Jump to content
The Education Forum

Recommended Posts

Much has been made of the fact that the the FBI went to Miller's Funeral Home and fingerprinted LHO. The inference is that the FBI used those prints to place them on the rifle so LHO would look more guilty. I was just thinking about this and the thought occured to me that there are either LATENT prints or KNOWN prints. For those of you who don't know Latent means (unknown) ie. the fingerprint expert doesn't know who the print belongs to. Everytime you touch something, the print you leave behind would be a latent print. Because a crime scene investigator who would lifts the print and a expert that would classify the print wouldn't know who it belonged to. The expert would have to compare it to known fingerprints in order to either find or eliminate a person as a suspect.

(Correct me Al is this is not right, you have more experience than I do.)

When the FBI went to the funeral home and fingerprinted LHO they didn't have to use fingerprint ink to put his prints on the rifle. All they had to do was take Oswald's hand and touch it to the rifle where they wanted to find his prints, and then protect the rifle like they would in a regular investigation till they got it back to the FBI Lab where they could lift, and compare the "latent" print with "known" prints of LHO and low and behold they had their "EVIDENCE."

Now the way we know that the FBI fingerprinted LHO is by word of mouth. The mouth being Paul Goody a Funeral Director for Miller's Funeral Home. Goody stated that the FBI came to the funeral home I believe on the night of the 25th and fingerprinted Oswald. Not calling Mr. Goody a xxxx, but he has been wrong about some of his other statement and has been known to elaborate a little. When Oswald was exhumed in 1981 Mr. Goody stated that he was in the autopsy room at the time that tha pathologist performed the examination on Oswald. Actually he was outside the room and was not allowed in the room except to open the casket so the autopsy team could remove Oswalds body for the examination. Mr Goody also stated that he did not observe the incision in the top of Oswald's head that had been made in order to remove Oswald's brain during the first autopsy that was performed by Dr. Rose. But yet the report and notes from the exhumation autopsy team makes note of and describes the incision.

I don't know why the FBI would be fingerprinting Oswald after he was dead but I don't believe it was to place his prints on the rifle.

Comments welcome!!!!

Mike

Link to post
Share on other sites
[

Now the way we know that the FBI fingerprinted LHO is by word of mouth. The mouth being Paul Goody a Funeral Director for Miller's Funeral Home. Goody stated that the FBI came to the funeral home I believe on the night of the 25th and fingerprinted Oswald. Not calling Mr. Goody a xxxx, but he has been wrong about some of his other statement and has been known to elaborate a little.

Comments welcome!!!!

Mike

Mike, I share your opinion about Paul Goody-goody twoshoes. Nothing he says can be considered reliable, including his claim about FBI fingerprinting.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Much has been made of the fact that the the FBI went to Miller's Funeral Home and fingerprinted LHO. The inference is that the FBI used those prints to place them on the rifle so LHO would look more guilty. I was just thinking about this and the thought occured to me that there are either LATENT prints or KNOWN prints. For those of you who don't know Latent means (unknown) ie. the fingerprint expert doesn't know who the print belongs to. Everytime you touch something, the print you leave behind would be a latent print. Because a crime scene investigator who would lifts the print and a expert that would classify the print wouldn't know who it belonged to. The expert would have to compare it to known fingerprints in order to either find or eliminate a person as a suspect.

(Correct me Al is this is not right, you have more experience than I do.)

When the FBI went to the funeral home and fingerprinted LHO they didn't have to use fingerprint ink to put his prints on the rifle. All they had to do was take Oswald's hand and touch it to the rifle where they wanted to find his prints, and then protect the rifle like they would in a regular investigation till they got it back to the FBI Lab where they could lift, and compare the "latent" print with "known" prints of LHO and low and behold they had their "EVIDENCE."

Now the way we know that the FBI fingerprinted LHO is by word of mouth. The mouth being Paul Goody a Funeral Director for Miller's Funeral Home. Goody stated that the FBI came to the funeral home I believe on the night of the 25th and fingerprinted Oswald. Not calling Mr. Goody a xxxx, but he has been wrong about some of his other statement and has been known to elaborate a little. When Oswald was exhumed in 1981 Mr. Goody stated that he was in the autopsy room at the time that tha pathologist performed the examination on Oswald. Actually he was outside the room and was not allowed in the room except to open the casket so the autopsy team could remove Oswalds body for the examination. Mr Goody also stated that he did not observe the incision in the top of Oswald's head that had been made in order to remove Oswald's brain during the first autopsy that was performed by Dr. Rose. But yet the report and notes from the exhumation autopsy team makes note of and describes the incision.

I don't know why the FBI would be fingerprinting Oswald after he was dead but I don't believe it was to place his prints on the rifle.

Comments welcome!!!!

Mike

Mike,

I can think of no legitimate reason for printing a corpse after the person had already been printed during a booking process at the jail.

Now, if there had been a reason, such as manufacturing new print cards to exchange for old print cards, because the old cards on file might not match the ones done by the DPD....????

As far as the ink on the hands?

Of course there was no need for ink to place prints on a rifle, but, to suport the supposed reason for the visit, there would have to be ink left on the hands when they were done.

Chuck

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chuck;

True, very true but I have seen the pictures of the fingerprint cards and they do not look like they came from a corpse. Fingerprinting a corpse is not as easy thing to do as printing a live subject. I have experience in this, as fingerprinting is one of my main duties. I fingerprint mostly live subjects but I have been called on to fingerprint corpses also. The prints that I have seen that are supposed to come from LHO were not taken from a dead body. They are normal fingerprints and were not taken with the use of fingerprint spoons.

Best Regards;

Mike

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
×
×
  • Create New...