Oswald's Fingerprint Evidence

[Rob Caprio]

One print is enough to associate Oswald with the rifle.  The prisons are full of criminals who left one print, hair, or drop of blood at a crime scene.  And Oswald's prints were also found on the SN boxes and bag.   If the FBI and DPD were involved in framing Oswald, they would have confirmed more prints on the rifle whether they were there or not.  If this tells us anything it is that they were not attempting to frame Oswald and his prints were found on these items.  I don't believe Oswald wore gloves during the assassination because he was smart enough to know it didn't matter, but who knows.  Using 1963 technology, it is entirely possible that few prints would show up on the rifle and maybe Oswald had wiped it down the night before.  Suggesting that in someone's subjective opinion that there should have been more prints found is not persuasive of anything.

Rubbish. A print means he touched the gun. It doesn't prove that he fired it at JFK.

[Rob Caprio]

The fingerprint evidence links Oswald to all these items beyond any doubt whether it is one print or a thousand.  There is zero credible evidence that they were planted.  Your subjective and unsubstantiated non-expert opinion that there should have been more prints is worthless nor does it rebut the actual evidence.  A slam dunk guilty conviction.

Who made the link?

[Rob Caprio]

All you've got is AnybodyButOswald.

All you've got is NobodyButOswald with NO supporting evidence.

[Rob Caprio]

Your post assumes two things.

One, Oswald would be sure to wipe the trigger guard.

Two, Oswald, if he tried to wipe the trigger guard, did it successfully.

Personally, I think it's as simple as the wooden stock of the rifle was too rough to hold prints.

Says the guy who assumed that LHO's took his shirt off for the alleged shooting and then used it to wipe down the rifle.

[Bill Brown]

Says the guy who assumed that LHO's took his shirt off for the alleged shooting and then used it to wipe down the rifle.

I made no such assumption.  You're not bright enough to understand, though.

[Rob Caprio]

I made no such assumption.  You're not bright enough to understand, though.

So you were there on 11/22/63?

[Bill Chapman]

All you've got is NobodyButOswald with NO supporting evidence.

You've got NO candidate to supplant Oswald as prime suspect. I've posted two topics requesting same, but y'all seem caught out like a deer in the headlights. Why is that?

My research reveals that 5 witnesses ID'd Oswald at the Tippit scene: another one saw him with pistol raised up, walking right past him, muttering something about a poor dumb cop.

Yes... Oswald, who just happened to work in the building that gave a somewhat opportunistic shooter a bird's eye view to a kill.