When the SN was built

[Richard Smith]

WC 3131 confirms that prints were taken for comparison from the TSBD employees who had access to the 6th floor.  None of their prints were identified as being on the boxes.

As per usual you misrepresent the evidence. WC3131 states that the prints of those employees were compared with latent prints on (only) four boxes and that no identification was effected.
What this means, in the real world, is that there were in fact unidentified prints on those boxes which they could match to anybody. This can happen because the quality of the print simply wasn't good enough for comparison. What it doesn't do is rule out that the prints of others were on the boxes.

Now you are suggesting Day was in on the conspiracy and lied about finding the prints? 

Day doesn't have to be "in on the conspiracy" to lie about finding the prints. We know for a fact he lied about other things, so why not about this? When Day found out, on Friday evening, that Frazier denied that the bag found in the TSBD was the one he had seen Oswald carry in the morning, it was Day who desperately tried to concoct a bogus story to explain away the problem.

Why does "not mention it to anybody for days" make his claim suspect?

Are you for real? On Friday evening, the rifle goes to the FBI lab for examination. They find no prints on the weapon or even residue of a lifted print. Day learns this when the rifle is returned to him, the next day, and he doesn't mention such a crucial piece of evidence (as a previously lifted print) until all the evidence has to be handed over again to the FBI, two days after Oswald was killed. Was Day merely incompetent or did he really withhold crucial evidence for nearly a week?

If there was a frameup going on with the FBI, why didn't they simply confirm his findings?

Clarify the question....

How do you know who and when he spoke about the prints to anyone?

That's easy. There is no contemporary report either by the FBI or DPD that confirms Day said anything to anybody, before the second shipment of evidence to the FBI. This can only mean one of two things; Day himself told nobody or he told somebody who in turn also kept his mouth shut. Either way, not really normal police procedure, right?

You really need to look at the bigger picture here; they have no evidence that places Oswald on the 6th floor when the shots were fired. They have boxes in the S/N with latent prints on them that can't be identified (and thus could belong to anybody) and they have Frazier's denial that the bag found at the TSBD was the one he had seen Oswald carry. In other words, they have nothing even remotely solid, except for the rifle and the evidence card with Oswald's prints on them.

Yet, Day never figures that it might be a good idea if he just did his job and simply compared the print he allegedly lifted from the rifle with Oswald's actual prints.... Really?

So to summarize.  Oswald's prints were found on the SN boxes.  Prints were taken from the other TSBD employees who worked on that floor.  None of their prints were identified, as Oswald's were, as being on those same boxes.  They also "worked there" but left no such identifiable prints.  Only Oswald did.  Such bad luck.  And here we learn that for some unspecified reason, that Day would lie AFTER Oswald's death about finding prints on the rifle EVEN if he were not involved in a conspiracy to frame Oswald.  Why he would do this is left to our imagination since there would be no prosecution of Oswald after his death and the only possible reason to lie about the prints would be to frame him for the crime and allow the guilty person to escape.  And Day's confirmation of finding Oswald's prints on the rifle is a "lie" because there is no "report" of him mentioning it for a whole week!  Of course, he very well could have done so verbally and there was simply no report to be made in that timeframe.  And even if he did not mention it, that alone does not cast doubt on his confirmation that it happened. 

[Martin Weidmann]

So to summarize.  Oswald's prints were found on the SN boxes.  Prints were taken from the other TSBD employees who worked on that floor.  None of their prints were identified, as Oswald's were, as being on those same boxes.  They also "worked there" but left no such identifiable prints.  Only Oswald did.  Such bad luck.  And here we learn that for some unspecified reason, that Day would lie AFTER Oswald's death about finding prints on the rifle EVEN if he were not involved in a conspiracy to frame Oswald.  Why he would do this is left to our imagination since there would be no prosecution of Oswald after his death and the only possible reason to lie about the prints would be to frame him for the crime and allow the guilty person to escape.  And Day's confirmation of finding Oswald's prints on the rifle is a "lie" because there is no "report" of him mentioning it for a whole week!  Of course, he very well could have done so verbally and there was simply no report to be made in that timeframe.  And even if he did not mention it, that alone does not cast doubt on his confirmation that it happened.

Nobody asked for your flawed and bogus "summary".

Prints were taken from the other TSBD employees who worked on that floor.  None of their prints were identified, as Oswald's were, as being on those same boxes.  They also "worked there" but left no such identifiable prints.  Only Oswald did.

And didn't that come in handy, right?

And here we learn that for some unspecified reason, that Day would lie AFTER Oswald's death about finding prints on the rifle EVEN if he were not involved in a conspiracy to frame Oswald.  Why he would do this is left to our imagination since there would be no prosecution of Oswald after his death and the only possible reason to lie about the prints would be to frame him for the crime and allow the guilty person to escape.

A far better question to ask (which is why you ignore it, of course) is; Why didn't Day say something when the FBI reported there were no prints on the rifle and Oswald was still alive? What possible reason could Day have had to stay silent?

the only possible reason to lie about the prints would be to frame him for the crime

You've answered your own question! 

How many (now proven) innocent people were convicted again over the years by Henry Wade and his corrupt ilk? In all those cases they allowed the guilty person to escape, right?

And Day's confirmation of finding Oswald's prints on the rifle is a "lie" because there is no "report" of him mentioning it for a whole week!  Of course, he very well could have done so verbally and there was simply no report to be made in that timeframe.

And now we're in La La Land. Again, finding a print of Oswald on the rifle used to kill Kennedy would be a big thing. The mere fact that Day allegedly managed to keep that print in his desk for six days means nobody knew about it or it simply wasn't there to begin with. Besides, nobody has ever come forward to confirm that Day told him about the print before Oswald died!

And even if he did not mention it, that alone does not cast doubt on his confirmation that it happened.

Only in your fantasy world. In the real world holding back a crucial piece of evidence for six days is not only a massive dereliction of duty but also destroys the chain of custody required for such evidence.

[Jack Nessan]

I could just as easily claim that his fingerprints would have been all over the undersides of the boxes if he had moved them to fashion a "sniper's nest".

Feel free to make all the claims you would like. Nothing will change the fact there were not any of LHO’s fingerprints found on top of the box supporting your claim that LHO had opened the box to remove books. Fingerprints or the lack of them on the bottom of the box actually is irrelevant.

[Richard Smith]

Feel free to make all the claims you would like. Nothing will change the fact there were not any of LHO’s fingerprints found on top of the box supporting your claim that LHO had opened the box to remove books. Fingerprints or the lack of them on the bottom of the box actually is irrelevant.

My recollection is that some of those boxes didn't even contain books.

[John Iacoletti]

Feel free to make all the claims you would like. Nothing will change the fact there were not any of LHO’s fingerprints found on top of the box supporting your claim that LHO had opened the box to remove books. Fingerprints or the lack of them on the bottom of the box actually is irrelevant.

So lack of fingerprints on the top is somehow relevant, but not lack of fingerprints anywhere else. Nice special pleading. But the real question is, how are fingerprints anywhere on a cardboard box evidence of murder?

[Richard Smith]

Nobody asked for your flawed and bogus "summary".

Prints were taken from the other TSBD employees who worked on that floor.  None of their prints were identified, as Oswald's were, as being on those same boxes.  They also "worked there" but left no such identifiable prints.  Only Oswald did.

And didn't that come in handy, right?

And here we learn that for some unspecified reason, that Day would lie AFTER Oswald's death about finding prints on the rifle EVEN if he were not involved in a conspiracy to frame Oswald.  Why he would do this is left to our imagination since there would be no prosecution of Oswald after his death and the only possible reason to lie about the prints would be to frame him for the crime and allow the guilty person to escape.

A far better question to ask (which is why you ignore it, of course) is; Why didn't Day say something when the FBI reported there were no prints on the rifle and Oswald was still alive? What possible reason could Day have had to stay silent?

the only possible reason to lie about the prints would be to frame him for the crime

You've answered your own question! 

How many (now proven) innocent people were convicted again over the years by Henry Wade and his corrupt ilk? In all those cases they allowed the guilty person to escape, right?

And Day's confirmation of finding Oswald's prints on the rifle is a "lie" because there is no "report" of him mentioning it for a whole week!  Of course, he very well could have done so verbally and there was simply no report to be made in that timeframe.

And now we're in La La Land. Again, finding a print of Oswald on the rifle used to kill Kennedy would be a big thing. The mere fact that Day allegedly managed to keep that print in his desk for six days means nobody knew about it or it simply wasn't there to begin with. Besides, nobody has ever come forward to confirm that Day told him about the print before Oswald died!

And even if he did not mention it, that alone does not cast doubt on his confirmation that it happened.

Only in your fantasy world. In the real world holding back a crucial piece of evidence for six days is not only a massive dereliction of duty but also destroys the chain of custody required for such evidence.

Again, Oswald would have been dead by that point.  So why would a member of the DPD feel the need to lie about finding the print?  There would be no prosecution of Oswald to present that evidence at trial.  The sole and only purpose would be to cover up the involvement of someone else and frame Oswald for the crime.   That means you are implying Day's lie was part of a conspiracy to frame Oswald - not prosecute him for the crime.  Can you understand the importance of that distinction?  The police might sometimes manufacture evidence to assist in the prosecution of a suspect but there is no reason to do so if there will be no trial.  What you are alleging is an intentional lie to cover up the crime even if you are not bright enough to realize it.  That means you are a CTer.

[Martin Weidmann]

Again, Oswald would have been dead by that point.  So why would a member of the DPD feel the need to lie about finding the print?  There would be no prosecution of Oswald to present that evidence at trial.  The sole and only purpose would be to cover up the involvement of someone else and frame Oswald for the crime.   That means you are implying Day's lie was part of a conspiracy to frame Oswald - not prosecute him for the crime.  Can you understand the importance of that distinction?  The police might sometimes manufacture evidence to assist in the prosecution of a suspect but there is no reason to do so if there will be no trial.  What you are alleging is an intentional lie to cover up the crime even if you are not bright enough to realize it.  That means you are a CTer.

Again, Oswald would have been dead by that point.

At what point would that be? Day claimed he lifted the print of the rifle on Friday evening, before the evidence was shipped to the FBI lab in Washington.
The evidence was returned the next day when Oswald was still alive. So, when the FBI did not find any prints on the rifle, why did Day stay quiet?

The police might sometimes manufacture evidence to assist in the prosecution of a suspect but there is no reason to do so if there will be no trial.

BS. There may not have been a trial in a court of law, but there's also the court of public opinion and Hoover as well as Katzenbach had already concluded that Oswald was a lone gunman. Against that background Day remarkably "remembering" this print turned out to be more than handy.

And btw, there never is a reason for police to "manufacture evidence to assist the prosecution"!

What you are alleging is an intentional lie to cover up the crime even if you are not bright enough to realize it.  That means you are a CTer.

Nope. Unlike you, I just look at the evidence honestly. There are more than enough indicators to justify the conclusion that the case was wrapped around Oswald regardless of his guilt or innocence.

[Jerry Organ]

The FBI requested and received the remaining physical evidence from the Dallas police on the Tuesday following the assassination, not aware of the palm print's existence. To say the least, they were surprised upon discovering the palm print included with the evidence. By matching irregularities found on the rifle barrel to it, the FBI later verified that the palm print lift that was delivered was, in fact, genuine.

Lieutenant Day believed at the time that he had not completely obliterated the palm print on the barrel after his lift and later stated that he had pointed out the area of the palm print to FBI Agent Drain when turning the rifle over to him. Drain, on the other hand, did not recall being shown the palm print.

Rusty was standing, by as Lieutenant Day gave the rifle to Drain. Rusty told me that Drain was in a hurry to leave and was distracted by another FBI agent who was hurrying him to leave. According to Rusty, "Drain was half listening to Lieutenant Day and half to the other FBI man and evidently didn't get the word about the palm print at that time."

     -- "JFK First Day Evidence" (1993 book)