Post by Herbert Blenner on Jan 15, 2019 13:10:11 GMT -5
Nitrate Hoax
When discussing factors that would have prevented Oswald from receiving a fair trial, the WC wrote:
"Wade might have influenced prospective jurors by his mistaken statement that the paraffin test showed that Oswald had fired a gun. The tests merely showed that he had nitrate traces on his hands, which did not necessarily mean that he had fired either a rifle or a pistol."
Here we have a carefully worded paragraph where the authorities displayed their magnanimity. While elevating themselves to sainthood, they maliciously distort evidence by concluding the paraffin showed nitrate traces on the hands.
In reality, the paraffin test shows the presence of oxidizers. Nitrates are one of many oxidizers. The WCR, Appendix X, "The Paraffin Test." wrote:
"In fact, however, the test is completely unreliable in determining either whether a person has recently fired a weapon or whether he has not. On the one hand, diphenylamine and diphenylbenzidine will react positively not only with nitrates from gunpowder residues, but nitrates from other sources and most oxidizing agents, including dichromates, permanganates, hypochlorates, periodares, and some oxides."
Normally when the paraffin test detects oxidizers, they submit samples for further testing. Here they test for the specific nitrate used in gunpowder. If chemical analysis identifies the specific Nitrate then they have evidence of gun firing.
Without doubt, after the positive result from the paraffin test they submitted samples for qualitative analysis. Oddly, neither the WCR nor the appendices report the chemical composition of the oxidizer found on Lee Harvey Oswald.
At the risk of being ridiculed, I suggest the lab forget to take notes. After all, this explanation is less damaging then the obvious conclusion; chemical analysis showed the oxidizing residue on Oswald was not the particular Nitrate found in gunpowder.
by Herbert Blenner | Posted December 28, 2002
Testing of Oswald's cheek cast by nuclear activation discredited earlier findings by the Dallas Police and suggested the department had planted evidence.
Many people believe a positive result on the Paraffin test shows presence of Nitrates.
"Wade might have influenced prospective jurors by his mistaken statement that the paraffin test showed that Oswald had fired a gun. The tests merely showed that he had nitrate traces on his hands, which did not necessarily mean that he had fired either a rifle or a pistol."
Here we have a carefully worded paragraph where the authorities displayed their magnanimity. While elevating themselves to sainthood, they maliciously distort evidence by concluding the paraffin showed nitrate traces on the hands.
In reality, the paraffin test shows the presence of oxidizers. Nitrates are one of many oxidizers. The WCR, Appendix X, "The Paraffin Test." wrote:
"In fact, however, the test is completely unreliable in determining either whether a person has recently fired a weapon or whether he has not. On the one hand, diphenylamine and diphenylbenzidine will react positively not only with nitrates from gunpowder residues, but nitrates from other sources and most oxidizing agents, including dichromates, permanganates, hypochlorates, periodares, and some oxides."
Normally when the paraffin test detects oxidizers, they submit samples for further testing. Here they test for the specific nitrate used in gunpowder. If chemical analysis identifies the specific Nitrate then they have evidence of gun firing.
Without doubt, after the positive result from the paraffin test they submitted samples for qualitative analysis. Oddly, neither the WCR nor the appendices report the chemical composition of the oxidizer found on Lee Harvey Oswald.
At the risk of being ridiculed, I suggest the lab forget to take notes. After all, this explanation is less damaging then the obvious conclusion; chemical analysis showed the oxidizing residue on Oswald was not the particular Nitrate found in gunpowder.