|
|
 July 20, 2010, 09:09:39 AM
|
Super Member
Posts: 679
|
In the O.J trial the police were grilled with tampering with evidence on how they walked thru the blood without proper shoe protection and anything that was NOT covered on human hands - that evidence was considered QUESTIONABLE iwth police cover -up........ Now when they found So- Called Oswald Murder weapon.....this picture shows Evidence tampering...WHERE'S THE GLOVES?????????? Touching the weapon without gloves could show a False Positive Palm print........If this case went to trail.....This could be a good case of evidence tampering 
-------------------------
-------------------------
Why was Kennedy killed, Who Benefited and Who has the Power to cover it up...Who?
|
|
|
 Reply |
|
|
|
|
July 29, 2010, 11:30:35 AM
|
Super Member
Posts: 2353
Germany
|
If the stock and shaft, the whole wooden stuff was varnished/lacquered it 100-sure is possible to take fingerprints.   ... you can see fingerprints on a varnished stock with the naked eye. was Oswald's rifle varnished ? Oswalds rifle is blackish-brown, and it looks as if the paint is pretty worn at some places.  i found this posting on a gun forum by some johnlpThere was a set of rifles that were black stock and thinner in thickness and lighter in weight. As it was explained once to me, these particular "black" stock rifles were used as a dress rifle by the Guardie Del Duce for Mussolini. They are almost a blackish-red. I once worked for the JFK Assassination Information Center in Dallas. Back in the late 80s a man named Larry Howard and I tracked down two black stock rifles, both with C serial numbers but one had the barrel cut-down (that is why it was replaced with another rifle and that's the one I have). It is assumed that that "C" serial numbers were the black stock only but this could be wrong.
After some research, Larry found the information about the black stocks and that this was a made rifle and not simply painted black by Oswald as some suggest. Another thing that is interesting about the black stock rifles we noticed in the two we found is that they are grainier and rough. We don't know if this is coincidence or if it served a purpose for grip. source: As a guest, you are not allowed to view links.
Register or Login posting #50
-------------------------
|
|
|
« Last Edit: July 29, 2010, 12:39:07 PM by Gerry_Dark »
|
-------------------------
"ich bin ein Berliner" As a guest, you are not allowed to view links.
Register or Login"There's none so blind as those who will not see."
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
July 29, 2010, 01:05:23 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 679
|
If the stock and shaft, the whole wooden stuff was varnished/lacquered it 100-sure is possible to take fingerprints. ... you can see fingerprints on a varnished stock with the naked eye. was Oswald's rifle varnished ? Oswalds rifle is blackish-brown, and it looks as if the paint is pretty worn at some places. i found this posting on a gun forum by some johnlpThere was a set of rifles that were black stock and thinner in thickness and lighter in weight. As it was explained once to me, these particular "black" stock rifles were used as a dress rifle by the Guardie Del Duce for Mussolini. They are almost a blackish-red. I once worked for the JFK Assassination Information Center in Dallas. Back in the late 80s a man named Larry Howard and I tracked down two black stock rifles, both with C serial numbers but one had the barrel cut-down (that is why it was replaced with another rifle and that's the one I have). It is assumed that that "C" serial numbers were the black stock only but this could be wrong.
After some research, Larry found the information about the black stocks and that this was a made rifle and not simply painted black by Oswald as some suggest. Another thing that is interesting about the black stock rifles we noticed in the two we found is that they are grainier and rough. We don't know if this is coincidence or if it served a purpose for grip. source: As a guest, you are not allowed to view links.
Register or Login posting #50 Exactly it would of taken prints...so for that detective to touch the rifle the way he did is WRONG......He could smeared other prints besides OSWALDS if oswald even had prints on them in the first place.......put that in front of a jury of 12 people and you have a mistrial...DAMAGED GOODS
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
July 29, 2010, 04:37:02 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 6699
|
This very clearly demonstrates your lack of knowledge of evidence standards, and how they change with time. You and so many other CTs keep thinking that what is done today as SOPs by detectives collecting forensic evidence is the same thing they must have done in 1963, but it ain't so Paul. THEY DID NOT WEAR GLOVES in those days, understand? By 1963 standards, HE IS NOT CONTAMINATING ANYTHING, period. The methods/precautions were different back then, something too many of you CTs just don't seem to understand no matter how many times it gets said to you.
It does not invalidate what they did, except of course to those of you who think Oswald was framed, set up, innocent, etc.
Let's flip it then -- why did LHO leave NO prints (the alleged palm-print was obviously NOT on the rifle per Latona when he got it from the DPD) on the rifle when he had NO gloves on? False premise. You wish. Oswald did leave fingerprints on the rifle. IF he did you can cite them for us, right? It was HIS rifle, so why shouldn't he be allowed to leave fingerprints on his own rifle? [/quote] YOU must have access to evidence I have never seen because the WCs points to a 36 Carbine, NOT a 40 Carcano. There is NO evidence that shows us LHO owned a 40 Carcano with C2766 on it. Why are you claiming LHO owned a 40 Carcano? No one could leave fingerprints on the wooden stock because the surface was too rough. [/quote] How convenient for the WC, huh? Explain for us why NO prints were on the barrel (beyond the claim of a palm print, the casings or the clip then. [/quote] Were you asleep in the 70's? You need to read the HSCA studies. Oswald ordered the 36" Carbine, but Klein's sent him a 40" rifle. The carbine looks different than the rifle. The HSCA photographic panel looked at all the photos of he rifle and it was always the same 40" rifle. It is not necessary for the shooter to leave prints on the barrel when he holds it by the stock.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
July 29, 2010, 04:40:02 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 6699
|
Both hands are on that strap........that is 2 hands....there are probably more pictures that could possibly show both hands on the rifle even more.....HMMMMMMM !!!!!!!! Not until AFTER Day had already determined that the wooden stock would not take fingerprints. Was the BEFORE OR AFTER Day photographed the rifle? After Day had photographed it in place. And picked up by ONLY the strap. How is Day supposed to photograph himself holding up the rifle?
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
July 29, 2010, 04:43:53 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 6699
|
LAW IS LAW !!!!!........
WRONG. Law changes everyday. What you are complaining about is procedure and that changes over time. What is NOT allowed for the police is common sense. WRONG! Photographing the weapon BEFORE you process it was valid in 1963! When did Day do this? I didn't say Day specifically. Look at the WC exhibits. They photographed the rifle while it was still hidden between the boxes.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 29, 2010, 04:54:40 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 6699
|
If the stock and shaft, the whole wooden stuff was varnished/lacquered it 100-sure is possible to take fingerprints. ... you can see fingerprints on a varnished stock with the naked eye. was Oswald's rifle varnished ? Oswalds rifle is blackish-brown, and it looks as if the paint is pretty worn at some places. i found this posting on a gun forum by some johnlpThere was a set of rifles that were black stock and thinner in thickness and lighter in weight. As it was explained once to me, these particular "black" stock rifles were used as a dress rifle by the Guardie Del Duce for Mussolini. They are almost a blackish-red. I once worked for the JFK Assassination Information Center in Dallas. Back in the late 80s a man named Larry Howard and I tracked down two black stock rifles, both with C serial numbers but one had the barrel cut-down (that is why it was replaced with another rifle and that's the one I have). It is assumed that that "C" serial numbers were the black stock only but this could be wrong.
After some research, Larry found the information about the black stocks and that this was a made rifle and not simply painted black by Oswald as some suggest. Another thing that is interesting about the black stock rifles we noticed in the two we found is that they are grainier and rough. We don't know if this is coincidence or if it served a purpose for grip. source: As a guest, you are not allowed to view links.
Register or Login posting #50 If? IF? IF it were a brand new rifle. Oswald's rifle was cheap WWII surplus and had seen a lot of wear and tear. Not newly lacquered or varnished or oiled. Not well taken care of. Maybe even buried in the ground after the Walker shooting.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
July 29, 2010, 05:04:28 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 6699
|
If the stock and shaft, the whole wooden stuff was varnished/lacquered it 100-sure is possible to take fingerprints. ... you can see fingerprints on a varnished stock with the naked eye. was Oswald's rifle varnished ? Oswalds rifle is blackish-brown, and it looks as if the paint is pretty worn at some places. i found this posting on a gun forum by some johnlpThere was a set of rifles that were black stock and thinner in thickness and lighter in weight. As it was explained once to me, these particular "black" stock rifles were used as a dress rifle by the Guardie Del Duce for Mussolini. They are almost a blackish-red. I once worked for the JFK Assassination Information Center in Dallas. Back in the late 80s a man named Larry Howard and I tracked down two black stock rifles, both with C serial numbers but one had the barrel cut-down (that is why it was replaced with another rifle and that's the one I have). It is assumed that that "C" serial numbers were the black stock only but this could be wrong.
After some research, Larry found the information about the black stocks and that this was a made rifle and not simply painted black by Oswald as some suggest. Another thing that is interesting about the black stock rifles we noticed in the two we found is that they are grainier and rough. We don't know if this is coincidence or if it served a purpose for grip. source: As a guest, you are not allowed to view links.
Register or Login posting #50 Exactly it would of taken prints...so for that detective to touch the rifle the way he did is WRONG......He could smeared other prints besides OSWALDS if oswald even had prints on them in the first place.......put that in front of a jury of 12 people and you have a mistrial...DAMAGED GOODS As usual you don't know what you are talking about. The stock on his rifle did not take prints. Instead of all your stupid speculations maybe you should read the evidence in this case.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
| 0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
|
