RIP to the Single-bullet theory?

[Royell Storing]

"Get off its' duff".

What's stopping the JFKA Conspiracy Theorists--many of whom somehow are allowed to own rifles (and Carcanos in particular)--from testing whether a palm-print placed on a rifle barrel and allowed to dry for an appropriate amount of time so that a lift could then be made using the same method as Lt. Day. Then see how visible the remaining print is after a few hours. See if the rifle barrel has to be tilted in a certain light to see the print, or if it can be easily overlooked if one didn't know where to look.

It's been 60 years. They don't trust authorities, so-called "LNers" or experts like the Haags to do it.

     This lack of action outta so called "Researchers" is due to No $$ being attached to it. These guys are all about making a buck off of the JFK Assassination. If there is no financial benefit attached, they ain't touching it. This is exactly why Landis needs to IMMEDIATELY be pressed on the different issues involving his recent claims. Landis is gonna have to do a book tour to some degree. It is imperative that his public availability be jumped on. 

[Jerry Organ]

Per Landis "Original Report"

You are quoting a statement by Landis dated November 30, 1963. I was quoting a statement he made on November 27, 1963. Both are here (the November 30th statement begins the page): Link .

, ".....I recall seeing clearly a Negro male in light green slacks and a beige colored shirt running from my left to right, up the slope, across a grassy section, along a SIDEWALK, TOWARDS some steps, and what appeared to be a low stone wall." ..... "I was looking Back, and saw a motorcycle policeman Stopping along the CURB approximately ADJACENT to where I saw the Negro running".

The man Landis saw running would seem to be running "up the slope" that was "across a grassy section", "along a sidewalk" that led "towards some steps ... and a low stone wall".



According to Landis, the fellow was "running from my left to right". (GIF by Chris Davidson).

Clearly, this is happening on the North side of Elm and the cop is at the curb West of The Steps.

There is nothing "clear" about this happening West of the steps. Where is the motorcycle "West of the steps" in the Nix film sequence of that area?


The Altgens Photo shows no motorcycle immediately behind the four Presidential motorcycle escorts, which rules out that as a source for the "mystery" motorcycle.

No motorcycle cop is known to have been "Stopping along the curb"  WEST of the Steps at this point in time.

If Mark Tyler's stopping of Officer Douglas Jackson's cycle is correct, then Jackson is likely the motorcycle Landis was describing. Could be Jackson came to a full stop further along Elm than Tyler depicts. In any event, Officer Jackson's is not a previously-unknown motorcycle.

The current Landis "Magic Bullet" stuff is getting all the attention, but his "Original Report" and his NOW claiming to have seen/handled 2 bullet fragments that were laying between the bench seat and the back rest should also be examined very closely. SA Clint Hill should also be called in to tell us whatever he can/will about ALL of this. These 2 central players are not going to be members of the cast forever.   

[Charles Collins]

That's even less believable.  He told Drain about the "trace of a print under the foregrip" that didn't turn out to even be there, but didn't bother to mention that he already lifted it?  Was he trying to sabotage the FBI's efforts?

So now you're saying that he didn't get around to trying to photograph it until after he had already lifted it?  Doesn't that defeat the purpose of doing the photograph in the first place?  Why the different procedure than what he followed for the trigger guard?

Didn't tell Drain.  Didn't tell anybody else.  Didn't submit the evidence via a CSSS.  Didn't secure the evidence.  Didn't write any kind of report indicating that he had made this lift and what he did with it.  The first documented evidence of its existence is after Oswald is dead.

"Lt. DAY stated he saw no reason for wrapping the palm print on the underside of the barrel with any protective covering since it was protected by the wood stock when fully assembled and that it was not necessary to use cellophane or other protective coating as it would have been on the exposed prints."

On this we agree. Especially since there is no evidence that there was actually a print underneath the foregrip when it got to Latona.

And there's no evidence that such a verbal message actually transpired.  Day didn't start claiming he told Drain anything until years later in response to criticism about it.

Agreed.  Otherwise, I would just be calling Day a liar rather than just saying that his story is unbelievable and makes no sense on multiple levels.

All this "evidence" is, is replacing "Day said so" with "Hoover said so".  It's still an unverifiable, unconfirmable claim.

What I'm saying is that if Drain had really been told about the lift, or even the print, it would have been number one on his list to bring back to the FBI.  He wouldn't have just ignored it.  This is the only piece of evidence that could be physically connected back to Oswald.  Drain wouldn't have just forgotten about it.  It just conveniently turned up when there was nothing else that could be used.

Yes.  Latona said that he got the other materials to be examined (boxes and so forth) on November 27th, and the index card lift on the 29th.

I'm suggesting that the partial palmprint lift known as CE 637 cannot be authenticated as having been lifted from the CE 139 rifle on 11/22/63 as claimed by Carl Day, and that there are too many inconsistencies and discrepancies to accept that as true beyond a reasonable doubt.  And that even the Warren Commission had the same reservations until they (for some unfathomable reason) were sufficiently reassured by an equally unauthenticatable claim by Hoover in a letter not given under oath or with enough detail to assess it adequately.

That's even less believable.  He told Drain about the "trace of a print under the foregrip" that didn't turn out to even be there, but didn't bother to mention that he already lifted it?  Was he trying to sabotage the FBI's efforts?

Day was following his orders. Day said he told his superiors (Curry and Fritz) about the lift before the time that Drain took the rifle. If Curry and Fritz had wanted to tell the FBI about the lift, it was up to them to do it. Remember, the DPD had jurisdiction (not the FBI). The DPD leadership had decided to let the FBI temporarily take the evidence that the FBI had requested. The DPD was not even required to do that.



So now you're saying that he didn't get around to trying to photograph it until after he had already lifted it?  Doesn't that defeat the purpose of doing the photograph in the first place?  Why the different procedure than what he followed for the trigger guard?

I believe that Day stated that he had no other reason than an urgent request to process the gun ASAP. I believe he said that Captain Fritz ordered him to resume processing the rifle after Day had already been stopped earlier. Another snip from "No More Silence", page 237:  "Captain Fritz came back a little later and had run across the chief of police. He told me to go ahead and start again on what I had been doing with the gun, which I did. Before I got the picture made, another message came in: 'Drop everything! Don't do anything else!'" I don't believe that there was a requirement to photograph prints first, or even to photograph them at all.


Didn't tell Drain.  Didn't tell anybody else.  Didn't submit the evidence via a CSSS.  Didn't secure the evidence.  Didn't write any kind of report indicating that he had made this lift and what he did with it.  The first documented evidence of its existence is after Oswald is dead.

Day said he told Curry and Fritz about the palm print lift before the rifle was taken by Drain. Is the palm print the only item not "submitted via a CSSS? Is there a CSSS that he submitted for the partial prints on the trigger guard for example? Why do you assume a CSSS is required to be submitted at the same time the rifle was being processed? What do you think that a CSSS's purpose is? To whom is this CSSS supposed to be submitted to? Day stated he secured the card in his office, that doesn't necessarily mean that other employees that worked in that office couldn't access it. What kind of report do you think Day should have written? Written to whom? Written when? Why are you assuming a report was required of Day while he was processing the rifle? He did write a report to his superiors when it was requested of him. First documentation of the palm print by whom, the FBI? (Remember that the FBI didn't have jurisdiction on 11/22/63.)


"Lt. DAY stated he saw no reason for wrapping the palm print on the underside of the barrel with any protective covering since it was protected by the wood stock when fully assembled and that it was not necessary to use cellophane or other protective coating as it would have been on the exposed prints."

Isn't that essentially what I just said? Why are you repeating it?


On this we agree. Especially since there is no evidence that there was actually a print underneath the foregrip when it got to Latona.

Snip from "No More Silence", pages238-239:

I don't know why they didn't find any prints on the gun at all. I don't know why they didn't locate that piece of print that I thought was still there. ... But anyway, they didn't find any prints, or didn't find that one or were unable to do anything with what I thought was on there. It may have been that there wasn't enough there, but I thought I could still see it.

I have already indicated a few possibilities that I think are possible earlier in this thread. We will most likely never have a definitive answer that will satisfy everyone as to why Latona didn't find a print. The evidence that it was there includes the actual lift of the palm print, Day's testimony about that lift, and the irregularities the FBI found on the rifle that match the corresponding marks on the lift of the palm print that Day made. You can complain about the evidence all you wish, but it exists.


And there's no evidence that such a verbal message actually transpired.  Day didn't start claiming he told Drain anything until years later in response to criticism about it.

I could be mistaken, but I think I remember that Drain's report of September 1964 indicated that Day made the claim when Drain talked to him.



All this "evidence" is, is replacing "Day said so" with "Hoover said so".  It's still an unverifiable, unconfirmable claim.

The physical evidence, a copy of which is a part of Hoover's letter, is conclusive.


What I'm saying is that if Drain had really been told about the lift, or even the print, it would have been number one on his list to bring back to the FBI.  He wouldn't have just ignored it.  This is the only piece of evidence that could be physically connected back to Oswald.  Drain wouldn't have just forgotten about it.  It just conveniently turned up when there was nothing else that could be used.

Day said he told Drain about the print on the rifle. Day didn't say he told Drain about the lift.


Yes.  Latona said that he got the other materials to be examined (boxes and so forth) on November 27th, and the index card lift on the 29th.

Day said he sent it on the 26th. Do you not think that a possible explanation for the difference is that it simply took Latona a few days to process some of the other 400+ items before he even knew that the palm print lift was included?


I'm suggesting that the partial palmprint lift known as CE 637 cannot be authenticated as having been lifted from the CE 139 rifle on 11/22/63 as claimed by Carl Day, and that there are too many inconsistencies and discrepancies to accept that as true beyond a reasonable doubt.  And that even the Warren Commission had the same reservations until they (for some unfathomable reason) were sufficiently reassured by an equally unauthenticatable claim by Hoover in a letter not given under oath or with enough detail to assess it adequately.

So, essentially you just don't like the evidence. What else is new? 

[Royell Storing]

You are quoting a statement by Landis dated November 30, 1963. I was quoting a statement he made on November 27, 1963. Both are here (the November 30th statement begins the page): Link .

The man Landis saw running would seem to be running "up the slope" that was "across a grassy section", "along a sidewalk" that led "towards some steps ... and a low stone wall".



According to Landis, the fellow was "running from my left to right". (GIF by Chris Davidson).

There is nothing "clear" about this happening West of the steps. Where is the motorcycle "West of the steps" in the Nix film sequence of that area?


The Altgens Photo shows no motorcycle immediately behind the four Presidential motorcycle escorts, which rules out that as a source for the "mystery" motorcycle.

If Mark Tyler's stopping of Officer Douglas Jackson's cycle is correct, then Jackson is likely the motorcycle Landis was describing. Could be Jackson came to a full stop further along Elm than Tyler depicts. In any event, Officer Jackson's is not a previously-unknown motorcycle.

     Jerry -  "Along a sidewalk that LED TOWARDS SOME STEPS" = West of The Steps. Nowhere else on Elm St does this description apply. And remember that the "Original" Nix Film has been MIA for decades. There being no motorcycle cop at this specific Elm St curb area or a Black Man on the "Current" Nix Film therefore does Not puzzle me. Perhaps you can explain the roughly 3 frames that show a guy wearing a white shirt running up The Steps immediately following the Kill Shot? A white shirted man was also referenced in the Lee Bowers WC Testimony when he detailed seeing a guy inna white shirt in this very same area.

[Dan O'meara]

John cited an article about the palm print on Pat Speer's website which is well worth a read.

One point Speer raises is that instead of processing the weapon that murdered the President, Day went back to the TSBD building in order to give a tour of the crime scene to the local press and have his picture taken. He also took some meaningless pictures of the outside of the building. I find this quite mind-blowing.
Speer also stresses the point that Day did not take a picture of the print before lifting it. This was basic procedure. Photographing the print is non-invasive, it causes no harm to the print and can be used for identification purposes. Lifting the print may go wrong so the photo is back up. Day's excuse - that he didn't feel photographing the print first was necessary - is 

As for Day telling Drain about the print -

Reasonable Doubt (1985)

p.109 "In 1984, the author interviewed both Lieutenant Day and Agent Drain about the mysterious print. Day remains adamant that the Oswald print was on the rifle when he first examined it a few hours after the shooting. Moreover, Day stated that when he gave the rifle to Agent Drain, he pointed out to the FBI man both the area where the print could be seen and the fingerprint dust used to bring it out. Lieutenant Day states that he cautioned Drain to be sure the area was not disturbed while the rifle was in transit to the FBI laboratory. Drain flatly disputes this, claiming Day never showed him such a print. 'I just don't believe there was ever a print,' said Drain, He noted that there was increasing pressure on the Dallas police to build evidence in the case. Asked to explain what might have happened, Agent Drain stated, “All I can figure is that it (Oswald's print) was some sort of cushion, because they were getting a lot of heat by Sunday night. You could take the print off Oswald’s card and put it on the rifle. Something like that happened.”

Drain doesn't believe the print existed at the time Day handed over the evidence. He believes the print was forged, which would explain why Day was so reluctant to hand it over. Day never mentioned the palm print to Drain and lied that he did.
So much of the strangeness around this aspect of the case disappears if Drain's version of events is accepted.
There was no print for Latona to find because there was never a print there. Day insisted it was there to deflect from his lie.
Day's bizarre excuse - that he didn't have time to work on the identification of a print he had in his possession for days - now makes sense. He already knew who's print it was as he had used one of Oswald's palm prints "and put it on the rifle".
That's why the palm print had the same markings as the rifle.

Day manufactured this evidence in order to link Oswald to the murder weapon. He didn't expect "all the evidence" was going to be handed over to the FBI that night and got caught with his pants down.
Or maybe it was all some big misunderstanding.

[John Iacoletti]

Day was following his orders. Day said he told his superiors (Curry and Fritz) about the lift before the time that Drain took the rifle.

Yes, I know he claimed that. It’s uncorroborated by Fritz and Curry, and wasn’t publicly mentioned by Fritz or Curry even though they discussed other evidence, including prints that they had.

If Curry and Fritz had wanted to tell the FBI about the lift, it was up to them to do it.

This would be a “not my job” evasion. But Day is the one who handed the evidence over, not Curry and Fritz.

Remember, the DPD had jurisdiction (not the FBI). The DPD leadership had decided to let the FBI temporarily take the evidence that the FBI had requested. The DPD was not even required to do that.

That’s not relevant. They agreed to turn the evidence over. How could the FBI request something they didn’t even know existed?

I believe that Day stated that he had no other reason than an urgent request to process the gun ASAP. I believe he said that Captain Fritz ordered him to resume processing the rifle after Day had already been stopped earlier. Another snip from "No More Silence", page 237:  "Captain Fritz came back a little later and had run across the chief of police. He told me to go ahead and start again on what I had been doing with the gun, which I did. Before I got the picture made, another message came in: 'Drop everything! Don't do anything else!'" I don't believe that there was a requirement to photograph prints first, or even to photograph them at all.

So which is it then? He didn’t think it was necessary, or he didn’t have time?

One thing Speer points out is that the FBI manual is very clear that prints should always be photographed first before trying to develop them, and Latona reiterates that. Yes, Day was not FBI, but he mentions in his testimony having gone through advanced latent-print school conducted by the FBI.

Is the palm print the only item not "submitted via a CSSS? Is there a CSSS that he submitted for the partial prints on the trigger guard for example?

They were still on the rifle, and thus part of it. The rifle had a CSSS. It’s how they logged evidence in the possession of the police department.They were submitted to the Crime Scene Search Section of the Dallas Police Department for (supposedly) safe keeping and control.

First documentation of the palm print by whom, the FBI?

By anybody. Day didn’t get around to writing a report about this for two months.

"Lt. DAY stated he saw no reason for wrapping the palm print on the underside of the barrel with any protective covering since it was protected by the wood stock when fully assembled and that it was not necessary to use cellophane or other protective coating as it would have been on the exposed prints."

Isn't that essentially what I just said? Why are you repeating it?

Apologies. I misread what you wrote. I thought you were saying that Day didn’t say the foregrip was the reason he didn’t cover it with cellophane. I think the “maybe the part that was sticking out was still protected” speculation is just yet another case of trying to resolve a discrepancy by proposing a hypothetical for which there is no evidence.

I have already indicated a few possibilities that I think are possible earlier in this thread. We will most likely never have a definitive answer that will satisfy everyone as to why Latona didn't find a print.

Frankly, I think your suggestion that Day was just more skilled at locating prints than Latona is the most absurd possibility.

The evidence that it was there includes the actual lift of the palm print, Day's testimony about that lift, and the irregularities the FBI found on the rifle that match the corresponding marks on the lift of the palm print that Day made. You can complain about the evidence all you wish, but it exists.

Hoover’s letter and indistinct smudge with no background details certainly does exist. That doesn’t make it reliable or conclusive evidence.

I could be mistaken, but I think I remember that Drain's report of September 1964 indicated that Day made the claim when Drain talked to him.

You are indeed mistaken. It wasn’t until the time of the HSCA (1977) that Day started claiming he told Drain about the print.

Day said he told Drain about the print on the rifle. Day didn't say he told Drain about the lift.

The question remains, why the hell not?

Day said he sent it on the 26th. Do you not think that a possible explanation for the difference is that it simply took Latona a few days to process some of the other 400+ items before he even knew that the palm print lift was included?

No. Latona said he received it on November 29th.

So, essentially you just don't like the evidence. What else is new? 

It has nothing to do with “liking it”. In light of the many discrepancies, contradictions, morphing memories, CYA, and hedging, “Day said so” just doesn’t cut it.

[Dan O'meara]

Speer puts it quite succinctly:

"It's as simple as this.... Consider: the President of a third world country is murdered and the crime scene investigator tasked with building a case against his suspected assassin fails to take pictures of not one but three important pieces of evidence (the box the assassin supposedly sat on, the bag supposedly used by the assassin to smuggle his weapon into the building from which the fatal shots were fired, and the palm print on the underside of the weapon supposedly used in the assassination), and instead gives tours of the crime scene to the media, and parades key evidence before the cameras. He then takes a few days off, during which he fails to perform any of the comparisons or tests he knows can shed further light on the case.

And not only that, in the investigation that follows, he tells numerous lies about the evidence, and pays no price for his dishonesty."


There was no print on the barrel of the rifle.
That's why there was no print when Latona received it.
That's why Day never mentioned it to Drain.

Day took a fresh palm print from Oswald and put it on the rifle.
He then lifted this print from the rifle.
That's why the forged print matches the rifle.

On a different note - I've been at this about three years now and it's not until this thread has it dawned on me that a lot of LNers have the same mentality as a lot of the more extreme, tinfoil CTers.
There is literally no room for debate.
This aspect of the case stinks to high heaven. The very kindest thing that can be said is that it represents staggering incompetence, yet it appears to the LNer mind that it is all above board and run-of-the-mill.
And it wouldn't be so bad if this was an isolated example of staggering incompetence as far the investigation into JFK's murder goes.
But it isn't.
Not by a long shot.

[Charles Collins]

Does anyone know whose initials those are beside Day’s initials, when they were put there, etc?