Jump to content
The Education Forum
  • Announcements

    • Evan Burton

      OPEN REGISTRATION BY EMAIL ONLY !!! PLEASE CLICK ON THIS TITLE FOR INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR REGISTRATION!:   06/03/2017

      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team
Sign in to follow this  
Vince Palamara

Oswald's fingerprints on rifle?

Recommended Posts

Hi Vince. This examination in the video you posted was done by a person who claimed that the suicide note left by Vince Foster (whom Bill Clinton murdered, as claimed by the craziest of right wing nuts) was forged.

Scalice's kooky theory is disproved by investigation which include one led by a Republican ,which condlude that Foster committed suicide.

  • An August 12, 1994, report by Congressman William F. Clinger Jr., then the ranking Republican on the House Committee on Government Operations, concluding that "all available facts lead to the undeniable conclusion that Vincent W. Foster, Jr. took his own life in Fort Marcy Park, Virginia on July 20, 1993."

But that biographical fact aside, a legend in FBI forenics could not see the "points of identity" that Scalice saw. HIs name is George Bonebrake a man who was supervisor of the Laten Fingerprint Section at the FBI, retiting in 1978. bio

I wrote a thread about this in 2011: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=17865

Edited by Andric Perez

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Andric, for beating me to the punch. Have you found anything to suggest Bonebrake couldn't find the points of similarity? My understanding is that he rejected Scalice's methodology of mixing and matching numerous photos until he had enough points to claim he had a match. To Bonebrake and the FBI this was a Bozo no-no.

It's also of interest that Scalice, as far as I can tell, never published his results...anywhere. I mean, why the heck not? This is supposedly ground-breaking information, and yet, here, more than 20 years later, all we have is his WORD for it?

As you probably know, this is something I've been writing about for awhile... How is it that the LNs attack Wecht for his paid appearance in a TV show about aliens, whilst simultaneously propping up Baden, who took the big bucks and defended O.J. AND Phil Spector, and Scalice, who took the bucks and joined forces with the Clinton is Hitler crowd. Ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Andric, for beating me to the punch. Have you found anything to suggest Bonebrake couldn't find the points of similarity? My understanding is that he rejected Scalice's methodology of mixing and matching numerous photos until he had enough points to claim he had a match. To Bonebrake and the FBI this was a Bozo no-no.

It's also of interest that Scalice, as far as I can tell, never published his results...anywhere. I mean, why the heck not? This is supposedly ground-breaking information, and yet, here, more than 20 years later, all we have is his WORD for it?

As you probably know, this is something I've been writing about for awhile... How is it that the LNs attack Wecht for his paid appearance in a TV show about aliens, whilst simultaneously propping up Baden, who took the big bucks and defended O.J. AND Phil Spector, and Scalice, who took the bucks and joined forces with the Clinton is Hitler crowd. Ridiculous.

Pat, I'm unsure as to why Bonebrake found Scalise's claim of 18 points of identity insufficient to reach a positive conclusion. PBS did not tell us which technique each expert used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right, Andric. I found the transcript. Bonebrake told them the prints were not clear enough. He said nothing about Scalice's methodology. It's intriguing, nonetheless, that they don't say if they showed these prints to Bonebrake after Scalice made his "breakthrough" or before. I suspect it was after, and that Bonebrake totally rejected Scalice's ID of Oswald.

Here's the transcript:

NARRATOR: Amid decades of accusations that the police had planted the palm print on the rifle, the latent fingerprints on the trigger guard were largely ignored. But 30 years later, a complete set of the long forgotten photographs of the rifle and of the latent fingerprints came to light.

A former high-ranking FBI fingerprint expert who examined the prints for FRONTLINE said they were simply not clear enough to make any identification. But Vincent Scalice, the House Assassinations Committee expert, came to a very different conclusion.

VINCENT SCALICE, Fingerprint Expert: There were a total of four photographs in all. And I began to examine them and I saw two faint prints. And as I examined them, I realized that these prints had been taken at different exposures and it was necessary for me to utilize all of the photographs to compare against the ink prints.

As I examined them, I found that by maneuvering the photographs in different positions, I was able to pick up some details on one photograph and some details on another photograph. Using all of the photographs at different contrasts, I was able to find in the neighborhood of about 18 points of identity between the two prints.

Well, I feel that this is a major breakthrough in this investigation because we’re able for the first time to actually say that these are definitely the fingerprints of Lee Harvey Oswald and that they are on the rifle. There is no doubt about it

Edited by Pat Speer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The important points regarding Oswald's "print" on the Carcano is the fact the FBI didn't report finding it originally, and when taken in conjunction with the nitrate tests, which proved conclusively that Oswald hadn't fired a rifle on the day of the assassination, it is extremely questionable that the print discovered by Lt. Day got there legitimately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for the clarifications, guys

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The important points regarding Oswald's "print" on the Carcano is the fact the FBI didn't report finding it originally, and when taken in conjunction with the nitrate tests, which proved conclusively that Oswald hadn't fired a rifle on the day of the assassination, it is extremely questionable that the print discovered by Lt. Day got there legitimately.

Don,

I'm going from memory here, but didn't Oswald's mortician say that some FBI types came there late at night and insisted on being alone with Oswald's body for a few minutes, and that when they left there was lots of ink on Oswald's hands, as though they had taken his palm and finger prints so that those prints could be transferred to something?

It's reasonable to assume that Oswald was fingerprinted while still alive at the police station, so the authorities wouldn't have needed to take them from his dead body for identification purposes, I wouldn't think...

--Tommy :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The important points regarding Oswald's "print" on the Carcano is the fact the FBI didn't report finding it originally, and when taken in conjunction with the nitrate tests, which proved conclusively that Oswald hadn't fired a rifle on the day of the assassination, it is extremely questionable that the print discovered by Lt. Day got there legitimately.

Don,

I'm going from memory here, but didn't Oswald's mortician say that some FBI types came there late at night and insisted on being alone with Oswald's body for a few minutes, and that when they left there was lots of ink on Oswald's hands, as though they had taken his palm and finger prints so that those prints could be transferred to something?

It's reasonable to assume that Oswald was fingerprinted while still alive at the police station, so the authorities wouldn't have needed to take them from his dead body for identification purposes, I wouldn't think...

--Tommy :sun

My recollection is that the DPD admitted finger-printing Oswald after his death, and that this was standard for homicide cases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tommy,

Yes, Paul Groody made that claim. You would think they'd fingerprint Oswald at the station, but that way certainly sounds deliciously dramatic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right, Andric. I found the transcript. Bonebrake told them the prints were not clear enough. He said nothing about Scalice's methodology. It's intriguing, nonetheless, that they don't say if they showed these prints to Bonebrake after Scalice made his "breakthrough" or before. I suspect it was after, and that Bonebrake totally rejected Scalice's ID of Oswald.

Here's the transcript:

NARRATOR: Amid decades of accusations that the police had planted the palm print on the rifle, the latent fingerprints on the trigger guard were largely ignored. But 30 years later, a complete set of the long forgotten photographs of the rifle and of the latent fingerprints came to light.

A former high-ranking FBI fingerprint expert who examined the prints for FRONTLINE said they were simply not clear enough to make any identification. But Vincent Scalice, the House Assassinations Committee expert, came to a very different conclusion.

VINCENT SCALICE, Fingerprint Expert: There were a total of four photographs in all. And I began to examine them and I saw two faint prints. And as I examined them, I realized that these prints had been taken at different exposures and it was necessary for me to utilize all of the photographs to compare against the ink prints.

As I examined them, I found that by maneuvering the photographs in different positions, I was able to pick up some details on one photograph and some details on another photograph. Using all of the photographs at different contrasts, I was able to find in the neighborhood of about 18 points of identity between the two prints.

Well, I feel that this is a major breakthrough in this investigation because we’re able for the first time to actually say that these are definitely the fingerprints of Lee Harvey Oswald and that they are on the rifle. There is no doubt about it

Thanks Pat. This is why fingerprinting and other forensic fields, perhaps with the exception of DNA testing, are so unreliable. There is too much room for subjectivity. A group of distinguished scholars recently agreed that,:

"the traditional forensic sciences in general, and the pattern identification disciplines, such as fingerprint, firearm, tool mark and handwriting identification evidence in particular, do not currently possess—and absolutely must develop—a well-established scientific foundation."

By the way, PBS should have conducted a blind test. You don't tell a right wing nut, "Can you tell me if these are the the fingerprints of a left-wing Communist on the rifle?". Blind tests are one of the things that can improve the accuracy of forensic tests.

Edited by Andric Perez

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×