The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Specter, you may proceed.
You have been sworn and you are still under oath, as you understand?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes.
Mr. SPECTER. Will you state your name again for the record, please?
Mr. FRAZIER. Robert A. Frazier.
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Frazier, you have appeared heretofore to testify
about certain tests which you have conducted, but at this phase of the
record, will you state briefly your occupation and your specialty,
please?
Mr. FRAZIER. I am a special agent assigned to the FBI laboratory,
the firearms identification unit in Washington, D.C., where I make
examinations of bullets, cartridges, gunpowder tests, bullet holes,
examinations of clothing, and other similar types of examinations.
Mr. SPECTER. In the course of your duties have you had an occasion
to examine the clothing which was purportedly worn by President John
Kennedy on November 22, 1963?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; I have.
Mr. SPECTER. And do you have that clothing with you at the present
time, sir?
Mr. FRAZIER. I have certain parts of it. I have the coat, shirt, tie,
and the bandages and support belt which he allegedly was wearing that
day.
Mr. SPECTER. Would you refer at this time to the coat, if you please,
which, may the record show, has heretofore been marked as Commission
Exhibit 393.
And by referring to that coat will you describe what, if anything, you
observed on the rear side of the coat?
Mr. FRAZIER. There was located on the rear of the coat 5-3/8 inches
below the top of the collar, a hole, further located as 1-3/4 inches to
the right of the midline or the seam down the center of the coat; all
of these being as you look at the back of the coat.
Mr. SPECTER. What characteristics did you note, if any, on the nature
of that hole?
Mr. FRAZIER. I noticed that the hole penetrated both the outer and
lining areas of the coat, that it was roughly circular in shape. When
I first examined it it was approximately one-fourth of an inch in
diameter, and the cloth fibers around the margins of the hole were
pushed inward at the time I first examined it in the laboratory.
Mr. SPECTER. Did any tests conducted on the coat disclose any metallic
substance on that area of that hole?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. I had a spectrographer run an analysis of a
portion of the hole which accounts for its being slightly enlarged at
the present time. He took a sample of cloth and made an analysis of it.
I don't know actually whether I am expected to give the results of his
analysis or not.
Mr. SPECTER. Yes; would you please, or let me ask you first of all,
were those tests run by the Federal Bureau of Investigation in the
regular course of its testing procedures?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; they were.
Mr. SPECTER. And have those results been made available to you through
the regular recordkeeping procedures of the FBI?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. Would you then please tell us what those tests disclose?
Mr. FRAZIER. Traces of copper were found around the margins of the hole
in the back of the coat, and as a control, a very small section under
the collar was taken, and no copper being found there, it was concluded
that the copper was foreign to the coat itself.
Mr. SPECTER. Have you now described all of the characteristics of
that hole, which you consider to be important for the Commission's
consideration?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. Assuming that those clothes, that jacket, specifically,
at this juncture, was worn by President Kennedy, and was in the same
condition when that hole was made as it is now, and at the time when
you made your examination, do you have a professional opinion as to
what caused that hole in the back of the jacket?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; I would say that it was an entrance hole for a
bullet.
Mr. SPECTER. And what is the reason for that conclusion, please?
Mr. FRAZIER. It has all the physical appearance characteristics which
are considered when examining holes, such as its shape, its size, and
in particular the fact that the fibers around the margins of the hole
were all pushed inward where the cloth was torn by the object which
passed through, and the fibers were unraveled as they were pushed
inward, which is characteristic of a entrance-type bullet hole.
Mr. SPECTER. Is the presence of the metallic substance relevant in your
conclusion that it was a bullet hole?
Mr. FRAZIER. Not necessarily. It is a factor which corroborates that
opinion but even without it, it would still have been my opinion that
it was a bullet entrance hole.
Mr. SPECTER. Can you tell the size of the bullet from the hole in the
jacket?
Mr. FRAZIER. The hole in the jacket is approximately a quarter of an
inch in diameter.
Mr. SPECTER. Would that hole be consistent with a hole which would be
caused by a 6.5 millimeter bullet?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; the actual bullet which makes a hole cannot be
determined because the cloth in one instance may stretch more than
it does in another instance causing either a larger or smaller hole
even for the same caliber, but it is consistent for a bullet of 6.5
millimeters in diameter to make a hole of approximately this size.
Mr. SPECTER. Were there any holes indicative of being bullet holes
found on the front part of the President's jacket?
Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. Did you have further occasion to examine the President's
shirt?
Mr. FRAZIER. I did.
Mr. SPECTER. May the record show that the shirt has heretofore been
identified as Commission Exhibit 394?
The CHAIRMAN. Yes; it may be.
Mr. SPECTER. What, if anything, did you observe then on the back side
of the shirt, Mr. Frazier?
Mr. FRAZIER. I found on the back of the shirt a hole, 5-3/4 inches
below the top of the collar, and as you look at the back of the shirt
1-1/8 inch to the right of the midline of the shirt, which is this hole
I am indicating.
Mr. SPECTER. May the record show the witness is examining the shirt, as
he has the coat, to indicate the hole to the Commission.
The CHAIRMAN. The record may show that.
Mr. FRAZIER. In connection with this hole, I made the same examination
as I did on the coat, Exhibit 393. I found the same situation to
prevail, that is the hole was approximately circular in shape, about
one-fourth inch in diameter, and again the physical shape of it is
characteristic of a bullet hole, that is the edges are frayed, and
there are slight radial tears in the cloth, which is characteristic
of a bullet having passed through the cloth, and further, the fibers
around the margin of the hole were--had been pressed inward, and
assuming that, when I first examined the shirt it was in the same
condition as it was at the time the hole was made, it is my opinion
that this hole, in addition, was caused by a bullet entering the shirt
from the back at that point.
Mr. SPECTER. Is that hole consistent with having been caused by a 6.5
millimeter bullet?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; it is.
Mr. SPECTER. With respect to the front side of the shirt, what, if any,
hole did you find there?
Mr. FRAZIER. Only one hole.
Mr. DULLES. May I ask one question there?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; certainly.
Mr. DULLES. Is the hole in the shirt and the hole in the coat you have
just described in a position that indicates that the same instrument,
whatever it was, or the same bullet, made the two?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; they are. They are both--the coat hole is 5-3/8
inches below the top of the collar. The shirt hole is 5-3/4 inches,
which could be accounted for by a portion of the collar sticking up
above the coat about a half inch.
Mr. DULLES. I see.
Mr. FRAZIER. And they are both located approximately the same distance
to the right of the midline of both garments.
Now, on the front of the shirt, I found what amounts to one hole.
Actually, it is a hole through both the button line of the shirt and
the buttonhole line which overlap down the front of the shirt when it
is buttoned.
Mr. SPECTER. Proceed.
Mr. FRAZIER. This hole is located immediately below the button being
centered seven-eighths of an inch below the button on the shirt, and
similarly seven-eighths of an inch below the buttonhole on the opposite
side.
The CHAIRMAN. You are speaking of the collar button itself, aren't you?
Mr. FRAZIER. The collar button.
The CHAIRMAN. Yes.
Mr. FRAZIER. In each instance for these holes, the one through the
button line and the one through the buttonhole line, the hole amounts
to a ragged slit approximately one-half inch in height. It is oriented
vertically, and the fibers of the cloth are protruding outward,
that is, have been pushed from the inside out. I could not actually
determine from the characteristics of the hole whether or not it
was caused by a bullet. However, I can say that it was caused by a
projectile of some type which exited from the shirt at that point and
that is again assuming that when I first examined the shirt it was--it
had not been altered from the condition it was in at the time the hole
was made.
Mr. SPECTER. What characteristics differ between the hole in the rear
of the shirt and the holes in the front of the shirt which lead you to
conclude that the hole in the rear of the shirt was caused by a bullet
but which are absent as to the holes in the front of the shirt?
Mr. FRAZIER. The hole in the front of the shirt does not have the round
characteristic shape caused by a round bullet entering cloth. It is an
irregular slit. It could have been caused by a round bullet, however,
since the cloth could have torn in a long slitlike way as the bullet
passed through it. But that is not specifically characteristic of a
bullethole to the extent that you could say it was to the exclusion of
being a piece of bone or some other type of projectile.
Mr. SPECTER. Have you now described all of the characteristics of the
front of the shirt holes which you consider to be important?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.
Mr. DULLES. Could I ask one question there. If the bullet, after
entering, hit something that made it tumble or change, would that
account for this change in the appearance of the exit through the shirt?
Mr. FRAZIER. I think not. In my opinion it would not have been
necessary, if I may put it that way, for the bullet to have turned
sideways or partially sideways in order to make an elongated hole.
Mr. DULLES. I see.
Mr. FRAZIER. I think the effect in the front of the shirt is due more
to the strength of the material being more in the horizontal rather
than the vertical direction which caused the cloth to tear vertically
rather than due to a change in the shape or size of the bullet or
projectile.
Mr. DULLES. Or possibly the velocity of the bullet at that place, would
that have anything to do with it?
Mr. FRAZIER. I think the hole would not have been affected unless it
was a very large change in velocity.
The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Frazier, I notice that the front of the shirt
immediately around the hole you have just been describing and in fact
on much of the front of the shirt is bloodsoaked. Would that, with the
other evidences you have seen there indicate to you as an expert that
this was the exit of the bullet that had entered in the back of the
coat as you have described it?
Mr. FRAZIER. The presence of the blood would have in my opinion no
value for determining which was entrance or exit, because I have seen
entrance wounds which bleed extensively and exit wounds which bleed not
at all and vice versa. It depends entirely on the type of bullet which
strikes, whether or not it mutilates itself in the body, and probably
more importantly it depends on the position of the person who is shot
after the shooting occurs as to where the blood will be located on the
garments.
The CHAIRMAN. May I put it this way, probably a little better. Do the
evidences that you see on this shirt indicate to you that this hole in
the front of the shirt that you have just described was made by the
bullet which entered in the rear.
Mr. FRAZIER. I can say that this hole in the collar area could have
been made by this bullet but I cannot say that the bullet which entered
the back actually came out here or at some other place because I am not
aware of the autopsy information as to the path of the bullet through
the body.
The CHAIRMAN. I see.
Mr. FRAZIER. But if the path of the bullet was such that it came
through the body at the right angle, then one bullet could have caused
both holes.
The CHAIRMAN. Could have caused both holes.
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes.
The CHAIRMAN. That is sufficient.
Mr. DULLES. Is it correct that the blood on the shirt might well have
been occasioned by the second wound rather than exclusively by the
first wound?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; it could have come from any other wound on the body
as well as this one.
Mr. SPECTER. When you refer to any other wound, Mr. Frazier, are
you referring to the head wound which is widely known to have been
inflicted on the President at the time of the assassination?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. Did you have occasion to examine the President's tie or
the tie purportedly worn by the President on November 22, 1963?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; I did.
Mr. SPECTER. May the record show at this juncture that that tie has
heretofore been marked as Commission Exhibit 395?
The CHAIRMAN. Yes; it may show that.
Mr. SPECTER. What did you note, if anything, with respect to the tie,
Mr. Frazier?
Mr. FRAZIER. When the tie was examined by me in the laboratory I noted
that the neck portion had been cut from one side of the knot. However,
the knot remained in apparently its original condition. The only damage
to the tie other than the fact that it had been cut, was a crease or
nick in the left side of the tie when you consider the tie as being
worn on a body. As you view the front of the tie it would be on the
right side. This nick would be located in a corresponding area to the
area in the shirt collar just below the button.
Mr. SPECTER. As you now indicate on your own tie, you are indicating on
the portion of the tie to your right?
Mr. FRAZIER. If it was on my tie it would be on the left side of the
tie.
Mr. SPECTER. Your left side.
Mr. FRAZIER. The left side of my tie. There is a nick on the left side
of the tie if you consider it as left and right according to the person
wearing the tie.
Mr. SPECTER. Does the nick in the tie provide any indication of the
direction of the missile?
Mr. FRAZIER. The nick is elongated horizontally, indicating a possible
horizontal direction but it does not indicate that the projectile which
caused it was exiting or entering at that point. The fibers were not
disturbed in a characteristic manner which would permit any conclusion
in that connection.
Mr. SPECTER. Is the nick consistent with an exiting path?
Mr. FRAZIER. Oh, yes.
Mr. SPECTER. Is there any indication from the nature of the nick as to
the nature of the projectile itself?
Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. Is the nick consistent with a 6.5 millimeter bullet having
caused the nick?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes. Any projectile could have caused the nick. In this
connection there was no metallic residue found on the tie, and for that
matter there was no metallic residue found on the shirt at the holes in
the front. However, there was in the back.