The President's Commission met at 9 a.m. on March 31, 1964, at 200 Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C.
Present were Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman; Representative Hale Boggs and John J. McCloy, members.
Also present were J. Lee Rankin, general counsel; Melvin Aron Eisenberg, assistant counsel; Norman Redlich, assistant counsel; Charles Murray and Lewis Powell, observers; and Leon Jaworski, special counsel to the attorney general of Texas.
The Chairman. Mr. Frazier, the purpose of today's hearing is to take the testimony of yourself and Mr. Ronald Simmons.
You are, we understand, a firearms expert with the FBI, and Mr. Simmons is a firearms expert with the Weapons System Division at Fort Meade, Md.
You are asked to provide technical information to assist the Commission in this work.
Would you raise your right hand and be sworn, please?
You solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give before this Commission will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Frazier. I do.
The Chairman. You may be seated, please.
Mr. Eisenberg. Mr. Frazier, will you give your name and position?
Mr. Frazier. Robert A. Frazier, Special Agent, Federal Bureau of Investigation, assigned to the FBI Laboratory, Washington, D.C.
Mr. Eisenberg. And your education?
Mr. Frazier. I have a science degree which I received from the University of Idaho.
Mr. Eisenberg. Could you briefly state your training and experience in the fields of firearms, firearms identification, and ballistics?
Mr. Frazier. Beginning in 1937, I was on the University of Idaho Rifle Team, and the following year, 1938. In 1939 I enlisted in the National Guard and for 2 years was on the National Guard Rifle Team firing both small bore, or .22 caliber weapons, and the large bore, .30 caliber weapons, both being of the bolt-action type weapons.
In 1939 and 1940 I instructed in firearms in the Army of the United States, and acquired additional experience in firing of weapons, training in firing at moving targets, additional training in firing the .45 caliber automatic and machineguns. And to further my firearms, practical firearms training, I received in 1942 a training course offered by the Federal Bureau of Investigation after entering on duty with that organization in—on June 9, 1941. That firearms training course consisted of a basic training in handguns—that is, revolvers and automatic pistols, training in autoloading rifles, training in submachineguns, shotguns, and various other types of firearms.
One year later, approximately 1943, I received a specialized administrative firearms course which qualified me for training other agents in the field of law-enforcement type firearms.
Over the past 23 years, I have received the regular FBI firearms training, which is a monthly retraining in firearms, and a periodic, or every 4 years, detailed retraining in the basic FBI firearms—the firearms training with the rifle, submachinegun, shotgun, revolver.
In the FBI, training includes firing both at stationary targets and moving targets with both revolver and rifle and shotgun, and includes firing at slow-fire targets—that is aimed fire for accuracy and rapid fire to increase speed of firing.
Generally in the field of firearms identification, where I have been assigned for 23 years, I received specialized training given in the FBI Laboratory to train me for the position of firearms identification specialist. In that field, we make examinations of bullets and cartridge cases, firearms of various types, for the purpose of identifying weapons as to their caliber, what they are, their manufacturer, their physical characteristics, and determining the type of ammunition which they shoot.
We examine ammunition of various types to identify it as to its caliber, its specific designation, and the type or types of weapons in which it can be fired, and we make comparisons of bullets to determine whether or not they were fired from a particular weapon and make comparisons of cartridge cases for the purpose of determining whether or not they were fired in a particular weapon, or for determining whether or not they had been loaded into or extracted from a particular weapon.
That training course lasted for approximately 1 year. However, of course, the experience in firearms is actually part of the training and continues for the entire time in which you are engaged in examining firearms.
Briefly, that is the summary of the firearms training I have had.
Mr. Eisenberg. Could you estimate the number of examinations you have made of firearms to identify the firearms?
Mr. Frazier. Thousands, I would say—firearms comparisons—I have made in the neighborhood of 50,000 to 60,000.
Mr. McCloy. Have you written any articles on this subject?
Mr. Frazier. Yes. I have prepared an article for the "FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin" on firearms identification, which is published as a reprint and provided to any organization or person interested in the general field of firearms identification.
Mr. McCloy. Have you read most of the literature on the subject?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, I have.
Mr. McCloy. Is there any classical book on this subject?
Mr. Frazier. There are a number of fairly good texts.
The basic one, originally published in 1936, is by Maj. Julian S. Hatcher, who later, as a general, rewrote his book "Firearms Investigation, Identification, and Evidence."
There are many other books published on the subject.
Mr. Eisenberg. May I ask that this person be accepted as a qualified witness on firearms?
The Chairman. Yes, indeed.
Mr. Eisenberg. Mr. Frazier, I now hand you a rifle marked Commission Exhibit 139.
Are you familiar with this weapon?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, I am.
Mr. Eisenberg. And do you recognize it by serial number or by your mark?
Mr. Frazier. By serial number on the barrel, and by my initials which appear on various parts of the weapon.
Mr. Eisenberg. For the record, this is the rifle which was found on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository Building on November 22.
Can you describe this rifle by name and caliber?
Mr. Frazier. It is a caliber 6.5 Italian military rifle, commonly referred to in the United States as a 6.5 mm. Mannlicher-Carcano.
It is a bolt-action clip-fed military rifle.
Do you wish a general physical description of the weapon at this time?
Mr. Eisenberg. Well, no; not at this time.
Can you explain the American equivalent to the 6.5 mm. caliber?
Mr. Frazier. That is the same as .25 caliber. Such weapons in the United States as the .25-20 Winchester, .25-35, the .250 Savage, and the .257 Roberts, are all of the same barrel diameter, or approximately the same barrel diameter. So a decimal figure of .257 inch is the equivalent of 6.5 mm.
Mr. Eisenberg. And can you explain what the caliber is a measure of?
Mr. Frazier. The caliber is the measure of the distance across the raised portions or the lands in the barrel. The groove diameter, or the spirals cut in the barrel to form the rifling, will be slightly larger—in this case between 7/1000ths and 8/1000ths of an inch larger than the actual bore diameter.
The caliber is normally determined by the bore diameter.
Mr. Eisenberg. Can you explain how you made the identification of this rifle?
Mr. Frazier. I identified it pictorially by comparing it with pictures in reference books. And the actual identification was of the manufacturer's name appearing on the barrel and serial number, which indicated it was an Italian military rifle.
Mr. Eisenberg. Did you independently determine the caliber of the rifle?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, I did.
Mr. Eisenberg. Can you tell us how you did that?
Mr. Frazier. The caliber and the caliber type may be confusing here.
The caliber, being the diameter of the barrel, is determined in two ways—one, by comparing the barrel with 6.5mm. Mannlicher-Carcano ammunition, which we also chambered in the weapon and determined that it actually fit the weapon. And, secondly, we measured the width of the barrel with, a micrometer. And in that connection, I would like to point out that we made a sulphur cast of the muzzle of the weapon which permitted us to use a micrometer to determine the land width and the groove width in the barrel.
Mr. Eisenberg. Do you have that sulphur cast?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, I do.
Mr. Eisenberg. And that was made by you or under your supervision?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, it was made by me.
Mr. Eisenberg. Mr. Chairman, I ask that this be admitted as Commission Exhibit No. 540.
The Chairman. It will be admitted.
(The article referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 540, and received in evidence.)
Mr. Eisenberg. Is there any reason that you can think of why this Exhibit 139 might be thought to be a 7.35-or 7.65-caliber rifle?
Mr. Frazier. From outward appearances, it could be a 7.35-mm. rifle, because, basically, that is what it is. But its mechanism has been rebarreled with a 6.5-mm. barrel. Photographs of the weapons are similar, unless you make a very particular study of the photographs of the original model 38 Italian military rifle, which is 7.35 mm.
Early in the Second World War, however, the Italian Government barreled many of these rifles with a 6.5-mm. barrel, since they had a quantity of that ammunition on hand. I presume that would be the most logical way of confusing this weapon with one of a larger caliber.
Mr. Eisenberg. And is the 6.5-caliber weapon distinguished from the 7.35-caliber weapon by name?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, it is; it is by the model number. The model 91/38 designates the 6.5-mm. rifle, whereas the model 38 designates the 7.35.
Mr. Eisenberg. Have you taken photographs of the various markings on the rifle?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, I did.
Mr. Eisenberg. Do you have those with you?
Mr. Frazier. Actually, I think we forwarded those photographs to the Commission.
Mr. Eisenberg. Are these the photographs that you took, or had taken?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir.
Mr. Eisenberg. Has the Federal Bureau of Investigation been supplied with information concerning the meanings and significances of these various markings?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir; we have.
Mr. Eisenberg. Can you state the source of that information?
Mr. Frazier. This information came to us by mail as a result of an inquiry of the Italian Armed Forces Intelligence Service, abbreviated SIFAR, by letter dated March 26, 1964, through the FBI representative in Rome, Italy.
This information is classified as secret by the Italian Government, who have advised that the material may be released to the Commission. However, they desire the retention of the information in a secret category.
The Chairman. Is this essential to the proof?
If it is not, I think we would rather not have it, because the fewer things we have to keep in secret, the better the situation is for us.
Mr. Eisenberg. Off the record.
(Discussion off the record.)
Mr. Eisenberg. Back on the record.
Based on your experience with firearms, is the placement of a specific serial number on a weapon generally confined to one weapon of a given type?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, it is. Particularly—may I refer to foreign weapons particularly?
The serial number consists of a series of numbers which normally will be repeated. However, a prefix is placed before the number, which actually must be part of the serial number, consisting of a letter.
Mr. Eisenberg. Have you been able to confirm that the serial number on this weapon is the only such number on such a weapon?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, it is.
Mr. Eisenberg. All right.
Now, without reference to any classified information, could you briefly describe the markings shown on these photographs?
Mr. Frazier. The first photograph is an overall photograph of the rifle.
Mr. Eisenberg. Excuse me.
These photographs—when you say "first photograph"—these photographs are marked No. 1, No. 2, et cetera, on the back.
Mr. Frazier. Yes, they are.
Photograph No. 1 is an overall photograph of the rifle.
Photograph No. 2 is made of the top of the barrel, showing the serial number C2766.
Photograph No. 3 is also of the top of the rifle, showing a portion of the inscription on the telescopic sight, and the figures 1940, which is the manufacturer's date, the words "Made Italy" and a figure in the form of a crown, under that the letters "R-E," and then a portion of the word "Terni."
Mr. Eisenberg. Can you explain the significance of "Terni?"
Mr. Frazier. Terni is the location for an Italian ordnance plant in Italy where rifles are made, and it is apparent that this weapon was made in Terni, because it is stamped with that name.
Mr. Eisenberg. And the significance of that crown?
Mr. Frazier. I think that would be just an Italian identification mark or proof mark.
Mr. Eisenberg. And are the words "Made Italy" likely to have been put on the weapon at the time of manufacture or subsequently?
Mr. Frazier. No, sir; the words "Made Italy" would be stamped on the weapon by a purchaser or an individual desiring to send the weapon to another country, to establish actually its origin.
Photograph No. 4 is again of the top of the weapon showing the same information—1940, "Made Italy," the crown, the place it was made, and the inscription "Caliber 6.5" across the top of the rear sight.
Photograph No. 5 shows a small circle which appears on the forward end of the receiver, or that portion into which the barrel is screwed, with the words "TNI" in the circle, and over these letters is again a small crown. This could be a proof mark or an inspector's stamp.
Photograph No. 6 is of an inscription on the side of the rear sight which has the appearance of the letter "i," or the letter "l," followed by a capital letter "A," and the capital letter "G," with the numbers "47," and "2," stamped underneath them. I do not know what the significance of that is. It could be, again, an inspector's stamp or a proof mark of some type.
Photograph No. 7 is made of the cocking piece on the end of the bolt, which gives the word "Rocca." This apparently would be the name of the manufacturer of that part of the rifle.
Photograph No. 8 is an inscription "PG" on the top of the bolt of the weapon. This inscription—I do not know of my own knowledge what that is—but it could be the mark of a manufacturer or a proof mark or an inspector's mark made at the time the handle was made to be welded to the bolt.
Photograph No. 9 was taken of the bottom of the receiver of the weapon, with the stock removed. It shows the Number "40," which could refer again to the year of manufacture, 1940, on the receiver, and at the rear of the photograph a small lettered inscription referring again to an inspector stamp, a proof stamp, of some nature. The identity of this, I do not know.
Mr. Eisenberg. Mr. Chairman, I ask that these photographs be admitted as a group under the number 541.
The Chairman. You are going to put all of them in under one number?
Mr. Eisenberg. Yes. They have the subnumbers on the back, which will differentiate them.
The Chairman. They will be admitted.
(The documents referred to were marked Commission Exhibit No. 541, and received in evidence.)
Mr. Eisenberg. Can you explain why someone might call Exhibit 139 a German-made Mauser rifle or a Mauser bolt-action rifle?
Mr. Frazier. The Mauser was one of the earliest, if not the earliest, and the basic bolt-action rifle, from which many others were copied. And since this uses the same type of bolt system, it may have been referred to as a Mauser for that reason.
Mr. Eisenberg. Does this weapon show—how much use does this weapon show?
Mr. Frazier. The stock is worn, scratched. The bolt is relatively smooth, as if it had been operated several times. I cannot actually say how much use the weapon has had. The barrel is—was not, when we first got it, in excellent condition. It was, I would say, in fair condition. In other words, it showed the effects of wear and corrosion.
Mr. Eisenberg. Is this weapon——
The Chairman. I didn't get that last.
Mr. Frazier. It showed the effects of wear and corrosion.
Mr. Eisenberg. Is this weapon used when it is sold into the United States?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, it is a surplus type of weapon.
Mr. Eisenberg. So that it is impossible to attribute any given amount of wear to the last user?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir; it is impossible.
Mr. Eisenberg. Have you measured the dimensions of this rifle assembled, and disassembled?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, I have.
Mr. Eisenberg. Could you give us that information?
Mr. Frazier. The overall length is 40.2 inches. It weighs 8 pounds even.
Mr. McCloy. With the scope?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, with the scope.
The Chairman. And the sling?
Mr. Frazier. That is with the sling, yes, sir. The sling weighs 4¾ ounces. The stock length is 34.8 inches, which is the wooden portion from end to end with the butt plate attached. The barrel and action from the muzzle to the rear of the tang, which is this portion at the rearmost portion of the metal, is 28.9 inches. The barrel only is 21.18 inches.
Mr. Eisenberg. When you say, "this portion," Mr. Frazier, I don't think that is coming down clear in the record. I wonder whether you could rephrase that so as to describe the part of the barrel or part of the stock to which you are pointing when you say "tang."
Mr. Frazier. The tang is the rear of the receiver of the weapon into which the rear mounting screw is screwed to hold the rearmost part of the metal action of the weapon into the wooden stock. From the end of that portion to the muzzle of the weapon is 28.9 inches.
Mr. Eisenberg. And the length of the longest component when the rifle is dissembled, Mr. Frazier?
Mr. Frazier. 34.8 inches, which is the length of the stock, the wooden portion.
Mr. Eisenberg. Can you describe to us the telescopic sight on the rifle in terms of——
Mr. McCloy. Before you get to the sight, can I ask a question?
Mr. Eisenberg. Surely.
Mr. McCloy. How soon after the assassination did you examine this rifle?
Mr. Frazier. We received the rifle the following morning.
Mr. McCloy. Received it in Washington?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir.
Mr. McCloy. And you immediately made your examination of it then?
Mr. Frazier. We made an examination of it at that time, and kept it temporarily in the laboratory.
It was then returned to the Dallas Police Department, returned again to the laboratory—the second time on November 27th, and has been either in the laboratory's possession or the Commission's possession since then.
Mr. McCloy. When you examined the rifle the first time, you said that it showed signs of some corrosion and wear?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir.
Mr. McCloy. Was it what you would call pitted, were the lands in good shape?
Mr. Frazier. No, sir; the lands and the grooves were worn, the corners were worn, and the interior of the surface was roughened from corrosion or wear.
Mr. McCloy. Was there metal fouling in the barrel?
Mr. Frazier. I did not examine it for that.
Mr. McCloy. Could you say roughly how many rounds you think had been fired since it left the factory, with the condition of the barrel as you found it?
Mr. Frazier. No, sir; I could not, because the number of rounds is not an indication of the condition of the barrel, since if a barrel is allowed to rust, one round will remove that rust and wear the barrel to the same extent as 10 or 15 or 50 rounds just fired through a clean barrel.
Mr. McCloy. Thank you.
Mr. Eisenberg. Could you describe the telescopic sight on the rifle? Magnification, country of origin?
Mr. Frazier. It is a four-power telescopic sight employing crosshairs in it as a sighting device, in the interior of the scope.
It is stamped "Optics Ordnance Incorporated, Hollywood California," and under that is the inscription "Made in Japan." It is a very inexpensive Japanese telescopic sight.
The mount attached to it was also made in Japan.
Mr. Eisenberg. Have you removed the mount?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, I have.
Mr. Eisenberg. How many holes did you find drilled into the receiver?
Mr. Frazier. There are two holes in the receiver.
Mr. Eisenberg. Could you form an opinion as to whether these were original holes or whether new holes—new and larger holes had been formed over the original holes?
Mr. Frazier. Normally, the receiver would have no holes at all, and would have to be drilled and tapped for the screws. In the sight itself there normally are three holes, two of which have been enlarged to accommodate the two mounting screws presently holding the mount to the rifle.
Mr. Eisenberg. Do you think, based on your experience with types of screws used in mounts, that these were the original screws and the original holes for the screws?
Mr. Frazier. I could not say—I could not answer that specifically. However, they appear to be the same type of screw as is present on the rest of the mount—although they are somewhat larger in size than the remaining hole which is present in the lower portion of the mount.
Mr. Eisenberg. Now, I now hand you a rifle which is marked C-250. Are you familiar with this rifle?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir.
Mr. Eisenberg. Can you describe it briefly?
Mr. Frazier. It is an identical rifle physically to the rifle Commission's Exhibit 139, in that it is the same caliber, 6.5-mm. Mannlicher-Carcano Italian Military rifle, Model 91/38.
Mr. Eisenberg. Did you attempt to determine by use of this rifle whether the scope was mounted on Exhibit 139 by the firm which is thought to have sold Exhibit 139?
Mr. Frazier. Would you repeat that, please?
Mr. Eisenberg. Yes.
Did you make an attempt to determine, by use of this C-250, whether the firm which had sold Exhibit 139 had mounted the scope on Exhibit 139?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir.
Mr. Eisenberg. Can you describe how you made that attempt?
Mr. Frazier. We contacted the firm, Klein's Sporting Goods in Chicago, and asked them concerning this matter to provide us with a similar rifle mounted in the way in which they normally mount scopes of this type on these rifles, and forward the rifle to us for examination.
In this connection, we did inform them that the scope should be in approximately this position on the frame of the weapon.
Mr. Eisenberg. Pardon me, Mr. Frazier. When you say "this position," so that the record is clear could you——
Mr. Frazier. Oh, yes; in the position in which it now is, approximately three-eighths of an inch to the rear of the receiver ring.
Mr. Eisenberg. On the——
Mr. Frazier. On the C-250 rifle.
When we received the rifle C-250, we examined the mount and found that two of the holes had been enlarged, and that screws had been placed through them and threaded into the receiver of the C-250 rifle.
The third hole in the mount had not been used.
We also found that an identical scope to the one on the Commission's rifle 139 was present on the C-250 rifle.
Mr. Eisenberg. Were the screws used in mounting the C-250 rifle—in mounting the scope on the C-250 rifle—type of screws as those used in mounting the scope on Exhibit 139?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir.
Mr. Eisenberg. And the holes were the same dimensions?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, they are. And the threads in the holes are the same.
Mr. Eisenberg. Mr. Chairman, I would like C-250 admitted into evidence as Commission Exhibit 542.
The Chairman. It may be admitted.
(The article referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 542, and received in evidence.)
The Chairman. At this time I will interrupt to say I must now leave to attend a session of the Supreme Court, and I will return at the conclusion of the session.
In the meantime, Mr. McCloy will preside at the Commission hearing, and in the event he should be required to leave, Mr. McCloy, whatever Commissioner is here will conduct the examination in his absence.
(At this point, Chairman Warren withdrew from the hearing room.)
Mr. Eisenberg. Have you examined the sling on Commission Exhibit 139?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, I did.
Mr. Eisenberg. Do you feel that this is—that this sling was originally manufactured as a rifle sling?
Mr. Frazier. No, sir; it is not in any way similar to a normal sling for a rifle. It appears to be a sling from some carrying case, camera bag, musical-instrument strap, or something of that nature.
We have made attempts to identify it, with no success.
Mr. Eisenberg. Apart from the addition of this sling and mounting of the telescopic sight, have any modifications been made in the C-139 rifle—in the Commission Exhibit 139 rifle?
Mr. Frazier. No, sir.
Mr. McCloy. You would suggest, I gather, Mr. Frazier, that this is a homemade sling?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir; it appears to have been cut to length by inserting this strap, or this sling, on the rifle, and then trimming off the excess ends of the two straps to fit.
Mr. McCloy. How would that broad patch on the sling—how would that be used, in your judgment, in firing the rifle? Would it be wrapped around the base of your——
Mr. Frazier. I find it very difficult to use the rifle with a sling at all. The sling is too short, actually, to do more than put your arm through it.
Mr. McCloy. You get quite a leverage with that?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir, you do, in one direction. But it is rather awkward to wrap the forward hand into the sling in the normal fashion.
Mr. McCloy. This gives a pretty tight——
Mr. Frazier. It can be used. But I don't feel that actually the position of this broad piece is of too much significance as far as use of the sling goes.
Mr. McCloy. But certainly the sling would tend to steady the aim, even in this crude form?
Mr. Frazier. Oh, yes.
Mr. McCloy. It would make more easy an offhand shot than if you didn't have a sling? It would make it more accurate?
Mr. Frazier. It would assist more in offhand than any other type of shooting, yes.
Mr. Eisenberg. Returning to the scope for a moment, on the basis of the experiment, so to speak, which you had Klein's conduct, would you form an opinion as to whether the telescopic sight was mounted on Exhibit 139—was likely to have been mounted—by Klein's, or likely to have been mounted subsequently?
Mr. Frazier. Well, I could not deduce from that—from the way the scope is mounted—who mounted it. I can only say that the two are mounted in identical fashion. And it is possible that the same person or persons mounted the two scopes.
Mr. Eisenberg. Could you briefly explain the operation of this rifle, the bolt action and the clip-feed mechanism?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir; the weapon is loaded by turning up the bolt handle, drawing the bolt to the rear, and inserting the clip from the top of the weapon, after the clip has been loaded with the number of rounds you desire to load.
The maximum number of rounds the clip holds is six. However, the weapon can be loaded with a clip holding 5, 4, 3, 2, or 1 round.
This is done by inserting the clip in the rear portion of the ejection port, and pushing it downwards until it clears the bottom of the bolt. The weapon then is loaded by moving the bolt forward. It picks up one cartridge out of the clip, carries it into the chamber of the weapon, and the bolt is then locked by turning down.
To fire the weapon, it is merely necessary to pull the trigger, since the closing of the bolt has cocked the cocking piece on the weapon.
Mr. Eisenberg. Can you proceed to show the extraction and ejection mechanism?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir. The extraction is merely by raising the bolt and drawing it to the rear. When the cartridge is first loaded, the rim on the base of the cartridge is caught under the extractor in the face of the bolt, so that drawing the bolt to the rear draws the fired cartridge or a loaded cartridge if it has not been fired, out of the chamber to the rear, where the opposite side of the cartridge strikes a projection in the ejection port called the ejector. The ejector strikes on the opposite side of the case from the extractor, causing the shell to be thrown out of the weapon on the right-hand side.
Mr. Eisenberg. Now, to fire the next shot, is any further action necessary, apart from closing the bolt and pulling the trigger, if remaining cartridges are in the clip?
Mr. Frazier. No, sir.
Mr. Eisenberg. Could you pull out the clip and explain any markings you find on it?
Mr. Frazier. The only markings are the manufacturer's markings, "SMI," on the base of the clip, and a number, 952. The significance of that number I am not aware of. It could be a part number or a manufacturer's code number.
Mr. Eisenberg. Is there any reason that you can think of why someone might call that a five-shot clip?
Mr. Frazier. No, sir, unless they were unfamiliar with it. There is an area of confusion in that a different type of rifle shooting larger ammunition, such as a .30-06 or a German Mauser rifle, uses five-shot clips, and the five-shot clip is the common style or size of clip, whereas this one actually holds six.
Mr. Eisenberg. Have you had occasion to purchase ammunition for this rifle?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir.
Mr. Eisenberg. Does the ammunition come in the clip?
Mr. Frazier. Normally it does not. The ammunition that we have purchased for this rifle comes in 20-shot boxes. It is possible—and I say this as a result of reading advertisements—to buy ammunition for this rifle, and to receive a clip or clips at the same time, but not necessarily part of the same shipment.
Mr. Eisenberg. When you ordered C-250, which is now Commission Exhibit 542, did you receive a clip with that rifle?
Mr. Frazier. No, sir.
Mr. Eisenberg. Would you deduce, therefore, that the clip—that someone wishing to shoot that rifle and use a clip in the rifle would have purchased the clip later?
Mr. Frazier. They would have to acquire it from some source, yes.
Mr. Eisenberg. Is it commonly available?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir.
Mr. McCloy. Can you use that rifle without the clip?
Mr. Frazier. Yes; you can.
Mr. McCloy. What is the advantage of the clip?
Mr. Frazier. It permits repeated firing of the weapon without manually loading one shot at a time.
Mr. McCloy. The only other way you can fire it is by way of manual load?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir; one shot at a time.
Mr. McCloy. When you say a six-cartridge clip, could that gun have been fired with the clip fully loaded and another one in the chamber?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir.
Mr. McCloy. The same as the .30-06?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir; the weapon will hold a maximum of seven.
Mr. Eisenberg. I now hand you a cartridge in an envelope, marked Commission Exhibit 141. Are you familiar with this cartridge?
Mr. Frazier. Yes; I am. I received this cartridge for examination in the FBI laboratory, submitted to me as a cartridge removed from the rifle at the time it was recovered.
Mr. Eisenberg. Can you describe that cartridge in terms of name, manufacturer, and country of origin?
Mr. Frazier. It is a 6.5 mm. Mannlicher-Carcano cartridge, manufactured by the Western Cartridge Co., at East Alton, Ill.
It is loaded with a full metal-jacketed bullet of the military type. Cartridges of this type which I have examined, having this type of bullet, have bullets weighing 160 to 161 grains.
Mr. McCloy. When you mentioned that cartridge as being a Mannlicher-Carcano cartridge, could that be fired, for example, in a Mannlicher 6.5 Schoenauer?
Mr. Frazier. I am not familiar with that.
Mr. McCloy. That is the normal sporting rifle—that Mannlicher Schoenauer is the normal 6.5 Austrian sporting rifle that you buy. I just wondered if it was the same cartridge.
Mr. Frazier. I am sorry. I don't know whether there is a distinction between these two or not.
Mr. McCloy. I happen to have one of those. And I was just wondering if it is the same cartridge.
Mr. Eisenberg. Mr. Frazier, I now hand you a series of three cartridge cases. I ask you whether you are familiar with these cartridge cases.
Mr. Frazier. Yes; I am. I received these cartridge cases on two different occasions for examination in the laboratory, and comparison with the rifle.
Mr. Eisenberg. Do these cases have your mark on them?
Mr. Frazier. Yes; they do. Each is marked with my initials and the inscription for identification purposes.
Mr. Eisenberg. Mr. Chairman, I would like to introduce these cartridge cases into evidence as Commission Exhibits 543, 544 and 545.
Mr. McCloy. They may be admitted.
(The articles referred to were marked Commission Exhibits Nos. 543, 544, and 545 and received in evidence.)
Mr. McCloy. Will you introduce evidence to show where they came from?
Mr. Eisenberg. Well, sir, the record will show at the conclusion of the hearings where they came from. This witness is able to identify them only as to his examination.
Mr. McCloy. I understand that. I understand that witness cannot identify them. But I simply asked for the record whether you have evidence to show where they did come from.
Mr. Eisenberg. Yes; for the record, these cartridges were found on the sixth floor of the School Book Depository Building. They were found near the southeast corner window—that is, the easternmost window on the southern face of the sixth floor of that building.
Mr. Frazier, are these cartridge cases which have just been admitted into evidence the same type of cartridge—from the same type of cartridge—as you just examined, Commission Exhibit No. 141?
Mr. Frazier. Yes; they are.
Mr. Eisenberg. That is, 6.5 mm. Mannlicher-Carcano, manufactured by the Western Cartridge Co.?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir.
Mr. Eisenberg. You gave the weight of the bullet which is found in this type of cartridge. Could you give us a description of the contour of the bullet, and its length?
Mr. Frazier. The bullet has parallel sides, with a round nose, is fully jacketed with a copper-alloy coating or metal jacket on the outside of a lead core. Its diameter is 6.65 millimeters. The length—possibly it would be better to put it in inches rather than millimeters. The diameter is .267 inches, and a length of 1.185, or approximately 1.2 inches.
Mr. McCloy. You say that the diameter is 6.65. Did you mean 6.65 or 6.5 millimeters?
Mr. Frazier. I was looking for that figure on that. It is about 6.6—6.65 millimeters.
The bullet, of course, will be a larger diameter than the bore of the weapon to accommodate the depths of the grooves in the barrel.
On the base of the bullet is a crimp ring, or a cannelure, which is located two-tenths of an inch from the base up the bullet and which is 6/100ths of an inch in width—that is, it is a band around the bullet 6/100ths of an inch wide.
I believe that is a description of the bullet.
Mr. Eisenberg. Have you tested Commission Exhibit 139 with the type of ammunition you have been looking at to determine the muzzle velocity of that type of ammunition in this weapon?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir. The tests were run to determine the muzzle velocity of this rifle, using this ammunition, at the Naval Research Laboratory in Washington, D.C., on December 2, 1963, using two different lots of ammunition—Lot No. 6,000 and Lot No. 6,003.
I might point out that there were four lots of ammunition manufactured by the Western Cartridge Co., only two of which are available.
Mr. Eisenberg. Can you give the results?
Mr. Frazier. Possibly I can give the results shot by shot, so the record will show each one, and then give an average for them.
Mr. Eisenberg. Fine.
Mr. Frazier. The first shot, Lot 6,000, the velocity was 2199.7 feet per second.
Shot No. 2, Lot 6,000, velocity 2,180.3 feet per second.
The third shot, velocity—same lot—velocity 2,178.9 feet per second.
The third shot, velocity—and this is Lot No. 6,003—velocity was 2,184.8 feet per second.
The fourth shot, Lot No. 6,003, was 2,137.6 feet per second.
Fifth shot, Lot No. 6,000, 2,162.7 feet per second.
The sixth shot, Lot 6,003, 2,134.8 feet per second.
An average of all shots of 2,165 feet per second.
Mr. Eisenberg. How would you characterize the differences between the muzzle velocities of the various rounds in terms of whether that difference was a large or small difference?
Mr. Frazier. This is a difference well within the manufacturer's accepted standards of velocity variations. They permit in their standard ammunition manual, which is a guide to the entire industry in the United States, a 40-foot-per-second, plus or minus, variation shot to shot in the same ammunition.
Mr. Eisenberg. Have you calculated the muzzle energy of this 6.5 millimeter ammunition in this weapon?
Mr. Frazier. It was furnished by letter to the Commission. Yes, sir—the muzzle energy was calculated on the basis of the average velocity of 2,165 feet per second as 1,676 foot-pounds.
Mr. Eisenberg. This is a calculation rather than a measurement?
Mr. Frazier. Necessarily a calculation, because it is merely a term used to compare one bullet against another rather than for any practical purposes because—because of the bullet's extremely light weight.
The bullet's velocity and weight, and gravity enter into the determination of its energy in foot-pounds.
Mr. Eisenberg. Is the 6.5 millimeter Mannlicher-Carcano with which we are dealing an accurate type of ammunition as opposed to other types of military ammunition—as compared, I should say, with other types of military ammunition?
Mr. Frazier. I would say it is also accurate. As other types of ammunition the 6.5 millimeter cartridge or bullet is a very accurate bullet, and ammunition of this type as manufactured in the United States would give fairly reasonable accuracy. Other military cartridges may or may not give accurate results.
But the cartridge inherently is an accurate cartridge.
Mr. Eisenberg. Is this type of cartridge readily available for purchase?
Mr. Frazier. Yes; it is. Information we have indicates that 2 million rounds of this ammunition was reimported into this country and placed on sale.
Mr. Eisenberg. Commission Exhibit No. 141, the cartridge found in the chamber—I should say, was found in the chamber. Do you draw any inference from the fact that the cartridge was found in the chamber? In your experience, does one automatically reload whether or not one intends to fire, or is there a special significance in the fact that the cartridge had been chambered?
Mr. Frazier. I would say no, there would be no inference which I could draw based on human behavior as to why someone would or would not reload a cartridge. Normally, if you were—in my experience—shooting at some object, and it was no longer necessary to shoot, you would not reload.
You may or may not reload. It would be a normal thing to automatically reload. But not necessarily in every instance.
Mr. McCloy. Do you have any information of your own knowledge as to whether this cartridge was in the chamber or not at the time the rifle was found?
Mr. Frazier. Only as furnished to me—it was submitted as having been removed from the rifle by the Dallas Police Department.
Mr. McCloy. As having been removed from the chamber?
Mr. Frazier. From the chamber of the rifle.
Mr. McCloy. But you did not remove it yourself?
Mr. Frazier. No, sir.
Mr. Eisenberg. Did you make a test to determine the pattern of the cartridge-case ejection of Commission Exhibit 139?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir; I made two studies in connection with the ejection pattern—one to determine distance and one to determine the angle at which the cartridge cases leave the ejection port.
Mr. Eisenberg. And did you summarize your examination by diagrams?
Mr. Frazier. Yes; I did.
Mr. Eisenberg. Could you show us those diagrams?
Mr. Frazier. In this diagram——
Mr. Eisenberg. Excuse me just a second, Mr. Frazier.
Were these diagrams prepared by you?
Mr. Frazier. Yes; they were—not the actual physical diagrams, but the figures on the diagrams were furnished by me to the draftsman.
Mr. Eisenberg. Mr. Chairman, may I introduce these diagrams as Commission Exhibits Nos. 546 and 547?
Mr. McCloy. They may be admitted.
(The documents referred to were marked Commission Exhibits Nos. 546 and 547, and were received in evidence.)
Mr. Eisenberg. Could you give us the results of your tests by using these diagrams, Mr. Frazier?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir.
In this test, Commission Exhibit 546, the diagram illustrates the positions on the floor at which cartridge cases landed after being extracted and ejected from the rifle, Commission's Exhibit 139. In the top portion of Exhibit 546, the barrel was held depressed at a 45-degree angle, and in the lower half of the exhibit it shows the pattern with the barrel held in a horizontal position. Each spot marked with a figure on the diagram shows where one cartridge case landed in both instances, and each one is marked with the distance and the angle to which the cartridge case was ejected.
With the barrel held in the depressed condition, all of the cartridge cases landed within an 85-inch circle located 80 degrees to the right front of the rifle. That may be confusing. It was 80 degrees to the right from the line of sight of the rifle and at a distance of 86 inches from the ejection port.
Now, this circle will not necessarily encompass all cartridge cases ejected from the rifle, since the ejection is determined, not only by the angle of the weapon, but more by the force with which the bolt is operated. A very light force on the bolt can cause the cartridge case to tip gently out and fall at your feet. However, under normal conditions of reloading in a fairly rapid manner, we found the cartridge cases to land in this circle.
The same situation is true of the test made with the muzzle in the horizontal condition.
All of the cartridge cases landed within a 47-inch circle, which was located at right angles to the ejection port, or 90 degrees from the line of sight, and at a distance 80 inches from the ejection port.
In both of these tests, the ejection port of the weapon was held 32 inches above the floor.
In the second test performed, Commission Exhibit 547, the test was made to ascertain how high above the ejection port a cartridge case would fly as it was being ejected.
After ejecting numerous cartridge cases from the weapon with the barrel held in a depressed condition, it was found that the cartridge cases did not exceed two inches above the level of the ejection port. And with the muzzle held horizontally, it did not exceed 12 inches above the level of the ejection port.
Mr. Eisenberg. In making these tests, was the bolt pulled with a normal degree of rifle pull?
Mr. Frazier. It was pulled with various pulls, to determine what the effect would be with different speeds of the bolt.
Mr. Eisenberg. How did you select the distance above the floor at which the rifle was fired?
Mr. Frazier. We selected a distance which we thought might be typical of a condition which would give an overall picture of the ejection pattern, and not from any basis of previous information as to possibly how the weapon had been fired previously. Thirty-two inches happened to be approximately table height, so that we could control the height of the weapon readily.
Mr. Eisenberg. I now hand you three Commission Exhibits, 510, 511, and 512, which are photographs which have been identified as giving the location of the cartridges—cartridge cases—Nos. 543, 544, and 545, on the sixth floor of the School Book Depository Building. I ask you to examine these pictures, and to determine whether if the rifle had been fired from the window shown in these pictures, the location of the cartridge cases is consistent with the results of the tests you ran to determine the ejection patterns.
Mr. Frazier. I would say yes; it is consistent—although the cartridge cases are—two of them—against the wall. There is a stack of boxes fairly near the wall, and the position of the cartridge cases could very well have been affected by the boxes. That is, they could strike the box and bounce for several feet, and they could have bounced back and forth in this small area here and come to rest in the areas shown in the photographs.
Mr. Eisenberg. In making your tests, did you notice much ricochet?
Mr. Frazier. Yes; considerable. Each time a cartridge case hit the floor, it would bounce anywhere from 8 inches to 10 to 15 feet.
Mr. McCloy. Make a lot of noise?
Mr. Frazier. Yes; a clatter.
Mr. Eisenberg. Have you tested Commission Exhibit 139 to determine its accuracy under rapid-fire conditions?
Mr. Frazier. Yes; I have.
Mr. Eisenberg. Can you describe these tests?
Mr. Frazier. A series of three tests were made. When we first received the rifle, there was not an opportunity to test it at long range, so we tested it at short range. After we had obtained sample bullets and cartridge cases from it, we fired accuracy and speed tests with it. Three examiners did the firing, all three being present at the same time.
The first tests were made at 15 yards, and shooting at a silhouette target.
Mr. Eisenberg. A silhouette of a man?
Mr. Frazier. A paper silhouette target of a man; yes.
Possibly you may wish to mark these, to refer to them.
Mr. Eisenberg. These targets were made by you or in your presence?
Mr. Frazier. These are actually copies of the actual targets. I have the actual targets here, if you would rather use those. However, the markings show better on the copies than they do on the actual targets.
Mr. Eisenberg. Mr. Chairman, I request permission to introduce the copies for the reasons given, as Commission Exhibits 548 and 549.
Mr. McCloy. You have made these copies, Mr. Frazier?
Mr. Frazier. Well, I had them made. They are actual xerox copies of the original targets, which are black, and do not show the markings placed around the holes.
Mr. Eisenberg. Off the record.
Mr. McCloy. Back on the record.
Mr. Frazier, you have the original targets that were used in this experiment.
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir.
Mr. McCloy. Were you one of the three that fired?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir.
Mr. McCloy. Can you identify your target as distinguished from the other two?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir.
Mr. McCloy. Do you have the target that you fired?
Mr. Frazier. I fired—yes, I do. However, another examiner also fired at this same target.
Mr. McCloy. Have you made a copy of that—or did you cause a copy of that target to be made?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir.
Mr. McCloy. And you have that with you?
Mr. Frazier. Yes; I do.
Mr. McCloy. Have you marked it yet?
Mr. Eisenberg. No. That would be 548.
Mr. McCloy. Suppose you identify that copy.
Mr. Eisenberg. This copy that you are presenting to us has initials at the bottom "CC-R-CK"?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir.
Mr. Eisenberg. And the numbers and letters D-2 on the right-hand margin?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir.
Mr. Eisenberg. And that has been copied under your supervision?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir.
Mr. Eisenberg. Mr. Chairman?
Mr. McCloy. That can be admitted as Commission Exhibit 548.
(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 548, and received in evidence.)
Mr. McCloy. Now, is Commission Exhibit 548 an accurate copy of the target which you have—that you fired, and which you presented?
Mr. Frazier. Yes; it is.
Mr. Eisenberg. Now, you also have a copy here which has the name on it Killion, and similar initials, letters, and numbers to the other target. Is this an accurate copy which you had prepared?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir. That was the target fired by Charles Killion in my presence.
Mr. Eisenberg. May I have this admitted as 549?
Mr. McCloy. It may be admitted.
(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 549, and received in evidence.)
Mr. Eisenberg. This test was performed at 15 yards, did you say, Mr. Frazier?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir. And this series of shots we fired to determine actually the speed at which the rifle could be fired, not being overly familiar with this particular firearm, and also to determine the accuracy of the weapon under those conditions.
Mr. Eisenberg. And could you give us the names of the three agents who participated?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir. Charles Killion, Cortlandt Cunningham, and myself.
Mr. Eisenberg. And the date?
Mr. Frazier. November 27, 1963.
Mr. Eisenberg. How many shots did each agent fire?
Mr. Frazier. Killion fired three, Cunningham fired three, and I fired three.
Mr. Eisenberg. And do you have the times within which each agent fired the three shots?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir. Killion fired his three shots in nine seconds, and they are shown—the three shots are interlocking, shown on Commission Exhibit No. 549.
Cunningham fired three shots—I know the approximate number of seconds was seven.
Cunningham's time was approximately seven seconds.
Mr. Eisenberg. Can you at a later date confirm the exact time?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir.
Mr. Eisenberg. And you will do that by letter to the Commission, or if you happen to come back by oral testimony?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir.
Mr. Eisenberg. And your time, Mr. Frazier?
Mr. Frazier. For this series, was six seconds, for my three shots, which also were on the target at which Mr. Cunningham fired, which is Exhibit 548.
Mr. Eisenberg. Could you characterize the dispersion of the shots on the two targets which you have been showing us, 548 and 549?
Mr. Frazier. The bullets landed approximately—in Killion's target, No. 549, approximately 2½ inches high, and 1 inch to the right, in the area about the size of a dime, interlocking in the paper, all three shots.
On Commission Exhibit 548, Cunningham fired three shots. These shots were interlocking, or within an eighth of an inch of each other, and were located approximately 4 inches high and 1 inch to the right of the aiming point. The three shots which I fired were—landed in a three-quarter inch circle, two of them interlocking with Cunningham's shots, 4 inches high, and approximately 1 inch to the right of the aiming point.
Mr. Eisenberg. Can you describe the second series of tests?
Mr. Frazier. The second test which was performed was two series of three shots at 25 yards, instead of 15 yards. I fired both of these tests, firing them at a cardboard target, in an effort to determine how fast the weapon could be fired primarily, with secondary purpose accuracy.
We did not attempt—I did not attempt to maintain in that test an accurate rate of fire.
This is the actual target which I fired.
Mr. Eisenberg. And that target has all six holes in it?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir—two series of three holes, the first three holes being marked with the No. 1, and the second series being marked No. 2.
Mr. Eisenberg. Mr. Chairman, I would like this introduced as 550.
Mr. McCloy. That will be admitted.
(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 550, and received in evidence.)
Mr. Eisenberg. Could you describe for the record the dispersion on the two series?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir. The first series of three shots were approximately—from 4 to 5 inches high and from 1 to 2 inches to the right of the aiming point, and landed within a 2-inch circle. These three shots were fired in 4.8 seconds. The second series of shots landed—one was about 1 inch high, and the other two about 4 or 5 inches high, and the maximum spread was 5 inches.
That series was fired in 4.6 seconds.
Mr. Eisenberg. And do you have the date?
Mr. Frazier. That also was on the 27th of November.
Mr. Eisenberg. Same date as the first tests?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir.
Mr. Eisenberg. And you performed one more test, I believe?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir. We fired additional targets at 100 yards on the range at Quantico, Va., firing groups of three shots. And I have the four targets we fired here.
Mr. Eisenberg. Mr. Chairman, I would like these admitted as 551, 552, 553, and 554.