JFK Assassination Forum

Enough is enough.
It's one thing dealing with someone who comes across as a very unintelligent child, it's another dealing with a downright liar.
I cannot believe you have posted this lie yet again:

"Your two prints on the barrel claim have gone away, replaced by a print on the trigger housing, which is what Lt Day stated."

In my last two posts I have made it absolutely clear that the second print that Day mentioned WAS NOT on the trigger housing.
It is clear you are just going to repeat this meaningless lie over and over again no matter what I post.
In any debate, lying is the lowest tactic that can be used. It is the strategy of a genuine loser.

"The only person who thinks he did not disassemble the rifle is you."

This is another lie.
Stombaugh DID NOT disassemble the Carcano. Do not continue with this lie.
In his WC testimony, Latona explains that the rifle was disassembled by a weapons expert. You would know this if you had any clue about the basics of this case.
But you don't.
So you don't.
It was only when the rifle was disassembled that the part of the barrel covered by the wood was revealed and it was Latona who examined it. He reported there were no prints on this part of the rifle and no sign that it had even been processed for prints. That is to say there was no fingerprint powder on this part of the rifle. The barrel was clean.
Where did the prints and the powder go?
They were either never there or Day wiped the barrel clean.

"Oh, the FBI did authenticate the palm print as having been come from the carcano."

I know they did.
I was correcting another one of your lies.
You posted that the FBI authenticated the palmprint ON the Carcano.
THE PALMPRINT WAS NOT ON THE CARCANO WHEN THE FBI AUTHENTICATED IT.
This is a lie!
This is what I posted in response to your lie:

"Firstly, the FBI DID NOT authenticate the palmprint on the Carcano.
There was no palmprint on the Carcano when the FBI received it.
You should know this basic fact.
The FBI authenticated that the palmprint allegedly lifted by Day was taken from the Mannlicher Carcano. As has been explained to you over and over again, this DOES NOT mean the palmprint was on the rifle when Day first examined it."

No doubt you will carry on with these lies but I will just refer you back to this post.

Like all Nutters, you resort to outright lies when confronted with evidence/testimony that undermines your belief system.
Like all Nutters, you are a zealot.
It is very interesting that there are no reasonable Nutters on this forum and there never has been. Every single one reverts to spouting utter nonsense or lies rather than engage in a genuine debate about the numerous troubling aspects of this case.

You claim to be well read but apparently you go blind when you see something you do not like. Latona clearly states the print was on the trigger guard. Again, not the barrel like you repeatedly claimed but the trigger guard.

Mr. LATONA. Well, the technique that I used first was simply to examine it visually under a magnifying glass, a hand magnifying glass, primarily for the purpose of seeing, first of all, whether there were any visible prints. I might point out that my attention had been directed to the area which we refer to as the trigger guard on the left side of the weapon, Commission Exhibit 139.
Mr. EISENBERG. The trigger-guard area?
Mr. LATONA. The trigger-guard area.
Mr. EISENBERG. Which actually, in the case of this particular weapon, is the area in which the magazine is inserted at the 'top; is that correct? You are looking at the weapon now, and the magazine comes out the bottom of what is called the trigger-guard area, which would be a trigger guard on another weapon Mr. EISENBERG. Now, when you received it with the cellophane cover, what portion did it cover?


Mr. LATONA. Closest to the trigger area.
Mr. EISENBERG. On the trigger guard, closest to the trigger area?
Mr. LATONA. That's right.
Mr. EISENBERG. Was that on the right or left side of the weapon?
Mr. LATONA. Left side. [/b]
Mr. EISENBERG. And was there a print visible to you underneath the cellophane?
Mr. LATONA. I could see faintly ridge formations there. However, examination disclosed to me that the formations, the ridge formations and characteristics, were insufficient for purposes of either effecting identification or a determination that the print was not identical with the prints of people. Accordingly, my opinion simply was that the latent prints which were there were of no value. Now, I did not stop there.

----------------------

DM---”In his WC testimony, Latona explains that the rifle was disassembled by a weapons expert. You would know this if you had any clue about the basics of this case.”


What I know is you make things up. Here I will quote it for you, even something as simple as this is now messed up.:
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.

Not an “expert”, an “examiner”---- You know an assistant. Stombaugh most likely had one too.

It is not firearms expert it is firearms examiner. Why would the same examiner not be available for Mr Stombaugh? Do you think they just ship the parts and pieces around willy nilly and hope things do not get misplaced?

---------------------------

You should refer to something in an attempt to understand the testimony. I would not think your misguided posts would be a good choice.

So two or maybe three different people handled the firearm after Lt Day and before Mr Latona. Mr Stombaugh mentions all the fingerprint powder. The Firearms examiner is not questioned. From this you accuse Lt Day of fabricating evidence?
 

This election is very interesting to me, I have been following much more closely than usual and I see a vast discrepancy between social media comments and the pre polls, which could be down to Trump supporters being more vocal but from my perspective nearly ALL Americans are very passionate about what's important to them.
Anyway, when push comes to shove, in this current economic climate I feel that Americans can see that they need a powerful leader who can represent himself not only to his country but to the entire World, and not some silly giggling confused woman who doesn't appear to have a strong grasp of what her country really needs.
So in closing, I predict Trump in a landslide!!

JohnM

2020 "early votes"? More like ballot boxes being pulled out from under the table in Georgia. And then there's the truck pulling up at 3AM to that vote counting center in Philly and unloading pallets of vote boxes. All of this clearly recorded on video surveillance and nobody does squat. Plus, the video surveillance footage had to be fought for. And then there was the truck driver claiming that his truck full of uncounted ballots was stolen. He was immediately tarred a liar and a nut job with a drug record. His story was VERIFIED 2 yrs later by the Fed Govt. They said he got his truck number wrong which threw off their checking out his story. The DOJ is as crooked as a dog's hind leg.

The Dems are too dumb to steal the election with fraud.  They have proven that time and again.   In 2020, they legalized ballot harvesting just before the election and ran up the totals such that they were impossible to overcome.  That's all ancient history, however.  What matters is this election.  The early voting numbers are down by 20%.  The percentage of Republican votes in early voting is up.  So if the election day trend of many more Republicans showing up at the polls holds true, it should be a good day.

 2020 "early votes"? More like ballot boxes being pulled out from under the table in Georgia. And then there's the truck pulling up at 3AM to that vote counting center in Philly and unloading pallets of vote boxes. All of this clearly recorded on video surveillance and nobody does squat. Plus, the video surveillance footage had to be fought for. And then there was the truck driver claiming that his truck full of uncounted ballots was stolen. He was immediately tarred a liar and a nut job with a drug record. His story was VERIFIED 2 yrs later by the Fed Govt. They said he got his truck number wrong which threw off their checking out his story. The DOJ is as crooked as a dog's hind leg.

It is more like English is your third language. You have managed to have completely prove the opposite and do not seem to realize it. Your claims of two prints on the barrel have become a distant memory. You posted Mr Strombaugh detailing the black finger print powder all over the rifle, yet claim the powder is not there. You now are admitting the second print Lt Day referred to was on the trigger housing not the barrel. Exactly what is your point again? 


The FBI authenticated the palm print on the Carcano due to the irregularities of the barrel appearing in the finger print. Exactly what is your problem with that again?

Begging for someone to please believe you, that there is a conspiracy is not the same as actually proving it and with zero evidence of any kind to boot. You believe there is the appearance of impropriety just by your reasoning alone, so that means there has to be a conspiracy?

DM---Just to make something clear - I'm not disputing that the rifle belonged to Oswald (there would be no point framing him with someone else's rifle). I'm pointing out that some aspects of the investigation were clearly corrupt. There can be no doubt about this.

This is not proof of a conspiracy. LHO's rifle being found on the 6th floor and being matched to the bullet and fragments is proof of LHO's guilt not a conspiracy. If not LHO, who and why?



 

 
Wow!!
Even for you, this insane rant of a post is next level.
I'll deal with the craziest part of it first, then try to pick my way through this swamp of Nutter confusion and delusion.

You posted:
"You now are admitting the second print Lt Day referred to was on the trigger housing not the barrel. Exactly what is your point again?"
In the post you are responding to. I wrote this:
"When Day states that this second print was "near" the trigger housing he is saying that IT IS NOT ON THE TRIGGER HOUSING!!"
I wrote that the second print was not on the trigger housing. I wrote it IN CAPITAL LETTERS.
I even put the word "NOT" in bold print.
Yet you have somehow interpreted this as me "admitting the second print Lt Day referred to was on the trigger housing not the barrel"!!

How have you interpreted what I have written this crazy way?
How have you interpreted it as the exact opposite of what I actually posted??
How confused are you?
Can't you understand basic English?
I also posted this:
"There is only one place Day can be referring to and that is on the barrel of the rifle, this is the metal part "under the wood".
I specifically stated that, as far as the second print is concerned, Day was talking about it being on the barrel. It's totally obvious what I'm saying but you seem to be so confused that you understand it as the opposite of what's being said!

Then we have this gem:
"You posted Mr Strombaugh detailing the black finger print powder all over the rifle, yet claim the powder is not there."

I have already patiently explained this 'mystery' to you but you just don't get it.
Rather than explain it all again I will simply reproduce my earlier post:

Part of the barrel of the rifle of the MC is covered by a wooden foregrip when it is assembled.
Do you understand that?
The area where Day said he discovered two sets of prints was on the part of the barrel that was covered by the foregrip.
Day had to disassemble the rifle so he could access this part of the underside of the barrel of the rifle.
It was on this part of the rifle that Day said he saw two sets of prints.
Day would like us to believe that he covered this area of the barrel of the rifle with black fingerprint powder and tried to lift a palmprint off the surface.
Obviously, the rifle had to be disassembled for him to do this.

Hopefully that all makes sense.

Now, let's go back to when the rifle was first discovered on the 6th floor.
Tom Alyea filmed Day covering the rifle with fingerprint dust, using his little brush to brush away lots of the fibre evidence.
Paul Stombugh, the FBI's fibre expert, was the first person to view the rifle when Drain brought it back to Washington. Stombaugh comments how well the rifle was packaged:

"...I received this gun from Special Agent Vincent Drain of the Dallas FBI office. It was crated very well. I opened the crate myself and put my initials on the gun and at that time I noted it had been dusted for latent prints."


Stombaugh notes that "fingerprint powder was all over the gun".
So your stupid idea, that all this powder had simply disappeared, can be put to one side.
Now...here's the bit where you really have to focus.
Stombaugh never disassembled the rifle!!
So he didn't examine the area where Day claimed to have lifted the print from.
The person who disassembled the rifle was a firearms expert brought in by Latona, as part of a team that examined the alleged murder weapon of the President.
Although the rifle was covered with latent fingerprint powder, when Latona examined the underside of the barrel that had been covered by the foregrip, he discovered there was no fingerprint powder there. There were no prints there. The underside of the rifle barrel was clean.
The rest of the rifle was covered with fingerprint powder except for the area where Day lied about having lifted a palmprint.
It was clean.
It had either been wiped clean or it had never been examined in the first place.

Stombaugh testified that the rifle was covered with fingerprint powder.
But when the rifle was disassembled the underside of the barrel, which had been covered with wood, was clean.
There was no fingerprint powder and no prints.
I can't state this any more simply.
The rifle was covered with fingerprint powder, but not the part of the barrel that had been covered by the wooden stock.
Do you understand what is being said here?
Do you understand that there is no mystery or contradiction?

The FBI authenticated the palm print on the Carcano due to the irregularities of the barrel appearing in the finger print. Exactly what is your problem with that again?

Firstly, the FBI DID NOT authenticate the palmprint on the Carcano.
There was no palmprint on the Carcano when the FBI received it.
You should know this basic fact.
The FBI authenticated that the palmprint allegedly lifted by Day was taken from the Mannlicher Carcano. As has been explained to you over and over again, this DOES NOT mean the palmprint was on the rifle when Day first examined it.
More importantly, it doesn't explain where the print and the fingerprint powder that Day insisted was on the barrel of the rifle when sent it to the FBI, disappeared to.
And that is the question that is being asked.
How did the print and fingerprint powder disappear?
You have already stated that you don't know. It is the only honest thing you have posted on this thread.
Like all Nutters, you have no idea what happened to the print and powder.
Like all Nutters, you don't think there is anything wrong with this. You don't think there's anything mysterious or suspicious about it.
Like all Nutters, you don't do any thinking for yourself.
Your opinions are provided for you and are based on the investigation into the assassination.
But what if the investigation was corrupt?
Would that cause you to have second thoughts? [ as if]