A question about Oswald

Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: A question about Oswald  (Read 54645 times)

Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Re: A question about Oswald
« Reply #140 on: September 01, 2023, 01:37:35 AM »
Mr. Cakebread, are you saying they used photographic trickery to superimpose Mr. Oswald's palm print onto the smudge on Lt. Day's white card--------and the result was CE639?

NO!   OPEN your eyes and LOOK at the print on the white card (CE 639).... See those parallel lines at the left?  Those were made by the bayonet groove that is cut into the foregrip of the model 91/38 carcano rifle. And that proves that the "palm print" lift was taken from the WOODEN foregrip.

Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Re: A question about Oswald
« Reply #141 on: September 01, 2023, 01:41:38 AM »
Thanks for the explanation, Walt.

I wasn't aware of that scenario and, honestly, it seems somewhat far fetched. What is your source for this?

Most of it is the statements of Tom Alyea and about what he saw Detective Day doing in the TSBD that afternoon.

I don't blame you for finding it hard to believe.....  You're still too trusting in the statements of the authorities.

Offline Alan Ford

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4820
Re: A question about Oswald
« Reply #142 on: September 01, 2023, 01:50:23 AM »
NO!   OPEN your eyes and LOOK at the print on the white card (CE 639).... See those parallel lines at the left?  Those were made by the bayonet groove that is cut into the foregrip of the model 91/38 carcano rifle. And that proves that the "palm print" lift was taken from the WOODEN foregrip.

So what EXACTLY do you mean when you say that "they did manage to change that smudge into the palm print of Lee Oswald after they sent all of the evidence back to the DPD"?

Offline Richard Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6008
Re: A question about Oswald
« Reply #143 on: September 01, 2023, 01:40:50 PM »
So what EXACTLY do you mean when you say that "they did manage to change that smudge into the palm print of Lee Oswald after they sent all of the evidence back to the DPD"?

That is the only way Walt can avoid admitting it was Oswald's print.  Imagine the narrative behind this line of events.

Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Re: A question about Oswald
« Reply #144 on: September 01, 2023, 02:24:17 PM »
That is the only way Walt can avoid admitting it was Oswald's print.  Imagine the narrative behind this line of events.

The vaunted FBI said that the smudge was Lee's palm print. (After the evidence was sent back to the DPD but when the FBI first examined the smudge on the white card they declared that it was worthless for ID purposes)    Lee Oswald had already been cast in the public eye, as  a deranged killer by the authorities. So who would doubt that his prints were on the rifle even though that was simply a damned lie.

Offline Richard Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6008
Re: A question about Oswald
« Reply #145 on: September 01, 2023, 03:45:54 PM »
The vaunted FBI said that the smudge was Lee's palm print. (After the evidence was sent back to the DPD but when the FBI first examined the smudge on the white card they declared that it was worthless for ID purposes)    Lee Oswald had already been cast in the public eye, as  a deranged killer by the authorities. So who would doubt that his prints were on the rifle even though that was simply a damned lie.

Why wouldn't the FBI just claim they found Oswald's prints all over the rifle if they are going to fabricate evidence and had that capability?  They could have claimed they found a dozen of his prints on the rifle.   Why go through this fantasy charade?

Offline Alan Ford

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4820
Re: A question about Oswald
« Reply #146 on: September 01, 2023, 06:26:46 PM »