Post by John Duncan on Oct 23, 2019 21:25:08 GMT -5
impiousdigest.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/NA014784.jpg
This was written by Gil Jesus in September 2008 in response to LNer nonsense. It is about the alleged murder weapon and fingerprints.
Quote on
The rifle was in the hands of the Dallas Police TWICE. Now prove to us that IDENTIFIABLE prints were on the rifle BEFORE it was sent to the FBI.
LATONA RECEIVED A RIFLE WITH "NO LATENT PRINTS OF VALUE":
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, you were saying that you had worked over that rifle by applying a gray powder to it. Did you develop any fingerprints?
Mr. LATONA. I was not successful in developing any prints at all on the weapon. I also had one of the firearms examiners dismantle the weapon and I processed the complete weapon, all parts, everything
else. And no latent prints of value were developed.
Mr. EISENBERG. Does that include the clip?
Mr. LATONA. That included the clip, that included the bolt, it included the underside of the barrel which is covered by the stock.
Mr. EISENBERG. Were cartridge cases furnished to you at that time?
Mr. LATONA. They were, which I processed, and from which I got no prints.
Mr. EISENBERG. Therefore, the net result of your work on Exhibit 139 was that you could not produce an identifiable print?
Mr. LATONA. That's correct.
Mr. EISENBERG. So as of November 23, you had not found an identifiable print on Exhibit 139?
Mr. LATONA. That is right. (4 H 23)
Now, Timmy, what part of this testimony don't you understand?
The Dallas Police reported that there were no prints on the rifle. The FBI said that there were no prints "of value" on the rifle. The two agencies on which the whole "Oswald-did-it case" depends said that not only they couldn't find Oswald's prints on the rifle, they couldn't find ANYBODY'S prints on the rifle, BUT YOU TROLLS KNOW BETTER....
So tell us, did they lie? And why would they lie about NOT finding any identifiable prints, if there WERE identifiable prints of Oswald's on the rifle?
Then the rifle comes back to the DPD and all of a sudden, there's a "palm print". Years later they "discover" the partial prints from photographs that were taken whenever.
Quote off
This was written by Gil Jesus in September 2008 in response to LNer nonsense. It is about the alleged murder weapon and fingerprints.
Quote on
The rifle was in the hands of the Dallas Police TWICE. Now prove to us that IDENTIFIABLE prints were on the rifle BEFORE it was sent to the FBI.
LATONA RECEIVED A RIFLE WITH "NO LATENT PRINTS OF VALUE":
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, you were saying that you had worked over that rifle by applying a gray powder to it. Did you develop any fingerprints?
Mr. LATONA. I was not successful in developing any prints at all on the weapon. I also had one of the firearms examiners dismantle the weapon and I processed the complete weapon, all parts, everything
else. And no latent prints of value were developed.
Mr. EISENBERG. Does that include the clip?
Mr. LATONA. That included the clip, that included the bolt, it included the underside of the barrel which is covered by the stock.
Mr. EISENBERG. Were cartridge cases furnished to you at that time?
Mr. LATONA. They were, which I processed, and from which I got no prints.
Mr. EISENBERG. Therefore, the net result of your work on Exhibit 139 was that you could not produce an identifiable print?
Mr. LATONA. That's correct.
Mr. EISENBERG. So as of November 23, you had not found an identifiable print on Exhibit 139?
Mr. LATONA. That is right. (4 H 23)
Now, Timmy, what part of this testimony don't you understand?
The Dallas Police reported that there were no prints on the rifle. The FBI said that there were no prints "of value" on the rifle. The two agencies on which the whole "Oswald-did-it case" depends said that not only they couldn't find Oswald's prints on the rifle, they couldn't find ANYBODY'S prints on the rifle, BUT YOU TROLLS KNOW BETTER....
So tell us, did they lie? And why would they lie about NOT finding any identifiable prints, if there WERE identifiable prints of Oswald's on the rifle?
Then the rifle comes back to the DPD and all of a sudden, there's a "palm print". Years later they "discover" the partial prints from photographs that were taken whenever.
Quote off