The Palmprint

[Jack Nessan]

I think what he means is the print was up by the trigger housing, just like he said, and not anywhere near the barrel like the other print.

Like all Nutters, you would rather post utter nonsense than admit you're wrong.
A few posts ago you were insisting Day never mentioned two sets of prints. After giving you an English lesson you now accept he did state there were two sets of prints but now you want to argue about where on the rifle this second print was! You really are a joke.
Time for yet another English lesson.
When Day states that this second print was "near" the trigger housing he is saying that IT IS NOT ON THE TRIGGER HOUSING!!
Do you understand this very simple point?
There is another point you have tried to ignore.
Day stated this second print was "under the wood". This means that the second print was UNDER THE WOOD.
There is only one place Day can be referring to and that is on the barrel of the rifle, this is the metal part "under the wood".
When he states that the print was NEAR the trigger housing, he is simply referring to which end of the barrel the print was located - not the end near the muzzle, the end near the trigger housing.

If you disagree with this then state exactly where on the rifle this second print is. If it's not on the trigger housing then where is it?
[not even you are stupid enough to try and argue the second print is on the trigger housing.]

Not that it means anything.
Like all Nutters, you have no idea how the two sets of prints and all the black fingerprint powder could have disappeared from the barrel of the rifle by the time it reached Latona.
The answer is simple - there was never any prints or powder on the barrel of the rifle, or the barrel was wiped completely clean.
Day stated that he told Fritz, Curry and Drain about the palmprint. There is absolutely no evidence of this but plenty of evidence that he never told any of them about the print.
Day lied about not having enough time to identify the print.
The FBI did not receive the palmprint until the 29th - a full week after the assassination.
There are so many inconsistencies and contradictions in Day's account of the palmprint that all disappear when it is realised he is lying.

Just to make something clear - I'm not disputing that the rifle belonged to Oswald (there would be no point framing him with someone else's rifle). I'm pointing out that some aspects of the investigation were clearly corrupt. There can be no doubt about this.

It is more like English is your third language. You have managed to have completely prove the opposite and do not seem to realize it. Your claims of two prints on the barrel have become a distant memory. You posted Mr Strombaugh detailing the black finger print powder all over the rifle, yet claim the powder is not there. You now are admitting the second print Lt Day referred to was on the trigger housing not the barrel. Exactly what is your point again? 


The FBI authenticated the palm print on the Carcano due to the irregularities of the barrel appearing in the finger print. Exactly what is your problem with that again?

Begging for someone to please believe you, that there is a conspiracy is not the same as actually proving it and with zero evidence of any kind to boot. You believe there is the appearance of impropriety just by your reasoning alone, so that means there has to be a conspiracy?

DM---Just to make something clear - I'm not disputing that the rifle belonged to Oswald (there would be no point framing him with someone else's rifle). I'm pointing out that some aspects of the investigation were clearly corrupt. There can be no doubt about this.

This is not proof of a conspiracy. LHO's rifle being found on the 6th floor and being matched to the bullet and fragments is proof of LHO's guilt not a conspiracy. If not LHO, who and why?



 

[Dan O'meara]

It is more like English is your third language. You have managed to have completely prove the opposite and do not seem to realize it. Your claims of two prints on the barrel have become a distant memory. You posted Mr Strombaugh detailing the black finger print powder all over the rifle, yet claim the powder is not there. You now are admitting the second print Lt Day referred to was on the trigger housing not the barrel. Exactly what is your point again? 


The FBI authenticated the palm print on the Carcano due to the irregularities of the barrel appearing in the finger print. Exactly what is your problem with that again?

Begging for someone to please believe you, that there is a conspiracy is not the same as actually proving it and with zero evidence of any kind to boot. You believe there is the appearance of impropriety just by your reasoning alone, so that means there has to be a conspiracy?

DM---Just to make something clear - I'm not disputing that the rifle belonged to Oswald (there would be no point framing him with someone else's rifle). I'm pointing out that some aspects of the investigation were clearly corrupt. There can be no doubt about this.

This is not proof of a conspiracy. LHO's rifle being found on the 6th floor and being matched to the bullet and fragments is proof of LHO's guilt not a conspiracy. If not LHO, who and why?



 

 
Wow!!
Even for you, this insane rant of a post is next level.
I'll deal with the craziest part of it first, then try to pick my way through this swamp of Nutter confusion and delusion.

You posted:
"You now are admitting the second print Lt Day referred to was on the trigger housing not the barrel. Exactly what is your point again?"
In the post you are responding to. I wrote this:
"When Day states that this second print was "near" the trigger housing he is saying that IT IS NOT ON THE TRIGGER HOUSING!!"
I wrote that the second print was not on the trigger housing. I wrote it IN CAPITAL LETTERS.
I even put the word "NOT" in bold print.
Yet you have somehow interpreted this as me "admitting the second print Lt Day referred to was on the trigger housing not the barrel"!!

How have you interpreted what I have written this crazy way?
How have you interpreted it as the exact opposite of what I actually posted??
How confused are you?
Can't you understand basic English?
I also posted this:
"There is only one place Day can be referring to and that is on the barrel of the rifle, this is the metal part "under the wood".
I specifically stated that, as far as the second print is concerned, Day was talking about it being on the barrel. It's totally obvious what I'm saying but you seem to be so confused that you understand it as the opposite of what's being said!

Then we have this gem:
"You posted Mr Strombaugh detailing the black finger print powder all over the rifle, yet claim the powder is not there."

I have already patiently explained this 'mystery' to you but you just don't get it.
Rather than explain it all again I will simply reproduce my earlier post:

Part of the barrel of the rifle of the MC is covered by a wooden foregrip when it is assembled.
Do you understand that?
The area where Day said he discovered two sets of prints was on the part of the barrel that was covered by the foregrip.
Day had to disassemble the rifle so he could access this part of the underside of the barrel of the rifle.
It was on this part of the rifle that Day said he saw two sets of prints.
Day would like us to believe that he covered this area of the barrel of the rifle with black fingerprint powder and tried to lift a palmprint off the surface.
Obviously, the rifle had to be disassembled for him to do this.

Hopefully that all makes sense.

Now, let's go back to when the rifle was first discovered on the 6th floor.
Tom Alyea filmed Day covering the rifle with fingerprint dust, using his little brush to brush away lots of the fibre evidence.
Paul Stombugh, the FBI's fibre expert, was the first person to view the rifle when Drain brought it back to Washington. Stombaugh comments how well the rifle was packaged:

"...I received this gun from Special Agent Vincent Drain of the Dallas FBI office. It was crated very well. I opened the crate myself and put my initials on the gun and at that time I noted it had been dusted for latent prints."


Stombaugh notes that "fingerprint powder was all over the gun".
So your stupid idea, that all this powder had simply disappeared, can be put to one side.
Now...here's the bit where you really have to focus.
Stombaugh never disassembled the rifle!!
So he didn't examine the area where Day claimed to have lifted the print from.
The person who disassembled the rifle was a firearms expert brought in by Latona, as part of a team that examined the alleged murder weapon of the President.
Although the rifle was covered with latent fingerprint powder, when Latona examined the underside of the barrel that had been covered by the foregrip, he discovered there was no fingerprint powder there. There were no prints there. The underside of the rifle barrel was clean.
The rest of the rifle was covered with fingerprint powder except for the area where Day lied about having lifted a palmprint.
It was clean.
It had either been wiped clean or it had never been examined in the first place.

Stombaugh testified that the rifle was covered with fingerprint powder.
But when the rifle was disassembled the underside of the barrel, which had been covered with wood, was clean.
There was no fingerprint powder and no prints.
I can't state this any more simply.
The rifle was covered with fingerprint powder, but not the part of the barrel that had been covered by the wooden stock.
Do you understand what is being said here?
Do you understand that there is no mystery or contradiction?

The FBI authenticated the palm print on the Carcano due to the irregularities of the barrel appearing in the finger print. Exactly what is your problem with that again?

Firstly, the FBI DID NOT authenticate the palmprint on the Carcano.
There was no palmprint on the Carcano when the FBI received it.
You should know this basic fact.
The FBI authenticated that the palmprint allegedly lifted by Day was taken from the Mannlicher Carcano. As has been explained to you over and over again, this DOES NOT mean the palmprint was on the rifle when Day first examined it.
More importantly, it doesn't explain where the print and the fingerprint powder that Day insisted was on the barrel of the rifle when sent it to the FBI, disappeared to.
And that is the question that is being asked.
How did the print and fingerprint powder disappear?
You have already stated that you don't know. It is the only honest thing you have posted on this thread.
Like all Nutters, you have no idea what happened to the print and powder.
Like all Nutters, you don't think there is anything wrong with this. You don't think there's anything mysterious or suspicious about it.
Like all Nutters, you don't do any thinking for yourself.
Your opinions are provided for you and are based on the investigation into the assassination.
But what if the investigation was corrupt?
Would that cause you to have second thoughts? [ as if]

[Jack Nessan]

Wow!!
Even for you, this insane rant of a post is next level.
I'll deal with the craziest part of it first, then try to pick my way through this swamp of Nutter confusion and delusion.

You posted:
"You now are admitting the second print Lt Day referred to was on the trigger housing not the barrel. Exactly what is your point again?"
In the post you are responding to. I wrote this:
"When Day states that this second print was "near" the trigger housing he is saying that IT IS NOT ON THE TRIGGER HOUSING!!"
I wrote that the second print was not on the trigger housing. I wrote it IN CAPITAL LETTERS.
I even put the word "NOT" in bold print.
Yet you have somehow interpreted this as me "admitting the second print Lt Day referred to was on the trigger housing not the barrel"!!

How have you interpreted what I have written this crazy way?
How have you interpreted it as the exact opposite of what I actually posted??
How confused are you?
Can't you understand basic English?
I also posted this:
"There is only one place Day can be referring to and that is on the barrel of the rifle, this is the metal part "under the wood".
I specifically stated that, as far as the second print is concerned, Day was talking about it being on the barrel. It's totally obvious what I'm saying but you seem to be so confused that you understand it as the opposite of what's being said!

Then we have this gem:
"You posted Mr Strombaugh detailing the black finger print powder all over the rifle, yet claim the powder is not there."

I have already patiently explained this 'mystery' to you but you just don't get it.
Rather than explain it all again I will simply reproduce my earlier post:
Stombaugh testified that the rifle was covered with fingerprint powder.
But when the rifle was disassembled the underside of the barrel, which had been covered with wood, was clean.
There was no fingerprint powder and no prints.
I can't state this any more simply.
The rifle was covered with fingerprint powder, but not the part of the barrel that had been covered by the wooden stock.
Do you understand what is being said here?
Do you understand that there is no mystery or contradiction?

The FBI authenticated the palm print on the Carcano due to the irregularities of the barrel appearing in the finger print. Exactly what is your problem with that again?

Firstly, the FBI DID NOT authenticate the palmprint on the Carcano.
There was no palmprint on the Carcano when the FBI received it.
You should know this basic fact.
The FBI authenticated that the palmprint allegedly lifted by Day was taken from the Mannlicher Carcano. As has been explained to you over and over again, this DOES NOT mean the palmprint was on the rifle when Day first examined it.
More importantly, it doesn't explain where the print and the fingerprint powder that Day insisted was on the barrel of the rifle when sent it to the FBI, disappeared to.
And that is the question that is being asked.
How did the print and fingerprint powder disappear?
You have already stated that you don't know. It is the only honest thing you have posted on this thread.
Like all Nutters, you have no idea what happened to the print and powder.
Like all Nutters, you don't think there is anything wrong with this. You don't think there's anything mysterious or suspicious about it.
Like all Nutters, you don't do any thinking for yourself.
Your opinions are provided for you and are based on the investigation into the assassination.
But what if the investigation was corrupt?
Would that cause you to have second thoughts? [ as if]

The Gospel and an indisputable fact according to Dan:

Stombaugh never disassembled the rifle!!

DM---”Paul Stombugh, the FBI's fibre expert, was the first person to view the rifle when Drain brought it back to Washington. Stombaugh comments how well the rifle was packaged”


The only person who thinks he did not disassemble the rifle is you. 

If he did not disassemble the rifle, how would he have known it was thoroughly dusted with powder?

Maybe the only one you should be questioning is Mr. Stombaugh. He verified the rifle had been thoroughly dusted with fingerprint powder. For some reason known only to you, you seem to think Mr Stombaugh performed some half-baked examination of the rifle. Probably because you need it to be that way to continue with this ever-evolving discombobulated conspiracy rant.

We are making progress though. Your two prints on the barrel claim have gone away, replaced by a print on the trigger housing, which is what Lt Day stated. Maybe look at the diagram of the carcano that will help you fill in the missing information in your posts about the trigger housing.

---------------

Oh, the FBI did authenticate the palm print as having been come from the carcano. If you are denying that you should stop referring to Lt Day as having lifted it.

[Dan O'meara]

The Gospel and an indisputable fact according to Dan:

Stombaugh never disassembled the rifle!!

DM---”Paul Stombugh, the FBI's fibre expert, was the first person to view the rifle when Drain brought it back to Washington. Stombaugh comments how well the rifle was packaged”


The only person who thinks he did not disassemble the rifle is you. 

If he did not disassemble the rifle, how would he have known it was thoroughly dusted with powder?

Maybe the only one you should be questioning is Mr. Stombaugh. He verified the rifle had been thoroughly dusted with fingerprint powder. For some reason known only to you, you seem to think Mr Stombaugh performed some half-baked examination of the rifle. Probably because you need it to be that way to continue with this ever-evolving discombobulated conspiracy rant.

We are making progress though. Your two prints on the barrel claim have gone away, replaced by a print on the trigger housing, which is what Lt Day stated. Maybe look at the diagram of the carcano that will help you fill in the missing information in your posts about the trigger housing.

---------------

Oh, the FBI did authenticate the palm print as having been come from the carcano. If you are denying that you should stop referring to Lt Day as having lifted it.

Enough is enough.
It's one thing dealing with someone who comes across as a very unintelligent child, it's another dealing with a downright liar.
I cannot believe you have posted this lie yet again:

"Your two prints on the barrel claim have gone away, replaced by a print on the trigger housing, which is what Lt Day stated."

In my last two posts I have made it absolutely clear that the second print that Day mentioned WAS NOT on the trigger housing.
It is clear you are just going to repeat this meaningless lie over and over again no matter what I post.
In any debate, lying is the lowest tactic that can be used. It is the strategy of a genuine loser.

"The only person who thinks he did not disassemble the rifle is you."

This is another lie.
Stombaugh DID NOT disassemble the Carcano. Do not continue with this lie.
In his WC testimony, Latona explains that the rifle was disassembled by a weapons expert. You would know this if you had any clue about the basics of this case.
But you don't.
So you don't.
It was only when the rifle was disassembled that the part of the barrel covered by the wood was revealed and it was Latona who examined it. He reported there were no prints on this part of the rifle and no sign that it had even been processed for prints. That is to say there was no fingerprint powder on this part of the rifle. The barrel was clean.
Where did the prints and the powder go?
They were either never there or Day wiped the barrel clean.

"Oh, the FBI did authenticate the palm print as having been come from the carcano."

I know they did.
I was correcting another one of your lies.
You posted that the FBI authenticated the palmprint ON the Carcano.
THE PALMPRINT WAS NOT ON THE CARCANO WHEN THE FBI AUTHENTICATED IT.
This is a lie!
This is what I posted in response to your lie:

"Firstly, the FBI DID NOT authenticate the palmprint on the Carcano.
There was no palmprint on the Carcano when the FBI received it.
You should know this basic fact.
The FBI authenticated that the palmprint allegedly lifted by Day was taken from the Mannlicher Carcano. As has been explained to you over and over again, this DOES NOT mean the palmprint was on the rifle when Day first examined it."

No doubt you will carry on with these lies but I will just refer you back to this post.

Like all Nutters, you resort to outright lies when confronted with evidence/testimony that undermines your belief system.
Like all Nutters, you are a zealot.
It is very interesting that there are no reasonable Nutters on this forum and there never has been. Every single one reverts to spouting utter nonsense or lies rather than engage in a genuine debate about the numerous troubling aspects of this case.

[Jack Nessan]

Enough is enough.
It's one thing dealing with someone who comes across as a very unintelligent child, it's another dealing with a downright liar.
I cannot believe you have posted this lie yet again:

"Your two prints on the barrel claim have gone away, replaced by a print on the trigger housing, which is what Lt Day stated."

In my last two posts I have made it absolutely clear that the second print that Day mentioned WAS NOT on the trigger housing.
It is clear you are just going to repeat this meaningless lie over and over again no matter what I post.
In any debate, lying is the lowest tactic that can be used. It is the strategy of a genuine loser.

"The only person who thinks he did not disassemble the rifle is you."

This is another lie.
Stombaugh DID NOT disassemble the Carcano. Do not continue with this lie.
In his WC testimony, Latona explains that the rifle was disassembled by a weapons expert. You would know this if you had any clue about the basics of this case.
But you don't.
So you don't.
It was only when the rifle was disassembled that the part of the barrel covered by the wood was revealed and it was Latona who examined it. He reported there were no prints on this part of the rifle and no sign that it had even been processed for prints. That is to say there was no fingerprint powder on this part of the rifle. The barrel was clean.
Where did the prints and the powder go?
They were either never there or Day wiped the barrel clean.

"Oh, the FBI did authenticate the palm print as having been come from the carcano."

I know they did.
I was correcting another one of your lies.
You posted that the FBI authenticated the palmprint ON the Carcano.
THE PALMPRINT WAS NOT ON THE CARCANO WHEN THE FBI AUTHENTICATED IT.
This is a lie!
This is what I posted in response to your lie:

"Firstly, the FBI DID NOT authenticate the palmprint on the Carcano.
There was no palmprint on the Carcano when the FBI received it.
You should know this basic fact.
The FBI authenticated that the palmprint allegedly lifted by Day was taken from the Mannlicher Carcano. As has been explained to you over and over again, this DOES NOT mean the palmprint was on the rifle when Day first examined it."

No doubt you will carry on with these lies but I will just refer you back to this post.

Like all Nutters, you resort to outright lies when confronted with evidence/testimony that undermines your belief system.
Like all Nutters, you are a zealot.
It is very interesting that there are no reasonable Nutters on this forum and there never has been. Every single one reverts to spouting utter nonsense or lies rather than engage in a genuine debate about the numerous troubling aspects of this case.

You claim to be well read but apparently you go blind when you see something you do not like. Latona clearly states the print was on the trigger guard. Again, not the barrel like you repeatedly claimed but the trigger guard.

Mr. LATONA. Well, the technique that I used first was simply to examine it visually under a magnifying glass, a hand magnifying glass, primarily for the purpose of seeing, first of all, whether there were any visible prints. I might point out that my attention had been directed to the area which we refer to as the trigger guard on the left side of the weapon, Commission Exhibit 139.
Mr. EISENBERG. The trigger-guard area?
Mr. LATONA. The trigger-guard area.
Mr. EISENBERG. Which actually, in the case of this particular weapon, is the area in which the magazine is inserted at the 'top; is that correct? You are looking at the weapon now, and the magazine comes out the bottom of what is called the trigger-guard area, which would be a trigger guard on another weapon Mr. EISENBERG. Now, when you received it with the cellophane cover, what portion did it cover?


Mr. LATONA. Closest to the trigger area.
Mr. EISENBERG. On the trigger guard, closest to the trigger area?
Mr. LATONA. That's right.
Mr. EISENBERG. Was that on the right or left side of the weapon?
Mr. LATONA. Left side. [/b]
Mr. EISENBERG. And was there a print visible to you underneath the cellophane?
Mr. LATONA. I could see faintly ridge formations there. However, examination disclosed to me that the formations, the ridge formations and characteristics, were insufficient for purposes of either effecting identification or a determination that the print was not identical with the prints of people. Accordingly, my opinion simply was that the latent prints which were there were of no value. Now, I did not stop there.

----------------------

DM---”In his WC testimony, Latona explains that the rifle was disassembled by a weapons expert. You would know this if you had any clue about the basics of this case.”


What I know is you make things up. Here I will quote it for you, even something as simple as this is now messed up.:
Mr. LATONA. I was not successful in developing any prints at all on the weapon. I also had one of the firearms examiners dismantle the weapon and I processed the complete weapon, all parts, everything else. And no latent prints of value were developed.

Not an “expert”, an “examiner”---- You know an assistant. Stombaugh most likely had one too.

It is not firearms expert it is firearms examiner. Why would the same examiner not be available for Mr Stombaugh? Do you think they just ship the parts and pieces around willy nilly and hope things do not get misplaced?

---------------------------

You should refer to something in an attempt to understand the testimony. I would not think your misguided posts would be a good choice.

So two or maybe three different people handled the firearm after Lt Day and before Mr Latona. Mr Stombaugh mentions all the fingerprint powder. The Firearms examiner is not questioned. From this you accuse Lt Day of fabricating evidence?
 

[Dan O'meara]

You claim to be well read but apparently you go blind when you see something you do not like. Latona clearly states the print was on the trigger guard. Again, not the barrel like you repeatedly claimed but the trigger guard.

Mr. LATONA. Well, the technique that I used first was simply to examine it visually under a magnifying glass, a hand magnifying glass, primarily for the purpose of seeing, first of all, whether there were any visible prints. I might point out that my attention had been directed to the area which we refer to as the trigger guard on the left side of the weapon, Commission Exhibit 139.
Mr. EISENBERG. The trigger-guard area?
Mr. LATONA. The trigger-guard area.
Mr. EISENBERG. Which actually, in the case of this particular weapon, is the area in which the magazine is inserted at the 'top; is that correct? You are looking at the weapon now, and the magazine comes out the bottom of what is called the trigger-guard area, which would be a trigger guard on another weapon Mr. EISENBERG. Now, when you received it with the cellophane cover, what portion did it cover?


Mr. LATONA. Closest to the trigger area.
Mr. EISENBERG. On the trigger guard, closest to the trigger area?
Mr. LATONA. That's right.
Mr. EISENBERG. Was that on the right or left side of the weapon?
Mr. LATONA. Left side. [/b]
Mr. EISENBERG. And was there a print visible to you underneath the cellophane?
Mr. LATONA. I could see faintly ridge formations there. However, examination disclosed to me that the formations, the ridge formations and characteristics, were insufficient for purposes of either effecting identification or a determination that the print was not identical with the prints of people. Accordingly, my opinion simply was that the latent prints which were there were of no value. Now, I did not stop there.

 
Once again, you have to be taken by the hand and led through the basic aspects of this case.
Even though these things have been pointed out to you over and over and over again.
Here goes again, so listen up...
In his WC testimony, Day mentions THREE sets of prints on the rifle.

SET #1
Day dusts the rifle for prints while still on the 6th floor. Tom Alyea films it. While he is dusting he notices prints on the side of the trigger housing:
"I put fingerprint powder on the side of the rifle over the magazine housing. I noticed it was rather rough. I also noticed there were traces of two prints visible. I told Captain Fritz it was too rough to do there, it should go to the office where I would have better facilities for trying to work with the fingerprints."
These are the prints that Latona is referring to in the passage you posted.
There is no dispute about these prints.

SET #2
This is the palmprint that Day alleges to lift from the underside of the barrel.
This is the magical palmprint that mysteriously disappeared.
This palmprint is the subject of this thread.

SET #3
During his WC testimony, Day is asked why he didn't hand over the lift of the palmprint he allegedly took with the rest of the evidence taken by the FBI on the night of the assassination. It was, after all, the most important piece of evidence the DPD collected that day. Day's quite pathetic excuse for not handing the lift over is that, when he took the lift he made such a bad job of it that the better part of the print remained on the rifle. He felt he didn't need to hand in the lift as he thought the "best bet" for identifying the print was still on the rifle.
As he is explaining this, out of the blue, he suddenly announces there was "another print" on the rifle. A third print:
"The gun was being sent in to them for process of prints. Actually I thought the print on the gun was their best bet, still remained on there, and, too, there was another print, I thought possibly under the wood part up near the trigger housing."
This third print was "under the wood part". This means he is NOT referring to the print on the trigger guard as those prints were not "under the wood part".
He had never mentioned this third print before this moment and it was never mentioned again.
Although it is not stated explicitly in his testimony, this third print can only have been on the barrel of the rifle as it was "under the wood part". Whereas the palmprint was towards the muzzle end of the rifle, this third print was "up near the trigger housing" (again confirming that it was not a reference to the prints that were on the trigger housing).

I really hope this has cleared things up for you Jack.
You have been so confused in your posts.
Oh yeah, a firearm examiner with the FBI is a weapons expert and they are often called on as expert witnesses in court cases.

[Dan O'meara]

When examining the investigation into the assassination of JFK, it is very difficult to discern between the staggering incompetence of the investigation and outright corruption.
Day insists that when he handed the rifle over to the FBI there were at least one set of visible prints (if not two sets of prints) and black fingerprint powder on the barrel of the rifle. The rifle was packed in a crate and flown out to Washington. When it was examined, a few hours after it had left Dallas, the prints and powder had vanished from the barrel of the rifle.
This is not incompetence, this is no reasonable assumption other than corruption.

The most brazen example of corruption in this investigation is that, a few short hours after Oswald was killed Hoover, the head of the FBI, had already decided what the investigation was going to show - that Oswald was the lone assassin.
The investigation was in it's infancy but it had already been decided what the outcome was going to be!
Above all else, the Warren Commission investigation was an FBI investigation and the FBI were working towards a predetermined outcome.
How anyone can have any kind of faith in such an investigation is beyond me.