Whose Target was General Edwin Walker?

[Walt Cakebread]

Yeah one way or another all roads lead to Rome, you have an actual Carcano, cool, how about you do your experiment and present your results?

JohnM

Huh??....  You don't accept my finding ...and yet you want me to conduct a stupid experiment, the results of which you'd reject.     

Since you apparently lack the guts to post CE 639....Perhaps some one will accommodate me in posting a good cleat copy of CE 639 ( The so called "palm Print" has another exhibit number also-- CE 637? )   Once we have that exhibit to view I'll point out the obvious which you'd like to ignore.

Do you know what Commission  ............  No. 637 is?

Mr. DAY. This is the trace of palmprint I lifted off of the barrel of the gun  ............ ," and also "11/22/63" written on it in my writing off the underside gun barrel near the end of foregrip, ............ 

This establishes that Detective Day inscribed and dated the exhibit CE 637.....

[Walt Cakebread]

This is not meant to prove Oswald's palmprint was on the barrel. Only to demonstrate that physically it's possible to deposit a print from a part of the palm onto a Carcano barrel.

The only part of the palm that has useful prints is the heel of the palm...and the heel would not contact a rifle barrel that is the diameter of a AA pen light battery.   

And further more Lt Day wrote ....Off undersidee of gun barrell"   

That means he was referring to no more than 1/4  of the circumference of the barrel (2.045") ... which means that the bottom of the barrel that Day referred to was about 1/2 inch wide. ( 1/4 of 2 inches.)  Anyway you slice it a man could not deposit an identifiable palm print on a 1/2 inch strip of that round gun barrel.

[Walt Cakebread]

Wally is still ignoring the evidence. Cite a report that says it was a 6.5 Carcano.

There are dozens of photos that clearly show the rifle is a model 91 /38 Mannlicher Carcano.

[John Iacoletti]

Mr. MCDONALD. And you took the fragment, is it labeled CE-567, and microscopically compared it with the test-fired bullet from the FBI that was fired out of 139?
Mr. NEWQUIST. That is correct.
Mr. McDONALD. And what was the result of your examination?
Mr. NEWQUIST. From mine and the panel's comparison, of these two exhibits, it is our opinion, they had been fired from the same firearm.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo/firearm.htm

"(142) The panel also compared CE 567 with bullets it test-fired in the CE 139 rifle. The panel was unable to identify its tests with CE 567. The panel attributed this to changes in the bore caused by repeated firing of the rifle by the FBI and the Infantry weapons Evaluation Branch of the U.S. Army to test its accuracy, (76) as well as deterioration of the surfaces because the rifle had not been properly cleaned, lubricated, and maintained. For the same reasons, the panel was unable to identify its test-fired bullets with those of the FBI. The panel's test-fired bullets also could not be identified with each other, probably as a consequence of the poor condition of the barrel."

[Bill Chapman]

'probably as a consequence of the poor condition of the barrel'

Why you shouldn't clean your rifle bore before a hunt
https://www.outdoorlife.com/blogs/game-changers/why-you-shouldn?t-clean-your-rifle-bore-hunt

[Rob Caprio]

The HSCA was a neutral investigation who erroneously discovered and presented evidence of a conspiracy, had their firearms panel examine the same fragments as Frazier and they all agreed that the same fragments were fired from Oswald's rifle. The evidence still exists and these experts would be aware that there reputation was on the line because at any time in the future anyone good or evil could examine this evidence, so what could all these men from across two decades be possibly hiding and why?

JohnM

A neutral investigation? LOL. It may have started out that way, but it sure didn't stay that way for long. Expert witness testimony is nothing but OPINION when it isn't supported by corroborating evidence. The WC had NONE and the HSCA had NONE.

LHO was entitled to have his own expert witnesses, but that never happened.

[Rob Caprio]

There are dozens of photos that clearly show the rifle is a model 91 /38 Mannlicher Carcano.

So you can't cite a report, huh?

[Walt Cakebread]

So you can't cite a report, huh?

Pssst Robbie... Have you ever heard the old axiom.....  "A single picture is worth a thousand words."  ?

Well if one picture is worth a thousand words.... and there are dozens of photos that show the rifle and PROVE that it was a model 91/38 Mannlicher Carcano, why would you want a written report??    Clearly you are irrational.