3 x 5 Index Card that is item # 14 On the List

[Walt Cakebread]

The existence of this card does not demonstrate that it was lifted in the TSBD, or that it was lifted on 11/22/63, or that it was turned over to the FBI on 11/22/63, or that any evidence sheets were destroyed.

Yes, I do see ridges on the exhibit.

Would you please point them out....I have strained my eyes looking at the copy that has the "palm print" circled...and I can't see anything that looks like a print.  But on the large copy that you posted I can see a dark smudge but that smudge is not withing the circle  that is supposedly around the invisible print.

BTW....I believe the copy that you posted is excellent.... But there may be better copies available.

I know that the next argument will be :.... We are not qualified to identify a palm print.....  And that is true, but we sure as hell have eyes with which we can see for ourselves if there is a palm print on the exhibit.

I'm anxiously awaiting the copy on which you can see ridges....

[Jack Trojan]

[Walt Cakebread]

Thank you, Jack.....I can see a print on the copy you posted.....Is it possible to post Lee Oswald's palm print from his police file?

Mr. McCLOY. How about the palmprint?
Mr. DAY. The palmprint again that I lifted appeared to be his right palm, but I didn't get to work enough on that to fully satisfy myself it was his palm. With a little more work I would have come up with the identification there.

Lt Day never was able to identify the "palm print" as the print of Lee Oswald...... But Latona testified that

Here's Latona's testimony....
Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Latona, as I understand it, on November 23, therefore, the FBI had not succeeded in making an identification of a fingerprint or palmprint on the rifle, but several days later by virtue of the receipt of this lift, which did not come with the weapon originally, the FBI did succeed in identifying a print on Exhibit 139?
Mr. LATONA. That is right.
Mr. EISENBERG. Which may explain any inconsistent or apparently inconsistent statements, which I believe appeared in the press, as to an identification?
Mr. LATONA. We had no personal knowledge of any palmprint having been developed on the rifle. The only prints that we knew of were the fragmentary prints which I previously pointed out had been indicated by the cellophane on the trigger guard. There was no indication on this rifle as to the existence of any other prints. This print which indicates it came from the underside of the gun barrel, evidently the lifting had been so complete that there was nothing left to show any marking on the gun itself as to the existence of such even an attempt on the part of anyone else to process the rifle.

Latona testified that when he examined the rifle on SaPersonay 11 / 23 /63 there was no indication that a lift had been made from the underside of the gun barrel, not even a hint of finger print powder.  How could he have focused his attention on that area  of the rifle if he didn't have any knowledge that a lift had been performed from that area?

The Bottom Line....By SaPersonay 11 / 23 / 63 , Nobody had found any prints on the rifle that would have allowed Henry Wade ,The Dallas DA,  to tell reporters that Lee Harrrrrrvey Ossssswald's prints had been found on the gun.   But he DID tell reporters that lie....and the reporters in turn  told the ignorant pissants, who  belived the lie because it came from authority.

[John Iacoletti]

Why do you think Latona focused his attention on that area of the rifle on 11/23?

[Walt Cakebread]

Why do you think Latona focused his attention on that area of the rifle on 11/23?

He said that he did.... He said that when he received the 3 X 5 card ( a week after the murder) he knew that he had examined the area depicted in the photo and found nothing to indicate a print had been there nor any indication that the area had been dusted for prints.

Now, Mr. Latona, as I understand it, on November 23, therefore, the FBI had not succeeded in making an identification of a fingerprint or palmprint on the rifle,

Latona testified that when he examined the rifle on SaPersonay 11 / 23 /63 there was no indication that a lift had been made from the underside of the gun barrel, not even a hint of finger print powder.  How could he have focused his attention on that area  of the rifle if he didn't have any knowledge that a lift had been performed from that area?

[Jack Trojan]

LHO's right palm print (probably taken at the morgue):

[Walt Cakebread]

Mr. BELIN. What other processing did you do with this particular rifle?
Mr. DAY. I took it to the office and tried to bring out the two prints I had seen on the side of the gun at the bookstore. They still were rather unclear. Due to the roughness of the metal, I photographed them rather than try to lift them. I could also see a trace of a print on the side of the barrel that extended under the woodstock. I started to take the woodstock off and noted traces of a palmprint near the firing end of the barrel about 3 inches under the wood-stock when I took the woodstock loose.
Mr. BELIN. You mean 3 inches from the small end of the woodstock?
Mr. DAY. Right--yes, sir.
Mr. McCLOY. From the firing end of the barrel, you mean the muzzle?
Mr. DAY. The muzzle; yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN. Let me clarify the record. By that you mean you found it on the metal or you mean you found it on the wood?
Mr. DAY. On the metal, after removing the wood.
Mr. BELIN. The wood. You removed the wood, and then underneath the wood is where you found the print?
Mr. DAY. On the bottom side of the barrel which was covered by the wood, I found traces of a palmprint. I dusted these and tried lifting them, the prints, with scotch tape in the usual manner. A faint palmprint came off. I could still see traces of the print under the barrel and was going to try to use photography to bring off or bring out a better print. About this time I received instructions from the chief's office to go no further with the processing, it was to be released to the FBI for them to complete. I did not process the underside of the barrel under the scopic sight, did not get to this area of the gun.



Jack, since you were kind enough to post he print.....Could you explain how Lt Day could have seen a print on the bottom of the barrel on the carcano?  Look at a photo of that area of a carcano and try to reconcile Day's description with that are of a carcano...

Day said ...Quote..."I could also see a trace of a print on the side of the barrel that extended under the woodstock"...unquote..

Question...How could Day have seen a print on THE SIDE of the barrel and then lift the print from the BOTTOM of the barrel??.....

[Walt Cakebread]

LHO's right palm print (probably taken at the morgue):

Jack , can you reduce the size a bit so we can see the area of Lee's palm that is allegedly shown in CE 639   .....I believe the WC said that the area was nearer to the litle finger joint, and that's the area that was circled on the exhibit.