Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?  (Read 44961 times)

Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Re: Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?
« Reply #120 on: August 12, 2021, 05:57:56 PM »
Advertisement
It was only with digital technology that the print photos could be seen under varying contrasts to bring out the detail. Now the process didn't add detail and combining the same print from one photo to another is a perfectly legitimate way of evaluating prints in photographs.

Day said the print was three inches from the forward end of the wooden fore-stock, not three inches from the muzzle. Above that area of the fore-stock, half of the metal barrel remains exposed. That's where the hardworking and sharp-eyed Day saw part of the palm print exposed. ("I could also see a trace of a print on the side of the barrel that extended under the woodstock.")



I have no trouble reconciling where Day found the barrel print.

Even on the day of the assassination, Day thought there was information (but not enough for a legal-standard "match") to tentatively link the prints to those of 'Lil' Lee. Years later, in the PBS-Frontline program, Day's tentative work on the trigger-guard housing fingerprints was re-examined by one of the nation's most prominent Latent Print Examiners, who said they matched positively to Oswald's.

    "As a result of an exacting and detailed examination and comparison under
     varying degrees of magnification and illumination, I have reached the
     conclusion that the developed latent prints are the fingerprints of Lee
     Harvey Oswald's right middle finger (#3) and right ring finger (#4) as
     they appear on the inked fingerprint card [JFK Exhibit F-400 of the HSCA]."

Day said the print was three inches from the forward end of the wooden fore-stock, not three inches from the muzzle. Above that area of the fore-stock, half of the metal barrel remains exposed. That's where the hardworking and sharp-eyed Day saw part of the palm print exposed. ("I could also see a trace of a print on the side of the barrel that extended under the woodstock.")


OK, Mr O..... Please show me where the three inches back is related to?      3 inches from WHERE??  And if the print was on the SIDE of the barrel then why did Day write on the index card,  that it was "Off UNDERSIDE" of gun barrel "
« Last Edit: August 12, 2021, 07:26:03 PM by Walt Cakebread »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?
« Reply #120 on: August 12, 2021, 05:57:56 PM »


Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Re: Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?
« Reply #121 on: August 12, 2021, 06:37:24 PM »
Latona (FBI) saw no signs of anyone having even attempted to process the rifle.

Day's prints are utter and total BS.

Your "reconciling" should come as no surprise.

Day's prints are utter and total BS.

The entire story about the palm prints is nothing but pure fabrication.     But I don't know how to open peoples eyes this fact.

There is ample evidence that Day discovered the so called palm print while examining the rifle in the TSBD just minutes after he lifted the carcano from THE FLOOR where it had been hidden beneath boxes of books  ( there is film footage showing Day lifting the rifle from the FLOOR ( It was NOT jammed between boxes of books as the DPD in situ photos depict it.)

Day spotted what he thought was a palm print on the WOODEN foregrip and he lifted that smudge using cellophane tape.  Tom Alyea watched him as le lifted that " print"    After lifting the "print Day placed that cellophane tape on a white index card and scrawled the pertinent information on that index card.  Day wrote.... " Off underside gun barrel near end of foregrip" on rifle C 2766  He also initialed and dated the card.

That's where the so called "palm print originated....  It was sent to the FBI along with the other evidence at midnight ..... The FBI lab examined the smudge on the cellophane tape and reported that it was useless for identification purposes.

Then they discovered that Henry Wade had proclaimed that they had found Oswald's prints on the rifle.....But the FBI knew that no such incriminating evidence had been sent to them....  That's when the DPD ( JC Day) and the FBI created the whopper about how Day had dismantled the rifle and found the print.    Watta CROCK!!

Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Re: Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?
« Reply #122 on: August 12, 2021, 07:09:25 PM »
It was only with digital technology that the print photos could be seen under varying contrasts to bring out the detail. Now the process didn't add detail and combining the same print from one photo to another is a perfectly legitimate way of evaluating prints in photographs.

Day said the print was three inches from the forward end of the wooden fore-stock, not three inches from the muzzle. Above that area of the fore-stock, half of the metal barrel remains exposed. That's where the hardworking and sharp-eyed Day saw part of the palm print exposed. ("I could also see a trace of a print on the side of the barrel that extended under the woodstock.")



I have no trouble reconciling where Day found the barrel print.

Even on the day of the assassination, Day thought there was information (but not enough for a legal-standard "match") to tentatively link the prints to those of 'Lil' Lee. Years later, in the PBS-Frontline program, Day's tentative work on the trigger-guard housing fingerprints was re-examined by one of the nation's most prominent Latent Print Examiners, who said they matched positively to Oswald's.

    "As a result of an exacting and detailed examination and comparison under
     varying degrees of magnification and illumination, I have reached the
     conclusion that the developed latent prints are the fingerprints of Lee
     Harvey Oswald's right middle finger (#3) and right ring finger (#4) as
     they appear on the inked fingerprint card [JFK Exhibit F-400 of the HSCA]."



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."...DPD detective JC Day

I could also see a trace of a print on the side of the barrel

OK ,Mr O..... Would you please point out the location on the rifle where Day said that he saw " a trace of a print ON THE SIDE OF THE BARREL......

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?
« Reply #122 on: August 12, 2021, 07:09:25 PM »


Offline Jon Banks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1219
Re: Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?
« Reply #123 on: August 12, 2021, 07:43:02 PM »
Jon: Yes, but he wrote that he disliked the American political and economic systems. He compared them, unfavorably, to the Soviet system. He said both were "slave" systems that needed to be overthrown. Michael Paine said that Oswald told him that the US system was irredeemable and couldn't be changed; that it needed to be replaced.

In 1963, after spending some time in the USSR, Oswald publicly ridiculed the USSR, the American Communist Party, and said he preferred the US over the USSR.

"He still held the ideals of the Soviets, was still a Marxist, but did not like the widespread lack of material goods that the Russians had to endure"


https://jfkassassination.net/parnell/ce2649.htm

"communist U.S.A. have existed for 40 years and they are still a pitiful group of radicals"

http://22november1963.org.uk/lee-oswald-speech-in-alabama


I don't know if his contradictory statements represent growth from his teenage years to becoming an adult. Or if it's evidence that his prior statements weren't sincere and were being used to create a persona that would make it easier for him to get into the USSR (or Cuba).

It's also worth noting that Oswald didn't participate in the American Communist Party and didn't associate with any known Communists.

But again, he did identify as a Marxist and to most Americans in 1963, the "Marxist vs Communist" thing was a difference without distinction.

In other words, if Oswald was being used as a Patsy, the fact that he proclaimed to be a Marxist was bad enough to convince most Americans that he was an anti-American Communist in 1963. With 20/20 hindsight, we can see that his views on politics were complex and sometimes contradictory.

His brother, Robert, said Lee wanted to be an "American" (whatever that means) when he returned from the USSR.


So, whether he disliked America or not he certainly didn't care for our economic and political systems. Whether his belief in Marxism was simply an explanation for the world he disliked - and given his childhood it's understandable that he'd be alienated from it - or not can be debated I guess. I think he had a bit more sophisticated understanding of some of its basic concepts than others think, e.g., his views on surplus value for example were pretty solid.

Most people with Left-wing views are dissatisfied with the Status Quo and want to improve America.

Oswald may very well have been "anti-American" but I don't view his Marxist or anti-capitalist beliefs as evidence of anti-Americanism. After all, capitalism exists lots of other places besides America.

There were very legitimate reasons for criticizing capitalism and racism in Oswald's time.

Recognizing America's flaws and wanting to create a fairer economic and political system shouldn't be mistaken for hatred of the US.

See the quote below from Martin Luther King Jr:


"I am convinced that capitalism has seen its best days in American, and not only in America, but in the entire world. It is a well known fact that no social institution can survive when it has outlived its usefulness. This, capitalism has done. It has failed to meet the needs of the masses."


https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/king-papers/documents/notes-american-capitalism


As to his views on JFK: they are a puzzle, aren't they? If he was pretending to be a Marxist, if this was an act I would think part of it would be to denounce JFK. But if he was a sincere Marxist (as he understood it) and an admirer of Castro I would also think he'd be critical of JFK. But we can't find anything other than the Schmidt story.

Per Marina and others close to Oswald, he liked JFK's stances on Civil Rights. It also seems overlooked that Gen. Edwin Walker's aggressive opposition to Civil Rights, not his views on Cuba, might be what motivated Oswald's hatred of Walker.

Given Oswald's alleged love for Castro, I agree that one would expect him to hate JFK who presided over the Bay of Pigs and Cuban Missile Crisis. But JFK's views on Cuba were pretty much the consensus in the US government at the time so maybe Oswald didn't hold that against him.

He did in fact tell Captain Fritz that he was aware that Lyndon Johnson wouldn't be any different on Cuba policies.

If there was no Conspiracy, maybe Governor Connally was his intended target? If Oswald was a political extremist, he would've been proud to have killed JFK. Most terrorists express pride when they successfully hit their intended target.
« Last Edit: August 12, 2021, 08:14:36 PM by Jon Banks »

Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Re: Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?
« Reply #124 on: August 12, 2021, 07:53:20 PM »
Carl Day, Dallas Crime Lab on work done November 22nd ...

    "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."

    "These are prints or pictures, I should say, of the latent—of the traces of
     prints on the side of the magazine housing of the gun No. C-2766 ...
     They appeared to be the right middle and right ring finger of Harvey Lee
     Oswald, Lee Harvey Oswald."

Day's photographs of the trigger-housing prints were confirmed as Oswald's in the 1993 PBS-TV NOVA Frontline program "Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?" (See also: "JFK First Day Evidence" by Gary Savage, p.120 and "Reclaiming History" by Vincent Bugliosi, pp.803-04)




(Yet another example of the exemplary unbiased work contributed by the Dallas Police Department.)

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."...DPD detective JC Day

Lets try to parse Detective Day's statement......

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

In this statement Day says he' has spotted the "unclear" palm print on the SIDE of the barrel.....

"I started to take the woodstock off and noted traces of a palmprint "    

In this statement he indicates that when he started to take the woodstock off the rifle he " noted traces of a palmprint "
This sounds like two different prints.....He said that he had already seen  "a trace of a print"...and that what had prompted him to "take the woodstock off"....Then he noted traces of a palm print. that was near the firing end of the barrel ( normally called the muzzle) 

"about 3 inches under the wood-stock when I took the  woodstock loose."...DPD detective JC Day

The front of the woodstock is 5 1/4" back from the "firing end" ( muzzle)......and the side of the barrel above the wooden foregrip is 9 inches to the rear of the muzzle.

Day also testified that he removed the stock and dusted the area with black finger print powder......then he claimed that he used cellophane tape to lift the print.    And he said that the print was still visible on the barrel and the FBI should have been able to see that print......However The FBI man was far better qualified in examining finger prints than detective Day  and he testified that he saw not a trace of a print nor did he see any finger print powder on the barrel.... 
« Last Edit: August 12, 2021, 07:55:53 PM by Walt Cakebread »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?
« Reply #124 on: August 12, 2021, 07:53:20 PM »


Offline Jon Banks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1219
Re: Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?
« Reply #125 on: August 12, 2021, 08:07:34 PM »
Even if it were a confirmed fact that "LHO did not hate JFK" that means absolutely nothing in terms of his guilt.  The evidence is used to prove guilt.  There is an abundance that links Oswald to this crime.  But again, JFK was also the President of the United States.  Not just a person.  Someone with a axe to grind with the US might take that out on its most prominent representative.  So even if LHO did not "hate" JFK he still had an obvious motive for targeting him because Oswald was a political nut job.   And you cannot discount the fact that the opportunity fell into Oswald's lap.  JFK's motorcade literally drove by his place of work affording him the chance.  Oswald did not "target" JFK in the sense that he had to seek him out as most assassins have to do.  JFK came to Dallas and drove right into Oswald's line of sight.

I agree that the lack of a clearly defined motive doesn't exonerate Oswald. It's just one of many weird things about the JFK assassination case. Taken collectively with other problems with the case, I continue to believe the case is unsolved and might've been a conspiracy.


I disagree that he was likely a Nut-job. Calling both Oswald and Ruby "Nut-jobs" is the defense of last resort when people can't explain their motives for doing certain things that they did.

Oswald was diagnosed with Personality Disorder issues, he wasn't diagnosed with any known mental illness. Personality Disorders and Mental Illness aren't the same. Some speculate that he had Aspergers or was Autistic. Aspergers wasn't widely recognized in the 1950s-1960s. 


Online Richard Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5342
Re: Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?
« Reply #126 on: August 12, 2021, 08:19:20 PM »
I agree that the lack of a clearly defined motive doesn't exonerate Oswald. It's just one of many weird things about the JFK assassination case. Taken collectively with other problems with the case, I continue to believe the case is unsolved and might've been a conspiracy.


I disagree that he was likely a Nut-job. Calling both Oswald and Ruby "Nut-jobs" is the defense of last resort when people can't explain their motives for doing certain things that they did.

Oswald was diagnosed with Personality Disorder issues, he wasn't diagnosed with any known mental illness. Personality Disorders and Mental Illness aren't the same. Some speculate that he had Aspergers or was Autistic. Aspergers wasn't widely recognized in the 1950s-1960s.

The act of shooting the President is not a rational one.  There can't be a rational motive for doing so.  There was something wrong with Oswald as demonstrated in many ways.  His defection to the USSR.  Not normal.  His attempt to kill Walker.  Not normal.  His desire to defect to Cuba and trips to the Cuban Embassy.  Not normal.  Whether he had some type of clinical mental illness can be debated but there is no doubt that he was a very strange guy.  Of course there are lots of odd people (some of whom frequent this forum) who never commit any violent act.  But Oswald certainly falls within the category of suspect individuals.  The FBI was keeping tabs on him.  His own wife went to check on whether his rifle was still in the garage when she heard of JFK's assassination.  That speaks volumes that his wife was suspicious that he might commit the crime even before the police arrived.  He was the type.  That doesn't make him guilty.  That is what the evidence proves, but Oswald's personality is entirely consistent with being the assassin and nothing about his alleged lack of "motive" casts any doubt on his guilt as was suggested.  That is not a defense of last resort but reality.  Only Oswald can ever explain why he did it but it was no real surprise to anyone who knew him.  He was a lifelong malcontent with a screw loose. 

Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Re: Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?
« Reply #127 on: August 12, 2021, 09:02:20 PM »
The act of shooting the President is not a rational one.  There can't be a rational motive for doing so.  There was something wrong with Oswald as demonstrated in many ways.  His defection to the USSR.  Not normal.  His attempt to kill Walker.  Not normal.  His desire to defect to Cuba and trips to the Cuban Embassy.  Not normal.  Whether he had some type of clinical mental illness can be debated but there is no doubt that he was a very strange guy.  Of course there are lots of odd people (some of whom frequent this forum) who never commit any violent act.  But Oswald certainly falls within the category of suspect individuals.  The FBI was keeping tabs on him.  His own wife went to check on whether his rifle was still in the garage when she heard of JFK's assassination.  That speaks volumes that his wife was suspicious that he might commit the crime even before the police arrived.  He was the type.  That doesn't make him guilty.  That is what the evidence proves, but Oswald's personality is entirely consistent with being the assassin and nothing about his alleged lack of "motive" casts any doubt on his guilt as was suggested.  That is not a defense of last resort but reality.  Only Oswald can ever explain why he did it but it was no real surprise to anyone who knew him.  He was a lifelong malcontent with a screw loose.


 His attempt to kill Walker.  Not normal.

How do you know that Walker's assailant intended to kill him ??

Were you involved in the shooting?

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?
« Reply #127 on: August 12, 2021, 09:02:20 PM »