Questions for Glen Sample

John Simkin · December 15, 2006

Glen:
Re your fingerprint expert out there who said there was no match. I have a couple of questions: Everything I know about your work on the print came from J. Harrison. The times we spoke on the phone I meant to ask you these questions but got sidetracked. (Should have made notes to self

1. How was your guy's study done? By this I mean was he presented with the latent and the known Wallace print, in a "blind" fashion, like Nathan Darby was? Or did he know exactly what he was observing?

2. What were his credentials? You know of course that Nathan was not only a top certified expert, but that he taught the science of fingerprinting to police officers in Austin for many years. Did your guy even remotely compare?

3. J told me many times that because you obtained this known Wallace print from Austin's Department of Public Safety "with no case to which to attach said print" (J. Harrison) , that this consitituted a violation of DPS' policy, which has since rendered a dead end for anyone else to now obtain this print. I tried, at Nathan's request, many avenues to obtain a second print for him after his home was illegally entered and this entire Wallace file was stolen. (A burglar alarm was bypassed and nothing else was taken, causing Nathan to fear that his life may have been in danger). Can you comment on how you obtained the print? And the alleged ramifications of same?

4. When you visited Nathan what was it that caused you to change your mind and agree that there was indeed a match?

I probably have more questions, but thank you, in advance, for responses to these.

Dawn

Dawn: Re your fingerprint expert out there who said there was no match. I have a couple of questions: Everything I know about your work on the print came from J. Harrison. The times we spoke on the phone I meant to ask you these questions but got sidetracked. (Should have made notes to self
1. How was your guy's study done? By this I mean was he presented with the latent and the known Wallace print, in a "blind" fashion, like Nathan Darby was? Or did he know exactly what he was observing?

I e-mailed a regional fingerprint organization called SCAFO http://www.scafo.org/ and requested assistance in identifying a print from an old crime scene. My request was answered by a young Police officer from San Bernardino P.D. The prints I had were horrible. The young officer and his superior did what they could do with what I had. To that point, I had not mentioned the JFK case. Later, I did mention the circumstances of the prints, something I now realize to be unprofessional and counterproductive. However, the intrigue moved these two officers to request a better fingerprint from Austin. When they received the print, they again examined for a match, but to no avail. I was not permitted to keep the print. No mention was made to me about any violation of department rules, but I got the impression that they were stretching something to get this print. I was totally convinced by these men that the print was not a match, although they did admit that there were several points that did match. As they explained it, there were also several points that did not match.

Dawn: 2. What were his credentials? You know of course that Nathan was not only a top certified expert, but that he taught the science of fingerprinting to police officers in Austin for many years. Did your guy even remotely compare?

I am well aware of Nathan's career and his experience. Brilliant indeed! My guys were fingerprint officers, who routinely investigated crime scenes. Nothing spectacular, but I was totally convinced that we had reached a dead end with the prints. What's more, I had nothing to go on, since the Austin print was kept by the S.B. officers and they later told me that they were ordered not to go any further with the case. Eventually I later came into possession of clearer prints from various individuals involved with J. and his group. How I wish that I would have made contact with Nathan Darby a long time ago.

Dawn: 3. J told me many times that because you obtained this known Wallace print from Austin's Department of Public Safety "with no case to which to attach said print" (J. Harrison), that this consitituted a violation of DPS' policy, which has since rendered a dead end for anyone else to now obtain this print. I tried, at Nathan's request, many avenues to obtain a second print for him after his home was illegally entered and this entire Wallace file was stolen. (A burglar alarm was bypassed and nothing else was taken, causing Nathan to fear that his life may have been in danger). Can you comment on how you obtained the print? And the alleged ramifications of same?

That may be true, I'm not aware of any of these ramifications, but I'm pretty sure that the Wallace print we now have, the one

Nathan worked with, is clear enough. What is NOT clear, however, is the box print latent. That is, in my opinion, where the problem is. Nathan told us about the break in of his home. I felt bad for him as he was home alone for much of the time and

this would be disturbing to anyone.

By the way, J and I had many wonderful dialogues for quite a long period of time. What a splendid researcher! Did he ever tell you that it was I who put him in touch with Stephen Pegues? J. was terribly upset and shaken the day Stephen died, as was I. Pegues was one of the sources of the "Estes" letters that Mark and I made public and later included in a later edition of "The Men on the Sixth Floor." The other source of those long secret files is a member of this forum........

Dawn: 4. When you visited Nathan what was it that caused you to change your mind and agree that there was indeed a match?

Well, first and foremost was Nathan's 100% positive assurance that there was a match. I first noticed that in the "Guilty Men" documentary, and then again when I reached him by phone. When Mark and I visited him, he was no less confident in his work. Step by step he took us through the process. I still have many pages of his hand written notes and diagrams. And while I am convinced that there is a match, the quality of the box 29 print is such that we may never get a concensus. But in my mind, Nathan IS the concensus!