JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate > JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate
Did Roy Truly and/or Marion Baker Lie?
Walt Cakebread:
--- Quote from: Jerry Freeman on August 19, 2022, 05:58:32 AM ---Please cite evidence of that.
Perhaps..just cite the evidence to the previous request.I see. Then Oswald's should have been easily found...if in fact Oswald was the shooter right?
But yet---The FBLie couldn't do any better stating that the poor quality of the wood and metal was not conducive to retaining fingerprints.
If the thing was in such poor quality...how did it shoot?
A bum like Oswald couldn't have done it.Same thing as with the Tippit encounter...he has to hurry up and get to the lunchroom before Truly and Baker does.
How could he have known that he must do this?
--- End quote ---
The FBLie couldn't do any better stating that the poor quality of the wood and metal was not conducive to retaining fingerprints.
Does the metal appear to be "poor quality" ?..... Do you believe that the metal wouldn't have been "conducive to retaining fingerprints"?
Tim Nickerson:
--- Quote from: Jerry Freeman on August 19, 2022, 05:58:32 AM ---Please cite evidence of that.
--- End quote ---
https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/finding-aids/jfk-key-persons
Not all of those listed gave depositions or testified before the WC. Of those who did, not all of their testimonies are included in their folders. There are some marked as Confidential and some without any classification, but a great many of them were marked as Top Secret. Just starting down from the top, I see Top Secret on the transcripts of the testimonies of Adrian Alba, Don Archer, Andrew Armstrong, Charles Arnett, Tommy Bargas, W.E Barnes, Colin Barnhorst, Charles Batchelor, Pauline Bates, B.L. Beaty.......
--- Quote ---I see. Then Oswald's should have been easily found...if in fact Oswald was the shooter right?
--- End quote ---
Wrong.
Contrary to portrayals in the movies and on television, fingerprints are not always easy to find on certain items of evidence. In the author's experience identifiable fingerprints are found on guns, knives, clubs, and the like in less than 10 percent of the cases.
https://www.bevfitchett.us/forensic-science/firearms-and-fingerprints-in-the-crime-lab.html
Jerry Freeman:
--- Quote from: Tim Nickerson on August 20, 2022, 01:19:04 PM ---
... identifiable fingerprints are found on guns, knives, clubs, and the like in less than 10 percent of the cases.
--- End quote ---
That said..I wonder then why the Warren-ites on this forum constantly throw up as fact that Oswald's fingerprints were found on the rifle.
--- Quote ---Mr. DAY. Well, actually in fingerprinting it either is or is not the man. So I wouldn't say those were his prints.
--- End quote ---
I might construe from that statement that fingerprints were found on the rifle but they were not Oswald's.
BTW thanks for the archives link. Found once again [click for full page] -----
That still just doesn't sound the same as everything described in the lunchroom encounter.
--- Quote from: David Von Pein on October 25, 2019, 01:59:16 AM ---As I said before, CTers have no ability to properly evaluate the JFK evidence. The Internet CTers are the last people on the planet who should be looking into this case.
--- End quote ---
You would almost think that this individual did actually personally lead the JFK investigation :D
Move over Chief Justice Warren.
Walt Cakebread:
--- Quote from: Jerry Freeman on August 20, 2022, 08:16:50 PM ---That said..I wonder then why the Warren-ites on this forum constantly throw up as fact that Oswald's fingerprints were found on the rifle.I might construe from that statement that fingerprints were found on the rifle but they were not Oswald's.
BTW thanks for the archives link. Found once again [click for full page] -----
That still just doesn't sound the same as everything described in the lunchroom encounter.
You would almost think that this individual did actually personally lead the JFK investigation :D
Move over Chief Justice Warren.
--- End quote ---
I believe Baker's affidavit is the truth.... But the lunchroom encounter with Lee Oswald was so brief and innocuous that Baker didn't include it in his affidavit. At the time that Baker submitted that affidavit he had no idea that the young man with the coke in his hand was the designated patsy. He did recall a man who caught his attention because he was furtively trying to slip away from the stairs. And this is the man Baker described ....And the description does not fit Lee Oswald.
When Baker returned to DPD headquarters late that afternoon he was informed that he may have encountered the assassin in his dash through the TSBD with Roy Truly. ( Fritz said that he was told about the lunchroom encounter by Roy Truly when he (fritz) was at the TSBD at about 1:30) Baker didn't know that his informant was referring to Lee Oswald and the lunchroom encounter, he recalled encountering a 30 year old, 165 pound man, who was wearing a light brown jacket.
Walt Cakebread:
--- Quote from: Tim Nickerson on August 20, 2022, 01:19:04 PM ---https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/finding-aids/jfk-key-persons
Not all of those listed gave depositions or testified before the WC. Of those who did, not all of their testimonies are included in their folders. There are some marked as Confidential and some without any classification, but a great many of them were marked as Top Secret. Just starting down from the top, I see Top Secret on the transcripts of the testimonies of Adrian Alba, Don Archer, Andrew Armstrong, Charles Arnett, Tommy Bargas, W.E Barnes, Colin Barnhorst, Charles Batchelor, Pauline Bates, B.L. Beaty.......
Wrong.
Contrary to portrayals in the movies and on television, fingerprints are not always easy to find on certain items of evidence. In the author's experience identifiable fingerprints are found on guns, knives, clubs, and the like in less than 10 percent of the cases.
https://www.bevfitchett.us/forensic-science/firearms-and-fingerprints-in-the-crime-lab.html
--- End quote ---
Contrary to portrayals in the movies and on television, fingerprints are not always easy to find on certain items of evidence. In the author's experience identifiable fingerprints are found on guns, knives, clubs, and the like in less than 10 percent of the cases.
As I recall DPD detective J.C. Day said basically the same thing in his testimony before the WC. Day said that a print is either positively identifiable or it is not. Sooooo..... my question is: Why is it that no experienced finger print expert could positively identify any prints ON THE CARCANO? Some folks have claimed that they were able to identify the prints in a photograph of the carcano's magazine while experts who actually examined the carcano were unable to identify the partial finger prints.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version