a photo that is more on axis with the rod. It is close to 1/2 the circumference.



Are you kidding?.... The heel of his hand is in contact with about 1/3 of the 5/8" dowel....  The dowel has a circumference of a fraction more that 2 inches....1/3 (.333) of 2 is .666..... Or about 5/8 "   It's nowhere close to 1/2 the circumference ....

[John Mytton]

How strange that Day didn't want to show off his "slam dunk" on the 22nd -- LOL

Coming from Day, the print has ZERO provenance and didn't surface until November 26, according to Day, and was not seen by Latona until November 29 -- ROFL

BTW, you shouldn't try to talk science when we already know you can't even add two numbers.

Hilarious, I can read you like a book, each and every time you are out of your depth your responses always follow the same format, when you have no answers your increasing usage LOL's and ROFL's are inversely proportional to your decreasing lack of comprehension. Thanks for being so predictable. DOH!

Anyway, for the members who have more than a single brain cell, Oswald's print on the barrel beyond all doubt came from Oswald's rifle because the multiple random marks and imperfections on Days lift which also contain Oswald's palm print are a perfect match to a later lift by the FBI from the actual rifle. Case Closed!





 

JohnM

[Charles Collins]

I used my center finder device to draw a line through the center of the dowel (the diameter). This line divides the dowel in half. When holding the dowel as in the previous photos this line clearly shows that about half of the dowel's circumference is touching the relevant meaty part of the palm.



I also noticed that Jerry's description of what happens when the hand is opened (rolling action of the dowel across more of the palm's area) is accurate. Probably the best way to gauge the width of the tape is to measure the area of the palm print (on the card) that is depicted by the lift. My palm measures about 4" across. So that might be a good place to start placing a scale on the palm print. It is only to get a rough idea of the width of the tape, not for exact accuracy.