Part 66

He states in this letter that as he came in contact with Oswald, "I managed to get my right hand on the pistol over the suspect's hand. I could feel his hand on the trigger. I then got a secure grip on the butt of the pistol. I jerked the pistol and as it was clearing the suspect's clothing and grip, I heard the snap of the hammer, and the pistol crossed over my left cheek. I marked the pistol and six rounds at central station. The primer of one round was dented on misfire at the time of the struggle with the suspect."

Now, in light of your examination of this weapon, and your discussion, could you comment on this statement?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. I personally have fired this weapon numerous times, as well as Special Agents Robert Frazier and Charles Killion. At no time did we ever attempt to fire this weapon that it misfired. It operated excellently and every time we have tried to fire it, it has fired.

It is very possible when he says that he reached across, and he grabbed it, that he locked the cylinder, which I think any trained police officer would do. You want to stop this cylinder from rotating. As soon as you do that, you have actually stopped the hammer falling on a live round, because if the hammer is allowed to go forward again, and it hasn't gotten into the cocked position, the rebound slide, as I was stating before, would block the firing pin from striking the primer of the cartridge.

Mr. EISENBERG. As I understand it, the cylinder is so interconnected with the trigger, that the trigger cannot be pulled all the way back when the cylinder has been firmly grasped?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. That is correct.

Mr. EISENBERG. And if the hammer has not been pulled all the way back, the rebound slide will not allow the firing pin to strike the cartridge?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. That is correct.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Officer McDonald's statement that the primer of one round was dented on misfire: as far as you can tell, could this statement be confirmed?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. No, sir; we found nothing to indicate that this weapon's firing pin had struck the primer of any of these cartridges.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, if the firing pin had struck the primer, it could only have been after the trigger was pulled all the way back, under the discussion you have just given us, is that correct?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Or after cocking.

Mr. EISENBERG. Or after it had been cocked and pulled?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes; if it is in the cocked position, grabbing the cylinder will do you no good; due to the fact that in the very operation of cocking this weapon, the cylinder is rotated, and it is ready to be fired.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, in either event, the hammer would have traveled almost to the outermost extremity to which it can go. That is, the hammer would have traveled back all the way, whether it was cocked or fired in a double-action manner. If that had happened, what would the likelihood be that upon returning to the cartridge case, it would not fire the cartridge case--that upon returning to the cartridge, the cartridge would not be fired?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. You mean actually the hammer had gone all the way through its cycle?

Mr. EISENBERG. Yes.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. I can only say that from my examination internally, as well as having fired this weapon--I found no reason why you would get a misfire with this weapon.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, if a man had put his hand between the hammer and the point at which the hammer enters, with the firing pin, into the breech face, would that stop the weapon from firing?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes and no. It is very possible that you can do it. And it hurts, by the way, because the mainspring in this one--you can see the indentation in my thumb--is a very strong mainspring. It would be possible. You could put something in there.

Now, the question is when you pull that object out, would there be enough distance and enough force to set off the primer?

That is quite a moot point, because you could grab the hammer and recock it.

Mr. EISENBERG. Apart from that question, would the man's finger or whatever object he stuck in there be firmly fixed for a second or two, between the hammer and the breech face?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. It could be.

Mr. EISENBERG. Would he feel the impact?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. He would definitely feel the impact--if he had a piece of tissue of his hand in between. Now, if a piece of material, of course, went between it which I don't know how it could happen--if you were struggling over the gun, and he said he grabbed the gun--I don't know how he could have anything except a portion of his hand, and I am sure he would feel it if the trigger was pulled.

Mr. EISENBERG. Finally, if he had just grasped the cylinder, and Oswald had pulled back on the trigger, could you demonstrate the sound which might have been heard?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes; you can hold it, and you get a snapping sound--if the gun is grabbed away forcefully, and he would be really grabbing hard. So there could have been an attempt to shoot and a snap would be heard. Yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. The only thing which is unlikely is that the primer would be dented on the misfire?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. You would not get any denting if the cylinder was held and the gun was jerked forcibly out of Oswald's hands. You would hear the snap, but you would get no mark on the primer whatsoever.

The same thing he could hear if he jerked it out of his hands and he accidentally, somehow, hit the hammer--you would still get a noise, a snapping sound. But the firing pin would not come in contact with the primer of the cartridge.

Representative FORD. Because of the discussion we had a few minutes ago?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir.

Representative FORD. Using the diagram that was inserted as Exhibit 593.

Mr. EISENBERG. One final question. Officer McDonald says in this letter, "I then got a secure grip on the butt of the pistol."

Now, would that grip in itself in any way interfere with the action of the pistol--the revolver?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. I don't know what he means by that.

Mr. EISENBERG. If he means what he says, that is, if he got a secure grip on the butt----

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. If he got a secure grip on the butt, that would take him away.

Mr. EISENBERG. Take him away from what?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. That would take him away from the cylinder. If you are fighting over a weapon, the first thing is to get it off of you and then get hold of the cylinder. And then you can get both hands on the gun to jerk it away. That is what I would do.

As I say, it is the way we are taught. You want to get the gun off of you first, so you are not in direct line, and then go in and attempt to get it away from the person.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, suppose the gun was pulled away from Oswald as Oswald had his grip on the trigger, so that he could not get the trigger through the complete cycle. Would there be a snapping noise made?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Definitely. If you locked the cylinder and jerked it away, you would get a snapping noise.

Mr. EISENBERG. Suppose you did not lock the cylinder, but for some reason or other the full trigger cycle was not gone through?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Then you would also get it. It would be difficult, but you could get it.

Mr. EISENBERG. How hard do you have to pull on that trigger in order to fire the weapon?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. For double action--that is, without cocking, it is approximately 11 to 12 pounds, which is normal for this type of weapon.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, I handed you earlier four cartridge cases in a plastic envelope marked Q-74, Q-75, Q-76, and Q-77, also marked C47-C50. Are you familiar with these cartridge cases?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. I am. I have previously looked at them.

Mr. EISENBERG. Do they have your mark on them?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. They do. Right on the side of each one, right there.

Mr. EISENBERG. When did you receive these cartridge cases?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. These cartridge cases were received from the Dallas office of the FBI on November 30, 1963.

Mr. EISENBERG. For the record, I would like to state that these cartridge cases were found in the immediate proximity of the site at which Officer Tippit was killed. They were found on the ground near the street where Officer Tippit was killed on November 22.

Representative FORD. These are the ones that were found in the street near the automobile?

Mr. EISENBERG. Well, either in the street or in a lawn in front of a private residence, or semiapartment house.

Representative FORD. I see. In other words, they were possibly some of those that were on the lawn in the front of 400?

Mr. EISENBERG. Yes, sir; again, for the record only, since this witness is unable to testify as to where they were picked up. The mechanism of this revolver is such that the shells are not ejected until the user decides to eject them--unlike a bolt-action rifle where the cartridge must be ejected where you shoot from.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to have these four cartridge cases introduced into evidence as 594.

Representative FORD. They may be admitted.

(The articles referred to were marked Commission Exhibit No. 594, and received in evidence.)

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Cunningham, could you describe the make of these cartridge cases?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Two of these cartridge cases are Remington-Peters .38 Special cartridge cases. The other two cartridge cases are Western .38 Special cartridge cases.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, you examined earlier six bullets which I told you had been--six cartridges which I told you had been taken from the chamber of the revolver which we have been looking at.

Those cartridges were divided into three Remington-Peters and three Western, were they not?

(At this point, Representative Boggs entered the hearing room.)

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. So that--or 50-50. So that the division is the same, the division of the cartridge cases is the same, as between Remington-Peters and Western, as the division of the cartridges found--which I told you were found in the chamber?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. Did you examine the cartridge cases in Exhibit 594 in an attempt to determine whether they had been fired in Exhibit 143, the revolver, to the exclusion of all other revolvers?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. I did.

Mr. EISENBERG. Can you tell us your conclusion?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. As a result of my examination, it is my opinion that those four cartridge cases, Commission Exhibit 594, were fired in the revolver, Commission Exhibit 143, to the exclusion of all other weapons.

Mr. EISENBERG. When did you perform this examination, Mr. Cunningham?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. On November 30, 1963.

Mr. EISENBERG. And how did you make the examination?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. I first marked these cartridge cases upon receiving them. There were four. I would like to state, first of all that Special Agents Frazier and Killion also independently examined these four cartridge cases, and made the same comparisons that I am going to state. I am telling you what I found--although they independently arrived at the same conclusion.

The cartridge cases were first marked and examined for the presence of any individual characteristic marks on these cartridge cases whereby it would be possible to identify them as having been fired in a weapon. I then test-fired Commission Exhibit 143, using similar ammunition, and microscopically compared the four cartridge case--one at a time--that is Commission Exhibit 594--with the tests obtained from the revolver, Commission Exhibit 143.

Mr. EISENBERG. I hand you here two cartridge cases, and ask you whether you are familiar with these cartridge cases?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. I am.

Mr. EISENBERG. And can you describe these cartridge cases to us?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes. One is a Western .38 Special cartridge case. The other is a Winchester .38 Special cartridge case.

Mr. EISENBERG. And how did you get possession of these cartridge cases?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. These were test-fired in Commission Exhibit No. 143, by myself.

Mr. EISENBERG. So these are the test cartridges you were referring to?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. That was a portion of them; yes.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have these admitted as Commission Exhibit 595?

Representative FORD. They will be admitted.

(The articles referred to were marked Commission Exhibit No. 595, and received in evidence.)

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. I also would like to state that we were test firing Remington-Peters, also.

Mr. EISENBERG. How many test cartridges were fired, Mr. Cunningham?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. To begin with, three. And we have since fired the weapon many times.

Representative BOGGS. How many cartridges were fired by Oswald?

Mr. EISENBERG. We are going to get into that. This is a difficult question which you are going to have to make a decision on. So I would rather develop that slowly.

I notice that one of the cartridge cases in Exhibit 595 is split on the side, Mr. Cunningham.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. Why is that?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. That is due to the oversized chambers of this revolver. As I previously testified, the weapon was originally chambered for the .38 S&W, which is a wider cartridge than .38 Special. And when a .38 Special is fired in this particular weapon, the case form fits to the shape of each chamber. And in one of those cartridges, the metal just let go. Normally it does not; however this one particular case split slightly.

Representative FORD. Does that have any impact on the rest of the operation?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. No, sir. As a matter of fact, I test-fired the weapon originally, and I didn't even know it had split until I tried to eject it.

Mr. EISENBERG. You mentioned before, by the way, that there had been no misfires with this weapon. Approximately how many times was the weapon fired altogether?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. I would have no way of knowing exactly, but I imagine we are approaching close to a hundred times by now.

Mr. EISENBERG. And no misfires?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. And no misfires.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Cunningham, did you take photographs of the cartridge cases which you have just identified as having been fired from 143, and the cartridge cases which are Commission Exhibit No. 595?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. I did.

Mr. EISENBERG. Did you make your identification on the basis of the photographs or on the basis of your examination under the microscope?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. My conclusions were arrived at strictly on the basis of my examinations. These photographs in no way entered into the identification and are strictly for demonstrative purposes.

Mr. EISENBERG. Could you show us these photographs, Mr. Cunningham?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. Let's take them one at a time, and let's introduce them as exhibits, one at a time. I have here--you have given me five photographs. Did you take each of these photographs?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. As a matter of fact; I did. I personally took these.

Mr. EISENBERG. And these are photographs of what?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. They are photographs of the individual characteristic marks on the base and in the firing-pin impression on test cartridge cases obtained from Oswald's revolver, and also the marks on the base and in the firing-pin impression on the cartridge cases, Commission Exhibit No. 594.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I would like these admitted, if you would, as 596, 597, 598, 599, and 600.

Representative FORD. They may be admitted.

(The documents referred to were marked Commission Exhibits Nos. 596 through 600, and received in evidence.)

Representative FORD. Will the witness explain to the Commission what they mean?

Mr. EISENBERG. Yes; he will. Did you also make a photograph of the breech face of the weapon, Mr. Cunningham?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. I did. I didn't take this photograph. I was present when it was taken. I have compared the negative with the actual breech face of Commission Exhibit 143, and I found it to be a true and accurate reproduction.

Mr. EISENBERG. Could you show us that photograph? May I have that admitted as 601, Mr. Chairman?

Representative FORD. It may be admitted.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 601, and received in evidence.)

Mr. EISENBERG. Could you show us the area of the revolver which corresponds to the area shown in the photograph, Exhibit 601?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. The cylinder was first removed to facilitate the photograph. That is very easily done by removing the forward sideplate screw, which is just above the trigger, which allows the crane to slide right out, and the cylinder removed.

The photograph was taken from the right side, looking in toward the firing-pin hole.

Representative BOGGS. Just the way you are holding the revolver now?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir; just the way I am holding it now.

Representative BOGGS. With the cylinder removed?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. With the cylinder removed.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, there is a cylindrical-shaped object in the center of that picture, Mr. Cunningham. Could you describe what that is--right in the center of the picture?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. That is known by two different names. It is known as a hammer-nose bushing, or a recoil block. It is--Smith and Wesson presses this particular block in. It forms the hole through which the firing pin comes out of the breech face.

Mr. EISENBERG. That is, the firing pin strikes the center of the cartridge, or the primer, as it is called?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes.

Mr. EISENBERG. Which causes the cartridge to fire. Now, what is the magnification of the photograph of the breech face?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Of the breech face, it is approximately 17 times.

Mr. EISENBERG. There are a number of markings or lines on this breech face. Are these the microscopic characteristics which reproduce on the cartridge cases?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. That is correct.

Mr. EISENBERG. And are the microscopic characteristics of this breech face individual to this weapon, to the exclusion of all other weapons?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. They are.

Mr. EISENBERG. This is your method of determining that a given cartridge case has been fired from a given weapon?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. The breech face marks, as well as the individual imperfections in the firing pin.

Representative BOGGS. Let me ask a very elementary question, the answer to which I used to know years ago, but I have forgotten. Just exactly what does the firing pin do? What happens after that strikes?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Well, it is easier to start with the cartridge itself. The components of a cartridge are a bullet, a cartridge case, a primer in the base of the cartridge case, and powder.

Now, the primer is made out of a very soft metal that can be dented. These primers at manufacture are filled with, basically, an explosive. For instance, Remington-Peters cartridges have PETN, which is one of Du Pont's explosives. RDX is used as one of the components of Western cartridge cases, as well as lead styphnate, lead azides, and other explosive materials.

When the firing pin strikes, there is a small explosion. Fire is given off----

Representative BOGGS. How does that bring about the explosion?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. It is sensitive to detonation by a sharp blow.

Mr. EISENBERG. That is, the primer is sensitive?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes; it is an explosive. To differentiate from the powder, which is not explosive. Powder burns.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, I have taken Commission Exhibit No. 591, which consists of an unfired cartridge, and there is a round circle in the middle of the base of that cartridge. Is that the primer?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes. That is actually a separate entity that has been pressed into a hole in the base of the cartridge case.

Mr. EISENBERG. And that is more sensitive to shock than the powder in the cartridge case itself?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes. Powder is relatively insensitive. You don't set off powder by a blow.

Mr. EISENBERG. But the primer is quite sensitive?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. That is normally. I am talking about a normal blow. The primer is very sensitive. I just named a few of the components, but there are many other compounds in priming mixtures, which are considered secret by each company. But I know that they are explosive mixtures. And the actual striking of the firing pin--with enough force--causes a small detonation to occur. The fire given off, goes through holes in the base, and into where the powder is, and starts the powder burning. It is the gases that are given off when powder burns, which actually cause the bullet to move forward--the pressure builds up behind it, and the bullet goes forward.

Representative BOGGS. That is a very good explanation. Thank you.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cunningham, I wonder whether you could review the pictures with us, and discuss some of the markings which you found in those pictures that led you to decide that the cartridge cases shown therein have been fired in the revolver we have been discussing.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes. The first photograph is a photograph of the breech-face marks, the individual characteristic marks remaining on test cartridge cases obtained from the revolver, and on the C-50 cartridge case that was recovered from the scene. C-50 is on the left. C-15 is on the right. And the hairline, the magnified hairline down the center separates the two cartridge cases.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, is the invariable procedure to put the test cartridge on the right and the suspect cartridge on the left? Or at least is that your standard procedure?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. I usually put the suspect on the left.

Mr. EISENBERG. Well, in the photographs at any rate, in all the photographs we are going to see, the test cartridge is on the right, and the suspect cartridge is on the left?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Usually.

Mr. EISENBERG. And what is the magnification of this photograph?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. It is approximately 91 times.

Mr. EISENBERG. Could you go on, please?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes. On the left you will see the stamping, "SP", which is in the cartridge case itself. And over here next to the hairline you will see the individual characteristic marks. And you will see similar marks continuing on the other side of the hairline.

On the C-15, the revolver side, you will see a dark portion running vertically down through. That is the space that the Congressman was asking about--how it fits the primer. That is the small space at the top where the primer fits into the base of the cartridge. And over here to the right of that dark mark you will see a lighter colored object with more individual characteristic marks, that is actually the primer, the individual characteristic marks on the primer of the test cartridge case.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, as I understand it, in effect this picture can be viewed as a composite cartridge? That is, the picture on the left begins where the picture on the right ends, in terms of position on the cartridge case?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. In essence; yes.

Mr. EISENBERG. And the point of the picture is to show that when you make this composite, the lines on each case show up as if there were no composite at all, but as if they were simply one case, because they are so close together in microscopic markings?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes; in proximity. And they are brought together.

Representative BOGGS. And so similar?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes.

Representative BOGGS. What is the magnification again?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. That is approximately 91 times.

Mr. EISENBERG. Are there any dissimilarities on the two--on the test and the suspect cartridge cases, Mr. Cunningham?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir; there are always dissimilarities. However, the similarities so outweigh the dissimilarities that it is an identification. If there are no dissimilarities, I would be suspicious that it would be faked--using the same photograph and just cut and put together.

There are always dissimilarities.

Mr. EISENBERG. Can you explain why there are always dissimilarities when the two cartridge cases are fired in the very same weapon?