The more recent articles, which are old now, have mentioned that they never fingerprinted Henry so LE did not know if it was Henry's partial finger print on the bat. Does anyone know if this is true?
I have always thought that even if Henry was not fingerprinted, I would think that if LE asked his family could have and would have supplied items that he had handled that had is fingerprints on them.
As far as old cold cases, I hope any discussion will somehow help to solve the case but look at the GSK. There was a Lot more physical evidence as well as eye witnesses in that case and it took decades to bring someone to justice.