The President's Commission reconvened at 2:10 p.m.
Mr. McCLOY. You are still under oath, you know.
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.
Mr. EISENBERG. I would like to begin by clearing up a few items which
have been covered or left open during the morning session.
First, you were going to supply us with certain figures concerning the
times which were taken by two of the Agents to fire three shots in the
first series of tests which were made for determining the accuracy of
the firing under rapid-fire conditions.
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; that was at two targets. The first one I
gave you--Killion fired in 9 seconds. The other was a target marked
Cunningham and Frazier. Cunningham fired his three shots in 8 seconds
and I fired my three shots in 5.9 seconds.
Mr. EISENBERG. Now also you had made certain calculations concerning
what we have been calling the lead that had to be given to a target,
assuming various factors which were supplied to you. Do you have those
calculations now?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; the lead would amount to shooting over the
target at 175 feet, a distance of 6.7 inches, and the decimal on that
figure is not an accurate decimal because this figure relates to an
average velocity of ammunition of this type, and is concerned with a
speed of a vehicle which is also estimated, and a distance which may or
may not be exactly accurate.
But at a ground speed of 11 miles an hour, it would be necessary to
shoot over or lead a target 6.7 inches for the bullet to hit the
intended spot on the target. At 265 feet the lead would be .51 feet, or
6.1 inches.
I might say that the variation, that of less lead at the longer
distance, is in great part due to the fact that the target is farther
away and that the shot is more nearly in line with the direction in
which the target is moving, which would account for much of the drop in
the amount of lead.
And, in addition, I calculated this on the basis of the fact that there
was a slight slope between the 175-foot and the 265-foot location
downwards away from the shooter, which would also tend to more nearly
cause the target to be moving in the same path as the bullet.
Mr. EISENBERG. And did you convert those lead distances into the amount
of inches which the shooter would have to sight above the head, above
the point of the target?
Mr. FRAZIER. Those figures I gave were the elevations or the sighting
distances above the target. The 6.7 inches vertical lead or sighting
over the target is the equivalent of leading on the ground of 1.4 feet.
Mr. EISENBERG. And that table also shows leads at other car speeds?
Mr. FRAZIER. This table--I could calculate them--it only shows miles
per hour translated into feet per second.
Mr. EISENBERG. I mean, does it show various miles per hour?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; it shows miles per hour in feet per second.
Mr. EISENBERG. Without going into detail at this time, may I have
permission to introduce this table into evidence?
Mr. McCLOY. It may be admitted.
Mr. EISENBERG. This will be Commission Exhibit 560.
(The item identified as Commission Exhibit No. 560 was received in
evidence.)
Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Frazier, in the construction of this table
and also in your last tests for rapid fire for this rifle, you used a
five-and-a-half second figure as a factor in your calculations, and in
your attempt at rapid fire accuracy placements. Can you give us the
source of that figure?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. You were the source of it, based on examination,
as I understood it, of a movie taken at the scene, and measurements
taken at the scene. However, I have no knowledge of the actual time.
Mr. EISENBERG. For the record, I just wanted to establish that this is
a source that was supplied by the Commission and which is tentative,
and it is not to imply any final conclusion on the part of the FBI; is
that correct?
Mr. FRAZIER. I hope it is taken that way, because we don't know what
the time actually was.
Mr. EISENBERG. Another point then, which should have been covered this
morning, Mr. Frazier, in your qualifications: have you testified before
in court?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; I have.
Mr. EISENBERG. Can you estimate the number of times?
Mr. FRAZIER. Approximately 400 times.
Mr. EISENBERG. Finally, we had discussed briefly your examination
of consecutively manufactured bolt faces to see whether any two
such consecutively manufactured bolt faces were identical in their
microscopic characteristics. How many such examinations have you
performed.
Mr. FRAZIER. I would say about four examinations of pairs of bolt faces
which have been consecutively manufactured.
Mr. EISENBERG. And in each case the result was what?
Mr. FRAZIER. The marks on one bolt face in no way resembled the marks
on the other bolt face.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Frazier, we were just beginning to discuss,
before the recess, Commission Exhibit 559, which is a picture, as
you described it, of Exhibit No. 543 and a test cartridge under a
microscope, and that is also known as C-6 and C-14, is that right?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.
Mr. EISENBERG. Could you discuss, by using that picture, some of the
markings which you have seen under the microscope and on the basis of
which you made your identification?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. In the photograph I have drawn some small
circles and numbered them, those circles, correspondingly on each side
of the photograph. The purpose of the circles is not to point out all
the similarities, but to call attention to some of them and to help
orient in locating a mark on one with a mark on the opposite side of
the photograph. In general the area shown is immediately outside of
the firing pin in the bolt of the 139 rifle, on the left side of the
photograph, and Commission Exhibit 543 on the right side.
The circles have been drawn around the dents or irregularly shaped
ridges, small bumps, and depressions on the surface of the metal in six
places on each side of the photograph. It is an examination of these
marks, and all of the marks on the face of the breech, microscopically
which permits a conclusion to be reached. The photograph itself
actually is a substitute to show only the type of marks found rather
than their nature, that is, their height, their width, or their
relationship to each other, which is actually a mental, visual,
comparison on the two specimens themselves.
Mr. EISENBERG. Referring for a second to this mental, visual,
comparison, Mr. Frazier, would a person without firearms
training--firearms-identification training--be able to look under a
microscope and make a determination for himself concerning whether a
given cartridge case had been fired in a given weapon?
Mr. FRAZIER. In that connection that person could look through the
microscope. He may or may not see these individual characteristics
which are present, because he does not know what to look for in the
first place, and, secondly, they are of such a nature that you have
to mentally sort them out in your mind going back and forth between
one area and the other until you form a mental picture of them in a
comparison such as this.
If it was a different type of comparison, of parallel marks or
something of that nature, then he could see the marks, but in either
instance, without having compared hundreds and hundreds of specimens,
he would not be able to make any statement as to whether or not they
were fired from the same rifle.
Mr. EISENBERG. Would you say that this is, then, a matter of expert
interpretation rather than a point-for-point comparison which a layman
could make?
Mr. FRAZIER. I would say so; yes. I don't think a layman would
recognize some of the things on these cartridge cases and some shown
in the photographs as actually being significant or not significant,
because there will be things present which have nothing whatsoever to
do with the firing of the cartridge case in the gun.
There may be a depression in the primer to begin with, and there are no
marks registered at that point as a result of the firing. Unless these
things are known to occur, someone may actually arrive at a different
conclusion, because of the absence of similar marks.
Mr. EISENBERG. Now having reference to the specific exhibit before you,
which is 559----
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Are all the marks shown in both photographs identical?
Mr. FRAZIER. No.
Mr. EISENBERG. And could you go into detail on a mark which is not
identical to explain why you would get such a result?
Mr. FRAZIER. Well, for instance, between what I have drawn here as
circle 4 and circle 5, there is a slanting line from the upper left
to the lower right on C-6. This line shows as a white line in the
photograph.
On the other side there is a rough, very rough ridge which runs through
there, having an entirely different appearance from the relatively
sharp line on C-6. The significant part of that mark is the groove in
between, rather than the sharp edge of the mark, because the sharp
corner could be affected by the hardness of the metal or the irregular
surface of the primer and the amount of pressure exerted against
it, pressing it back against the face of the bolt, at the time the
cartridges were fired. So that you would never expect all the marks
on one cartridge case to be identical with all the marks on the other
cartridge case.
In fact, you would expect many differences. But the comparison is made
on the overall pattern, contour, and nature of the marks that are
present.
Mr. EISENBERG. Off the record.
(Discussion off the record.)
Mr. EISENBERG. Back on the record.
Mr. Frazier, could you discuss or characterize those points which you
have circled on Commission Exhibit 559, starting from the top?
Mr. FRAZIER. Number 1 circle is drawn around a depression in the metal
of irregular shape. I might say that number 1 shows on the right side
of the photograph, and only half of it shows on the left side because
of the relative position of the two cartridge cases in the photograph.
Number 2 is a circle drawn around a long line which extends obliquely
across each cartridge case from the upper left to the lower right. The
long line itself is a means of orienting the cartridge cases one with
the other, but the circle is drawn around a break in that line in the
form of a very small hump or an absence of metal which shows up as an
actual break in the long line.
Number 3 again is a depression between two grooves, which is rather
similar in shape. I cannot tell you how deep it is because the
photograph only shows two dimensions. But on the cartridge cases it has
a very characteristic depth to it, which is readily apparent.
It is formed by two parallel lines extending from the upper left to the
lower, towards the lower right, with the depression in between, and
again one side of the depression is formed by a small raised area in
the primer metal which is seen in each photograph as a conical, almost
a conical-shaped bump or raised area.
Number 4 is another raised portion on the photograph. In connection
with 4, I would like to point out that a portion of this bump has
been erased from the test cartridge case on the left-hand side of the
photograph, the erasure caused by the turning of the bolt of the weapon
while being pressed against the primer, which has smoothed off some of
the protruding rough areas on the primer.
Number 5 is a horizontal ridge which has two depressions, one on the
top and one on the bottom, shown on both sides of the photograph, and
number 6 is a wishbone type of ridge, a wide ridge which divides into
two smaller ridges on the left-hand edge, and in the middle of the
dividing lines, the forked lines, is a small dent or raised portion.
Those six which I have marked are only portions of those shown in the
photograph, and of course the photograph does not show the entire
surface of the primer.
Mr. EISENBERG. Were you able to find identifying marks on the brass as
well as the primer on this cartridge case?
Mr. FRAZIER. No; I did not notice any marks on the brass portions
outside of the primer.
Mr. EISENBERG. Is that typical of cartridge-case identification?
Mr. FRAZIER. Generally that is true, unless there is a great pressure,
unless the brass of the cartridge case is soft, or unless the marks are
very sharp on the breech face; then they will be impressed into the
brass.
Mr. EISENBERG. This picture represents only a portion of the primer.
You examined the entire primer to make your identification?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.
Mr. EISENBERG. And found?
Mr. FRAZIER. It would not have been necessary to examine the entire
primer necessarily, but of course we do examine the entire primer,
pick out all of the marks on the left and the right, and rotate the
cartridge cases and look at them from various angles, before arriving
at a conclusion.
Mr. EISENBERG. Can you amplify the meaning of the statement that it
would not be necessary to examine the entire primer?
Mr. FRAZIER. There are sufficient marks shown in this photograph upon
which to base an identification. In other words, it would not be
necessary to have the rest of the primer if it had been mutilated or
destroyed or something of that nature.
Mr. EISENBERG. Did you also examine the firing-pin impression in the
cartridge?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.
Mr. EISENBERG. Did you take a picture of that examination?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes. Here is the photograph of the firing-pin impression,
again on the left the rifle, and on the right the cartridge case,
Commission's 543.
Mr. EISENBERG. That bears the number C-14 and C-6, corresponding to the
numbers on Commission Exhibit 559?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; it does.
Mr. EISENBERG. Did you take this photograph or have it taken under your
supervision?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.
Mr. EISENBERG. What is the magnification of this photograph?
Mr. FRAZIER. 90 diameters.
Mr. EISENBERG. Is it equal on both sides?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have this admitted?
Mr. McCLOY. It may be admitted.
Mr. EISENBERG. That will be 561.
(The item identified as Commission Exhibit No. 561 was received in
evidence.)
Mr. EISENBERG. Could you proceed with the discussion of the circled
marks on this photograph, number 561?
Mr. FRAZIER. In the case of firing-pin impressions which are shown on
Exhibit 561, the marks result from two related sources; excuse me, not
sources, but from two related causes, one being the force given to the
firing pin driving it into the primer to set off the cartridge, and
the second being the force of the powder charge inside the cartridge
being driven back--driving the primer back against the firing pin at
the same time, so that the metal of the primer is caused to flow or be
stamped by the firing pin and pressed against by the gases, so that any
irregularities in the firing pin will be impressed into the primer of
the cartridge case.
Number 1 consists of a double horizontal line, one a fairly wide coarse
line at the top. Immediately under that approximately one-eighth of an
inch is a fairly fine horizontal line.
Circled and marked number 2 is a very coarse, wide ridge, very short
in length, approximately one-half an inch, and an eighth to a quarter
of an inch in height. This ridge is formed by two grooves, a straight
groove across the top, and a curved or crescent-shaped groove across
the bottom.
Number 3 is a circle drawn around two small raised areas in the primer
metal separated by a depression.
Number 4 is a section from a large ridge across the metal of the
primer, which has a break in its surface in the lower portion of the
circle, and immediately above the break is a groove, and immediately
above that again is another ridge which is at a little steeper angle
upwards to the left.
Number 5 is a depression, is a portion of a depression appearing at
the bottom of the circle with a very short ridge running horizontally
across the circle.
Mr. EISENBERG. Again there are dissimilar marks on these two pictures,
Mr. Frazier?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; there are, for the same reason, that metal does not
flow the same in every instance, and it will not be impressed to the
same depth and to the same amount, depending on the type of metal, the
blow that is struck, and the pressures involved.
Mr. EISENBERG. Is your identification made therefore on the basis
of the presence of similarities, as opposed to the absence of
dissimilarities?
Mr. FRAZIER. No, that is not exactly right. The identification is made
on the presence of sufficient individual microscopic characteristics
so that a very definite pattern is formed and visualized on the two
surfaces.
Dissimilarities may or may not be present, depending on whether there
have been changes to the firing pin through use or wear, whether the
metal flows are the same, and whether the pressures are the same or not.
So I don't think we can say that it is an absence of dissimilarities,
but rather the presence of similarities.
Mr. EISENBERG. Any further questions on this cartridge case?
Mr. McCLOY. No.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Frazier, you have testified also that you identified
the cartridge case which is Exhibit 544 as having been fired from this
rifle, in this rifle, to the exclusion of all others. Did you take a
photograph of the comparison that you made under the microscope of
number 544?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes. I again took two photographs, one of the breech-face
or bolt-face marks, and one of the firing-pin marks.
Mr. EISENBERG. This exhibit which I am holding is a picture of the
breech-face marks?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.
Mr. EISENBERG. And was that taken by you or under your supervision?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; it was.
Mr. EISENBERG. And the magnification here is what?
Mr. FRAZIER. 90 diameters.
Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this admitted, Mr. Chairman?
Mr. McCLOY. It may be admitted.
Mr. EISENBERG. That will be number 562, Mr. Reporter.
(The item described as Commission Exhibit No. 562 was received in
evidence.)
Mr. EISENBERG. Could you discuss the markings on this picture, Mr.
Frazier?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. In Commission Exhibit 562, there is again the
vertical dividing line which is the top of the prism in the microscope
which divides your view. On the left hand side is a portion of the
primer and a portion of the head of the test cartridge case from
Exhibit 139. On the right side of the photograph is a portion of the
surface of the primer and a portion of the firing-pin impression of the
cartridge case, Commission Exhibit 544.
To assist in pointing out on the photograph some of the areas where
individual microscopic characteristics are present, I have had circles
drawn, circling at the top, number 1, an oval-shaped depression in the
metal, having an irregularly shaped or wavy ridge across the bottom of
the circle. Immediately below that is another ridge which has a flat
top, and is more or less of a diamond shape.
Number 3 circle is over a very coarse, wide ridge separated by two
fairly deep grooves on each side.
Number 4 circle is over a conical-shaped raised portion on the primer
which represents a dent in the metal of the bolt face, and number 5
again is a raised area on the primer which is a portion of a ridge.
In this instance this is more or less of a compound ridge which runs
horizontally with a small break in it pointing down toward the lower
left.
Mr. McCLOY. Is that same break apparent in the left hand photograph?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; it is. Looking very closely and right at the
hairline, you can see the break in the ridge where it forms more or
less of a =Y=. The actual connecting point is not present, but you can
see the portion of the ridge as it heads towards the horizontal ridge.
The hairline has separated that portion of it.
Mr. EISENBERG. Would you call these marks strongly characteristic
marks, Mr. Frazier?
Mr. FRAZIER. Oh, yes; very characteristic. They are primarily
characteristic because of their irregular shape. If they had been
regular in shape, it wouldn't have meant nearly as much as it does to
have the irregular rough surfaces and contours of the marks.
Mr. EISENBERG. I think you have identified the next picture I am
holding as having been taken by you?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; it was. That is a 70-diameter magnification
photograph of Exhibit 544 on the right, and the test from the rifle on
the left.
Mr. EISENBERG. And this bears the numbers C-14 and C-7, and is a
firing-pin photograph?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.
Mr. EISENBERG. May this firing-pin mark photograph be admitted, Mr.
Chairman?
Mr. McCLOY. It may be admitted.
Mr. EISENBERG. That is 563.
(The item was numbered 563, and was received in evidence.)
Mr. EISENBERG. Could you review that photograph, Mr. Frazier?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. In Exhibit 563 the test cartridge case
representing the rifle is on the left side of the photograph, and shows
most of the firing-pin impression in that cartridge case. Five circles
have been drawn over towards the right-hand edge of the firing-pin
impression, and five similarly located circles have been drawn over the
area at the right-hand edge of the firing-pin impression of Exhibit 544.
Mr. EISENBERG. Which is actually the left-hand side of the right-hand
part of the picture?
Mr. FRAZIER. It would be--that is right; at the dividing line, the
circles on 544 are drawn close to the dividing line, which shows only a
very small portion of the firing pin of that cartridge case.
Beginning with number 1, it has a gently sloping ridge running from
upper left toward lower right in each instance, with a break in the
ridge contour at the middle in the form of an extension upwards toward
the top of the photograph.
In number 2 there is a circle drawn around the end of a very long line
in the left-hand side of the photograph. The circle is drawn to show a
=Y=-shaped break in this line located on both cartridge cases.
Number 3 is a photograph of an irregular-shaped raised portion on the
firing-pin impression, which is very difficult to describe in words.
Number 4 is a groove extending from upper right to lower left which
has a break in its lower side to allow a horizontal groove to come in
towards the main groove. The lower portion of that groove coming in
from the lower side is in the form of a crescent-shaped ridge, which
starts horizontally from the left and then falls off towards the lower
right-hand side of the photograph.
The circle, number 5, is again a =Y=-shaped or wishbone-shaped ridge,
with a horizontal bar on the right, and then extending ridges upward
toward the left and downward to the left.
Mr. EISENBERG. Again, are these firing-pin marks what you would call
strongly characteristic?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; I would say so.
Mr. EISENBERG. Does the firing pin give any evidence of having been
altered subsequent to the original manufacture?
Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir; only in an accidental sort of way, that is, very
fine scratches which may have been caused by firing or dirt on a
cartridge or something which may have scratched the firing pin.
Mr. EISENBERG. Are firing-pin marks usually as characteristic of a
given cartridge case as the primer marks?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; I would say they are as characteristic. However,
they may not always be as evident, they may not be seen as readily.
However, they are just as characteristic.
Mr. McCLOY. Just to repeat again, what is this side of this picture?
What does this represent?
Mr. FRAZIER. That represents the rifle cartridge.
Mr. McCLOY. The rifle cartridge itself?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.
Mr. McCLOY. And this on the right?
Mr. FRAZIER. This is one of the three cartridge cases recovered from
the building, Exhibit 544.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Frazier, you fired two test cartridges in the rifle,
is that correct?
Mr. FRAZIER. We fired several test cartridge cases. These two are the
ones that were used in the comparisons.
Mr. EISENBERG. Did you fire several for possible comparison purposes,
or only two for possible comparison purposes?
Mr. FRAZIER. Those we fired were in the time-fire test and we retained
some of those for possible use in comparing, but it was not necessary
to use them, actually.
Mr. EISENBERG. Did you use both of these test cartridge cases in the
photographs, or only one of them?
Mr. FRAZIER. I could not tell by these photographs. We did not make any
distinction when we were comparing tests with the evidence as to which
test cartridge case we were using.
Mr. EISENBERG. When you made your selection among cartridge cases to
select the items which would be used as test cases for comparison
purposes, were the items you rejected much different from those you
selected?
Mr. FRAZIER. No. The marks were generally the same on all of them.
Those we used in this comparison were two tests which we fired on
November 23d and used them in our tests--made our examination, our
identification.
Later on we fired accuracy tests and speed tests and retained some of
those cartridge cases, but they were not necessarily retained for test
purposes, for identification of the weapon, but merely as a result of
the other tests that were made.
Mr. EISENBERG. Could you just as easily have used other of the items
from your original November twenty----
Mr. FRAZIER. Oh, yes; yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Getting to the last cartridge case, Exhibit 545, did you
take a photograph of the exhibit together with the test case under the
microscope after making your identification?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; I did. This photograph shows that cartridge case 545
on the right, and the test cartridge case from the rifle, 139, on the
left.
Mr. EISENBERG. This is marked on the right C-38 and on the left C-14?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.
Mr. EISENBERG. Again this is a photograph taken by you or under your
supervision?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.
Mr. EISENBERG. And that is of the primer?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; it is.
Mr. EISENBERG. And you have a second photograph here also, marked C-14
and C-38, also taken by you or under your supervision?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.
Mr. EISENBERG. And this is of the markings of the firing pin?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; it is.
Mr. EISENBERG. Can you give us the magnification first of the
primer-markings photograph?
Mr. FRAZIER. That is 100 diameters enlargement on the primer, and on
the firing-pin it is 80 diameters.
Mr. EISENBERG. Now in all the cases of the photographs you have given
us, the magnifications are equal on both sides, are they?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; they are.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have these admitted into evidence?
Mr. McCLOY. They may be admitted.
Mr. EISENBERG. They will be 564 and 565.
(The items, identified as Commission Exhibits Nos. 564 and 565, were
received in evidence.)
Mr. EISENBERG. Could you discuss the photograph, Exhibit 564 please,
Mr. Frazier?
Mr. FRAZIER. Exhibit 564 is again, a portion of the primer of the
cartridge case fired by me in the rifle number 139 appearing on the
left side of the vertical dividing line through the center of the
photograph, and on the right side a portion of the surface of the
cartridge case, Exhibit 545, showing its primer and the marks on it.
In the photograph four circles, or portions of circles, have been
drawn, circling some of the areas where individual microscopic
characteristics are found which permitted identifying the two cartridge
cases as having been fired in the same weapon.
In the upper circle are again two ridges separated by a groove, the
lower right-hand end of which is blocked by a raised portion in the
metal of the primer.
Circle number 2 is again a depression bounded on the top by a long
sloping groove, sloping from the upper left subsequently to the lower
right.
In circle number 3 there is a series of ridges running horizontally
across the photograph. The lowest of these three ridges is a rather
wide round-topped ridge.
Circle number 4 shows the left-hand side of a figure which you could
roughly call a Z in the primer, which consists of a horizontal or
nearly horizontal line running from left to right which meets a second
line running from right down to the left, which again meets a third
line which runs from the left to the right. This is shown in both
photographs as the three lines which form the shape of a Z on the
primer.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Frazier, on this photograph there is shown a mark
at approximately 3 o'clock on the left-hand side of the picture, and
9 o'clock on the right-hand side, and the marks seem to be different
in the two pictures, being broader on the left-hand, C-14, than on the
right, C-38. Could you explain the genesis of the difference? It seems
to extend further down.
Mr. FRAZIER. Approximately in the center of the photograph where the
two images meet, there is a scraped area which is the result of the
surface of the metal of the bolt scraping the surface of the primer as
the bolt was turned in opening the bolt to extract the cartridge.
On the test cartridge case, this area is much broader and coarser
because the bolt was pressing more tightly against the primer when it
was turned. On the evidence cartridge case, the marks are relatively
fine, separated, and even show portions of the surface of the primer
in between the circular marks left by the rotating bolt. The reason is
that this primer was not being pressed as tightly against the bolt at
the time it was turned.
Mr. EISENBERG. Would that be due to differences in the construction of
the cartridge--the two cartridges?
Mr. FRAZIER. It could be differences in the cartridge, but primarily it
would be a difference in the amount of setback of the cartridge against
the bolt at the time it was fired.
If a cartridge is slightly away from the bolt when it is fired, the
primer is blown back out of the cartridge. As the pressure builds up,
the cartridge then moves back and reseats the primer in the primer
pocket. The manner in which that movement of the primer out and back in
is accomplished determines how tightly the primer will bear against the
face of the breach after the cartridge has been fired.
It could be that, and it could be just a slight difference in the
hardness of the metal of the primer which caused this one to flow back
more and be marked more.
Mr. EISENBERG. Could you discuss Exhibit No. 565?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; in Commission Exhibit No. 565 is shown the
firing-pin impressions of the test cartridge case from the 139 rifle
on the left and the cartridge case, 545, on the right, with a dividing
line through the middle separating the primer of one cartridge case
from the primer of the other.
No circles have been drawn around this photograph because the marks
shown are marks of an abraded area on the firing pin, and are more or
less parallel and formed parallel patterns, so that the eye can follow
from one line across to the opposite side of the photograph.
In this area shown of the firing pin of the weapon, there was a small
scraped area which left these microscopic ridges and grooves shown
on the left photograph, and also reproduced in the 545 primer or
firing-pin impression on the right side of the photograph.
Mr. McCLOY. State for me again what is on the left side? What is this
C-14?
Mr. FRAZIER. This is the rifle cartridge case, the test cartridge case.
Mr. McCLOY. The test rifle?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; the cartridge case which I fired in 139.
Mr. McCLOY. In 139. And the one on the right?
Mr. FRAZIER. This the cartridge case from the building, Exhibit 545.
Mr. McCLOY. Which was found in the building?
Mr. FRAZIER. Found in the building.