Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: Dallas Police Crime Lab  (Read 1079 times)

Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 736
Re: Dallas Police Crime Lab
« Reply #20 on: November 08, 2019, 01:10:21 PM »
Well, Livingston was loyal — I’ll give him that. Unfortunately it’s revisionist history from 30 years later.

CE 3145, p. 7:

“Lt. DAY related on that night he told only two people that he had made the tentative identification of the palm print obtained off the underside of the rifle barrel with that of the known palm print of LEE HARVEY OSWALD. Lt. DAY stated these two individuals were Chief of Police JESSE E. CURRY of the Dallas Police Department and Homicide Captain WILL FR1TZ of the Dallas Police Department.”

By the way, both Curry and Fritz were stating publicly on 11/23 and 11/24 that they had no prints on the rifle. Day also refused to sign a statement about his alleged lifting of the print from the rifle.


Well, Livingston was loyal — I’ll give him that. Unfortunately it’s revisionist history from 30 years later.


Savage writes that not only Rusty, but Pete Barnes, H. R. Williams, and Bobby Brown also saw and compared the palm print that weekend. And it was front page news on 11/24/63.



History? Yes! Revisionist? I don't think so!


“Lt. DAY related on that night he told only two people that he had made the tentative identification of the palm print obtained off the underside of the rifle barrel with that of the known palm print of LEE HARVEY OSWALD. Lt. DAY stated these two individuals were Chief of Police JESSE E. CURRY of the Dallas Police Department and Homicide Captain WILL FR1TZ of the Dallas Police Department.”

The key words are: "that he had made the tentative identification." Nothing in that statement precludes Day telling Drain about a palm print on the rifle (and Livingston overhearing the conversation).

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Dallas Police Crime Lab
« Reply #20 on: November 08, 2019, 01:10:21 PM »

Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 736
Re: Dallas Police Crime Lab
« Reply #21 on: November 08, 2019, 01:16:06 PM »
Thanks Charles, the rifle had to touch Oswald's palm to leave a print and considering that Oswald wasn't accessible after a few days, the stupid conspiracy theory that the palmprint "magically" turned up a week later is only endorsed by the extremely desperate.

The FBI confirmed that Day's print had to have come from the rifle.



This high res image of Day's print shows the random points that were used in matching the rifle prints.



JohnM

Thanks John, yes the FBI had to have been satisfied with that evidence which indicates that the palm print came from the rifle. Otherwise, it seems to me that they would have been questioning the other officers who worked in the Crime Lab to see if they had seen the palm print.

Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 736
Re: Dallas Police Crime Lab
« Reply #22 on: November 08, 2019, 01:17:30 PM »
I made the mistake of replying to Walt and discovered just how dishonest he really is, it's best to keep away.

JohnM

I usually do.  Thumb1:

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Dallas Police Crime Lab
« Reply #22 on: November 08, 2019, 01:17:30 PM »

Online Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3581
Re: Dallas Police Crime Lab
« Reply #23 on: November 08, 2019, 02:26:51 PM »
I usually do.  Thumb1:

It's not unusual for a person who is attempting to propagate a tale to avoid those who can easily expose the lies.

Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6776
Re: Dallas Police Crime Lab
« Reply #24 on: November 08, 2019, 02:36:15 PM »
Wow, "LOL" is such a witty response, I'm absolutely shattered.

Who cares if you’re shattered? LOL is the only response your baseless claims deserve.

Quote
No worries.



Your morph of two photos of the same lift proves exactly nothing about the rifle. Try again.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Dallas Police Crime Lab
« Reply #24 on: November 08, 2019, 02:36:15 PM »

Offline John Mytton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2435
Re: Dallas Police Crime Lab
« Reply #25 on: November 08, 2019, 02:41:21 PM »

Your morph of two photos of the same lift proves exactly nothing about the rifle. Try again.

Wrong, the Day print is being directly compared to the FBI print, check it yourself, you lose. But i am happy that you thought its the same print.  Thumb1:
Btw you are really getting your ass kicked in this thread, but keep trying! LOL.

JohnM
« Last Edit: November 08, 2019, 03:03:03 PM by John Mytton »

Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6776
Re: Dallas Police Crime Lab
« Reply #26 on: November 08, 2019, 02:44:21 PM »
You're trying to hard Iacoletti, all of the above can be true, Day was still releasing evidence to Drain at 11:45 PM and it's possible that Day gathered the rifle and gave C2766 to Drain a little after midnight which means that Day was not lying when he said that he only told Fritz and Curry about the palm print on that night and then on the next day he told Drain about the rifle, and Livingston obviously heard what was being said to Drain, so everyone is clean, job done!

Now who’s being desperate?

Quote
Cite?

Also in CE3145:

"Lt. Day stated he made a written report on January 8, 1964, to Mr. G. L. Lumpkin. Deputy of Police, Service Division of the Dallas Police Department. This report is set forth as requested of Lt. Day, and a copy of such report was furnished for transmittal to the President's Commission investigating the assassination pf President Kennedy. Lt. Day stated he preferred to let the written report speak for itself and would rather elaborate orally on the lifting of the palm print from the underside of the rifle, which palm print was found when he examined the rifle on November 22, 1963, rather than to make a written signed statement."

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Dallas Police Crime Lab
« Reply #26 on: November 08, 2019, 02:44:21 PM »

Offline John Mytton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2435
Re: Dallas Police Crime Lab
« Reply #27 on: November 08, 2019, 02:50:53 PM »

Also in CE3145:

"Lt. Day stated he made a written report on January 8, 1964, to Mr. G. L. Lumpkin. Deputy of Police, Service Division of the Dallas Police Department. This report is set forth as requested of Lt. Day, and a copy of such report was furnished for transmittal to the President's Commission investigating the assassination pf President Kennedy. Lt. Day stated he preferred to let the written report speak for itself and would rather elaborate orally on the lifting of the palm print from the underside of the rifle, which palm print was found when he examined the rifle on November 22, 1963, rather than to make a written signed statement."

So what, Day wasnt trying to hide anything, its just another worthless accusation.

JohnM

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Dallas Police Crime Lab
« Reply #27 on: November 08, 2019, 02:50:53 PM »

Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 736
Re: Dallas Police Crime Lab
« Reply #28 on: November 08, 2019, 02:59:30 PM »
Now who’s being desperate?

Also in CE3145:

"Lt. Day stated he made a written report on January 8, 1964, to Mr. G. L. Lumpkin. Deputy of Police, Service Division of the Dallas Police Department. This report is set forth as requested of Lt. Day, and a copy of such report was furnished for transmittal to the President's Commission investigating the assassination pf President Kennedy. Lt. Day stated he preferred to let the written report speak for itself and would rather elaborate orally on the lifting of the palm print from the underside of the rifle, which palm print was found when he examined the rifle on November 22, 1963, rather than to make a written signed statement."

You are trying to make what the document actually said into something that is obviously untrue. When did "he preferred to let the written report speak for itself and would rather elaborate orally" become "he refused to sign a statement"?

Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6776
Re: Dallas Police Crime Lab
« Reply #29 on: November 08, 2019, 03:00:37 PM »
Savage writes that not only Rusty, but Pete Barnes, H. R. Williams, and Bobby Brown also saw and compared the palm print that weekend. And it was front page news on 11/24/63.

Not only does that article say nothing about a print in a rifle, but even if it did it would tell you nothing about who saw what on 11/22.

And how did Livingston, Barnes, Williams, and Brown see something that Day didn’t tell anybody about?

Quote
The key words are: "that he had made the tentative identification." Nothing in that statement precludes Day telling Drain about a palm print on the rifle (and Livingston overhearing the conversation).

So we’re to believe that Day tentatively identified the only print evidence they had that connected Oswald to the rifle on the 22nd and didn’t bother to mention that detail to the “distracted” Drain (distracted by what, a heart attack?) or to anybody else, but that somehow 4 other guys in the office came to the same conclusion without Day telling them?

And then somehow when the rifle was in transit, it lost any evidence that it had been processed with fingerprint powder, as well as losing the traces of print that Day claimed were still there.

Seems legit.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Dallas Police Crime Lab
« Reply #29 on: November 08, 2019, 03:00:37 PM »

 

Mobile View