Ct's firstly ask yourself, where does my theory go?

[Charles Collins]

The bayonet lug is 5/16" (8.3mm) thick (wide)

Looking at post #804 which has a quote showing Mytton’s images from an earlier post, the flashing GIF shows me that when zoomed so that the thickness of the bayonet lug is 5/16”, we can see, by my estimate, about 1.5” (running the length of the tape) of the palm print on that graphic. It appears to run off the image to the left, so I assume that there is more that we do not see. And going by the same 5/16” thickness, I estimate the distance between the palm print and the lines to be about 7/8”. It appears to me that the tape itself is about 2” wide, and the lift takes up about 1-1/4” of the tape width.

I think that the 5/16” thickness of the bayonet lug is the most accurate measurement that we can use to estimate the other distances.

[Walt Cakebread]

If the lifting tape is 2", the linear lines are 5/16" apart, the same width as the bayonet lug.

If the tape is 2 inches wide then the card is 6 inches wide....and 10 inches long....

[Charles Collins]

If the lifting tape is 2", the linear lines are 5/16" apart, the same width as the bayonet lug.

Agreed, and for me, the actually measured 5/16” thickness is the most reliable dimension that we currently have in this discussion to gauge the other distances.

[Walt Cakebread]

Agreed, and for me, the actually measured 5/16” thickness is the most reliable dimension that we currently have in this discussion to gauge the other distances.

Let's review.....  The so called "palm print" was allegedly lifted from the bottom ( and right hand side) of the 5/8" metal barrel. The mid point of the print was about 3 inches to the rear of the forward end of the wooden stock.   The print was about 3/4 inch in diameter.  The forward end of the print would have been about 2 3/8 inches to the rear of the front end of the wooden stock.
The bayonet lug cannot slide back on the barrel beyond 3/4 inch from the front end of the stock.  ( the lug is precision machined to fit the tapered barrel ) Since the lug cannot slide back beyond 3/4 inch ( from the front of the stock there cannot be any marks that could have been created by the bayonet lug beyond that 3/4 inch limit.  And the gap between the front of the print and the lug would be 1 5/8 inches.   However CE 138 shows the print circled in red ink ....and the distance from the front of the print to the rear of the two parallel lines is about 1/4 the width of the tape ( so if the tape is 2 inches wide then the distance from the front of the print to the two lines is about 1/2 inch

Bottom line:...  the two lines could NOT have been made by the bayonet lug.     

[Charles Collins]

Let's review.....  The so called "palm print" was allegedly lifted from the bottom ( and right hand side) of the 5/8" metal barrel. The mid point of the print was about 3 inches to the rear of the forward end of the wooden stock.   The print was about 3/4 inch in diameter.  The forward end of the print would have been about 2 3/8 inches to the rear of the front end of the wooden stock.
The bayonet lug cannot slide back on the barrel beyond 3/4 inch from the front end of the stock.  ( the lug is precision machined to fit the tapered barrel ) Since the lug cannot slide back beyond 3/4 inch ( from the front of the stock there cannot be any marks that could have been created by the bayonet lug beyond that 3/4 inch limit.  And the gap between the front of the print and the lug would be 1 5/8 inches.   However CE 138 shows the print circled in red ink ....and the distance from the front of the print to the rear of the two parallel lines is about 1/4 the width of the tape ( so if the tape is 2 inches wide then the distance from the front of the print to the two lines is about 1/2 inch

Bottom line:...  the two lines could NOT have been made by the bayonet lug.   

I disagree with everything you just “reviewed. Dream on Walt.

[Walt Cakebread]

I disagree with everything you just “reviewed. Dream on Walt.

I understand that you don't agree.... But we're using math to determine facts.   Unless you can show a mathematical error, then you are simple lying to yourself....

[Charles Collins]

I understand that you don't agree.... But we're using math to determine facts.   Unless you can show a mathematical error, then you are simple lying to yourself....

Wrong again!