RIP to the Single-bullet theory?

[John Iacoletti]

Day said otherwise and Rusty said he was right there with Day and Drain when the rifle was turned over and Rusty agrees with Day. Rusty says there was another FBI agent with Drain who was trying to make them all hurry up. And that Drain was only half listening to Day.

Closing ranks, as cops do. And a dumb excuse. This wasn’t important enough to turn over as evidence or to even bother getting Drain’s attention about?

Why do you keep insisting Drain knew nothing about it?

Because Drain said he didn’t know anything about it.

[Charles Collins]

Closing ranks, as cops do. And a dumb excuse. This wasn’t important enough to turn over as evidence or to even bother getting Drain’s attention about?

Because Drain said he didn’t know anything about it.

The DPD had jurisdiction, the FBI did not. I think Day was correct in not turning anything over to the FBI that he wasn’t specifically instructed to turn over.

Day should have done more than get Drain’s attention regarding the palm print remnants under the fore stock. He should have indicated that it was there in some way that it should not have been overlooked. But he felt he could count on Drain to relay his message. This is why this type of transaction needs to be documented. Sadly, sometimes people end up learning some things the hard way.

Drain could have simply forgotten that Day told him that. Who are you going to believe? I will go with the one who was shown to have done what he said he did when the WC questioned it and the FBI provided solid physical evidence that he told the truth.

[John Iacoletti]

The DPD had jurisdiction, the FBI did not. I think Day was correct in not turning anything over to the FBI that he wasn’t specifically instructed to turn over.

“Lt. DAY stated he received instructions from Chief of Police JESSE B. CURRY, Dallas Police Department, Dallas, Texas, to turn over all of the evidence collected that he was examining, which related to LEE HARVEY OSWALD, to the FBI shortly before midnight on November 22, 1963.”

Day should have done more than get Drain’s attention regarding the palm print remnants under the fore stock. He should have indicated that it was there in some way that it should not have been overlooked. But he felt he could count on Drain to relay his message.

When did he ever say that?

Drain could have simply forgotten that Day told him that.

Sure and Day could have simply never told him that.

Who are you going to believe? I will go with the one who was shown to have done what he said he did when the WC questioned it and the FBI provided solid physical evidence that he told the truth.

I’m going to believe the one who isn’t trying to cover his ass with ever evolving stories to make up for mishandling evidence (at best), or falsifying evidence (at worst).

[Charles Collins]

“Lt. DAY stated he received instructions from Chief of Police JESSE B. CURRY, Dallas Police Department, Dallas, Texas, to turn over all of the evidence collected that he was examining, which related to LEE HARVEY OSWALD, to the FBI shortly before midnight on November 22, 1963.”

When did he ever say that?

Sure and Day could have simply never told him that.

I’m going to believe the one who isn’t trying to cover his ass with ever evolving stories to make up for mishandling evidence (at best), or falsifying evidence (at worst).

“Lt. DAY stated he received instructions from Chief of Police JESSE B. CURRY, Dallas Police Department, Dallas, Texas, to turn over all of the evidence collected that he was examining, which related to LEE HARVEY OSWALD, to the FBI shortly before midnight on November 22, 1963.”

Those are the words of Vincent Drain. Not the words of Carl Day. If you are going to claim that Day was told to turn over the palm print you need better evidence than Vincent Drain’s words.

Edit: These are the words of Carl Day as transcribed in “No More Silence” by Larry Sneed, page 238:

Around 11:30 that night I received orders which merely said, “Release the rifle to the FBI.” Shortly thereafter I handed it over to Vince Drain of the FBI. I told him, “There’s a trace of a print here” and showed him where it was. It was just a verbal communication to him. I didn’t have time to make any written reports; I just gave it to him and he signed for it without saying anything. I don’t remember whether he wrapped it up with anything or not, but he took it on to Washington that night. It’s a funny thing about that. We had a few other items around such as some of his clothes and paper off the roll at the Book Depository that we didn’t do anything else with. I didn’t send the card lift either. They told me not to do anything else, so I didn’t even look at it again.


When did he ever say that?

I didn’t say that Carl Day said that. It is my own opinion. Day has said that he and Drain had already known each other for years before the assassination and got along well. Combine that with Day saying he verbally told Drain about the palm print and a logical conclusion could be made that Day trusted Drain to relay the message.


I’m going to believe the one who isn’t trying to cover his ass with ever evolving stories to make up for mishandling evidence (at best), or falsifying evidence (at worst).

It is amazing to me that you can believe those claims of wrongdoing by Day without any evidence. You always insist that any evidence that points towards LHO’s guilt isn’t good enough for you. It sure appears hypocritical to me.


Edit #2:  Here is apparently what Vincent Drain meant by “all the evidence” in the report that your earlier post quotes:



These are Vincent Drains words as transcribed in “No More Silence” by Larry Sneed, page 247-248:

Earlier in the evening, about 8:00 o’clock, the division chief had talked to me on the telephone and informed me that the FBI in Washington demanded that we bring to them for examination the rifle, the revolver that was used to kill Tippit, as well as the different paraphernalia such as identification cards and other small items that Oswald had on him. I discussed it with the police chief and told him that we’d keep the chain of evidence intact and that I would pick them up there myself and wait for them until they were examined in Washington then bring them back. So it was turned over to us.

[Michael Capasse]

Cherry-picking statements isn't proof of anything.

[Martin Weidmann]

“Lt. DAY stated he received instructions from Chief of Police JESSE B. CURRY, Dallas Police Department, Dallas, Texas, to turn over all of the evidence collected that he was examining, which related to LEE HARVEY OSWALD, to the FBI shortly before midnight on November 22, 1963.”

Those are the words of Vincent Drain. Not the words of Carl Day. If you are going to claim that Day was told to turn over the palm print you need better evidence than Vincent Drain’s words.

Edit: These are the words of Carl Day as transcribed in “No More Silence” by Larry Sneed, page 238:

Around 11:30 that night I received orders which merely said, “Release the rifle to the FBI.” Shortly thereafter I handed it over to Vince Drain of the FBI. I told him, “There’s a trace of a print here” and showed him where it was. It was just a verbal communication to him. I didn’t have time to make any written reports; I just gave it to him and he signed for it without saying anything. I don’t remember whether he wrapped it up with anything or not, but he took it on to Washington that night. It’s a funny thing about that. We had a few other items around such as some of his clothes and paper off the roll at the Book Depository that we didn’t do anything else with. I didn’t send the card lift either. They told me not to do anything else, so I didn’t even look at it again.


When did he ever say that?

I didn’t say that Carl Day said that. It is my own opinion. Day has said that he and Drain had already known each other for years before the assassination and got along well. Combine that with Day saying he verbally told Drain about the palm print and a logical conclusion could be made that Day trusted Drain to relay the message.


I’m going to believe the one who isn’t trying to cover his ass with ever evolving stories to make up for mishandling evidence (at best), or falsifying evidence (at worst).

It is amazing to me that you can believe those claims of wrongdoing by Day without any evidence. You always insist that any evidence that points towards LHO’s guilt isn’t good enough for you. It sure appears hypocritical to me.


Edit #2:  Here is apparently what Vincent Drain meant by “all the evidence” in the report that your earlier post quotes:



These are Vincent Drains words as transcribed in “No More Silence” by Larry Sneed, page 247-248:

Earlier in the evening, about 8:00 o’clock, the division chief had talked to me on the telephone and informed me that the FBI in Washington demanded that we bring to them for examination the rifle, the revolver that was used to kill Tippit, as well as the different paraphernalia such as identification cards and other small items that Oswald had on him. I discussed it with the police chief and told him that we’d keep the chain of evidence intact and that I would pick them up there myself and wait for them until they were examined in Washington then bring them back. So it was turned over to us.

I’m going to believe the one who isn’t trying to cover his ass with ever evolving stories to make up for mishandling evidence (at best), or falsifying evidence (at worst).

It is amazing to me that you can believe those claims of wrongdoing by Day without any evidence. You always insist that any evidence that points towards LHO’s guilt isn’t good enough for you. It sure appears hypocritical to me.

There is nothing hypocritical about it. Day's story kept on evolving and even Rankin and Liebeler were questioning the authenticity and/or source of the palmprint.

[Royell Storing]

  Not sure how anything under the J Edgar Hoover/FBI letterhead can be trusted. That well was poisoned a long, long time ago. We have a couple generations that know little to nothing about J Edgar and the generation that should know, has either forgotten or chosen to forget the depths of deceit that head of the FBI had sunken to. The inclusion of Hoover in any discussion is an automatic DQ. 

[Chris Register]

A little sensitive are we? I understand your comfort level with this forum spending an inordinate amount of time insulting other members, since you are usually right in the fray. But speaking for myself, it's not really productive and doesn't do service to the collective expertise of many of the members, you included. To be honest, I find it boring. This was only my second post ever, so I guess I should be proud that it only took that long to be belittled. Let me point out why I brought up to other topics in my post Martin.
 As you know Agent Landis was one of 8 agents within approximately 30 feet of the people they were trying to protect. They were not required to look back like the driver and passengers of the Kennedy limo, they had a front row seat. Of those 8, 2 remain. One has spoken volumes and written books, one has been quiet and now is promoting a book. For me, listening to him and listing to his answers is new, interesting and worth a discussion. The accidental shooting of JFK by Agent Hickey is less than credible, and doesn't have the credibility similar to that of an agent who was as close to the Kennedy's as Landis was. In other words, his story is worth looking at. Mary Mumford shows that when new information is presented, new theories can evolve, and we can inch closer to the truth. So you missed my use of analogy to make a point. The point was new information is valuable. Especially because if true it puts the SBT in pretty substantial jeopardy. I was not trying to derail the thread to argue Mumford or Hickey.

I have seen many times members, including yourself, tell posters to start a new thread or go to a similar thread that is elsewhere on the forum. I think that is appropriate with where this thread has gone, if indeed the Landis information is a stale as you suggest.