RIP to the Single-bullet theory?

[Charles Collins]

Despite what anybody tried to claim later, there is no other way to interpret "all the evidence collected that he was examining, which related to LEE HARVEY OSWALD".

Read Pat Speer's chapter, already cited, on Day's morphing "memories". It seems that you are all over these when they suit your purposes.

Despite what anybody tried to claim later, there is no other way to interpret "all the evidence collected that he was examining, which related to LEE HARVEY OSWALD".

The evidence, the testimonies, the later recollections, etc ALL indicate the following interpretation is correct:

"all the evidence collected [that the FBI requested] that he was examining, which related to LEE HARVEY OSWALD".

Many of us don’t always use very precise language all the time. I have gotten better at it as a result of trying to communicate on forums like this one. Drain’s language in that report is not very precise. I think that it would have been wrong for Day to turn over evidence that he had not specifically been instructed to turn over to the FBI. Your charges of Day mishandling or falsifying evidence simply don’t have any credible evidence to support them.

[Alan Ford]

Despite what anybody tried to claim later, there is no other way to interpret "all the evidence collected that he was examining, which related to LEE HARVEY OSWALD".

The evidence, the testimonies, the later recollections, etc ALL indicate the following interpretation is correct:

"all the evidence collected [that the FBI requested] that he was examining, which related to LEE HARVEY OSWALD".

The original text:

“Lt. DAY stated he received instructions from Chief of Police JESSE B. CURRY, Dallas Police Department, Dallas, Texas, to turn over all of the evidence collected that he was examining, which related to LEE HARVEY OSWALD, to the FBI shortly before midnight on November 22, 1963.”

Excellent propaganda-hermeneutics, Mr. Collins! 

[Michael Capasse]

Despite what anybody tried to claim later, there is no other way to interpret "all the evidence collected that he was examining, which related to LEE HARVEY OSWALD".

The evidence, the testimonies, the later recollections, etc ALL indicate the following interpretation is correct:

"all the evidence collected [that the FBI requested] that he was examining, which related to LEE HARVEY OSWALD".

Many of us don’t always use very precise language all the time. I have gotten better at it as a result of trying to communicate on forums like this one. Drain’s language in that report is not very precise. I think that it would have been wrong for Day to turn over evidence that he had not specifically been instructed to turn over to the FBI. Your charges of Day mishandling or falsifying evidence simply don’t have any credible evidence to support them.

lame desperation 

[John Iacoletti]

From Jesse Curry’s testimony:

“We kept getting calls from the FBI. They wanted this evidence up in Washington, in the laboratory, and there was some discussion, Fritz told me, he says, "Well, I need the evidence here, I need to get some people to try to identify the gun, to try to identify this pistol and these things, and if it is in Washington how can I do it?"
But we finally, the night, about midnight of Friday night, we agreed to let the FBI have all the evidence and they said they would bring it to their laboratory and they would have an agent stand by and when they were finished with it to return it to us.”

[Charles Collins]

From Jesse Curry’s testimony:

“We kept getting calls from the FBI. They wanted this evidence up in Washington, in the laboratory, and there was some discussion, Fritz told me, he says, "Well, I need the evidence here, I need to get some people to try to identify the gun, to try to identify this pistol and these things, and if it is in Washington how can I do it?"
But we finally, the night, about midnight of Friday night, we agreed to let the FBI have all the evidence and they said they would bring it to their laboratory and they would have an agent stand by and when they were finished with it to return it to us.”

Again, this would be all of the evidence that the FBI requested. Are you REALLY suggesting that Vince Drain took ALL of the evidence with him to Washington and returned with it on Sunday? And that Day secretly withheld the palm print for some unknown reason. Or that Day didn’t have a palm print from the rifle when Drain took the evidence to Washington?

[John Iacoletti]

“…that the FBI requested” is your invention that was not said by Curry or Day (via Drain).

I’m suggesting that there is no good reason to believe Day’s story about doing a lift from the rifle on 11/22. He didn't turn it over to the FBI with the other evidence that night, nor did he even tell FBI agent Drain of its existence.  He didn't photograph it in place or cover it with cellophane.  He claimed that there were still visible ridges left after doing his lift. Furthermore, Sebastian Latona examined the rifle and said that area didn't look like it had been processed at all.  He found no traces of ridges there. Then a week later, Latona receives (separately from all the other evidence) an index card with a partial print on it. When asked by the WC to sign an affidavit regarding his handling of the print, Day refused. Your attempts to “explain” these things away fall flat and reek of desperation to maintain the “cop said so, therefore it’s true” position.

Paul Stombaugh testified that latent fingerprint powder was all over the gun when he examined it on 11/23. So it’s particularly significant that Latona said that the area of the barrel under the foregrip looked like it had not been processed at all. Standard procedure was to photograph a print before attempting a lift. And in fact he did so with the trigger guard prints. If he had time to actually do this lift then he had time to photograph it first. If he had really told Drain about the print then Drain would have wanted to take it. The FBI wanted to examine the rifle for prints.

[Charles Collins]

“…that the FBI requested” is your invention that was not said by Curry or Day (via Drain).

I’m suggesting that there is no good reason to believe Day’s story about doing a lift from the rifle on 11/22. He didn't turn it over to the FBI with the other evidence that night, nor did he even tell FBI agent Drain of its existence.  He didn't photograph it in place or cover it with cellophane.  He claimed that there were still visible ridges left after doing his lift. Furthermore, Sebastian Latona examined the rifle and said that area didn't look like it had been processed at all.  He found no traces of ridges there. Then a week later, Latona receives (separately from all the other evidence) an index card with a partial print on it. When asked by the WC to sign an affidavit regarding his handling of the print, Day refused. Your attempts to “explain” these things away fall flat and reek of desperation to maintain the “cop said so, therefore it’s true” position.

Paul Stombaugh testified that latent fingerprint powder was all over the gun when he examined it on 11/23. So it’s particularly significant that Latona said that the area of the barrel under the foregrip looked like it had not been processed at all. Standard procedure was to photograph a print before attempting a lift. And in fact he did so with the trigger guard prints. If he had time to actually do this lift then he had time to photograph it first. If he had really told Drain about the print then Drain would have wanted to take it. The FBI wanted to examine the rifle for prints.

If he had really told Drain about the print then Drain would have wanted to take it.

Based on what Day said to Larry Sneed (in “No More Silence”, page 238) Day told him about the remains of the print on the barrel. Day did what he was instructed to do and turned the rifle over to the FBI.

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.


Based on the above, Day appears to have verbally advised Drain of the palm print trace on the rifle. Day does not say that he told Drain about the lift he made of that print. So, where in all of this does your idea of mishandling or falsification of the evidence come from?



Paul Stombaugh testified that latent fingerprint powder was all over the gun when he examined it on 11/23. So it’s particularly significant that Latona said that the area of the barrel under the foregrip looked like it had not been processed at all.

I think that Latona’s statement meant that there was no indicator (as in cellophane, etc) that the barrel under the fore grip had been processed. You appear to be jumping to the conclusion that Latona’s statement meant that there was no powder on that area. I don’t agree with that conclusion. Read Latona’s testimony and you will find he made that statement immediately after his statement regarding the cellophane that he did find on the trigger guard.

All you appear to be doing is pointing out inconsistencies (as usual). You apparently are not suggesting that Drain took ALL of the evidence to Washington on 11/22/63. Yet you continue to point to the words as if you are. It is difficult to know what you are arguing. We just go around and around in the same circles.

[Jerry Organ]

  Jerry - Thanks for posting the Landis snippet from his "Original Report" along with the visual aids/still shots. I am not sure what your position is regarding Landis having seen a motorcycle at the Elm St. curb There is no way Landis was referencing the Hargis motorcycle. The motorcycle Landis saw/reported, along with the Black Male were both on the (N Elm Curb. The Hargis motorcycle was on the (S) Elm curb. 

    "As we passed under the overpass, I was looking back and
     saw a motorcycle policeman stopping approximately where
     I saw the negro running."

Well, I don't see in Agent Landis's statement the word "curb", much less the words "N Elm Curb".

According to the Mark Tyler animation "Motorcade 63" ( Link ), other than the one driven by Officer Hargis, one of the remaining three motorcycle escorts that were just behind the limousine did stop for an extended time (the cycle driven by Officer Douglas Jackson). So you may be correct about a cycle stopped near the north curb but you are incorrect about "a different cop that history has failed to ID".



The motorcycle escort of the Presidential limousine. Left-to-right: Officer Chaney, Officer Hargis and Officer Martin. Officer Jackson is out-of-frame, camera-left. Jackson was the escort rider nearest to the North Elm curb.

The Nix film documents most of Elm Street between the concrete wall and the Underpass just after the head shot. There is no mysterious motorcycle recorded in that sequence that could be the motorcycle seen by Landis other than one of the four known escorts (which we can narrow down to Jackson or Hargis).

The film shows all four escort motorcycles slowed or stopped, while the limousine traveled away from them. The three cycles that are suspected of having stopped are roughly opposite the pedestal used by Zapruder when they go out of frame. The one cycle seen still moving (though it soon goes out of frame) is that of B.J. Martin.


The limousine and followup car are then picked up by the Bell Film. The motorcycle seen in that clip is that of B.J. Martin, traveling on the southernmost lane of Elm.

The motorcycle of Officer B. J. Martin    (southernmost lane of Elm) is followed    by that of Officer James M. Chaney    (in the northernmost lane of Elm)

By then, Officer Jackson might be on the move since he said he left Dealey Plaza with Chaney. The Mark Tyler animation shows Jackson begin to move four seconds after Chaney resumed moving.