JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate > JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate
Malcolm Wallace's fingerprint from carton on 6th floor
Matt Grantham:
--- Quote from: Steve M. Galbraith on May 05, 2018, 12:08:17 AM ---In his book "Best Evidence", David Lifton says that the wounds on JFK were all altered to make them appear as if the shooters were located behind him. In reality, Lifton says, all of the shooters of JFK were situated in front of him. No one, he says, fired a shot from behind JFK.
These alterations included creating "two false entry wounds" to the rear of JFK's body, one to the back of the head and another to his upper back. Both were done, again, to make it appear that JFK was shot from behind.
Additionally, the alterations also included enlarging the neck wound and the head wound on the right side of JFK's head to make them appear to be exit wounds.
Again, this is all explicitly stated in his book.
--- End quote ---
OK thanks Steve That seems pretty ridiculous on his part I am not sure how he would explain Tague being hit from a bullet from the front
Steve M. Galbraith:
--- Quote from: Matt Grantham on May 05, 2018, 12:14:57 AM ---
OK thanks Steve That seems pretty ridiculous on his part I am not sure how he would explain Tague being hit from a bullet from the front
--- End quote ---
It is ridiculous. It doesn't explain the back entrance wound on Connally either.
Why would anyone go through such a convoluted plot? Shoot JFK from the Grassy Knoll and then go through all of these alterations - the films, steal the body, alter the wounds - to make it appear he was shot from behind?
All of this done BEFORE they could know that other films wouldn't expose their conspiracy?
And how about letting the doctors at Parkland examine JFK? Wouldn't the conspirators need to control them? To prevent them from exposing their act? Apparently the conspirators planned all of this but forgot to control what those doctors would see?
Matt Grantham:
--- Quote from: Steve M. Galbraith on May 05, 2018, 12:24:39 AM ---It is ridiculous. It doesn't explain the back entrance wound on Connally either.
And how about letting the doctors at Parkland examine JFK? Wouldn't the conspirators need to control them? To prevent them from exposing their act? Apparently the conspirators planned all of this but forgot to control what those doctors would see?
--- End quote ---
This is an area of speculation of course, but I would think they believed if they controlled the autopsy, and the media, that would be enough to either override the doctors opinions, or to keep that information out of the mainstream reporting Also it is possible that they fully expected to kill him with shots from behind , but when that failed it was a last resort to have the final shot from the front
Larry Trotter:
--- Quote from: Matt Grantham on May 04, 2018, 09:06:23 PM --- I guess a partial palm print would not be good enough to convict someone as well
--- End quote ---
It would be somewhat questionable, especially coming from a box in a warehouse, that had been stored elsewhere, and shipped place to place, and handled by numerous persons. Just not very evidentiary valuable for me. As for the fingerprint, how was it known from which finger? In any event, I recall watching a video re:Mr Darby's analysis, and I recall some questions that I would have to answer for myself before even concluding a possible match.
Royell Storing:
--- Quote from: Larry Trotter on May 04, 2018, 08:54:21 PM ---Not that I am an expert, but I viewed a film about Mr Darby's "conclusion", and I must say, if I were on a jury, I just don't believe I could "rely" on said finding that it, just one finger, was solid as an indication that Mr Wallace had been on the TSBD 6th floor on 11/22/'63. And, said finding was, I believe over 20 years after the death of MalcolmWallace.But, to each their own, and so it goes.
--- End quote ---
Since when is "just one finger" print not enough to place someone inside a crime scene? You also need to consider that computers/national data bases were not around back then to process/cross reference the print = the 20+ year time gap. Today, DNA from 1 drop of blood is used as evidence resulting in slam dunk convictions. The same goes for "just one finger" print.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version