The Palmprint

[Jack Nessan]

Once again, you have to be taken by the hand and led through the basic aspects of this case.
Even though these things have been pointed out to you over and over and over again.
Here goes again, so listen up...
In his WC testimony, Day mentions THREE sets of prints on the rifle.

SET #1
Day dusts the rifle for prints while still on the 6th floor. Tom Alyea films it. While he is dusting he notices prints on the side of the trigger housing:
"I put fingerprint powder on the side of the rifle over the magazine housing. I noticed it was rather rough. I also noticed there were traces of two prints visible. I told Captain Fritz it was too rough to do there, it should go to the office where I would have better facilities for trying to work with the fingerprints."
These are the prints that Latona is referring to in the passage you posted.
There is no dispute about these prints.

SET #2
This is the palmprint that Day alleges to lift from the underside of the barrel.
This is the magical palmprint that mysteriously disappeared.
This palmprint is the subject of this thread.

SET #3
During his WC testimony, Day is asked why he didn't hand over the lift of the palmprint he allegedly took with the rest of the evidence taken by the FBI on the night of the assassination. It was, after all, the most important piece of evidence the DPD collected that day. Day's quite pathetic excuse for not handing the lift over is that, when he took the lift he made such a bad job of it that the better part of the print remained on the rifle. He felt he didn't need to hand in the lift as he thought the "best bet" for identifying the print was still on the rifle.
As he is explaining this, out of the blue, he suddenly announces there was "another print" on the rifle. A third print:
"The gun was being sent in to them for process of prints. Actually I thought the print on the gun was their best bet, still remained on there, and, too, there was another print, I thought possibly under the wood part up near the trigger housing."
This third print was "under the wood part". This means he is NOT referring to the print on the trigger guard as those prints were not "under the wood part".
He had never mentioned this third print before this moment and it was never mentioned again.
Although it is not stated explicitly in his testimony, this third print can only have been on the barrel of the rifle as it was "under the wood part". Whereas the palmprint was towards the muzzle end of the rifle, this third print was "up near the trigger housing" (again confirming that it was not a reference to the prints that were on the trigger housing).

I really hope this has cleared things up for you Jack.
You have been so confused in your posts.
Oh yeah, a firearm examiner with the FBI is a weapons expert and they are often called on as expert witnesses in court cases.

https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/Smileys/DarkB/bs.gif

Based on the question LT Day was asked by Mr Belin, Print 3 is a recant of print 1 and print 2. Mr Belin and Mr McCloy understood this why can’t you?

Mr. BELIN. Did you do anything with the other prints or partial prints that you said you thought you saw?
Mr. DAY. I photographed them only. I did not try to lift them.

Mr. McCLOY. Can you restate again for the record what you can positively identify in terms of fingerprints or palmprints and Oswald's----
Mr. DAY. The palmprint on the box he apparently sat on I can definitely say it is his without being in fear of any error. The other, I think it is his, but I couldn't say definitely on a witness stand.
Mr. McCLOY. By the other, you mean the other palmprint?
Mr. DAY. The palmprint and that tracer print aside the trigger housing or the magazine housing.
Mr. McCLOY. Thank you very much.

DM--”Oh yeah, a firearm examiner with the FBI is a weapons expert and they are often called on as expert witnesses in court cases.”

Says you. No, it was one more person handling the rifle. A person not involved in the case. A person we know nothing about while you make all these claims of conspiracy. Mr. Stombaugh stated there was fingerprint powder all over the rifle. Mr Latona stated there was very little. Your “expert” handled it in between with no credentials listed. From this information, you somehow manage to blame LT Day?

[Jack Nessan]

When examining the investigation into the assassination of JFK, it is very difficult to discern between the staggering incompetence of the investigation and outright corruption.
Day insists that when he handed the rifle over to the FBI there were at least one set of visible prints (if not two sets of prints) and black fingerprint powder on the barrel of the rifle. The rifle was packed in a crate and flown out to Washington. When it was examined, a few hours after it had left Dallas, the prints and powder had vanished from the barrel of the rifle.
This is not incompetence, this is no reasonable assumption other than corruption.

The most brazen example of corruption in this investigation is that, a few short hours after Oswald was killed Hoover, the head of the FBI, had already decided what the investigation was going to show - that Oswald was the lone assassin.
The investigation was in it's infancy but it had already been decided what the outcome was going to be!
Above all else, the Warren Commission investigation was an FBI investigation and the FBI were working towards a predetermined outcome.
How anyone can have any kind of faith in such an investigation is beyond me.

In the last 11 pages you could have provided some kind of proof and have not provided anything but a clearly flawed and biased opinion. This post is just a compilation of your opinion with an added plea of please believe.

 

[Dan O'meara]

https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/Smileys/DarkB/bs.gif

Based on the question LT Day was asked by Mr Belin, Print 3 is a recant of print 1 and print 2. Mr Belin and Mr McCloy understood this why can’t you?

Mr. BELIN. Did you do anything with the other prints or partial prints that you said you thought you saw?
Mr. DAY. I photographed them only. I did not try to lift them.

Mr. McCLOY. Can you restate again for the record what you can positively identify in terms of fingerprints or palmprints and Oswald's----
Mr. DAY. The palmprint on the box he apparently sat on I can definitely say it is his without being in fear of any error. The other, I think it is his, but I couldn't say definitely on a witness stand.
Mr. McCLOY. By the other, you mean the other palmprint?
Mr. DAY. The palmprint and that tracer print aside the trigger housing or the magazine housing.
Mr. McCLOY. Thank you very much.

DM--”Oh yeah, a firearm examiner with the FBI is a weapons expert and they are often called on as expert witnesses in court cases.”

Says you. No, it was one more person handling the rifle. A person not involved in the case. A person we know nothing about while you make all these claims of conspiracy. Mr. Stombaugh stated there was fingerprint powder all over the rifle. Mr Latona stated there was very little. Your “expert” handled it in between with no credentials listed. From this information, you somehow manage to blame LT Day?

"Based on the question LT Day was asked by Mr Belin, Print 3 is a recant of print 1 and print 2. Mr Belin and Mr McCloy understood this why can’t you?"

 
Why do you bother posting this crazy nonsense?
Don't you have anything better to do?
Just for a laugh explain exactly what you mean by saying print 3 is a "recant" of print 1 and print 2.
This is what Day said:

"The gun was being sent in to them for process of prints. Actually I thought the print on the gun was their best bet, still remained on there, and, too, there was another print, I thought possibly under the wood part up near the trigger housing."

When he says "the print on the gun was their best bet" he is referring to the palmprint he said was left on the barrel when he tried his botched attempt to lift it. This is the magical print that vanished.
He then says there was another print that was under the wood and near the trigger housing.
I can't wait to hear your explanation.

[Dan O'meara]

Here's another little mystery i came across while going through Day's WC testimony.
Maybe you could help me out with it Jack, you're unique outlook might come in useful.
Day is testifying about when he first discovered the magical palmprint:

"I could also see a trace of a print on the side of the barrel that extended under the woodstock. I started to take the woodstock off and noted traces of a palmprint near the firing end of the barrel about 3 inches under the wood-stock when I took the woodstock loose...On the bottom side of the barrel which was covered by the wood, I found traces of a palmprint. I dusted these and tried lifting them, the prints, with scotch tape in the usual manner. A faint palmprint came off."

Now, my interpretation of this is that Day saw traces of the palmprint sticking out from under the wooden stock. When he takes the wood off he sees the palmprint on the underside of the barrel. In the pic below I've put a red arrow to point out where Day is referring to when he says the print "extended under the woodstock" and was on "the bottom side of the barrel".



What do you reckon Jack?
Is this a fair interpretation of what Day testified to?

[Jack Nessan]

"Based on the question LT Day was asked by Mr Belin, Print 3 is a recant of print 1 and print 2. Mr Belin and Mr McCloy understood this why can’t you?"

 
Why do you bother posting this crazy nonsense?
Don't you have anything better to do?
Just for a laugh explain exactly what you mean by saying print 3 is a "recant" of print 1 and print 2.
This is what Day said:

"The gun was being sent in to them for process of prints. Actually I thought the print on the gun was their best bet, still remained on there, and, too, there was another print, I thought possibly under the wood part up near the trigger housing."

When he says "the print on the gun was their best bet" he is referring to the palmprint he said was left on the barrel when he tried his botched attempt to lift it. This is the magical print that vanished.
He then says there was another print that was under the wood and near the trigger housing.
I can't wait to hear your explanation.

Excuse me.  Recant is what I was thinking you should be doing with the two palm prints storyline. Reiterate is what Day was doing in restating the two prints he noted.
 Lt Day is only talking about two prints. Reiterate is what Lt Day was doing about the two prints.

Print one is actually two fingers (right middle and right ring finger) but is the print covered by the cellophane on the trigger guard as noted by Latona. It is alternately referred to as a print or prints. Basically, one print of two fingers.

Print two is the palm print which is under the fore end of the stock.

[Jack Nessan]

Here's another little mystery i came across while going through Day's WC testimony.
Maybe you could help me out with it Jack, you're unique outlook might come in useful.
Day is testifying about when he first discovered the magical palmprint:

"I could also see a trace of a print on the side of the barrel that extended under the woodstock. I started to take the woodstock off and noted traces of a palmprint near the firing end of the barrel about 3 inches under the wood-stock when I took the woodstock loose...On the bottom side of the barrel which was covered by the wood, I found traces of a palmprint. I dusted these and tried lifting them, the prints, with scotch tape in the usual manner. A faint palmprint came off."

Now, my interpretation of this is that Day saw traces of the palmprint sticking out from under the wooden stock. When he takes the wood off he sees the palmprint on the underside of the barrel. In the pic below I've put a red arrow to point out where Day is referring to when he says the print "extended under the woodstock" and was on "the bottom side of the barrel".



What do you reckon Jack?
Is this a fair interpretation of what Day testified to?

You have posted the wrong Carcano rifle. That looks like the M91 TS and has a shorter barrel. You want the 91/38 rifle. I would think the WC located exactly where it was found on the barrel. Can you make your point anyway with the wrong rifle?

[Zeon Mason]

So What was the date/time  when the FBI received possession of this fingerprint card that Lt.Day supposedly made by transferring  the supposedly lifted prints from MC rifle,  but for some reason Day was unwllling or unable to hand over  this card along with the MC rifle when Day was instructed to hand over ALL evidence  on Nov 22/63 to the FBI?