Mr. LATONA. To the moisture that was left by the finger, the fingers or
the hands, when it came in contact with the surface.
Representative BOGGS. How long will that condition remain?
Mr. LATONA. Going from one extreme to the other, it may remain for
years; under other circumstances, it may not even last for 15 or 20
minutes.
Representative BOGGS. Why the difference?
Mr. LATONA. Because of the amount of material which was left and the
condition of the material which was left. Basically, the material may
be made up of protein material and salt and water--primarily water. If
it is totally water, with very little salt or oily material, when the
evaporation is effected, then it is complete--there will be nothing
left.
Representative BOGGS. You mean that it is gone?
Mr. LATONA. Right. On the other hand, if there is an oily matter there,
we know that latent prints will last literally for years on certain
objects.
Representative BOGGS. Well, just for purposes of information, if I make
fingerprints there on the table, how long would they normally last?
Mr. LATONA. I don't know.
Representative BOGGS. Well, would there be any way to know?
Mr. LATONA. No, sir.
Mr. DULLES. It depends on temperature, on the amount of moisture
involved?
What does it depend on?
Mr. LATONA. First of all, I saw him touch it, but I am not even sure he
left a print there.
Representative BOGGS. Well, I can see it.
Mr. LATONA. As to the quality of the print, there again it is simply a
matter of what material you have in your hands that made that print, as
to how long it will last, how long it will take for it to evaporate.
Actually, when it dries out, it may, in itself, leave a print with such
clarity that it would not--even though it would not accept the powder,
still by highlighting it, the way you did to see that the print was
there, we could photograph it so it would come out just as clear as
though it were black on white.
Representative BOGGS. Does the material that one touches have any
effect?
Mr. LATONA. Very definitely. It depends on how hard or smooth the
material is.
Representative BOGGS. Now, does a weapon lend itself to retaining
fingerprints?
Mr. LATONA. This particular weapon here, first of all, in my opinion,
the metal is very poorly finished. It is absorbent. Believe it or not,
there is a certain amount of absorption into this metal itself. It is
not finished in the sense that it is highly polished.
Representative BOGGS. So this would be conducive to getting a good
print, or would it?
Mr. LATONA. It would not.
Representative BOGGS. I see--because it would absorb the moisture.
Mr. LATONA. That's right. Now, there are other guns--for example,
Smith and Wesson, which have exceptionally nice finishes, the blue
metal finishes are better surfaces for latent prints. Where you have a
nickel-plated or silver-plated revolvers, where it is smooth--they are
much more conducive to latent prints than some of these other things,
say like the army type, the weapons used in wartime that are dull, to
avoid reflection--things of that type--they are not as good.
Mr. DULLES. I wonder if you would like to look at the fingerprints we
have gone over. They are quite apparent there with the glass.
Representative BOGGS. I would like to look at them. That is all I want
to ask right at the moment.
Mr. DULLES. I would like to ask a general question.
Mr. LATONA (addressing Representative Boggs). This is one of the
fingerprints developed on the brown wrapper. It is this print here.
Mr. DULLES. You can see these prints quite clearly, and the palmprint.
Representative BOGGS. This is a photograph of that?
Mr. LATONA. This is approximately a time and a half enlargement. This
is the left index finger. Here is the palmprint that was developed.
Representative FORD. Mr. Boggs--each of us here, Mr. Dulles, Mr.
Murray, and myself, have said on the record that we have seen the
prints on the wrapping. We did this because, as Mr. Latona has
indicated, such prints may disappear over a period of time. We thought
it might be well for the record to indicate that we saw them. If you
wish to do the same----
Representative BOGGS. I would like to do the same, having just seen it.
Mr. DULLES. The witness has certified to the fact that these are true
photographs of the prints that we have seen.
Representative BOGGS. And the witness has also certified that those are
Oswald's prints?
Mr. LATONA. No; I cannot certify to that.
Mr. EISENBERG. Do you want to explain that?
Mr. LATONA. As I am not the one that fingerprinted Oswald, I cannot
tell from my own personal knowledge that those are actually the
fingerprints of Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr. EISENBERG. But you can certify that those prints are identical with
the prints on the card which bears the name of Lee Harvey Oswald which
was furnished to you?
Mr. LATONA. That is right.
Mr. EISENBERG. We will get other evidence in the record at a subsequent
time to show those were the prints of Oswald. Mr. Latona, you were
saying that you had worked over that rifle by applying a gray powder to
it. Did you develop any fingerprints?
Mr. LATONA. I was not successful in developing any prints at all on the
weapon. I also had one of the firearms examiners dismantle the weapon
and I processed the complete weapon, all parts, everything else. And no
latent prints of value were developed.
Mr. EISENBERG. Does that include the clip?
Mr. LATONA. That included the clip, that included the bolt, it included
the underside of the barrel which is covered by the stock.
Mr. EISENBERG. Were cartridge cases furnished to you at that time?
Mr. LATONA. They were, which I processed, and from which I got no
prints.
Mr. EISENBERG. Therefore, the net result of your work on Exhibit 139
was that you could not produce an identifiable print?
Mr. LATONA. That's correct.
Mr. DULLES. May I ask one question? Does the Secret Service do
fingerprinting work, or do they turn it over to you--turn to you for
all of that?
Mr. LATONA. I think they do some of their own, and on occasion we
will do some for them, too. Primarily I think they do their own. I am
not too familiar with the Secret Service as to how elaborate their
laboratory is.
Mr. EISENBERG. So as of November 23, you had not found an identifiable
print on Exhibit 139?
Mr. LATONA. That is right.
Mr. EISENBERG. I now hand you a small white card marked with certain
initials and with a date, "11-22-63." There is a cellophane wrapping,
cellophane tape across this card with what appears to be a fingerprint
underneath it, and the handwriting underneath that tape is "off
underside of gun barrel near end of foregrip C 2766," which I might
remark parenthetically is the serial number of Exhibit 139. I ask you
whether you are familiar with this item which I hand you, this card?
Mr. LATONA. Yes; I am familiar with this particular exhibit.
Mr. EISENBERG. Can you describe to us what that exhibit consists of,
that item rather?
Mr. LATONA. This exhibit or this item is a lift of a latent palmprint
which was evidently developed with black powder.
Mr. EISENBERG. And when did you receive this item?
Mr. LATONA. I received this item November 29, 1963.
Mr. EISENBERG. Before we go any further may I have this admitted into
evidence?
Representative FORD. It will be. What is the number?
Mr. EISENBERG. That will be No. 637.
(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 637, and
received in evidence.)
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, could you describe to us what a lift is?
Mr. LATONA. A lift is merely a piece of adhesive material which is used
for purposes of removing a print that has been previously developed
on an object, onto the adhesive material. Then the adhesive material
is placed on a backing, in this case which happens to be the card.
The adhesive material utilized here is similar to scotch tape. There
are different types of lifting material. Some of them are known as
opaque lifters, which are made of rubber, like a black rubber and white
rubber, which has an adhesive material affixed to it, and this material
is simply laid on a print which has been previously developed on an
object and the full print is merely removed from the object.
Mr. EISENBERG. When you say "the print" is removed, actually the
powder----
Mr. LATONA. The powder that adhered to the original latent print is
picked off of the object.
Mr. EISENBERG. So that the impression actually is removed?
Mr. LATONA. That is right.
Representative FORD. Is that a recognized technique?
Mr. LATONA. Yes; it is.
Representative FORD. In the fingerprinting business?
Mr. LATONA. It is very common, one of the most common methods of
recording latent prints.
Mr. EISENBERG. Who did you get this exhibit, this lift from?
Mr. LATONA. This lift was referred to us by the FBI Dallas office.
Mr. EISENBERG. And were you told anything about its origin?
Mr. LATONA. We were advised that this print had been developed by the
Dallas Police Department, and, as the lift itself indicates, from the
underside of the gun barrel near the end of the foregrip.
Mr. EISENBERG. Now, may I say for the record that at a subsequent point
we will have the testimony of the police officer of the Dallas police
who developed this print, and made the lift; and I believe that the
print was taken from underneath the portion of the barrel which is
covered by the stock. Now, did you attempt to identify this print which
shows on the lift Exhibit 637?
Mr. LATONA. Yes; I did.
Mr. EISENBERG. Did you succeed in making identification?
Mr. LATONA. On the basis of my comparison, I did effect an
identification.
Mr. EISENBERG. And whose print was that, Mr. Latona?
Mr. LATONA. The palmprint which appears on the lift was identified by
me as the right palmprint of Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Latona, as I understand it, on November 23,
therefore, the FBI had not succeeded in making an identification of
a fingerprint or palmprint on the rifle, but several days later by
virtue of the receipt of this lift, which did not come with the weapon
originally, the FBI did succeed in identifying a print on Exhibit 139?
Mr. LATONA. That is right.
Mr. EISENBERG. Which may explain any inconsistent or apparently
inconsistent statements, which I believe appeared in the press, as to
an identification?
Mr. LATONA. We had no personal knowledge of any palmprint having been
developed on the rifle. The only prints that we knew of were the
fragmentary prints which I previously pointed out had been indicated
by the cellophane on the trigger guard. There was no indication on
this rifle as to the existence of any other prints. This print which
indicates it came from the underside of the gun barrel, evidently the
lifting had been so complete that there was nothing left to show any
marking on the gun itself as to the existence of such--even an attempt
on the part of anyone else to process the rifle.
Mr. DULLES. Do I understand then that if there is a lifting of this
kind, that it may obliterate----
Mr. LATONA. Completely.
Mr. DULLES. The original print?
Mr. LATONA. That is right.
Mr. EISENBERG. So that you personally, Mr. Latona, did not know
anything about a print being on the rifle which was identifiable until
you received, actually received the lift, Exhibit 637?
Mr. LATONA. On the 29th of November.
Mr. EISENBERG. Seven days after the assassination.
And in the intervening period, correspondingly, the FBI had no such
knowledge?
Mr. LATONA. As far as I know.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, could you tell us what portion of the palm
of Lee Harvey Oswald you identified that print as being?
Mr. LATONA. Yes. Here again I have a photograph that will show the
approximate area involved, which is on the ulnar side of the lower
portion of the palm.