When seeking employment in New Orleans, Oswald listed a “Sgt. Robt. Hidell” as a reference on one job application[C4-39] and “George Hidell” as a reference on another.[C4-40] Both names were found to be fictitious.[C4-41] Moreover, the use of “Alek” as a first name for Hidell is a further link to Oswald because “Alek” was Oswald’s nickname in Russia.[C4-42] Letters received by Marina Oswald from her husband signed “Alek” were given to the Commission.[C4-43] Oswald’s Palmprint on Rifle Barrel Based on the above evidence, the Commission concluded that Oswald purchased the rifle found on the sixth floor of the Depository Building. Additional evidence of ownership was provided in the form of palmprint identification which indicated that Oswald had possession of the rifle he had purchased. A few minutes after the rifle was discovered on the sixth floor of the Depository Building[C4-44] it was examined by Lt. J. C. Day of the identification bureau of the Dallas police. He lifted the rifle by the wooden stock after his examination convinced him that the wood was too rough to take fingerprints. Capt. J. W. Fritz then ejected a cartridge by operating the bolt, but only after Day viewed the knob on the bolt through a magnifying glass and found no prints.[C4-45] Day continued to examine the rifle with the magnifying glass, looking for possible fingerprints. He applied fingerprint powder to the side of the metal housing near the trigger, and noticed traces of two prints.[C4-46] At 11:45 p.m. on November 22, the rifle was released to the FBI and forwarded to Washington where it was examined on the morning of November 23 by Sebastian F. Latona, supervisor of the Latent Fingerprint Section of the FBI’s Identification Division.[C4-47] In his testimony before the Commission, Latona stated that when he received the rifle, the area where prints were visible was protected by cellophane.[C4-48] He examined these prints, as well as photographs of them which the Dallas police had made, and concluded that: * * * the formations, the ridge formations and characteristics, were insufficient for purposes of either effecting identification or a determination that the print was not identical with the prints of people. Accordingly, my opinion simply was that the latent prints which were there were of no value.[C4-49] Latona then processed the complete weapon but developed no identifiable prints.[C4-50] He stated that the poor quality of the wood and the metal would cause the rifle to absorb moisture from the skin, thereby making a clear print unlikely.[C4-51]