Jump to content
The Education Forum

Is the Malcolm Wallace fingerprint in the sniper's nest a "myth"?


Terry Adams
 Share

Recommended Posts

"I see you've fallen for the myth about Malcolm Wallace's prints being on the TSBD boxes. Of course, Wallace's prints were not on any of those boxes, because the only unidentified print on ANY of the TSBD boxes (per Commission Exhibit 3131) was a palmprint, not a fingerprint. The Wallace thing is a hoax". Simple as that. David Von Pein

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have always been under the impression that this print was found in the sniper's nest. I have even read where different experts declared it to be that of Malcolm Wallace. Isn't that how most members have seen it. I am somewhat bewildered to hear, now, that there was no such print ever found. I read the pages that Mr. Von Pein posted from the Warren Report which stated that only a palm print was left unidentified. Is there other information substantiating that a fingerprint existed. I certainly would appreciate some input from others on this forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Robert Morrow

In 2011 I interviewed Kasey Wertheim, an experienced fingerprint examiner, and he told me that in NO WAY was the Mac Wallace fingerprint a match. http://www.clpex.com/images/Darby-Wallace-Analysis/Erroneous-Match.htm

The fingerprint examiners seemed to be split on this topic. About 1/2 say its a match and the other 1/2 say it is not one.

I just don't know. Waiting for some more fingerprint examiners to take a look at it.

So if its not a match ... maybe Malcolm Wallace was on the Grassy Knoll after all...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have always been under the impression that this print was found in the sniper's nest. I have even read where different experts declared it to be that of Malcolm Wallace. Isn't that how most members have seen it. I am somewhat bewildered to hear, now, that there was no such print ever found. I read the pages that Mr. Von Pein posted from the Warren Report which stated that only a palm print was left unidentified. Is there other information substantiating that a fingerprint existed. I certainly would appreciate some input from others on this forum.

There was a long thread on this some years back, with input from Walt Brown, which is probably the definitive discussion. While Darby may have been mistaken in his identification of the print as Wallace's, Bugliosi's argument against it, which has been repeated ad nauseum by Von Pein, is the true hoax.

Bugliosi let on that he'd actually studied this aspect of the case, when he was clearly too lazy to do so. The simplest reading of the books and articles on this subject make clear that the print Darby ID'ed as Wallace's print was not the still unidentified print discussed by the FBI and WC, but, if I recall it correctly, a print at one time considered to have been that of Robert Studebaker. In other words, Bugliosi was blowing smoke: there was no switcheroo from palm print to fingerprint.

Edited by Pat Speer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd recommend some internet searching in Richard Bartholomew and the subject of the Wallace prints and unidentified TSBD prints. He has written articles on that which are probably the best

reference. Certainly there were unidentified prints on various boxes...the WC brought that up as an issue towards the end of its tenure, sending people scurrying around to try and match

them to TSBD employees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pat, thank you, I do remember the thread. That is what I am arguing here,there was/were a fingerprint(s)! Obviously, at least according to the Warren Commission, there was an unidentified palm print as well. I just had to bring this up again because newcomers, at least, need not be mislead as to the evidence. And, as Larry indicated, this can be verified through research.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those going to Dallas in November, Joan will be speaking on Wallace, the fingerprint issue and her book. Early on I shared all the relevant information I had collected and I know she

has spoken with Richard B. and done additional work so her presentation should be the most up to date thing on the subject. I had asked her to present on Wallace and she

graciously agreed to the topic.

-- Larry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why not propose a project to Apple and see if their advanced fingerprint scan software agrees or disagrees with the match?

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT5949?viewlocale=en_US&locale=en_US

That's a great idea Chris. From what I remember about the boxes, it was determined from the photo evidence - (Dillard/Powell - HSCA) - that the box on top of the window sill - said to have been used by the Sixth Floor Sniper as a gun rest, was actually placed there after the last shot and was not used to balance the rifle at all.

That box and the other boxes moved around the window before and after the shooting - were taken into evidence but never covered - so everyone who handled them left their prints on them - mostly cops - but also whoever moved the boxes around the sniper's nest after the last shot was fired.

Since the finger prints were placed into evidence and released by the JFK Act they are now in the public domain and should be found on line or at the JFK Collection at the NARA.

All of the fingerprint evidence should be scanned by the latest technology and pumped into a computer and compared to other fingerprints on record to see if those that are unidentified can be identified.

When the FBI and the Warren Commission requested that all of the TSBD employees be fingerprinted Truly and Shelley balked, and rather than ordering them to do just that, they agreed to only take fingerprints of those employees who had access to the Sixth Floor, but those prints should be available.

Also, perhaps we can get an informed opinion of the fingerprint evidence from Dallas Police detective Joe Mayberry. If anyone in Dallas can go to the following presentation on Thursday, Oct. 3, at 12:15 PM at Klyde Warren Park's outdoor Salon (2012 Woodall Rodgers Freeway) retired Dallas Police detective and fingerprint specialist Joe Mayberry will "discuss the forensics behind the crime scene evidence from the John F. Kennedy murder investigation."

I found a notice for that posted on line at the Dallas Morning News Reading and Games Room.

Can a forum member who lives in Dallas attend that event, ask Joe Mayberry some questions and get back to us?

BK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can learn something new every day. All my life, from watching countless movies and TV shows about crime and punishment, I've labored under the false impression that fingerprinting is a fairly exact science. Now I find that fingerprinting experts can disagree over a fingerprint as a match.

This makes me wonder how many innocent people over the years in this country and others have been railroaded not only by corrupt cops but by so-called fingerprint matches.

Is all the importance attached to DNA matches also a bunch of hooey?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ron,

I think the odds that any two individuals would have the same DNA profile are about 7000/1.

So DNA alone, should not be the only evidence that convicts a person for an offense. In conjunction with other evidence it might be overwhelming. I.E. an individual was arrested before the DNA profile was known.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't it about how much material one has to work with and how many matches that determine a legal match?

The uniqueness of fingerprints and DNA is not really disputed. (?) A number of ex deathrow inmates are probably happy about that.

Isn't the apple personal tracking devices' fingerprinting technology at this stage quite rudimentary? Still it probably won't be long before a growing database of finferprints are ported to the NSA. (Who cares? Nothing to worry about. (sorry, I read too much Snowden/Greenwald.))

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John,

I don't have any personal knowledge of the details of the software/hardware package that does the scanning. I'm merely suggesting that it's a possible option. In it's present state, I'd assume though that the application is more objective than a human being. It has no preference for an outcome that is pro CT or pro LN theory. It doesn't worry about what other computers might think about it's results.

Here is a brief explanation of the technology:

http://www.macworld.com/article/2048514/the-iphone-5s-fingerprint-reader-what-you-need-to-know.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...