Dallas Police Crime Lab

[John Mytton]

Sorry, is this supposed to prove that Day’s lift “had to have come from the rifle“?

How do we even know your smudge with arrows came from the rifle?

I said let’s see the analysis, not another one of your contrived morphs. Or did Hoover do this himself?

Run Iacoletti run, the two images show precisely the same flaws in the exact same places.

Btw the analysis is the perfect match of the random imperfections,  my "morph" only reinforces the FBI, try to keep up, k?

JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

Run Iacoletti run, the two images show precisely the same flaws in the exact same places.

How do we know that your cherry-picked 5 dots are “flaws” and not for example dust on the camera lens? What about the other dots on the photo of the Day lift that don’t correspond?

Where on the rifle was the test lift made, and how did the FBI even know the exact spot where Day did his alleged lift?
Like I said, let’s see the actual FBI analysis, not Hoover’s claim.

Your morphs, as usual, prove nothing.

[John Mytton]

How do we know that your cherry-picked 5 dots are “flaws” and not for example dust on the camera lens?

Where on the rifle was the test lift made, and how did the FBI even know the exact spot where Day did his alleged lift?
Like I said, let’s see the FBI actual analysis, not Hoover’s claim.

Your morphs, as usual, prove nothing.

So both cameras had random dust dots that matched perfectly? Keep digging this is hilarious? LOLOLOL!
Btw my alternating gifs aren't morphs but whatever floats your boat.

JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

Sorry, is your alternating gif supposed to prove that Day’s lift “had to have come from the rifle“?

[John Mytton]

Sorry, is your alternating gif supposed to prove that Day’s lift “had to have come from the rifle“?

No need to be sorry, the evidence shows the two prints came from the same rifle and if for whatever reason you think you see something different then good for you.

JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

No need to be sorry, the evidence shows the two prints came from the same rifle and if for whatever reason you think you see something different then good for you.

Let’s assume for the sake of argument that Hoover actually did a lift from the same spot that Day allegedly did (even though there’s no evidence of it), and these cherry-picked 5 spots are “flaws” (even though there’s no evidence of it).

How many points of identification are required (for example in fingerprints) for something to be considered a match (much less a “perfect” match)?

[Charles Collins]

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?

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.

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.

Informed sources said the evidence "leaves little doubt" that the 24-year old Communist sympathizer held the rifle which fired the lethal bullet as President Kennedy's motorcade neared the Triple Underpass. "We've got a print that matches Oswald's," one investigator said.

The article is typical in that it protects the sources by not naming them. You can make your ad hoch assumptions (about what you believe "the evidence" was) to support whatever you believe in. However, a logical assumption (based on the actual evidence) is that the evidence referred to in the article is the palm print found on the rifle.

or to anybody else

He stated that he told Curry and Fritz. These are the ones who were asking. The others could have made the comparison without Day telling them that he had tentatively matched them. After all, Livingston says that he overheard that there was a palmprint found on the rifle.