Warren Commission (03 of 26): Hearings Vol. III (of 15)

Part 67

Chapter 674,049 wordsPublic domain

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. The metal is different; one cartridge case is slightly harder than another; for some reason the cartridge case wasn't driven back, upon firing, into the breech face exactly the same way. In other words, these marks are reproducing, but you don't get exactly the same hit. It would not be possible to get exactly the same hit time after time with different cartridge cases.

Representative FORD. What ratio of similarities and dissimilarities do you have to have?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. There is no ratio. Based upon the examiner's training and experience, he comes to the conclusion that a particular cartridge case or bullet has been fired from a particular weapon. As in this photograph, you can see the dissimilarity is very slight. These are excellent marks.

Representative FORD. There was never any doubt in your mind, then?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. None whatsoever.

Mr. EISENBERG. You say these are particularly strong marks?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. These are very, very, good marks.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, these marks are on the brass, so to speak, of the cartridge case, rather than in the primer?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes; that is correct. Actually, it is brass, it is nickelplated brass.

Mr. EISENBERG. Is that unusual, to be able to pick up such strong marks in the brass as opposed to the primer of the cartridge case?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. It is not really unusual; no. It depends upon the particular weapon.

Mr. EISENBERG. Did you also examine the microscopic markings on the primer?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. I did.

Mr. EISENBERG. And you found what?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. I could identify the weapon on the basis of the imperfections, individual characteristic marks, in the firing-pin impression.

Mr. EISENBERG. The firing-pin impression. And what about the area of the primer around the firing-pin impression?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. In other words, each of these three areas--the brass, the primer, and the firing-pin impression--carries individually characteristic microscopic marks which would be the basis of identification?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, you cannot make a flat statement.

Mr. EISENBERG. No; in this case.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. In this particular case, I knew at the time I was examining it, all of the firing-pin impressions were excellent, and some portions of the breech-face marks were. But you cannot say they will mark in exactly the same place, due to the fact that these cases will mark in different areas, they are different cartridges, they have been fired at a different time. You will get good areas, and then in another area your marks will not be sufficient. In other words, it is just the way the cartridge case was driven back at the time of the explosion in the primer, and the bullet is fired.

They can hit slightly different, hit deeper on one side, be lighter on the other. When a primer is set in a little bit deeper, it will not pick up these marks on the primer part, whereas the firing-pin impression can be excellent--one portion of the case will be excellent. But each one is a different examination. And many times they will mark in different places.

Mr. EISENBERG. Could you show us the next photograph?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. This is Commission document No. 597. This is a photograph, photomicrograph, rather, of the breech face marks on two cartridge cases. The one on the left is C-49, which is our number C-49, and the one on the right of the hairline is a test cartridge case from this revolver.

Mr. EISENBERG. What is the magnification?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. This one was approximately 120 times.

Mr. EISENBERG. Is the magnification equal on both sides?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. It is.

Mr. EISENBERG. Is that true of all the pictures you are showing us today?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. The negative is taken at exactly the same time. You are photographing through a single eyepiece, with a focusable hairline down the middle, whatever is on both stages of your comparison microscope.

Mr. EISENBERG. Could you turn that picture around again?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes.

Mr. EISENBERG. These marking are also on the brass, or outside of the primer?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. That is correct.

Mr. EISENBERG. And again it is a sort of a composite photograph?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. That is correct.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, these markings seem a little less distinct than the others.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. It is in a different area. On this particular case, the marks are excellent. You can see down in here some nice fine marks, and then the heavier marks coming across there. They are good marks.

Representative FORD. Could you point out, as you look at the photograph, what you consider good similarities, which would help you in the identification?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. Now, this is not the only point of similarity. These strictly demonstrate the type of marks. There are many more marks on these cartridge cases, all over the base of the cartridge cases, as well as in the firing-pin impressions. But Mr. Eisenberg asked that we have a photograph to demonstrate the type of marks on each particular cartridge case.

Representative FORD. This is only illustrative, then?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. That is correct. My identification was not based on this picture. It was based on my complete microscopic examination and comparison of test cartridge cases from the revolver with this particular cartridge case.

Representative FORD. Could you show me the similarities?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes. You see, you have your large--it is slightly out of focus up towards this end----

Mr. EISENBERG. Excuse me, as you demonstrate this, could you mark with circles and with a number what you are talking about, so when the record is looked at it is clear what you are talking about?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. All right--up here, near the top, you will find a very deep ridge, which I will mark "1." As you are coming down, you will find another real deep ridge, which I will mark "2."

When you consider this is 120 times, this is actually quite close together, except it has been magnified--you have a set of marks resembling "railroad tracks," which I will mark "3."

You will find over here--you go down to your next step. There are similarities in between there. The next big set of "railroad tracks" I will mark "4."

Then you move down, and you will find another similarity, four nice marks down near the bottom. This whole area is similar. You are going out of focus, but you can see these "railroad tracks." They are running along very nicely, and that is being marked "No. 5."

The next photograph is a photograph--on the left of the hairline----

Mr. EISENBERG. What Commission exhibit is that?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. No. 598.

On the left of the hairline is our number C-47, the cartridge case. On the right is a test from the C-15 revolver, which is Commission Exhibit 143. These also are breech-face marks in the base of the cartridge cases.

On the right you can see the space between the primer and the base of the cartridge case, and also the individual characteristic marks in the primer.

Mr. EISENBERG. What is the magnification?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. This is approximately 123-1/2 times.

Mr. EISENBERG. Congressman Ford, would you care for a discussion of this?

Representative FORD. No. The one previously gave the basis.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Actually, this seems to be a slightly larger area. You have again the same "railroad tracks," all up and down, going across the two cartridge cases.

Representative FORD. To the layman that seems even more----

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Demonstrative, yes. I don't know if you saw the photographs of the cartridge cases in the rifle, the assassination rifle. Those marks are just as distinctive as the more demonstrative marks in this particular breech face. But to a trained examiner, they stand out. They are harder to see than those on these particular photographs. And even in these photographs, the photograph you were asking me, they were not quite as vivid as they are on this photograph.

But there, again, it goes back to what I told you--each cartridge case will strike the breech face in a slightly different way, and you don't get complete similarity.

Mr. EISENBERG. To illustrate your point, Mr. Cunningham, I hand you Commission Exhibit 565, which is a photograph, which was explained yesterday, of the cartridge case fired in the rifle, and a test cartridge.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, this demonstrates it very well.

This is the very rough surface on the bolt of the assassination rifle.

Mr. EISENBERG. The bolt face?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes; the bolt face, and it is just as distinctive as these striae on my photographs of the breech-face marks of the revolver.

Mr. EISENBERG. By "striae" you mean lines?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes; just lines. But it is more difficult to see, due to the character of these marks--even though one type of mark is just as characteristic as the other type.

Mr. EISENBERG. As I understand your testimony, to the trained observer the photograph shown--the cartridges shown in the photographs on 565 can be as easily identified with each other as the cartridges shown on, let's say, 598?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. That is correct.

Mr. EISENBERG. But to the layman it is easier to see the similarities on 598, with its striae, than 565 with its grosser imperfections?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir; due to the type of marks on each of the cartridge cases, one is easier for the layman to see.

The next photograph is Commission document No. 599. On the left of the hairline is our number C-48, the cartridge case. On the right is the test cartridge case from Oswald's revolver.

Now, here you asked about what happens--somebody asked what happens on the other side. Here you have the other side. In this particular cartridge case----

Mr. EISENBERG. That is the other half of the cartridge case?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. In other words, you are seeing the primer, the space between the primer and the brass on the cartridge case itself--on the questioned cartridge case this time--and the base of the cartridge case of the test is on the right. It looks like it is one. It is just the opposite side of the cartridge case from the other photographs.

In other words, you take the photograph of the most demonstrative marks--which look real good, naturally. The examination is of all the marks. That is the big difference. And this time you will see--it is very demonstrative--on each side of the hairline, a great deal of similarity between these marks.

Mr. EISENBERG. And the magnification here?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. It is approximately 96 times.

Mr. RHYNE. Why do you vary the magnification?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. The magnification of every photograph you take, sir, depends on the length of the bellows of the camera. The microscope will have a set magnification. But each time that you focus the length of the bellows can change, which will increase or decrease the magnification. Also with some photographs you mask off areas which are out of focus. You certainly would not want to print a whole negative where you have distortion. You bring into focus one small portion of the surface of that bullet.

If, say, one surface of the bullet is slightly flattened and the other surface is rounded--the rounded surface will be going out of focus much faster than the flattened side, and it would be very confusing. That is the type of thing. You mask differently.

Then when you have the negatives enlarged, you can enlarge one negative more than you do the other. So it can be based either on the length of the bellows, or on the amount you have enlarged it.

Mr. EISENBERG. Is that all the photographs?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. No, there is one more.

This photograph is a photograph of the firing-pin impression of the C-49 cartridge case, and the firing-pin impression on the test from Oswald's revolver, and this is Commission document 600.

Mr. EISENBERG. And the magnification?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. 120 times, approximately.

Now, here you have very distinctive marks, but it is much more difficult for a layman to pick them out. That is the reason I have circled these marks and numbered them, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, on each side of the hairline. On the left is C-49, and on the right is the cartridge case obtained from C-143.

You have this very large, very distinctive imperfection.

Mr. EISENBERG. You are pointing to circle number 1?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. In number 1. Also, in number 2, it looks like a little set of railroad tracks, and this one with the same shape coming down through. You can see this little piece and this little piece. Over here you have a real small "railroad track."

Mr. EISENBERG. That is number 3?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. That is number 3. And it looks like a little hump or bump, and that is very distinctive.

There is a slight overlapping here, but you can see it is sort of a =V= shape--in number 4, very distinctive. Down here you have a =Z= line with a line through it, number 6. I only brought those out to show six of the similarities. If you go through you can pick out places in the firing-pin impressions, that are similar, by yourself.

Mr. EISENBERG. On the top of each of these photos, C-49 and C-15, there is a large comma-shaped indentation, or comma-shaped mark. What is that caused by, Mr. Cunningham?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. That is caused by a very large imperfection--a very distinctive imperfection in the firing pin itself. And here it is.

Here I am looking at Commission document 601, the breech face and firing pin. If you will look at the firing pin in this photograph, you will see over on this side, this very large imperfection. It is like a facet--it is a flattened side. It shows up in the photograph of the firing pin.

It is indented--since it is missing from the firing pin, it will show as a flattened area in the firing-pin impression. In other words, what is concave on the firing pin itself, will be convex in the firing-pin impression.

Mr. EISENBERG. If there are no further questions on the cartridge cases, I will move on to the bullets.

Representative FORD. Mr. Boggs?

Representative BOGGS. Just one question. What you are saying is that there is no doubt about the fact that the cartridges that you examined came from this revolver?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. That is correct.

Representative BOGGS. And, of course, there is no question about the fact that this was Mr. Oswald's revolver. Is that so?

Mr. EISENBERG. That will be proved, I hope, before the end of the hearings. This witness cannot himself testify.

Representative BOGGS. I understand that. I am asking you.

Mr. EISENBERG. There is no question, I don't think, about that. That will be the subject of testimony.

Representative BOGGS. I know--we are not following the exact rules of evidence around here.

Mr. EISENBERG. We will connect it up.

Representative BOGGS. In that connection--how many bullets were recovered?

Mr. EISENBERG. Four were recovered from the body of the officer. But as you will see from the testimony which we will get into right now, that doesn't mean four shots were fired, because there is a slight problem here. I would rather have the witness develop it.

Representative BOGGS. You are being very mysterious now, but it is all right.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cunningham, I hand you four bullets in plastic cases marked C-251, C-252, Q-13, and C-253, which have also certain other markings on them, and I ask you if you are familiar with these bullets.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. I am.

Mr. EISENBERG. Are your marks on these bullets?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, they are.

Mr. EISENBERG. For the record, I would like to state these four bullets were recovered from the body of Officer Tippit.

When did you receive these bullets, Mr. Cunningham?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. The Q-13 bullet was delivered to the Laboratory the first time on the morning of November 23d, and it was delivered to the Laboratory by Special Agent Vincent Drain of the Dallas office of the FBI.

Mr. EISENBERG. And the remaining bullets?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. By the way, it was returned to Dallas, and then it was returned to the Laboratory, delivered again by Special Agent Vincent Drain, of the Dallas office, also, Special Agent Warren De Brueys. They delivered our Q-13 a second time on November 27th.

Representative FORD. When you say "our," what do you mean by "our"?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. In other words, to facilitate reporting in the Laboratory, we usually give these items a Q or a K number. A Q number is a questioned item, like a bullet from a body, and a known is a gun, the K is a known, like a weapon.

That is for reporting purposes. But since this case began, we have so much evidence, and we have received so much evidence, it was considered practical to reassign a C number by us--like Mr. Eisenberg said, they are C-253, C-262, and C-251. They also have a Q number. Q-13 is C-13. That is the reason why I said "our" Q-13.

Mr. EISENBERG. When did you examine Q-13, Mr. Cunningham?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. November 23d, the first time. That was when I made my examination. It was returned on the other date. But it was examined on 11-23.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Q-13 has in it a brass colored object, as well as a bullet--that is, the box containing Q-13, your Q-13.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes. That was identified as the button--the button--from the coat of Officer Tippit. The bullet struck that button and when the bullet was removed from the body, the button was also removed.

Representative BOGGS. Went right in?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir. I have no first-hand knowledge. But that is what it was identified as.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I would like these four bullets admitted as 602, 603, 604, and 605.

Representative FORD. They will be admitted.

(The articles referred to were marked Commission Exhibits Nos. 602 through 605, and received in evidence.)

Mr. EISENBERG. When did you receive what are now marked 603, 604, and 605, Mr. Cunningham?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. They were received in the FBI Laboratory on March 16th of this year, and they were submitted to the Laboratory by the Dallas office of the FBI.

Mr. EISENBERG. When were they examined?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. They were examined on March 17, 1964.

Mr. EISENBERG. Can you explain the great time difference between the receipt and examination of the first bullet and the receipt and examination of the last three bullets?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. At your request, you asked us to postpone the examination of these three bullets in order to facilitate other examinations you wished more expedited than the examinations of these bullets.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now you are explaining the time between the receipt and the examination?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, can you explain why these three bullets----

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Oh, between the first submission and the second?

Mr. EISENBERG. Yes; between the submission of the first bullet, and the submission to you of the second three bullets.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Well, it is my understanding the first bullet was turned over to the FBI office in Dallas by the Dallas Police Department. They reportedly said this was the only bullet that was recovered, or that they had. Later at the request of this Commission, we went back to the Dallas Police Department and found in their files that they actually had three other bullets.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, did you examine these four bullets to determine whether they had been fired in the revolver, Exhibit No. 143, to the exclusion of all other weapons?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. I am sorry.

Mr. EISENBERG. Did you examine the four bullets which have just been marked into evidence to determine whether those four bullets had been fired in the revolver, No. 143?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. I did.

Mr. EISENBERG. And can you give us your results, your conclusions?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir.

First of all, Commission Exhibit 602, which is our Q-13 bullet, I found to be a .38 Special, copper-coated lead bullet of Western-Winchester manufacture which had been fired from a barrel having five lands and grooves, right twist. I also found the other three bullets----

Mr. EISENBERG. 603----

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. 603, 604, and 605, Commission Exhibits, which are C-253, C-252, and C-251, respectively. I found that 251 and C-253----

Mr. EISENBERG. Could you give us the Commission numbers?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Commission Exhibits 605, 603, they, too, were .38 Special copper-coated lead bullets of Winchester-Western manufacture, which had been fired from a barrel having five lands and grooves, right twist.

The grooves in the barrel ran in a right-hand direction, a right twist.

Mr. EISENBERG. That accounts for three bullets.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes.

And Commission Exhibit 604, which is C-252, is a .38 Special Remington-Peters lead bullet, which has been fired from a barrel having five lands and grooves, right twist.

Mr. EISENBERG. Winchester-Western, you say?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. No, sir; that is Remington----

Mr. EISENBERG. Let's go over that.

We have 603----

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. 602, 603, and 605 are your copper-coated lead bullets of Winchester-Western manufacture.

Mr. EISENBERG. And 604?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. And 604 is a Remington-Peters lead bullet.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, were you able to determine whether those bullets have been fired in this weapon?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. No; I was not.

Mr. EISENBERG. Can you explain why?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir.

First of all, Commission Exhibit No. 602 was too mutilated. There were not sufficient microscopic marks remaining on the surface of this bullet, due to the mutilation, to determine whether or not it had been fired from this weapon.

However, Commission Exhibits 603, 604, and 605 do bear microscopic marks for comparison purposes, but it was not possible from an examination and comparison of these bullets to determine whether or not they had been fired--these bullets themselves--had been fired from one weapon, or whether or not they had been fired from Oswald's revolver.

Further, it was not possible, using .38 Special ammunition, to determine whether or not consecutive test bullets obtained from this revolver had been fired in this weapon.

Mr. EISENBERG. Do you have an opinion as to why it was impossible to make either type of determination?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Yes, sir; this weapon, using .38 Special bullets, was not producing marks consistent with each other. Each time it was fired, the bullet would seem to pass down the barrel in a different way, which could be due to the slightly undersized bullets in the oversized .38 S&W barrel. It would cause an erratic passage down the barrel, and thereby, cause inconsistent individual characteristic marks to be impressed or scratched into the surface of the bullets.

Representative FORD. When you say this weapon, will you identify what you mean by "this weapon"?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. This particular revolver, Commission Exhibit 143.

Mr. EISENBERG. So this brings us back to your earlier testimony, that the gun had been rechambered for a .38 Special, which is slightly smaller in one respect than the .38 S&W, but it had not been rebarreled for the .38 Special?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. That is correct.

The original .38 Smith and Wesson barrel is still on the weapon.

Mr. EISENBERG. So that the .38 Special, when fired in that gun, might wobble slightly as it passes through the barrel?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. I don't know if wobble is the correct word. But as the bullet is passing down this shortened .38 barrel, we are probably getting an erratic passage, so the marks won't reproduce.

Mr. EISENBERG. Is it possible to say that the bullets were not fired from this weapon, No. 143?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. No, it is not; since the rifling characteristics of Commission Exhibit 143--this revolver--are the same as those present on the four bullets.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, you said that there were three bullets of Winchester-Western manufacture, those are 602, 603, and 605, and one bullet of R.-P. manufacture.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. That is correct.

Mr. EISENBERG. However, as to the cartridge cases, Exhibit 594, you told us there were two R.-P. cartridge cases and two Western cartridge cases.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. That is correct.