Mr. LATONA. Well, a lot of times that all depends. Sometimes they don't realize the significance of a latent examination, and it is unavoidable that an object has been contaminated. And then a lot of times it is simply because of the circumstances. Sometimes possibly in an instance of this kind because of the crime itself which was involved, I dare say there must have been a lot of panic there at that time. That is just pure conjecture on my part. I don't know whether they were thinking in details as to the examination. I don't think they sat down and just figured very calmly what they were going to do. Representative BOGGS. Of course not. Mr. LATONA. I imagine everybody just poured into that room where they found the thing, somebody would say, "Was this the gun?" and he handed it to someone else and then he would look at it. Lord knows what went on down there. By the time the gun got there--on the other hand, if the right officer was there he would have protected it from the beginning and that is unquestionably what happened here. Mr. DULLES. I have to make a telephone call. I will be right back. Mr. EISENBERG. I believe that the print showing in the lift was taken from an area which had been covered by the wooden stock so that it was protected even against---- Mr. LATONA. Promiscuous handling, yes. If that were on the underside, if that was covered by the wood then very obviously those people there never did touch that. Mr. EISENBERG. At any rate, we are going to find out exactly what they did. Representative BOGGS. Yes. Go ahead. Mr. EISENBERG. Now, just to elaborate on some questions which Mr. Boggs was asking earlier, Mr. Latona, referring specifically to this weapon, do you believe that a determination could have been made as to the age of the print found on the weapon which you have identified as being Oswald's print, and a lift of which is Exhibit No. 637? Mr. LATONA. No; I don't. Mr. EISENBERG. You don't? Mr. LATONA. No; I don't. Mr. EISENBERG. Are experts unanimous in this opinion? Mr. LATONA. No; they are not. There are some experts who contend that they can determine from the way the print develops, and they will use the term "fresh." Now, on the other hand, so far as the definition of "fresh," then it resolves itself into an hour, a day, a week, a month. What is "fresh" as aside from an "old" one? And my opinion simply is this. That on the basis of the print itself, on the basis of the print itself I cannot determine how old it is. Mr. EISENBERG. At least specifically on this type, or in particular focusing on this type of weapon? Mr. LATONA. Particularly on that weapon. Mr. EISENBERG. That is 139? Mr. LATONA. That is right. Mr. EISENBERG. If there are no further questions on Exhibit 139, Commissioner Boggs, I will move on to another exhibit.