Warren Commission (04 of 26): Hearings Vol. IV (of 15)
Part 7
I now hand you a carton, somewhat larger in area than the 641 which we were just discussing, with various markings on it which I won't discuss, but which is marked Box "D" in red pencil at the upper left-hand corner of the bottom of the box.
Are you familiar with this carton, Mr. Latona?
Mr. DULLES. Has that been admitted?
Mr. EISENBERG. It has not so far been admitted.
Mr. LATONA. This Box D, I received this along with Box A for purposes of examining for latent prints.
Mr. EISENBERG. Was that examined by you or under your supervision for that purpose?
Mr. LATONA. Yes, it was.
Mr. EISENBERG. When was that received?
Mr. LATONA. That was received on the 27th of November 1963.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have this admitted as 648?
Mr. DULLES. What date?
Mr. LATONA. 27th.
Mr. EISENBERG. That is 5 days after the assassination?
Mr. LATONA. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this admitted as 648?
Mr. DULLES. It shall be admitted.
(The box referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 648, and received in evidence.)
Mr. DULLES. Can you identify it in some further way? I think there are some markings on here.
Mr. EISENBERG. There is "Box D." It is a little hard to read. It says "1 40 N TH&DO"----
Mr. DULLES. "New People and Progress."
Mr. EISENBERG. Apparently referring to the name of the textbook. This is not a Rolling Reader carton.
Mr. DULLES. No.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, when you received this box, could you tell whether it had been previously examined for latent fingerprints?
Mr. LATONA. A portion of it had.
Mr. EISENBERG. And can you tell us what portion had been?
Mr. LATONA. The bottom evidently, because a piece had been cut out.
Mr. EISENBERG. You are pointing to a place on the bottom of the box which is to the left of the point at which I have affixed the sticker "Commission Exhibit No. 648," immediately to the left of that point?
Mr. LATONA. That is correct.
Mr. EISENBERG. Was that portion of the box given to you?
Mr. LATONA. Yes, it was.
Mr. EISENBERG. With the box?
Mr. LATONA. At the time we got the box.
Mr. EISENBERG. I think I have that.
I now hand you what appears to be a portion of a cardboard carton and a piece of tape with various writings, included among which is "From top of box Oswald apparently sat on to fire gun."
Do you recognize this piece of paper, Mr. Latona?
Mr. LATONA. Yes, I do. This is a piece of paper that evidently had been cut from the box.
Mr. EISENBERG. Does that fit into the box?
Mr. LATONA. It does.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have this admitted as 649?
Mr. DULLES. It shall be admitted as 649.
(The piece of carton referred to was marked commission exhibit no. 649, and received in evidence.)
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, did you find any identifiable prints on the cardboard carton 648?
Mr. LATONA. Yes; in addition to this one which has been cut out and which had been covered by a piece of lifting tape, there were two fingerprints developed in addition to that one.
Mr. EISENBERG. Two Identifiable Fingerprints?
Mr. LATONA. That is right.
Mr. EISENBERG. Palmprints?
Mr. LATONA. No; they were fingerprints.
Mr. EISENBERG. I mean were there any palmprints?
Mr. LATONA. There were no palmprints.
Mr. EISENBERG. How did you process this box?
Mr. LATONA. By the use of iodine fumes and silver nitrate solution.
Mr. EISENBERG. Did you find evidence of processing prior to your receipt apart from the exhibit which is now 649?
Mr. LATONA. Yes; this particular area which has been cut out had been processed with powder.
Mr. EISENBERG. Was there powder on other areas of the box?
Mr. LATONA. I don't believe there was.
Mr. EISENBERG. Did you identify any of the prints on the carton 648 as belonging to a specific individual?
Mr. LATONA. The two fingerprints which were developed on commission exhibit 648 by silver nitrate are not identified as anyone's, but the print which appears on the piece which was cut out has been identified.
Mr. EISENBERG. That is 649?
Mr. LATONA. Of exhibit 648--which is exhibit 649----
Mr. EISENBERG. Yes?
Mr. LATONA. Which came from exhibit 648 has been identified as a palmprint of Harvey Lee Oswald, the right palmprint.
Mr. EISENBERG. That is Lee Harvey Oswald, Mr. Latona?
Mr. LATONA. That is right. Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Latona, can you tell how this was developed, this print on 649?
Mr. LATONA. The appearance is it was developed with black powder.
Mr. EISENBERG. You testified before concerning the aging of fingerprints. Considering the material on which this print was developed, 649, do you think you could form an opinion, any opinion at all, concerning the freshness or staleness of this print?
Mr. LATONA. Bearing in mind the fact that this is an absorbent material, and realizing, of course, that a print when it is left on a material of this type it starts to soak in. Now, the reason that we in the FBI do not use powder is because of the fact that in a short period of time the print will soak in so completely that there won't be any moisture left.
Accordingly when you brush powder across there won't be anything developed.
Under circumstances, bearing in mind that here the box was powdered, and a print was developed with powder, the conclusion is that this is comparatively a fresh print. Otherwise, it would not have developed.
We know, too, that we developed two other fingerprints on this by chemicals. How long a time had elapsed since the time this print was placed on there until the time that it would have soaked in so that the resulting examination would have been negative I don't know, but that could not have been too long.
Mr. EISENBERG. When you say "not too long," would you say not 3 weeks, or not 3 days, or not 3 hours?
Mr. LATONA. Very definitely I'd say not 3 days. I'd say not 3 weeks.
Mr. EISENBERG. And not 3 days, either?
Mr. LATONA. No; I don't believe so, because I don't think that the print on here that is touched on a piece of cardboard will stay on a piece of cardboard for 3 days.
Mr. EISENBERG. Would you bring that any closer?
Mr. LATONA. I am afraid I couldn't come any closer.
Mr. EISENBERG. 3 days?
Mr. LATONA. That is right.
Mr. EISENBERG. That would be the outermost limit that you can testify concerning?
Mr. LATONA. We have run some tests, and usually a minimum of 24 hours on a material of this kind, depending upon how heavy the sweat was, to try to say within a 24-hour period would be a guess on my part.
Mr. EISENBERG. I am not sure I understand your reference to a minimum of 24 hours.
Mr. LATONA. We have conducted tests with various types of materials as to how long it could be before we would not develop a latent print.
Mr. EISENBERG. Yes?
Mr. LATONA. Assuming that the same print was left on an object or a series of similar prints were left on an object, and powdering them, say, at intervals of every 4 hours or so, we would fail to develop a latent print of that particular type on that particular surface, say, within a 24-hour period.
Mr. EISENBERG. So that is a maximum of 24 hours?
Mr. LATONA. That is right.
Mr. EISENBERG. You would not care, you say, though----
Mr. LATONA. No.
Mr. EISENBERG. To employ that here, but your experiments produced a maximum time of 24 hours.
Mr. LATONA. Bear that out; yes. Like I say, undoubtedly this print was left on there--between the time that the print was left and the time that it was powdered could not have been too long a time. Otherwise, the print would not have developed with the clarity that it did.
Mr. EISENBERG. You identified that, I believe, as the right palmprint of Lee Harvey Oswald?
Mr. LATONA. That is right.
Mr. EISENBERG. What portion of the right palm was that, Mr. Latona?
Mr. LATONA. It happens to be the center part of the palm close to the wrist.
Mr. EISENBERG. Can you show how the palm must have lain on the 649, the part of the 648 carton, to produce that print?
Mr. LATONA. It would have been placed on there in this fashion.
Mr. EISENBERG. Now, you are pointing so that your hand is parallel with the long axis of the box, and at right angles to the short axis?
Mr. LATONA. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. And just the bottom of the palm rests on the box, isn't that correct?
Mr. LATONA. That is right.
Mr. EISENBERG. Now, before going to this fingerprint or this palmprint rather, Mr. Latona, we have palmprints, a palmprint here on this 649, and a finger and a palm on 641, and those are the only identified prints on these two objects.
Is it possible that Lee Harvey Oswald could have touched these two cartons at other places without leaving identifiable prints?
Mr. LATONA. He could have.
Mr. EISENBERG. And how would that come about?
Mr. LATONA. Simply by the fact that he did not have any material on his finger at the time he touched the box.
Mr. EISENBERG. So that you can touch a carton at one point and leave a print, and at another point not, is that right?
Mr. LATONA. Very definitely, that is true.
Mr. EISENBERG. And when you say he doesn't have any material, how would that come about? Will he have used his material up, or not produced material with the particular finger?
Mr. LATONA. He could have used it up and failed to produce it fast enough to have left anything at the time he touched that.
Mr. EISENBERG. Is it uncommon or common for you to find an object which a person has touched more than once but only left one identifiable print?
Mr. LATONA. It is very common.
Mr. EISENBERG. It is common?
Mr. LATONA. Especially in, for example, the reading of a letter, a long letter where the person would run his finger and index finger down the edges. You might find prints at the top and then you don't find any at the bottom.
Mr. EISENBERG. Of course. I am not asking you to draw an inference whether or not Oswald touched the box in more than one place, but I just want to explore whether he could have touched the box in more than one place----
Mr. LATONA. Yes; he could.
Mr. EISENBERG. And not left a second imprint?
Mr. LATONA. He very definitely could have and not left one.
Mr. DULLES. May I add for the record, Commission Exhibit 648 apparently contained books of Scott Foresman and Co., from Scott, Foresman & Co., "Building for Today, Pioneering for Tomorrow."
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, did you take a photograph of the lift, or the print rather, which we see in 649?
Mr. LATONA. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. And this is an accurate photograph?
Mr. LATONA. It is, it is a true reproduction of the print which appears on Commission Exhibit 649 and it is enlarged about a time and a half.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have this admitted as 650?
Mr. DULLES. It will be admitted.
(The photograph referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 650, for identification and received in evidence.)
Mr. EISENBERG. Did you take a photograph of the known palmprint and make a red circle around it, as you had in previous cases?
Mr. LATONA. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. To show what portion of the palm of Oswald that was?
Mr. LATONA. Showing a portion of the right palm.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have that admitted?
Mr. DULLES. It will be admitted as 651.
(The photograph referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 651, and received in evidence.)
Mr. EISENBERG. By the way, Mr. Latona, on 649 there seems to be a scotch tape or cellophane tape over the fingerprint, is that right?
Mr. LATONA. That is right.
Mr. EISENBERG. Now, apparently there was no attempt at a lift being made here?
Mr. LATONA. No. This evidently was a print which was developed directly on the paper itself. The employing of that adhesive material like scotch tape was to protect the print itself.
Had they tried to lift that up I am afraid they would have spoiled that because they would have lifted the fibers of the cardboard along with it.
Mr. EISENBERG. Is that why, you think, they didn't lift it?
Mr. LATONA. Yes; very definitely.
Mr. EISENBERG. By the way, did the Dallas police take photographs of the lift which we had earlier, the lift which was apparently taken from Exhibit 139, or to put the question--actually I am not interested in whether they took photographs of the lift; do you know whether they took photographs of the print?
Mr. LATONA. I don't know.
Mr. EISENBERG. Is it normal to take a photograph of a print before it is lifted?
Mr. LATONA. If it is fairly visible, yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. What is the purpose of the lift, as opposed to a photograph reproducing the print?
Mr. LATONA. The purpose of the lift is simply to insure the probability of getting a good record of the print, because a lot of times when you photograph a print, you have to go through the process of having it developed and then printed and at the same time by lifting it you may, that would be an additional security that you are getting the best results.
Then you take your choice as to which result turns out the best.
Mr. EISENBERG. So these are alternative routes?
Mr. LATONA. That is right.
Mr. EISENBERG. Lifting and photographing?
Mr. LATONA. That is right. Well, primarily our recommendation in the FBI is simply every procedure to photograph and then lift. Then you choose the one which you feel gives you the best results in your final photograph.
Mr. EISENBERG. Returning to the palmprint on 649, taken from the carton 648, did you make up a chart showing some of the points----
Mr. LATONA. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Which led you to your conclusion that that print was the print of Lee Harvey Oswald?
Mr. LATONA. Yes, I did.
Mr. EISENBERG. And was that prepared by you or under your supervision?
Mr. LATONA. Prepared by me--under my supervision.
Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this chart admitted as 652?
Mr. DULLES. It will be admitted as Exhibit 652.
(The chart referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 652, for identification and received in evidence.)
Mr. EISENBERG. Again, without going into detail, Mr. Latona, could you show us some of the more salient points which led you to your conclusion that the print on 649 was the palmprint of Lee Harvey Oswald?
Mr. LATONA. The easiest points visible here, right offhand, point No. 11 which is a black line that goes upward and its relationship to point No. 10. This is known as the short ending ridge as is seen here. Its relation to point No. 8. Point No. 11 is a black line going upward. Point No. 8 is a black line going downward and there are one, two, three, ridges which are between the two. Over here in the latent print you find No. 11 which is a black line going upward. It is a short line to the other end of the point No. 10, and three ridges intervene between that and point No. 8, which is going downward.
One ridge to the right and going in an upward direction is point No. 7--7, 8, 9, 10, 11.
Mr. DULLES. And you identified 11 points of similarity?
Mr. LATONA. That is right.
Mr. DULLES. Between the inked palmprint of Lee Harvey Oswald and this palmprint taken from this cardboard carton?
Mr. LATONA. That is right.
Mr. DULLES. What is this white line that goes up through each?
Mr. LATONA. This is a crease in the center of the palm, a flexure crease of that area.
Mr. DULLES. The palm did not touch the carton at that point?
Mr. LATONA. That is right.
Mr. DULLES. And those two creases are in approximately the same location in the photograph and in the latent palmprint?
Mr. LATONA. Very definitely.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, I now hand you two further cartons, which are labeled Box B and Box C, the B box being a 10 Rolling Reader, and the C box being also a Scott, Foresman box with printing on the back, "The Three Pre-primers," apparently the name of the book contained in this box.
Mr. DULLES. Primers.
(Discussion off the record.)
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, did you examine Box B, which I have handed to you, to determine whether it had on it any identifiable latent fingerprints?
Mr. LATONA. Yes, sir; I did.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I would like that box admitted as 653.
Mr. DULLES. It shall be admitted.
(Commission Exhibit No. 653 was marked and received in evidence.)
Mr. EISENBERG. How many identifiable prints did you find on this carton?
Mr. LATONA. There were seven fingerprints and two palmprints developed on Commission Exhibit 653.
Mr. EISENBERG. That is, identifiable prints?
Mr. LATONA. Identifiable prints.
Mr. EISENBERG. Did you identify any of those prints as belonging to a specific person?
Mr. LATONA. I did not.
Mr. EISENBERG. May I have 654 marked, Box C, Mr. Chairman? Did you also examine Box C?
Mr. LATONA. Box C, yes, sir.
Mr. EISENBERG. May I have that admitted as 654?
Mr. DULLES. It shall be admitted as Commission Exhibit 654.
(Commission Exhibit No. 654 was marked and received in evidence.)
Mr. EISENBERG. Did you find any latent identifiable prints on 654?
Mr. LATONA. I found two fingerprints and one palmprint.
Mr. EISENBERG. Did you identify them as belonging to a specific individual?
Mr. LATONA. I did not identify them.
Mr. EISENBERG. Now, did you attempt to identify them with Lee Harvey Oswald's known prints?
Mr. LATONA. Yes; and they are not Lee Harvey Oswald's prints.
Mr. EISENBERG. When did you receive cartons 653 and 654?
Mr. LATONA. I received cartons 653 and 654 November 27.
Mr. EISENBERG. That is, with the earlier cartons, Boxes A and D, which have received Commission exhibit numbers?
Mr. LATONA. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Had they been processed? Could you tell whether they had been processed for latent fingerprints?
Mr. LATONA. I couldn't tell whether they had been or not.
Mr. EISENBERG. You could not tell?
Mr. LATONA. Could not tell. They had the appearance of not having been processed.
Mr. EISENBERG. How did you process them in your laboratory, Mr. Latona?
Mr. LATONA. Iodine fumes and chemicals.
Mr. EISENBERG. Did the prints react to the iodine fumes at all?
Mr. LATONA. No.
Mr. EISENBERG. Just to the chemicals?
Mr. LATONA. The silver nitrate prints which were developed.
Mr. DULLES. Do you mean that the prints were of such a caliber and character that you couldn't make anything out of them, or that you couldn't identify them with any known----
Mr. LATONA. They are not identical with those that they have been compared with.
Mr. DULLES. But the prints themselves were perfectly good prints?
Mr. LATONA. Oh, yes; the prints are good but they are not Lee Harvey Oswald's.
Mr. EISENBERG. At any subsequent time have you attempted to identify any of these prints on the boxes as belonging to any person other than Lee Harvey Oswald?
Mr. LATONA. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. And how did you proceed with this attempt?
Mr. LATONA. An effort was made to locate the fingerprints of all people employed in that building in which these cartons were found, on the basis of the names and birth dates which were furnished, and we located the fingerprints of 16 of those people who work in that building.
Mr. EISENBERG. Yes?
Mr. LATONA. And the fingerprints of those 16 employees were compared with all of the latent prints which were developed on these boxes. They do not belong to any of those 16 people.
Mr. DULLES. May I ask for my information here, Mr. Eisenberg, were all of these cartons, including the last two admitted in evidence, were they found in the general area of the sixth floor of the building from which it is believed the shot was fired?
Mr. EISENBERG. Yes; Mr. Chairman. I believe that the two boxes which were just admitted into evidence as 653 and 654 were two of the three boxes which were apparently used as a rest by the assassin. They were apparently either the two bottom boxes, or there might have been an arrangement such as that one was stacked on top of the other, and the box earlier admitted into evidence was some evidence of that.
Mr. DULLES. And in any event, does our evidence indicate that these boxes were moved from their normal position on the sixth floor to a new position near the window?
Mr. EISENBERG. Again I believe it does indicate that at least the 10 Rolling Reader carton was moved. There was some other movement of boxes that morning, and I think they are still in the process of tracing down all of the movements.
Mr. DULLES. Thank you.
Mr. EISENBERG. I have a letter, Mr. Latona, from Mr. Hoover to Mr. Rankin, the general counsel of our Commission, setting forth the names of the employees of the TSBD whose prints were compared in this recent attempt you mentioned. Would you recognize the names?
Mr. LATONA. Yes; I would because I believe that report is based on my report.
Mr. EISENBERG. If I read the name could you verify whether these individuals were the ones whose prints you checked out against the latents?
Mr. LATONA. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Haddon Spurgeon Aiken?
Mr. LATONA. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Jack Charles Cason?
Mr. LATONA. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Warren Cason?
Mr. LATONA. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Jack Edwin Doughterty?
Mr. LATONA. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Charles Douglas Givens?
Mr. LATONA. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mary Madeline Hollis?
Mr. LATONA. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. James Earl Jarman?
Mr. LATONA. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Spaulden Earnest Jones?
Mr. LATONA. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Herbert L. Junker?
Mr. LATONA. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Billy Nolan Lovelady?
Mr. LATONA. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Joe R. Molina?
Mr. LATONA. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Edward Shields?
Mr. LATONA. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Joyce Maurine Stansberg?
Mr. LATONA. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Roy Sansom Truly?
Mr. LATONA. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Lloyd R. Viles?
Mr. LATONA. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Troy Eugene West?
Mr. LATONA. Correct.
Mr. EISENBERG. Now as I understand it, these employees were not selected because any particular suspicion fell on them, but merely because of all the employees, those were the ones whose cards you knew you had in your files?
Mr. LATONA. That is right.
Mr. EISENBERG. And it was just accidental----
Mr. LATONA. That is right.
Mr. EISENBERG. That those employees were picked?
Mr. LATONA. That is right.
Mr. EISENBERG. There is no inference that there was any suspicion whatsoever attaching to any of these employees?
Mr. LATONA. That is right.
Mr. DULLES. We believe all these employees had access to the sixth floor of the building?
Mr. EISENBERG. We are still looking into that question. This is a recent effort on your part?
Mr. LATONA. Yes.
Mr. DULLES. Is that letter to be admitted as evidence or not?
Mr. EISENBERG. I think not----
Mr. DULLES. Right.
Mr. EISENBERG. Since I don't think the witness could identify the actual letter.
Mr. DULLES. It will be in the files, though?
Mr. EISENBERG. Yes; it is a Commission document in the files.
Mr. Latona, I believe that out of the total number of six prints you have identified today as being Lee Harvey Oswald's, four were palmprints, is that correct?
Mr. LATONA. Three.
Mr. EISENBERG. Three?
Mr. LATONA. Three, two rights and one left, three palms and three fingers.
Mr. EISENBERG. There was a palm on----
Mr. LATONA. The bag.
Mr. EISENBERG. A palm on the weapon?
Mr. LATONA. One on the gun and on this box.
Mr. EISENBERG. Four and two then?
Mr. LATONA. Three.
Mr. EISENBERG. There was a palm on each box?
Mr. LATONA. That is right.
Mr. EISENBERG. That is two palms?
Mr. LATONA. One off the gun.
Mr. EISENBERG. That is three palms, and the palm on the wrapping paper bag. Here is the wrapping paper bag.
Mr. LATONA. One palm and one finger.
Mr. EISENBERG. That is four palms all together?
Mr. LATONA. Four palms, okay.
Mr. EISENBERG. Is that correct?
Mr. LATONA. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Now, is the proportion of recovered fingerprints here an unusual one in your estimation? That is, we usually hear about fingerprints rather than palmprints, whereas here we have four palm and two finger prints. Is there anything unusual in this?