Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: The preponderance of the evidence  (Read 35971 times)

Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7395
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #224 on: April 06, 2019, 10:07:57 PM »
Advertisement

There are only two possible explanations; either Day screwed up big time or the print was added to the record after the fact.

innuendo and conjecture

This is more convincing to me:

The FBI confirmed that the print had been lifted from C2766 when they established that the adhesive material bearing the print also bore impressions of the same irregularities that appeared on the barrel of the rifle. Latona testified that this palmprint was the right palmprint of Lee Harvey Oswald. This finding was also confirmed by Arthur Mandella, and Ronald G. Wittmus.

In other words, Day screwed up big time, but it's no big deal...

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #224 on: April 06, 2019, 10:07:57 PM »


Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3574
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #225 on: April 06, 2019, 10:38:09 PM »
In other words, Day screwed up big time, but it's no big deal...


What is important is that the evidence was processed. The delay is understandable, given the circumstances.

Offline Tim Nickerson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1824
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #226 on: April 06, 2019, 10:44:11 PM »

What is important is that the evidence was processed. The delay is understandable, given the circumstances.

Day held onto the evidence which, as a crime lab officer, he was perfectly authorized to do so.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #226 on: April 06, 2019, 10:44:11 PM »


Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #227 on: April 06, 2019, 10:50:50 PM »
Conjecture and innuendo isn?t very convincing.

Then why are you convinced that Oswald killed Kennedy?

Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7395
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #228 on: April 06, 2019, 10:53:10 PM »

What is important is that the evidence was processed. The delay is understandable, given the circumstances.


What is important is that the evidence was processed.

Sure, regardless where it comes from, right?


The delay is understandable, given the circumstances.

So, first day evidence isn't important anymore? You can always manipulate the evidence later and claim it was an error or an understandable delay, right?



JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #228 on: April 06, 2019, 10:53:10 PM »


Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #229 on: April 06, 2019, 10:54:09 PM »
This is more convincing to me:

The FBI confirmed that the print had been lifted from C2766 when they established that the adhesive material bearing the print also bore impressions of the same irregularities that appeared on the barrel of the rifle.

A claim without evidence is convincing to you?

Oh wait...of course it is.
« Last Edit: April 06, 2019, 10:57:01 PM by John Iacoletti »

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #230 on: April 06, 2019, 10:56:20 PM »
Day held onto the evidence which, as a crime lab officer, he was perfectly authorized to do so.

Did his boss tell him to release all the evidence to the FBI or did he not?

Did he say that there were ridges left on the rifle barrel or did he not?

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #230 on: April 06, 2019, 10:56:20 PM »


Offline Tim Nickerson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1824
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #231 on: April 06, 2019, 11:07:19 PM »
Did his boss tell him to release all the evidence to the FBI or did he not?

No.

Quote
Did he say that there were ridges left on the rifle barrel or did he not?

Yes.