The Palmprint

[Zeon Mason]

So we are supposed to believe that Day had this print lifted before he released the rifle to Drain but that Day told ONLY Drain and NO ONE ELSE about having lifted this print ?

Are we supposed to believe Day when he said he could still see some of the print left on the barrel AFTER he made the lift, yet the FBI couldn’t find that remnant of print when they dusted the rifle?

Why was not a note affixed to the rifle about the print being found?

It stinks about as bad as the SS having a HQ with window overlooking the roof top that Crooks was crawling slowly up before taking shots at Trump, and the SS saw nothing?

It’s a weird parallel  with  Crooks and Oswald being KOOKs who were able to find the unsecured building closest to their targets even though SS and police were all over the place and did not spot them.

Yet it took Oswald 3 shots to hit JFK as close as only 50 yds away and not farther than 100 yds and Crooks  could not even hit a stationary large 6’3” x 1’8” target at 130 yds firing a semi auto rifle and taking 7-8 shots.

Me thinks the explanation is that when KOOKs are the assassins their state of mind being totally demented interferes with their ability to concentrate and aim accurately.

It also makes me reconsider MK ultra and if these KOOKs were being psychologically prepared and or hypnotic suggestion to be fixated on a particular person and the buildings were purposely left unsecured with a probability of expectation by their handlers that the KOOKS would likely perform if the target was presented to them as a sitting duck at close range.

[Dan O'meara]

No, because it doesn’t say that.

Yes it does.
That's how the English language works.
Your insane interpretation of what you want it to say is irrelevant.

It appeared probable the palmprint was Oswald's but the rifle was released to the FBI before a positive identification of the prints could be made.

It is blaming the lack of a positive identification of the probable prints on the fact the rifle was taken away.
That's what is being said.
If you think the English language works in a different way, let's hear it.
Let's hear your interpretation of this passage. 

[Zeon Mason]

The key point is that if Day had the lifted print in his procession then how could the act of giving the rifle to the FBI have prevented Day from verifying the print matched Oswald , given that Oswald was fingerprinted within hours after his arrest?

[Charles Collins]

The key point is that if Day had the lifted print in his procession then how could the act of giving the rifle to the FBI have prevented Day from verifying the print matched Oswald , given that Oswald was fingerprinted within hours after his arrest?

No, the key point is that no one has established that Day couldn’t have.

Day was ordered to stop processing. Day followed his orders. That is the reason that it wasn’t done.

A snip from “No More Silence” by Larry Sneed, pages 238-239:


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. …


… About four or five days later, an FBI man rolled up at the house and wanted to know where I had gotten the palm print. In Washington, 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. However, if I had received it with powder all over it, I probably would have thrown up my hands because somebody else had been messing with it. I suspect that’s what happened with the man in Washington. There were too many irons in the fire, too many fingers in the pie! 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. But anyway, I sent this palm print on the card to Washington. Of course, they identified it as Oswald’s, but they thought that I had gotten it off the gun after it had been sent back to us, which wasn’t true. So they were in kind of a stew. They thought their man in Washington had missed the print. After I explained what had happened, I guess that got him off the hook.


To know that Day told the FBI a few days after the assassination that he lifted the palm print on 11/22/63. And then to believe that Day would then turn around and write a report to his superiors a few weeks later that says he couldn’t verify the ID (due to the rifle being sent away) is pure lunacy.

Altering Day’s report’s sentences by leaving out relevant phrases and trying to insert words he didn’t use (and trying to pass that off as what one is supposed to think Day was trying to say) is an insult to anyone with any intelligence. All this ridiculous argument is is someone trying to support their point of view by using blatantly dishonest means.

[Zeon Mason]

So Lt.Day has this palm print on a card  which he just lifted from the rifle and Day is apparently suggesting that in HIS opinion it’s “probable” the print is from Oswald’s hand.

But then Day puts this print card containing a probable Oswald print lifted from the rifle and he interprets instructions from the FBI  to stop all processing of the rifle  to mean: “do nothing more with any print card containing a lifted probable print of Oswald or any other bit of evidence you may have found while inspecting the rifle  and just set all that aside until we get back to you”?

From those quotes from a book written by a 3rd party , the apparent explanation by Lt. Day seems to be this was just an unfortunate mistake due to confusion of overlapping investigating agencies.

So IDK for certain but imo the Worst “mistake” was Lt. Day unwilling to sign ANY affidavit explaining why FBI agent Drain was not informed about the print card instead Day waiting years later to explain why to a 3rd party author.

[Charles Collins]

So Lt.Day has this palm print on a card  which he just lifted from the rifle and Day is apparently suggesting that in HIS opinion it’s “probable” the print is from Oswald’s hand.

But then Day puts this print card containing a probable Oswald print lifted from the rifle and he interprets instructions from the FBI  to stop all processing of the rifle  to mean: “do nothing more with any print card containing a lifted probable print of Oswald or any other bit of evidence you may have found while inspecting the rifle  and just set all that aside until we get back to you”?

From those quotes from a book written by a 3rd party , the apparent explanation by Lt. Day seems to be this was just an unfortunate mistake due to confusion of overlapping investigating agencies.

So IDK for certain but imo the Worst “mistake” was Lt. Day unwilling to sign ANY affidavit explaining why FBI agent Drain was not informed about the print card instead Day waiting years later to explain why to a 3rd party author.

he interprets instructions from the FBI  to stop all processing of the rifle  to mean: “do nothing more with any print card containing a lifted probable print of Oswald or any other bit of evidence you may have found while inspecting the rifle  and just set all that aside until we get back to you”?


His instructions were not from the FBI. They were from his superiors in the DPD. Have you ever been in any kind of military or military-like organization (like the DPD)? If you haven’t, the first thing you learn is that you MUST follow orders, period. That is what Lt. Day did, follow his orders.


From those quotes from a book written by a 3rd party …


Actually the book is based on actual transcripts from recordings of interviews of each subject. The narratives are directly from the transcripts.


From the introduction section of “No More Silence” by Larry Sneed:

What follows are the stories in their entirety as they were related to me. I have made no changes in context or meaning, nor have I attempted to insert my own opinions into the narratives. One of my goals has been to allow the people to speak for themselves. The only alterations are in sentence structure and grammar to make the narratives more readable. Each subject was given the opportunity to critically review their original transcript and the completed narrative, and to make any necessary corrections or additions. Though few alterations were made, I have complied when requested by deleting certain detrimental comments about others as well as stories told to me in confidence which in no way altered the story of the assassination or its investigation. …

…. In converting the information from the transcripts to the narratives, occasional reorganization was necessary since the interviews sometimes meandered from one subject to another. As a result, transitional sentences were inserted to facilitate continuity. Nothing was changed to alter any substance from the original transcripts.  …

….  Here are the stories of those participants as they would want their stories told. Open your mind and listen to what they have to say.


It appears to me that your comment regarding a 3rd party book shouldn’t be a major concern.

[Michael Capasse]

No, the key point is that no one has established that Day couldn’t have.

Day was ordered to stop processing. Day followed his orders. That is the reason that it wasn’t done.

A snip from “No More Silence” by Larry Sneed, pages 238-239:


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. …


… About four or five days later, an FBI man rolled up at the house and wanted to know where I had gotten the palm print. In Washington, 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. However, if I had received it with powder all over it, I probably would have thrown up my hands because somebody else had been messing with it. I suspect that’s what happened with the man in Washington. There were too many irons in the fire, too many fingers in the pie! 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. But anyway, I sent this palm print on the card to Washington. Of course, they identified it as Oswald’s, but they thought that I had gotten it off the gun after it had been sent back to us, which wasn’t true. So they were in kind of a stew. They thought their man in Washington had missed the print. After I explained what had happened, I guess that got him off the hook.


To know that Day told the FBI a few days after the assassination that he lifted the palm print on 11/22/63. And then to believe that Day would then turn around and write a report to his superiors a few weeks later that says he couldn’t verify the ID (due to the rifle being sent away) is pure lunacy.

Altering Day’s report’s sentences by leaving out relevant phrases and trying to insert words he didn’t use (and trying to pass that off as what one is supposed to think Day was trying to say) is an insult to anyone with any intelligence. All this ridiculous argument is is someone trying to support their point of view by using blatantly dishonest means.

Garbage. 30 years too late. Drain said that evening Washington was calling every 15 minutes to find out what they had.
It is beyond dumb to think Drain didn't know exactly what that was before he left Dallas.

Interesting that NO DPD officers went to DC, instead it was only Drain and a top FBI from New Orleans, Warren deBrueys.
Harold Weisberg described deBrueys to the Grand Jury in the Shaw trial:

"...Warren deBrueys is fluent in Spanish, translates documents, he is one of these Spanish experts,
he is one of the Oswald experts, Pena had been an informant for him reporting on those for Castro.
When Oswald left New Orleans so did deBnueys. When Oswald wound up in Dallas so did deBrueys.
When he was no longer in Dallas neither was deBrueys. He came back to New Orleans when Oswald got murdered,
a remarkable coincidence, gentlemen. "  https://jfk.boards.net/post/3290/thread

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Sebastian Latona | WC Testimony

Representative BOGGS. And the witness has also certified that those are Oswald's prints?
Mr. LATONA. No; I cannot certify to that.

Mr. EISENBERG. Do you want to explain that?

Mr. LATONA. As I am not the one that fingerprinted Oswald, I cannot tell from my own personal knowledge that those
are actually the fingerprints of Lee Harvey Oswald.

Mr. EISENBERG. But you can certify that those prints are identical with the prints on the card which bears
the name of Lee Harvey Oswald which was furnished to you?

Mr. LATONA. That is right.

Mr. EISENBERG. We will get other evidence in the record at a subsequent time to show those were the prints of Oswald.
Mr. Latona, you were saying that you had worked over that rifle by applying a gray powder to it. Did you develop any fingerprints?

Mr. LATONA. I was not successful in developing any prints at all on the weapon.
I also had one of the firearms examiners dismantle the weapon and I processed the complete weapon, all parts, everything else.
And no latent prints of value were developed. https://jfk.boards.net/post/4930/thread

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
and we are still waiting for your interpretation of:

“… Two fingerprints were found on the side of the rifle near the trigger and magazine housing and a palm print was found on the underside of the gun barrel near the end of the stock. It appeared probable that these prints were from the right palm and fingers of Lee Harvey Oswald, but the rifle was released to the Federal Bureau of Investigation to be sent to Washington, D.C. before the examination was completed and positive identification of the prints could be made. …”

[Richard Smith]

Garbage. 30 years too late. Drain said that evening Washington was calling every 15 minutes to find out what they had.
It is beyond dumb to think Drain didn't know exactly what that was before he left Dallas.

Look at the confusion still surrounding the recent Trump assassination attempt.  Basic questions are still unanswered a month later.  Apply that to events in the JFK assassination that were occurring on the fly within 24 hours of event.  Investigations of these types can be chaotic.