If you cannot be wrong then you are wrong.

[John Iacoletti]

Documents were found showing that the rifle was ordered by someone who Oswald was found with a fake ID with the same name. But you find reasons to reject it.

That's because every bit of physical evidence in this case (of which there is little) has some problem associated with it.  Was the Hidell ID mentioned in any interview or report written prior to the FBI seizing the Klein's microfilm?  Why is the microfilm "missing"?  Why is there no USPS record of shipment or a signature card for anybody picking it up?  If there was some corroboration to the alleged shipment, it would be a better case.

QUESTION: What new fingerprint evidence would convince you and was not bogus like the palmprint.

If Day had followed the same procedure for the magic partial palmprint and photographed it and covered it, and turned it over with the others, it would be a lot more convincing.

Conclusive evidence that CE139 was the murder weapon? The marks left on the bullet found on the stretcher

Unfortunately there is no evidence that the bullet found on an unrelated stretcher at Parkland Hospital was involved in the assassination at all.  And there's no good reason to even think that CE399 was the bullet that Tomlinson found.  Wright said the bullet he handled was pointed.  And CE 399 doesn't have a solid chain of custody.  If these discrepancies didn't exist, it would be a stronger case.  But even if you could prove that CE399 went through Kennedy or Connally (DNA might do that), it wasn't the bullet that hit Kennedy in the head, so it doesn't tell you what the murder weapon was.

and the fragments in the limousine have been ballistically matched to the rifle to the exclusion of all other rifles in the world.

Also with no solid chain of custody.  And these multilated fragments were matched by Robert Frazier lining up the marks "in his mind" when they didn't line up under the microscope.  And there's no way to connect these fragments with the bullet fragments in Kennedy's head, so it's just an assumption that they came from the same bullet.  And there's no way to connect the fragments in Kennedy's head with any specific weapon.

If proper evidence handling procedures had been followed, it would be a much stronger case.

QUESTION: What new evidence would convince you that the bullet and bullet fragments were not planted. You claim good new ballistic evidence would convince you. Is that really true?

I didn't say that.  In fact, I said just the opposite.  No ballistics test in the world will tell you who fired a rifle.

At this point, we can't go back and make the investigators do things better or make the dodgy claims any less dodgy.  So it would have to be something new and unassailable.