Re: Easier shot towards Houston Street
Raymond
> On Jul 8, 11:34 am, mercury <mercury100.ste...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I see no reason why he couldn't simply make the shot from the window
> > straight down to Houston Street.
>
> > Mercury!
>
> He could have tried, although it would have been a more difficult
> shot:
>
> http://www.jfk-online.com/jfk100easy.html
>
> Dave!
I also believe that it would have been foolish to shot at the
motorcade as it was coming "toward" the TSBD. And I will never believe
that it was Oswald that fired that rifle found on the sixth floor. And
no one can prove that he did no matter how hard they try. The only
thing that connects LHO to the murder weapon is the serial number and
not even the prints on the rifle will convince me. As SA Drain said,
"Prints can be transferred to a weapon from a print card." And serial
numbers can be altered and even changed completely
Also, I will never believe that the weapon Lee ordered to kill Walker
is the same rifle used to kill JFK and is , today, in the National
Archives.
Lee never fired that rifle . However, he did know that JFK was to be
hit. He was a "patsy" and was made so because of his attempt to kill
Walker. Don't think that the CIA snopp dog, deMorenschildt didn't
report it to his superiors like Moore. As I recall, de Mohrenschildt
was asked by Dallas CIA agent J. Walton Moore to keep tabs on Oswald.
Moore worked for the CIA's domestic contact service in Dallas. He told
De Mohrenschildt about an ex-American Marine who had worked in an
electronics factory ...and "Keep an eye on him."
There were no prints on the rifle when it was sent to the FBI on
Friday night and only later did the DA tell the press, "Oh, did I tell
you, prints were found on the weapon." On the 24th......
In 1984, Henry Hurt, author of Reasonable Doubt, interviewed both Lt.
Day and Vincent Drain, the FBI agent that picked up the rifle and
delivered it to Washington on Friday night. Hurt : "Day remains
adament that the Oswald print was on the rifle when he first examined
it a few hours after the shooting. Moreover, Day stated that when he
gave the rifle to Agent Drain, he pointed out to the FBI man both the
area where the print could be seen and the fingerprint dust used to
bring it out.
"Drain flatly disputes this claiming that Day never showed him such
a print....' I just don't believe there ever was such a print,'said
Drain....'All I can figure out is that it (Oswald's print) was some
sort of cushion because they were getting a lot of heat by Sunday
night. You could take a print off Oswald's card and put it on the
rifle. Something like that happened.'"
I believe Drain before I would believe "Dick" Day.
And why did they go to the Moody Funeral Home and retake Lee's prints?
Moody said he had to clean the ink off of Lee's hands.
James K. Olmstead View profile
More options Jan 13 2002, 11:34 pm
Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk
From: "James K. Olmstead" <Thp...@onecom.com>
Date: 13 Jan 2002 22:34:55 -0500
Local: Sun, Jan 13 2002 11:34 pm
Subject: Re: Fingerprints
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author
The bag also has fingerprint problems....right beside the circled
latent image is another image ignored.....but each item has to be kept
seperate...the triggerguard prints will be the "starting" point of re-
examination of all the fingerprint evidence.
At least I hope so.
jko
James Olmstead knows more about prints than anyone posting on any of
these newsgroups. Don't challenge him. He will make a fool of you.
Leaving fingerprints can not always be that easy. I think that it
takes 7 lbs. of pressure to leave a print. You might ask
James Olmstead.
An interesting aside to Lt. Day and prints on the rifle:
In Day's official statement, he said that he only found the "old dry
print" on the underside of the barrel after he removed the wooden part
of the rifle by loosening three or four screws . He said that it was
not visible when the gun was assembled. What led him to look was some
impressions near the clip housing, so he decided to look underneath
the wood stock. He stated "This print appeared to be the right
palmprint of SOME individual." This print was found on the underside
of the barrel which was completely covered by the wooden stock of the
gun and not visible until he had removed the wooden portion of the
front end of the wooden stock. Lt. Day estimated" this print was
within three inches of the front end of the wooden stock." He dusted
this print with black powder and made one lift then carefully
reassembled the weapon, " and when the wooden stock was reassembled to
the barrel of the gun, this afforded the print that was still visible
on the underside of the barrel sufficient protection that it would not
be disturbed in his estimation..."
This print was not found when the gun arrived in Washington. Day
told Posner . " I respect the FBI... I know I told Drain . I don't
know if he heard me or what. I don't know what happened... I can't
gurantee it was still there when it got to the FBI office, etc. " read
Posner p. 285.
Day said that there was no reason for wrapping the palmprint on
the underside of the barrel with any protective covering since it was
protected by the wood stock when it was fully assembled and that it
was not necessary to use cellophane or other protective coating as it
would have been on the exposed prints." CE 3185.
Drain said, "Bullshit,"
Day told Gerald P. that there were some looping impressions as
opposed to arches and whorls and it turned out that Lee had looping
impressions. He said that there was a print partially developed , "
and I could see it running under the stock, so I lifted the gun out of
the stock."
Return to Posner:
"Day had so completely lifted the palmprint that the FBI, in its
Nov. 24 examination of the rifle, did not find any evidence of it. No
one knew that Oswald's print was found on the rifle until Dallas
District Attorney Henry Wade told a reporter in the press confrence on
Nov 24....
" The print was important because it was the first piece of direct
evidence that placed the rifle in Oswald's hands... " Case Closed PP.
283-264.
I call this: All In A Day's Work.
Gary Savage , nephew of "Rusty" Livingston tells us in his book,
JFK, FIRST DAY EVIDENCE that most if not all Crime Lab Officers saw
and compared the palm print themselves ,including his uncle. (Highly
unlikely since his uncle did not report for work until the 11 pm
shift).pp. 77-81. His book.
Day claims that only two other people knew about the palm print,
Police Chief Curry and Captain Fritz and he did not remember at what
time he told them or at what time he made the lift,. CE No. 3145.
From Jim Olmstead:
Concerning the issue of the fingerprints. To brng you up on some
other points where your imput would be interesting to read...concerns
the number of photographs taken of the MC and the
fingerprints....Rusty indicates 5 images were taken....that is
supported in testimony...however only 3 were submitted to the
WC......and only two were published CE 720 and CE 721. However.....the
photograph of the "barrell palmprint" could have been the third
image.....you opinion on that would be of interest.
Second part concerns Fritz.....if you have a chance to review some of
the film taken of Day and Fritz in the TSBD that has been included in
various "videos"....in all sequences where Fritz and Day are together
dusting the MC keep your eyes focused on the "hands of
Fritz"......there is a stronger chance that the "barrell print"
belongs to Fritz then to Lee.....Fritz's
hand is in the area of where the print was placed.....no record of Lee
placing his hand in this area can beestabllshed.....your comments
after re-veiwing the footage.
Let me interject some comments concerning the latent images developed
on the underside of the barrel.
First there is some concern over the exact location of the latent
images. The indication is that the latent image was in the area where
the wooden stock ends. The problems are seen in CE 637, 639 and 640
if one looks at the evidence on
the "defense" side of the evaluation problems can be noted. But if
you accept the evidence as presented you will not "want to" see the
conflicts.
The first requires that you look at CE 1304 and see the proper
landmarks of the barrel. There are two "features" to the barrel, the
rear sight and I believe the bayonet mount just before the front
sight. Now look at CE 639 the bayonet
mount "should" be seen in this exhibit it is not seen. Therefore the
placement of the image in not "near the end of foregrip" or the
mounting "feature" would be seen......there is enough of the barrel in
CE 639 on either side of the latent image for this feature to be seen
if the image is located where it is presented as being.
There are other conflicts of the evaluation but without knowledge of
fingerprint comparison of points of indentification the conflicts are
difficult to understand. There are about 6 key features presented
that just don't "line up" when they should. I can't present this
material at this time.....but if one looks hard enough they can see
the conflict without being an "expert" or even a layman student of
fingerprint.
jko
Back to why no shot at limo on Houston St.:
Dr. Cyril Wecht, in his book, Cause of Death wondered the same
thing on a trip to Dallas. As he stared out of the sixth floor window,
he wondered , like others before him, why Oswald (?) did not shoot the
President as the motorcade proceeded down Houston Street. The Doctor
believed that it would have been an easier shoot. I personally believe
that most hunters, or professional shootists, would not agree .
In such a shot, the President may have been hit, but , as you
suggested, the shooter would surely have been seen. With all of the
Secret Service men behind the Presuident's car, with all of the
motorcycle policemen surrounding the motorcade, and all of the Dallas
policemen and deputy sheriffs he would not have made it out of the
building.
It is my OPINION that the southeast corner of the sixth floor was a
last minute decision. Would any of you gone to the farthest corner of
the building to make the shot?
No doubt the location had to be flexible due to the possible human
traffic and the uncertanity of their movement. It was highly probable
that some would watch the parade from the front windows of the
building, and some did.
So why did the shooter go beyond the fourth floor? The first four
floors contained offices where employees were stationary. The fifth,
sixth, and seventh floors were used for stock and during lunch hour
would likely be free of employees.
My choice would have been to shoot from the fifth floor and from a
window facing the west where I would not be seen by the crowd on
Houston and Elm Streets. In a photograph taken just minutes after the
shooting, two windows , on the southwest corner of the building facing
the overpass are shown to be open. Windows , on that corner facing Elm
Street are also open. Jarman, Williams, and Norman said that they
moved to the southwest corner of he building and opened the windows,
but pictures taken before the shooting show the windows to be open.
No doubt the fifth floor plan had to be abandoned due to employee
traffic. In addition to Norman , Jarman, and Williams who joined them
at 12:20 pm, was Jack E. Daugherty, who had returned to work early and
was filling a book order on the fifth floor at the time of the
shooting. He testified that he took the west elevator to the first
floor after hearing a noise which sounded like a backfire.
If the fifth floor had to be abandoned, why wasn't a window on the
southwest corner of the sixth floor used? Was it because Williams was
eating his lunch in a spot where a shooter would have been seen? Was
time running out and the shooter had to go to the southeast corner to
the alleged "sniper's nest?"
And as long as I am SPECULATING: For those who watch gangster
movies, we all know that the excutioner never carries the weapon to
the scene of the hit. Did ya all watch The Godfather? Notice that when
Michael went to the restauraunt to do his "hit" the gun was in the
men's room.
Speculating again, If I were Oliver Stone I would have had my HITMAN
enter the TSBD building during the wee hours of the morning before the
building opened for business. I would have sent him to the seventh
floor to wait for the hour of the motorcade. Then, as the time
approached, I would have him come down to the fifth floor where the
rifle had been "stashed" and ready to fire, and where he was to shoot
from ,if possible. He would know where to find the rifle because he
was told it was in a certain row, behind a box of books with the words
"GHICAGO ORDER" written on it.( SEE CE 490) When he was not able to
shoot from the fifth floor, being a movie maker like Stone, I would
have had him go to wherever he thought he could make the shot from
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0116b.htm
Compare the handwriting with the envelope LHO used to send to Chicago
when he ordered the weapon. See the word 'Chicago". Both the same. A
blind man can see that.
Save your time in calling me names.
“Who steals my purse, steals trash, but he that filches from me my
good name robs me of that which not enriches him and makes me poor
indeed.”
--- William Shakespeare quotes (English Dramatist, Playwright and
Poet, 1564-1616)
Grizzlie Antagonist
> On Jul 8, 11:43 pm, Dave Reitzes <dreit...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 8, 11:34 am, mercury <mercury100.ste...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > I see no reason why he couldn't simply make the shot from the window
> > > straight down to Houston Street.
>
> > > Mercury!
>
> > He could have tried, although it would have been a more difficult
> > shot:
>
> >http://www.jfk-online.com/jfk100easy.html
>
> > Dave!
>
> I also believe that it would have been foolish to shot at the
> motorcade as it was coming "toward" the TSBD. And I will never believe
> that it was Oswald that fired that rifle found on the sixth floor. And
> no one can prove that he did no matter how hard they try. The only
> thing that connects LHO to the murder weapon is the serial number and
> not even the prints on the rifle will convince me. As SA Drain said,
> "Prints can be transferred to a weapon from a print card." And serial
> numbers can be altered and even changed completely
>
> Also, I will never believe that the weapon Lee ordered to kill Walker
> is the same rifle used to kill JFK and is , today, in the National
> Archives.
You should read the short story, "No Particular Night or Morning" by Ray
Bradbury.
Or, better still, "Obstinate Uncle Otis" by Robert Arthur.
Both stories are about individuals who are capable of disbelieving the
entire universe out of existence -- Uncle Otis perhaps in a more literal
sense than the character in the Bradbury story -- by sheer force of will.
You might also try looking at a very short piece written by a mid-
twentieth century humorist named Corey Ford called, "How To Guess Your
Age".
It's about a man who would rather believe that the staircases are getting
higher in his building and that the print is getting smaller in his
newspapers than to believe that he is getting older.
"Even the weather is changing. It's colder in winter and the summers are
hotter than they used to be. I'd go away, if it wasn't so far. Snow is
heavier when I try to shovel it, and I have to put on rubbers whenever I
go out, because rain today is wetter than the rain we used to get.
Draughts are more severe too. It must be the way they build windows now."
bigdog
> On Jul 8, 11:43 pm, Dave Reitzes <dreit...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 8, 11:34 am, mercury <mercury100.ste...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > I see no reason why he couldn't simply make the shot from the window
> > > straight down to Houston Street.
>
> > > Mercury!
>
> > He could have tried, although it would have been a more difficult
> > shot:
>
> >http://www.jfk-online.com/jfk100easy.html
>
> > Dave!
>
> I also believe that it would have been foolish to shot at the
> motorcade as it was coming "toward" the TSBD. And I will never believe
> that it was Oswald that fired that rifle found on the sixth floor. And
> no one can prove that he did no matter how hard they try. The only
> thing that connects LHO to the murder weapon is the serial number and
> not even the prints on the rifle will convince me. As SA Drain said,
> "Prints can be transferred to a weapon from a print card." And serial
> numbers can be altered and even changed completely
>
The print was lifted off the rifle before Oswald was killed so that
pretty much shoots that theory all to hell.
> Also, I will never believe that the weapon Lee ordered to kill Walker
> is the same rifle used to kill JFK and is , today, in the National
> Archives.
>
When someone doesn't want to believe the truth, they can always find
an excuse not to. CTs demonstrate that on this forum everyday.
Raymond
wrote:
> On Jul 9, 5:51 am, Raymond <Bluerhy...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jul 8, 11:43 pm, Dave Reitzes <dreit...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 8, 11:34 am, mercury <mercury100.ste...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > I see no reason why he couldn't simply make the shot from the window
> > > > straight down to Houston Street.
>
> > > > Mercury!
>
> > > He could have tried, although it would have been a more difficult
> > > shot:
>
> > >http://www.jfk-online.com/jfk100easy.html
>
> > > Dave!
>
> > I also believe that it would have been foolish to shot at the
> > motorcade as it was coming "toward" the TSBD. And I will never believe
> > that it was Oswald that fired that rifle found on the sixth floor. And
> > no one can prove that he did no matter how hard they try. The only
> > thing that connects LHO to the murder weapon is the serial number and
> > not even the prints on the rifle will convince me. As SA Drain said,
> > "Prints can be transferred to a weapon from a print card." And serial
> > numbers can be altered and even changed completely
>
> > Also, I will never believe that the weapon Lee ordered to kill Walker
> > is the same rifle used to kill JFK and is , today, in the National
> > Archives.
>
> You should read the short story, "No Particular Night or Morning" by Ray
> Bradbury.
Thanks for the tip . I wll read the books that you recommended just as
soon as I finish "My Pet Goat." GW Bush suggested I read it. He says it's
exciting and every parent should read it to their younuns.
>
> Or, better still, "Obstinate Uncle Otis" by Robert Arthur.
>
> Both stories are about individuals who are capable of disbelieving the
> entire universe out of existence -- Uncle Otis perhaps in a more literal
> sense than the character in the Bradbury story -- by sheer force of will.
>
> You might also try looking at a very short piece written by a mid-
> twentieth century humorist named Corey Ford called, "How To Guess Your
> Age".
>
> It's about a man who would rather believe that the staircases are getting
> higher in his building and that the print is getting smaller in his
> newspapers than to believe that he is getting older.
>
> "Even the weather is changing. It's colder in winter and the summers are
> hotter than they used to be. I'd go away, if it wasn't so far. Snow is
> heavier when I try to shovel it, and I have to put on rubbers whenever I
> go out, because rain today is wetter than the rain we used to get.
> Draughts are more severe too. It must be the way they build windows now."- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Grizzlie Antagonist
Who's reading it to you?
Raymond
Grizzlie Antagonist
If I had a "wife" and you were one of her "youn'uns", that would make
me your father, at least in the legal sense, if not in the biological
one.