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

[Walt Cakebread]

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.

You have a problem Charles....If the print had been liftd from the metal barrel at the location Jerry indicates....the palm could NOT have tightly contacted the metal barrel because there is an extension of the bayonet lug that extends back into that area and it is about 3/8 inch square,     IOW.....  that steel rectangle  protruding down from the round barrel would have prevented a palm from making solid contact with the round barrel.   And that bayonet extension would also have prevented detective Day from placing the cellophane tape against the round barrel.    On the other hand, the bayonet slot is clearly visible  on CE 639 , which means the "print" was lifted from the WOODEN foregrip.....

P.S.   Before you get in deeper.....  take a piece of paper cut into whatever width you believe the tape in the photo ( CE 639) is...   ( If you have some 2 inch wide scotch tape that's even better....) but a strip of paper  will serve as a substitute....

Now I'm sure you will realize that the strip of tape ( paper) must be curled to match the curvature of the metal barrel ( the dowel)     Now tape a wooden lead pencil to your wooden dowel and we'll pretend that the pencil is the bayonet lug attached to the bottom of the barrel ( although a pencil is not 3/8 " like the bayonet lug) .

Now try to place you strip of curled paper onto the barrel ( dowel) as though you were detective Day lifting a print from the barrel...      What happened??   You say you couldn't get the tape down onto the barrel because the curvature of curled tape sat on top of the 3/8" bayonet lug ( the pencil) and  wouldn't allow you to press the tape against the barrel...... 

[Jerry Organ]

Sounds more like you haven't got a clue what you're talking about and is now fabricating a story about what Latona migh have figured...

Those are verbatim quotes. Latona's photographs of the trigger-guard-housing prints weren't up to par with Day's.

He testified "...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. "

STOP IT, Jerry!

Now if you can get Latona's testimony that, in your words, " the print has ZERO provenance", then you might have something.

[Jerry Organ]

You have a problem Charles....If the print had been liftd from the metal barrel at the location Jerry indicates....the palm could NOT have tightly contacted the metal barrel because there is an extension of the bayonet lug that extends back into that area and it is about 3/8 inch square,     IOW.....  that steel rectangle  protruding down from the round barrel would have prevented a palm from making solid contact with the round barrel.   And that bayonet extension would also have prevented detective Day from placing the cellophane tape against the round barrel.    On the other hand, the bayonet slot is clearly visible  on CE 639 , which means the "print" was lifted from the WOODEN foregrip.....

P.S.   Before you get in deeper.....  take a piece of paper cut into whatever width you believe the tape in the photo ( CE 639) is...   ( If you have some 2 inch wide scotch tape that's even better....) but a strip of paper  will serve as a substitute....

Now I'm sure you will realize that the strip of tape ( paper) must be curled to match the curvature of the metal barrel ( the dowel)     Now tape a wooden lead pencil to your wooden dowel and we'll pretend that the pencil is the bayonet lug attached to the bottom of the barrel ( although a pencil is not 3/8 " like the bayonet lug) .

Now try to place you strip of curled paper onto the barrel ( dowel) as though you were detective Day lifting a print from the barrel...      What happened??   You say you couldn't get the tape down onto the barrel because the curvature of curled tape sat on top of the 3/8" bayonet lug ( the pencil) and  wouldn't allow you to press the tape against the barrel......

Oh brother. Day would have cut out a slot for the bayonet lug.



Now, your one-inch tape theory has a tape that didn't pick up the metal band one inch from the print nor explains how gripping the fore-stock would leave a mere 3/4" X 3/4" print.

[Charles Collins]

You have a problem Charles....If the print had been liftd from the metal barrel at the location Jerry indicates....the palm could NOT have tightly contacted the metal barrel because there is an extension of the bayonet lug that extends back into that area and it is about 3/8 inch square,     IOW.....  that steel rectangle  protruding down from the round barrel would have prevented a palm from making solid contact with the round barrel.   And that bayonet extension would also have prevented detective Day from placing the cellophane tape against the round barrel.    On the other hand, the bayonet slot is clearly visible  on CE 639 , which means the "print" was lifted from the WOODEN foregrip.....

P.S.   Before you get in deeper.....  take a piece of paper cut into whatever width you believe the tape in the photo ( CE 639) is...   ( If you have some 2 inch wide scotch tape that's even better....) but a strip of paper  will serve as a substitute....

Now I'm sure you will realize that the strip of tape ( paper) must be curled to match the curvature of the metal barrel ( the dowel)     Now tape a wooden lead pencil to your wooden dowel and we'll pretend that the pencil is the bayonet lug attached to the bottom of the barrel ( although a pencil is not 3/8 " like the bayonet lug) .

Now try to place you strip of curled paper onto the barrel ( dowel) as though you were detective Day lifting a print from the barrel...      What happened??   You say you couldn't get the tape down onto the barrel because the curvature of curled tape sat on top of the 3/8" bayonet lug ( the pencil) and  wouldn't allow you to press the tape against the barrel......

Please direct me to a photo that shows what you are talking about. You don’t have to post it here. Just tell me where to find it.

[Walt Cakebread]

Oh brother. Day would have cut out a slot for the bayonet lug.



Now, your one-inch tape theory has a tape that didn't pick up the metal band one inch from the print nor explains how gripping the fore-stock would leave a mere 3/4" X 3/4" print.

Day would have cut out a slot for the bayonet lug.

Clearly you understand the problem, Jerry.....   The curled tape wouldn't have made contact with the barrel because the bayonet lug protruding from the barrel would have prevent the tape from making contact.

You have invented a solution ......."Day would have cut out a slot for the bayonet lug."   Unfortunately for you....there isn't one iota of evidence that Day "cut a slot" in the tape , and there isn't an iota of evidence that Day even encountered the problem...   (Which he didn't )

[Walt Cakebread]

So dumb-ass Day ships the best he's got and keeps the "slam dunk" -- ROFL

I don't need Latona, it's a fact there's no evidence of the palm print being lifted on 11.22.

Priceless to watch a couple of Nutters play with a stick to "prove" a palm print was lifted from a Carcano.

Day cutting a slot as your latest desperate on-the-fly fabrication -- WOW

Dumb-ass Day......  An apt moniker.... His fist scrawled entry concerning the carcano, Day called it a 6.5 "lever action rifle"

Even an elementary school boy in Texas would have known that the carcano was a bolt action rifle......

However ... The FBI was able to work with Day and invent a plausible tale about that "palm print".   "Plausible", only if the tale isn't closely scrutinized....   Day actually sent that so called "palm print lift" on the index card  to the FBI at midnight 11-22-63 along with the other evidence.    ( It's listed as item #14 on the evidence inventory list )  The FBI examined it on Saturday 1-23-63 and reported that it was useless for identification purposes.   But in the mean time Henry Wade had told reporters that they had found Lee Harvey Oswald's prints on the rifle....  Unfortunately for the conspirators there was NO prints found on that rifle that could be identified as Lee Oswald's.   So the investigators ( conspirators) needed to invent a tale whereby detective Day had found a palm print on the rifle but failed to pass that information along to the FBI.   They failed to see that Day had in fact sent the palm print "off underside of barrel near end of foregrip on rifle C 2766"  on 11-22-63.   

Day had spotted what he imagined to be a palm print on the wooden fore grip while examining the rifle for finger prints while in the TSBD just minutes after the rifle was lifted FROM THE FLOOR where it had been hidden beneath the boxes of books.

Since the smudge that day imagined to be a palm print was in an area where it could easily be accidentally rubbed off, he decide to lift that print ......Which he did, as Tom Alyea watched.  Alyea saw him use the cellophane tape to lift the smudge and place the tape on the index card....and he saw Day scrawl the pertinent information on that card....  The card was sent to the FBI at midnight and the FBI examined it and reported that it was worthless for ID purposes.....It later became CE 639.   

[Walt Cakebread]

Oh brother. Day would have cut out a slot for the bayonet lug.



Now, your one-inch tape theory has a tape that didn't pick up the metal band one inch from the print nor explains how gripping the fore-stock would leave a mere 3/4" X 3/4" print.

nor explains how gripping the fore-stock would leave a mere 3/4" X 3/4" print.

When day was examining the rifle in the TSBD he knew that a shooter rested he foregrip of a rifle on his left palm as he aimed and fired the rifle....Thus the natural place to look for a palm print was on the foregrip. The shooter didn't "grip the fore stock"

[Charles Collins]

Here is a photo of a ~3//8" square dowel glued onto the 5/8" dowel to simulate the part of the barrel in the vicinity of where the palm print was lifted. The muzzle end is on the camera left.



I have considered the orientation of the contour lines of the palm print lift and found it on the palm print card and considered the orientation of those contour lines on the hand that made that print. And I currently believe that these items show that the barrel was picked up as shown in my demonstration photos below. As you can see the pertinent area of the palm is in contact with the barrel.








Here are some photos of some 2" wide clear shipping tape applied to the barrel and wrapped at least half-way around it. I had scribbled a little bit with a pencil in the area where I believe that the palm print would have been lifted from. The scribbling does not go half-way around the barrel. In hindsight I think I would have scribbled about half-way around if I were to do it again.







I then removed the 2" tape from the barrel (dowel). The graphite scribbles were "lifted" by the tape. Then the "lift" was applied to an 8-1/2" x 11" sheet of printing paper.




Thanks for the challenge Walt. This was fun. And it help confirm to me that there is nothing "impossible" about the lift that Day did on 11/22/63.