T.F. Bowley, A Wind-Up Wristwatch & 1:17

[John Mytton]

Well, Lt.Day apparently either forgot to tell FBI agent Drain about the palm print or Drain did not hear Lt.Day say anything about it.

Drain was willing to sign  an affidavit stating he was not told about the print, while Day decided not to sign one affirming Day had informed Drain about the print.

The FBI examined the rifle and found no prints on it nor even any signs the rifle had been dusted.

The FBI did not become aware that a print had supposedly  been lifted by Day until about a week later after Oswald was dead and his body was at the morgue.

It was at that time that According to the attending mortician , 2  FBI agents visited the morgue and when they left, the mortician noticed Oswald’s hands had been covered with black ink.

There is a part of Tom Aleyas film that shows Lt. Day using a brush on the rifle but it’s uncertain if there’s actually dust on the barrel or the brush nor is Day  actually shown applying tape and lifting a print with the tape.

There is no recording of the rifle being disassembled and then Day dusting the rifle and then applying tape and then lifting and applying the tape to a card to transfer the print.

This raises suspicion because it’s similar to not recording by film or tape recorder the process of interrogating Oswald which could have easily been done also.

Its like the  inability to allow Aleya to film the paper bag that was allegedly found in the SN or at least photograph the bag in place before the SN was rearranged several times.

It’s like the inability to at least have neutral 3rd parties like an attorney and stenographer present while Oswald was being questioned by Fritz.

So yes, while I might agree with SOME  of the evidence that JohnM and Bill Brown very astutely illustrate and with SOME points of their logical construction of a time line for Oswald, I still have issues with what  appears to be a very sloppy process by DPD/FBI of attaining and documenting the evidence. The failure to record the most important interrogation of Oswald  is the most crucial point of all that basically denies due process and thus introduces reasonable doubt about the veracity of the evidence.

On the following Monday, the Chicago Tribune reported that on Sunday the 24th, Dallas County Officials disclosed that Oswald's palm print was discovered on the barrel of the rifle!!



Obtaining prints from deceased individuals is done for many reasons and in this case wouldn't you want to be sure that you're 100% positive that the man shot by Ruby and the body in the Morgue was in fact Lee Harvey Oswald? Because you know how suspicious Conspiracy Theorists are? Right? LOL!



The FBI confirmed beyond all doubt that Oswald palm touched the rifle and since dead people don't sweat, I think we can safely say the Oswald touched the rifle while still alive.



Oswald's paper sack that was found in Oswald's sniper's nest and photographed here a few hours later is the right size to carry Oswald's broken down rifle.







JohnM

[Richard Smith]

On the following Monday, the Chicago Tribune reported that on Sunday the 24th, Dallas County Officials disclosed that Oswald's palm print was discovered on the barrel of the rifle!!



Obtaining prints from deceased individuals is done for many reasons and in this case wouldn't you want to be sure that you're 100% positive that the man shot by Ruby and the body in the Morgue was in fact Lee Harvey Oswald? Because you know how suspicious Conspiracy Theorists are? Right? LOL!



The FBI confirmed beyond all doubt that Oswald palm touched the rifle and since dead people don't sweat, I think we can safely say the Oswald touched the rifle while still alive.



Oswald's paper sack that was found in Oswald's sniper's nest and photographed here a few hours later is the right size to carry Oswald's broken down rifle.







JohnM

The theory that Day would fabricate this print after Oswald was already dead and the authorities were satisfied of his guilt is laughable.  There is zero incentive to do so. There was ample evidence to link Oswald to the rifle in the absence of any print. There are a multitude of reasons for Day not to do so including losing his job, humiliation, and possibly prison.  And I thought the CTer view was that the FBI was in on the framing of Oswald.  But they won't confirm his print on the rifle?  Why claim there was only one if the DPD is making this up?  Why not go all out and say his prints are all over the rifle and the FBI confirms as part of their role in framing Oswald?

[John Mytton]

The theory that Day would fabricate this print after Oswald was already dead and the authorities were satisfied of his guilt is laughable.  There is zero incentive to do so. There was ample evidence to link Oswald to the rifle in the absence of any print. There are a multitude of reasons for Day not to do so including losing his job, humiliation, and possibly prison.  And I thought the CTer view was that the FBI was in on the framing of Oswald.  But they won't confirm his print on the rifle?  Why claim there was only one if the DPD is making this up?  Why not go all out and say his prints are all over the rifle and the FBI confirms as part of their role in framing Oswald?

Zeon is like most modern CT's because they fully know there isn't a speck of evidence that anybody but Oswald did it, so they become anomaly hunters and without a shred of logical deductive reasoning they will throw anybody under a bus in hopes of sustaining their pointless suspicions, for example the interrogations are all lies except when they're not, the FBI altered evidence except when they didn't, key eyewitnesses cannot be trusted except when they can, and on and on it goes.

Anyway here's an interesting little titbit I found within some conspiracy literature, which according to the official timeline seems to be accurate.

1. Oswald's body was released from Parkland at around 11PM on Sunday night.
2. In the early hours of Monday, Secret Agents came and took Oswald's prints, and as I previously postulated this would be a forensic necessity in a case of this importance.

But here's the zinger, as posted above from the front page of the Chicago Tribune, it was reported that the Dallas Police disclosed the "Palmprint on the rifle barrel" way earlier than when the Secret Agents had access to Oswald's body?!?
Now wait for it, 3..2..1.. here comes the cries from the devoted, of yet another piece of official misinformation! Yawn!

In 1963 Paul Groody was employed at the Miller Funeral
Home in Fort Worth, where Oswald’s corpse was received from
Parkland Hospital in nearby Dallas at around 11 pm on 24
November, to be embalmed and prepared immediately for a
hasty viewing and burial the next day. In the early hours of 25
November Mr Groody’s work on Oswald’s corpse was
interrupted by the arrival of two ‘agents’. Mr Groody is now
dead but he did record statements to the effect that he didn’t
know whether the ‘agents’ were from the FBI or the Secret
Service.8 We can therefore infer with confidence that the two
men were formally attired rather than in any kind of uniform.
https://www.lobster-magazine.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/lob69-jfk-assassination.pdf

JohnM

[Zeon Mason]

You guys are making it very difficult for me to remain a loyal dedicated CT so I am going to remain merely as a skeptic just to give you loyalist WC devotees some kind of reason to continue posting here on the forum, even if it’s to 🙄 at old school Zeons questions. 🙂

[Martin Weidmann]

You guys are making it very difficult for me to remain a loyal dedicated CT so I am going to remain merely as a skeptic just to give you loyalist WC devotees some kind of reason to continue posting here on the forum, even if it’s to 🙄 at old school Zeons questions. 🙂

Your questions are beyond valid, Zeon.

If the case against Oswald was solid, they would not have the need for "evidence" suddenly showing up, whenever it was convenient.

Never mind that most of it had no chain of custody to actually place it at the scene of the crime to begin with.....   

For that they rely on all sorts of wack explanations, ignoring the simple fact that conclusive evidence and a solid chain of custody do not need any explanation at all.
The harder the try to explain things that are clearly questionable the weaker the "evidence" they are using becomes.

[Dan O'meara]

How the palmprint can be accepted as evidence is truly baffling.
According to FBI agent Vincent Drain, it was the opinion of his colleagues dealing with the palmprint that Day had faked it using one of the many palmprints that was taken from Oswald during the brief time he was in custody. I assume it is usual to take one set of prints from a suspect but it seems the DPD couldn't get enough of Oswald's prints.
It is the case that Day had an Oswald palmprint and the rifle in his possession on the evening of the assassination.
It is also the case that when the FBI received the rifle there was no sign of any fraction of a palmprint on the rifle. Not only that, there was no sign that the barrel of the rifle had even been processed for prints!!
There are two reasons why this would be the case:
1] The barrel of the rifle was never processed for prints.
2] The barrel was wiped spotlessly clean before the rifle was handed over to the FBI.
If Drain and his colleagues are correct it was probably option #2. After placing a fresh palmprint taken from Oswald on the barrel of the rifle, it was given time to dry and it was this fake print that was lifted from the barrel, after which the barrel was wiped clean.

What is the evidence that supports this sequence of events (other than the expert opinion of the FBI print specialists)?

1] NO PHOTO WAS TAKEN OF THE PALMPRINT

I imagine that in the very first lesson, on the very first day of fingerprint school, the students are taught this absolutely fundamental lesson - BEFORE A PRINT IS LIFTED IT IS PHOTOGRAPHED.
It is one of the most basic rules of finger-printing.
It is done because, very often, when a print is lifted it can be damaged or even destroyed by the actual act of lifting it. So a photo is taken first because it is non-invasive. It causes no damage to the print.
It can then act as a back up if the lifted print is compromised in any way.

It is beyond comprehension that Day, the fingerprint expert for the Dallas Police Department, did not take a photo first.
His excuse, that he didn't have enough time to photograph it but he did have enough time to lift it, is laughable. It cannot be taken seriously (but it is by those who need to believe).
His neglect in not taking the photo cannot be put down to gross incompetence. He was aware he should have taken the photo and we are supposed to believe he just decided not to.

The real reason he never took a photo is because there was no palmprint on the barrel of the rifle to take a print of.

2] DAY NEVER PASSED THE PRINT ON TO THE FBI ON THE 22ND

The DPD was ordered to hand over the evidence to the FBI on the night of the assassination.
The most important evidence was not the shells found on the 6th floor indicating where the shots were taken from. It was not even the rifle, the murder weapon itself. The most important piece of evidence was the palmprint Day was supposed to have taken from the barrel of the rifle.
This piece of evidence directly tied Oswald to the murder weapon. The palmprint taken from the rifle could be examined against the palmprint of Oswald the second it was lifted, wrapping the case up there and then.
Let's not forget, this is the most important piece of evidence in the most important case in U.S. history. The murder of the President.
Not only did Day forget to hand this unimaginably important piece of evidence over to the FBI, he forgot to mention he had it!
And not only that, we are being asked to believe that in the hours and days that followed the assassination Day was too busy to compare the palmprint to Oswald's!
We are being asked to believe that, not only did he neglect to give this evidence to the FBI so they could identify the print, he couldn't even be bothered doing it himself.
If it was true, that he really had lifted a palmprint from the barrel of the rifle, it would have been immediately recognised as the most important piece of evidence collected that day and there would have been a team working on it around the clock until an identification had been made.
It would not have been put in his drawer and forgotten about 

3] THERE WAS NO PRINT ON THE RIFLE WHEN IT ARRIVED AT THE FBI LAB

As I've said, the reason a photo is taken is to act as a back up in case the print is damaged or destroyed in the process of lifting the print.
According to Day's bogus story, he never took a photo and he did damage the print.
He would have us believe that after he lifted the print some stuck to the tape and some stayed on the rifle, irrevocably damaging the original print. However, according to Day, when he examined the print still left on the barrel of the rifle he felt that this was the better part of the damaged print and that the FBI would have no problem identifying the print. It must be remembered that a print that cannot be removed by the tape is really stuck on the barrel. Yet, when the rifle reached the FBI there was not even the tiniest fraction of print left on the barrel.
Where did it go?
Where did the print, that couldn't be removed by tape, go?
Could every single trace of a print that couldn't be removed by tape be rubbed off in transport?
How could that be the case if the wooden stock was put back on protecting the print?
Seriously, what is the excuse given for the disappearance of this print? How is it possible?

Unless, of course, the barrel of the rifle was thoroughly wiped clean before it was handed over to the FBI and that when it left the DPD there wasn't even a speck left to show that processing (or forgery) had even taken place.

The fingerprint experts at the FBI believed Day had faked the palmprint.
If we accept that, then all these other 'mysteries' are solved.

[Charles Collins]

Substitute CT for Calvin and this is what it is like to listen to their ideas:

[Jack Nessan]

How the palmprint can be accepted as evidence is truly baffling.
According to FBI agent Vincent Drain, it was the opinion of his colleagues dealing with the palmprint that Day had faked it using one of the many palmprints that was taken from Oswald during the brief time he was in custody. I assume it is usual to take one set of prints from a suspect but it seems the DPD couldn't get enough of Oswald's prints.
It is the case that Day had an Oswald palmprint and the rifle in his possession on the evening of the assassination.
It is also the case that when the FBI received the rifle there was no sign of any fraction of a palmprint on the rifle. Not only that, there was no sign that the barrel of the rifle had even been processed for prints!!
There are two reasons why this would be the case:
1] The barrel of the rifle was never processed for prints.
2] The barrel was wiped spotlessly clean before the rifle was handed over to the FBI.
If Drain and his colleagues are correct it was probably option #2. After placing a fresh palmprint taken from Oswald on the barrel of the rifle, it was given time to dry and it was this fake print that was lifted from the barrel, after which the barrel was wiped clean.

What is the evidence that supports this sequence of events (other than the expert opinion of the FBI print specialists)?

1] NO PHOTO WAS TAKEN OF THE PALMPRINT

I imagine that in the very first lesson, on the very first day of fingerprint school, the students are taught this absolutely fundamental lesson - BEFORE A PRINT IS LIFTED IT IS PHOTOGRAPHED.
It is one of the most basic rules of finger-printing.
It is done because, very often, when a print is lifted it can be damaged or even destroyed by the actual act of lifting it. So a photo is taken first because it is non-invasive. It causes no damage to the print.
It can then act as a back up if the lifted print is compromised in any way.

It is beyond comprehension that Day, the fingerprint expert for the Dallas Police Department, did not take a photo first.
His excuse, that he didn't have enough time to photograph it but he did have enough time to lift it, is laughable. It cannot be taken seriously (but it is by those who need to believe).
His neglect in not taking the photo cannot be put down to gross incompetence. He was aware he should have taken the photo and we are supposed to believe he just decided not to.

The real reason he never took a photo is because there was no palmprint on the barrel of the rifle to take a print of.

2] DAY NEVER PASSED THE PRINT ON TO THE FBI ON THE 22ND

The DPD was ordered to hand over the evidence to the FBI on the night of the assassination.
The most important evidence was not the shells found on the 6th floor indicating where the shots were taken from. It was not even the rifle, the murder weapon itself. The most important piece of evidence was the palmprint Day was supposed to have taken from the barrel of the rifle.
This piece of evidence directly tied Oswald to the murder weapon. The palmprint taken from the rifle could be examined against the palmprint of Oswald the second it was lifted, wrapping the case up there and then.
Let's not forget, this is the most important piece of evidence in the most important case in U.S. history. The murder of the President.
Not only did Day forget to hand this unimaginably important piece of evidence over to the FBI, he forgot to mention he had it!
And not only that, we are being asked to believe that in the hours and days that followed the assassination Day was too busy to compare the palmprint to Oswald's!
We are being asked to believe that, not only did he neglect to give this evidence to the FBI so they could identify the print, he couldn't even be bothered doing it himself.
If it was true, that he really had lifted a palmprint from the barrel of the rifle, it would have been immediately recognised as the most important piece of evidence collected that day and there would have been a team working on it around the clock until an identification had been made.
It would not have been put in his drawer and forgotten about 

3] THERE WAS NO PRINT ON THE RIFLE WHEN IT ARRIVED AT THE FBI LAB

As I've said, the reason a photo is taken is to act as a back up in case the print is damaged or destroyed in the process of lifting the print.
According to Day's bogus story, he never took a photo and he did damage the print.
He would have us believe that after he lifted the print some stuck to the tape and some stayed on the rifle, irrevocably damaging the original print. However, according to Day, when he examined the print still left on the barrel of the rifle he felt that this was the better part of the damaged print and that the FBI would have no problem identifying the print. It must be remembered that a print that cannot be removed by the tape is really stuck on the barrel. Yet, when the rifle reached the FBI there was not even the tiniest fraction of print left on the barrel.
Where did it go?
Where did the print, that couldn't be removed by tape, go?
Could every single trace of a print that couldn't be removed by tape be rubbed off in transport?
How could that be the case if the wooden stock was put back on protecting the print?
Seriously, what is the excuse given for the disappearance of this print? How is it possible?

Unless, of course, the barrel of the rifle was thoroughly wiped clean before it was handed over to the FBI and that when it left the DPD there wasn't even a speck left to show that processing (or forgery) had even taken place.

The fingerprint experts at the FBI believed Day had faked the palmprint.
If we accept that, then all these other 'mysteries' are solved.

“How the palmprint can be accepted as evidence is truly baffling.”

Because the FBI identified the palmprint, CE 2637, taken from LHO's rifle as having the irregularities associated with the barrel of the rifle and these irregularities from the barrel were present on the palmprint taken by Day.

CE 2637 proved the palmprint was taken from the barrel of the rifle.