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

[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

[Jerry Organ]

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 .

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?

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.....

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.

[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 ....

[Jerry Organ]

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 ....

Going by your 1" tape theory, what I want to know is how someone can grip the fore-stock and leave only a 3/4" X 3/4" print.

[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.

[John Mytton]

"Oswald's rifle" - - LOL

Speaking of predictability....you wanna get destroyed again trying to back up that claim?

BTW, Day didn"t even know where and when he marked the shells from the 6th floor, another ROFL.

Your desperate attempts to change the subject are pathetic, but I'm sorry I'm not going to let you run this time. Your goose is cooked! Muhahaha.

JohnM