MORE TESTIMONY ON THE PARTIAL PRINTS ON THE TRIGGERGUARD
Gil Jesus
Mr. LATONA. On the morning of November 23, 1963.
Mr. EISENBERG. And when did you proceed to make your examination?
Mr. LATONA. I proceeded to make my examination that same day that I
received it.
Mr. EISENBERG. Can you tell us what techniques you used?
Mr. LATONA. Well, the technique that I used first was simply to
examine it visually under a magnifying glass, a hand magnifying glass,
primarily for the purpose of seeing, first of all, whether there were
any visible prints. I might point out that my attention had been
directed to the area which we refer to as the trigger guard on the
left side of the weapon, Commission Exhibit 139.
Mr. EISENBERG. The trigger-guard area?
Mr. LATONA. The trigger-guard area.
Mr. EISENBERG. Which actually, in the case of this particular weapon,
is the area in which the magazine is inserted at the 'top; is that
correct? You are looking at the weapon now, and the magazine comes
out the bottom of what is called the trigger-guard area, which would
be a trigger guard on another weapon.
Mr. LATONA. That's correct. There had been placed over that area a
piece of cellophane material. My attention had been directed to it,
to the effect that a prior examination had been made of that area, and
that there were apparently certain latent prints available visible
under that area. I first examine most prints to see----
Mr. DULLES. Who placed the cellophane material there, in your opinion?
Mr. LATONA. Well, I was told--my information was simply that the
Dallas Police Department had done so. I have no personal knowledge as
to who did it, other than information that the Dallas Police had
examined the weapon and they had found these visible marks on there,
that they had developed the prints. Now, by what means they did it, I
do not know, but I would assume they used a gray powder.
Mr. DULLES. What was the purpose of putting the cellophane there?
Mr. LATONA. To protect the prints while the rifle was intransit to the
FBI.
Mr. EISENBERG. Now, when you received it with the cellophane cover,
what portion did it cover?
Mr. LATONA. Closest to the trigger area.
Mr. EISENBERG. On the trigger guard, closest to the trigger area?
Mr. LATONA. That's right.
Mr. EISENBERG. Was that on the right or left side of the weapon?
Mr. LATONA. Left side.
Mr. EISENBERG. And was there a print visible to you underneath the
cellophane?
Mr. LATONA. I could see faintly ridge formations there. However,
examination disclosed to me that the formations, the ridge formations
and characteristics, were insufficient for purposes of either
effecting identification or a determination that the print was not
identical with the prints of people. Accordingly, my opinion simply
was that the latent prints which were there were of no value. Now, I
did not stop there.
Mr. EISENBERG. Before we leave those prints, Mr. Latona, had those
been developed by the powder method?
Mr. LATONA. Yes; they had.
Mr. EISENBERG. Was that a gray powder?
Mr. LATONA. I assumed that they used gray powder in order to give them
what little contrast could be seen. And it took some highlighting and
sidelighting with the use of a spotlight to actually make those things
discernible at all.
Representative FORD. As far as you are concerned.
Mr. LATONA. That's right.
Mr. DULLES. Is is likely or possible that those fingerprints could
have been damaged or eroded in the passage from Texas to your hands?
Mr. LATONA. No, sir ; I don't think so. In fact, I think we got the
prints just like they were. There had, in addition to this rifle and
that paper bag, which I received on the 23d--there had also been
submitted to me some photographs which had been taken by the Dallas
Police Department, at least alleged to have been taken by them, of
these prints on this trigger guard which they developed. I examined
the photographs very closely and I still could not determine any
latent value in the photograph. So then I took the rifle personally
over to our photo laboratory. In the meantime, I had made
arrangements to bring a photographer in especially for the purpose of
photographing these latent prints for me, an experienced photographer--
I called him in. I received this material in the Justice Building
office of operations is in the Identification Division Building, which
is at 2d and D Streets SW. So I made arrangements to immediately have
a photographer come in and see if he could improve on the photographs
that were taken by the Dallas Police Department. Well, we spent,
between the two of us, setting up the camera, looking at prints,
highlighting, sidelighting, every type of lighting that we could
conceivably think of, checking back and forth in the darkroom--we
could not improve the condition of these latent prints. So,
accordingly, the final conclusion was simply that the latent print on
this gun was of no value, the fragments that were there. After that
had been determined, I then proceeded to completely process the entire
rifle, to see if there were any other prints of any significance or
value any prints of value--I would not know what the significance
would be, but to see if there were any other prints. I completely
covered the rifle.
(4 H 20-21 )
Gil Jesus
possess the "technology" to do what Scalice did, not only did the FBI
examine the same photographs, they tried to re-photograph the partials
by changing light locations in order to make the prints show up
better.
And no matter what they did, they could NOT make the partials
identifiable.
Now, show us where Oswald's fingerprints were positively identified on
that weapon BEFORE it was returned to the Dallas Police.
Gil Jesus
bump
Gil Jesus
bump again
David Von Pein
Gil's an impatient little kook today, isn't he?
>>> "Now, show us where Oswald's fingerprints were positively identified on that weapon BEFORE it was returned to the Dallas Police." <<<
They weren't, of course. Everybody knows that.
So what?
The print Day took off the rifle was evidently no longer visible to
the FBI's lab boys; and the triggerguard prints were not positively
IDed as Oswald's by the Feds. But Lt. Day did say that he thought
those prints were probably Oswald's. That's not a positive ID by Day,
that's true. But it's sure more than CTers have in any "print" regard.
And from my understanding of Scalice's work, he utilized different
methods of IDing the triggerguard prints from those traditionally used
by fingerprint experts in '63.
Dismiss Scalice if you must (and CTers must, of course; otherwise the
"patsy" had his hands right near the trigger of the murder weapon on
Nov. 22 without much of a doubt), but the patsy-loving crazies of the
world are still 500 miles and three bullets behind LNers when it comes
to the physical evidence in this case.
So, naturally, this must mean that everything leading in any way to
the "patsy" MUST be wrong, huh?
And around the mulberry bush we go....again.
Gil Jesus
>
> And from my understanding of Scalice's work, he utilized different
> methods of IDing the triggerguard prints from those traditionally used
> by fingerprint experts in '63.
Please tell us what those were.
justm...@gmail.com
Well, now because Jesus thinks he's stumped the LN's he'll start 4 or
5 threads about the same damn subject and keep bumping them because
he's so sure he's correct. Can you spell B-O-R-I-N-G?????
Stick to the thread where you were proven to be an idiot instead of
trying to lead people away from that one so they won't see it. You
really are one sorry sad ass Gilly. BTW you're here 24 hrs a day now,
wouldn't McDonalds hire you either? LMAO
Gil Jesus
wrote:
> Stick to the thread where you were proven to be an idiot instead of
> trying to lead people away from that one so they won't see it.
Joey:
We're still waiting for you wingnuts to show us where Oswald's
fingerprints were positively identified on that weapon BEFORE it was
returned to the Dallas Police.
We're still waiting for you wingnuts to provide evidence that the
photos Scalice viewed in 1993, the ones that were in a briefcase of a
Dallas detective and found after 30 years, were the same photos that
Sebastian Latona examined on 11/23/63.
We're still waiting foy you wingnuts to provide proof that a.) David
Brinkley lied in his report that the Dallas police said that "no
fingerprints were found on the rifle" or b.) that the Dallas Police
reported no such thing.
We're still waiting for you wingnuts to explain why it was the
Brinkley announcement was supported by the FBI, who testified that "no
prints of value" were found on the rifle.
We're still waiting for you wingnuts to explain why the Dallas Police
sent the rifle to the FBI to begin with, if they had Oswald's prints
on the rifle.
Now get to it.
Walt
> Gil's an impatient little kook today, isn't he?
>
> >>> "Now, show us where Oswald's fingerprints were positively identified on that weapon BEFORE it was returned to the Dallas Police." <<<
>
> They weren't, of course. Everybody knows that.
>
> So what?
>
> The print Day took off the rifle was evidently no longer visible to
> the FBI's lab boys; and the triggerguard prints were not positively
> IDed as Oswald's by the Feds. But Lt. Day did say that he thought
> those prints were probably Oswald's. That's not a positive ID by Day,
> that's true.
Lt. Day did say that he thought those prints were probably Oswald's.
That's not a positive ID by Day, that's true.
Ok, so you admit that Day was merely guessing and offering and
opinion. That OPINION was utterly worthless.
Just as Chief Curry's opinion was worthless when he opined that the
fingerprints would prove to be Oswald's.
The Dallas DA Henry Wade actually took the opinions and elevated them
to outright lies, when he boldly asserted that Oswald's prints had
been found on the rifle, when he talked to reporters on Saturday
morning.
If your thinking wasn't occluded by having yer in yer ass you may be
smart enough to realize that the authorities were offering OPINIONS
and lies about Oswald's guilt because of PRECONCEIVED ideas. They
were offering opinions concerning Oswald guilt before the evidence
warranted any conclusion.
That Saturday morning "press conference" by Wade brought the seething,
roiling, caldron of rumors to critical mass.
After Henry Wade boldly lied about Oswald's prints being on the rifle
Oswald's fate was sealed. He was the official designated patsy and
that was that!
Pea Brain.....I hope that someday that you will have a son, or
grandson, or some dear to you, accused of murder just as Oswald was,
and the authorities use the same tactics that were used against
Oswald.