Mr. DULLES. Just one moment. You mean bullet fragments related to the
car or bullet fragments found anywhere?
Mr. SPECTER. Related to the President's automobile.
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; you have.
Mr. SPECTER. Did you have occasion then to examine the windshield of
the Presidential limousine?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; I did.
Mr. SPECTER. What did that examination disclose?
Mr. FRAZIER. On the inside surface of the windshield there was a
deposit of lead. This deposit was located when you look at the inside
surface of the windshield, 13-1/2 inches down from the top, 23 inches
from the left-hand side or driver's side of the windshield, and was
immediately in front of a small pattern of star-shaped cracks which
appeared in the outer layer of the laminated windshield.
Mr. DULLES. What do you mean by the "outer layer of the laminated
windshield"?
Mr. FRAZIER. The windshield is composed of two layers with a very thin
layer of plastic in between which bonds them together in the form of
safety glass. The inside layer of the glass was not broken, but the
outside layer immediately on the outside of the lead residue had a very
small pattern of cracks and there was a very minute particle of glass
missing from the outside surface.
Mr. DULLES. And the outside surface was the surface away from where the
occupants were sitting?
Mr. FRAZIER. That is correct; yes.
Mr. DULLES. And the inside surface was the surface nearest the
occupants?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes.
Mr. SPECTER. What do those characteristics indicate as to which side of
the windshield was struck?
Mr. FRAZIER. It indicates that it could only have been struck on the
inside surface. It could not have been struck on the outside surface
because of the manner in which the glass broke and further because of
the lead residue on the inside surface. The cracks appear in the outer
layer of the glass because the glass is bent outward at the time of
impact which stretches the outer layer of the glass to the point where
these small radial or wagon spoke-wagon wheel spoke-type cracks appear
on the outer surface.
Mr. DULLES. So the pressure must have come from the inside and not from
the outside against the glass?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; that is correct.
Mr. DULLES. As far as the car is concerned from the back to the front?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.
Mr. DULLES. Not from outside against the glass--from the front against
the glass.
Mr. FRAZIER. That is right.
Mr. SPECTER. Was a comparison made of the lead residues on the inside
of the windshield with any of the bullet fragments recovered about
which you have heretofore testified?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes. They were compared with the bullet fragment found on
the front seat, which in turn was compared with Commission 399. The
lead was found to be similar in composition. However, that examination
in detail was made by a spectrographer, Special Agent John F. Gallagher.
Mr. SPECTER. Was that examination made in the regular course of
examining procedures by the FBI?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. And was that information made available to you through the
normal conference procedures among FBI examiners?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir. He submitted his report to me and I prepared the
formal report of the entire examination.
Mr. SPECTER. Are his report and your formal report a part of the
permanent record of the FBI then?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. I now show you Commission Exhibit No. 350 which has
heretofore been identified as a picture of the windshield of the
Presidential limousine and I ask you if that is the crack about which
you have just testified?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; it is. This Exhibit 350 is a photograph which I took
on the 23d of November, showing a view from the front toward the rear
of the Presidential limousine and showing the crack in the glass and
the lead residue on the inside surface.
Mr. SPECTER. Would you produce at this time the lead residue obtained
by you from that inside surface, please? May it please the Commission,
I would like to mark this as Commission Exhibit 841 and move for its
admission into evidence at this time.
Mr. DULLES. It shall be admitted into evidence.
(Commission Exhibit No. 841 was marked for identification and received
in evidence.)
Mr. DULLES. May I just ask a question of you, Mr. Specter, and possibly
of the witness.
I assume that the windshield we are now discussing is the windshield
that was exhibited to the Commission several weeks ago and which
members of the Commission examined?
Mr. SPECTER. It was, Mr. Dulles, and we can establish that, of record,
through another Commission Exhibit which is 351, which was the number
given to the windshield and we have a reproduction here through the
photograph.
Mr. DULLES. You don't have the windshield here today, though?
Mr. SPECTER. No, we do not.
Mr. DULLES. It would be the same windshield that the Commission saw.
Mr. SPECTER. We can establish it through the witness, too.
Mr. Frazier, for that purpose can you identify what is depicted in a
photograph heretofore identified as Commission Exhibit 351?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; this is a photograph of the very small pattern
of cracks in the windshield which was on the Presidential limousine
at the time I examined it, and which I also later examined in the FBI
laboratory.
(Discussion off the record.)
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Frazier, have you now described all of your findings
on the windshield of the Presidential limousine?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; that is concerning the glass itself and not the
molding around the windshield.
Mr. SPECTER. Will you then move to the molding around the windshield
and state what, if anything, you found there?
Mr. FRAZIER. On the strip of chrome which goes across the top of the
windshield and again on the passenger side of the windshield or the
inside surface, I found a dent in the chrome which had been caused by
some projectile which struck the chrome on the inside surface.
Mr. SPECTER. Was there one dent or more than one dent or what?
Mr. FRAZIER. One dent.
Mr. SPECTER. Will you identify what is depicted by a photograph
heretofore marked as Commission Exhibit 349?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; this is a photograph which I took of this dent
at that time, showing the damaged chrome, just to the right of the
rearview mirror support at the top of the windshield.
Mr. SPECTER. Did your examination of the President's limousine disclose
any other holes or markings which could have conceivably been caused by
a bullet striking the automobile or any part of the automobile?
Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir.
Mr. DULLES. I wonder if I could go back just a moment to the
indentation in the chrome around the windshield at the top of the
windshield, but on the inside, could that have been caused by a
fragment of a bullet?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, it very easily could have. It would not have been
caused, for instance, by a bullet which was traveling at its full
velocity from a rifle, but merely from a fragment traveling at fairly
high velocity which struck the inside surface of the chrome.
Mr. DULLES. Could that have been caused by any of the fragments that
you have identified as having been found on the front seat or near the
front seat of the car?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes; I believe it could have by either, in fact, of the
two fragments of rifle bullets found in the front seat.
Mr. DULLES. Thank you.
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Frazier, assume certain facts to be true for
purposes of expressing an opinion on a hypothetical situation, to
wit: that President Kennedy was struck by a 6.5 millimeter bullet
which passed through his body entering on the rear portion of his
neck 14 centimeters to the left of his right acromion process and 14
centimeters below his mastoid process, with a striking velocity of
approximately 1,904 feet per second, and exited after passing through
a fascia channel in his body, through the lower anterior third of his
neck with an exit velocity of approximately 1,772 to 1,779 feet per
second; and that bullet had then traveled from the point where it
exited from his neck and struck the front windshield in some manner.
What effect would that have had on the front windshield and the
subsequent flight of the missile?
Mr. FRAZIER. It would have shattered the front windshield. It would
have caused a very large, relatively large hole, approximately
three-eighths to an inch in diameter with radiating cracks extending
outward into the glass for several inches, even to the side of the
glass.
Mr. DULLES. It would have penetrated the windshield?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. Would the missile then have proceeded in a forward
direction?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; it would.
Mr. SPECTER. Do you have an opinion as to how far it would have gone?
Mr. FRAZIER. Until it struck some other object in the area of
approximately a mile.
Mr. SPECTER. Now assume the same sequence with respect to exit velocity
from the point of the President's neck at the same rate of 1,772
to 1,798 feet per second, and assume still further that the bullet
had, the whole bullet had, struck the metal framing which you have
heretofore described and identified. What effect would that have had on
the metal framing?
Mr. FRAZIER. It would have torn a hole in the chrome, penetrated the
framing both inside and outside of the car. I can only assume, since
I haven't tested the metal of that particular car, I would assume
that the bullet would completely penetrate both the chrome, the metal
supporting the chrome, on the inside, and the body metal on the outside
which supports the windshield of the car.
Mr. SPECTER. Now, assume the same set of factors as to the exit
velocity from the President's neck. What effect would that bullet have
had on any other portion of the automobile which it might have struck
in the continuation of its flight?
Mr. FRAZIER. In my opinion it would have penetrated any other metal
surface and, of course, any upholstery surface depending on the
nature of the material as to how deep it would penetrate or how many
successive layers it may have penetrated.
Mr. SPECTER. Was there any evidence in any portion of the car that the
automobile was struck by a bullet which exited from the President's
neck under the circumstances which I have just asked you to assume?
Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir; there was not.
Mr. SPECTER. And had there been any such evidence would your
examination of the automobile have uncovered such an indication or such
evidence?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; I feel that it would have.
Mr. SPECTER. Was your examination a thorough examination of all aspects
of the interior of the automobile?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; for our purpose. However, we did not tear out
all of the rugs on the floor, for instance. We examined the rugs
carefully for holes, for bullet furroughs, for fragments. We examined
the nap of the rug, in the actual nap of the rug, for fragments and
bullet holes. We pulled the rug back as far as we could turn it back
and even tore the glue or adhesive material loose around the cracks
at the edges of the rug so we could observe the cracks to see whether
they had been enlarged, and we examined all of the upholstery covering,
on the back of the front seat, on the doors, and in the rear seat
compartment, the jump seats, the actual rear seat, the back of the rear
seat, and we examined the front seat in a similar manner, and we found
no bullet holes or other bullet impact areas, other than the one on the
inside of the windshield and the dent inside the windshield chrome.
Mr. SPECTER. Had any of those portions of the automobile been struck by
the bullet exiting from the President's neck, which I have described
hypothetically for you, would you have found some evidence of striking?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.
Mr. DULLES. When was this examination made?
Mr. FRAZIER. Between 2 and 4:30 a.m. on November 23, 1963.
Mr. DULLES. That was about 10 hours, 12 hours after the assassination?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; 14 to 16 hours.
Mr. DULLES. Fourteen to sixteen hours.
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.
Mr. DULLES. May I ask, do you know in whose custody the automobile was
prior to your examination from the time it was shipped on the airplane?
Mr. FRAZIER. When I arrived there were two Secret Service men present
but I do not recall their names. They were introduced to me, and they
were there during the entire examination but I don't recall their
actual names. The car was under guard in the Secret Service garage in
Washington, D.C.
Other than that I do not know.
Mr. DULLES. Was this a joint examination by you and by the Secret
Service or was the examination made by the FBI?
Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir; by the FBI at the request of the Secret Service
who had already examined the interior of the car for personal effects
and other items.
Mr. DULLES. Did they certify to you or advise you that the car had been
under their custody during this 14-to 16-hour period?
Mr. FRAZIER. I don't recall whether they actually stated that. What
they stated was that the car had immediately been flown to Washington
and placed in this garage and kept under surveillance the entire time.
Mr. DULLES. Thank you.
Mr. SPECTER. Was a fragment of metal brought to you which was
identified as coming from the wrist of Governor Connally?
Mr. FRAZIER. It was identified to me as having come from the arm of
Governor Connally.
Mr. SPECTER. Will you produce that fragment at this time, please?
Mr. FRAZIER. This one does not have a Commission number as yet.
Mr. SPECTER. May it please the Commission, I would like to have this
fragment marked as Commission Exhibit 842.
(Commission Exhibit No. 842 was marked for identification and received
in evidence.)
Mr. SPECTER. Now, referring to a fragment heretofore marked as Q9 for
FBI record purposes, and now marked as Commission Exhibit No. 842, will
you describe that fragment for us, please?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; this is a small fragment of metal which weighed
one-half a grain when I first examined it in the laboratory. It is a
piece of lead, and could have been a part of a bullet or a core of a
bullet.
However, it lacks any physical characteristics which would permit
stating whether or not it actually originated from a bullet.
Mr. SPECTER. Are its physical characteristics consistent with having
come from Commission Exhibit 399?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; it could have.
Mr. SPECTER. Are they consistent with that fragment identified as
Commission Exhibit No. 842, as having come from fragment identified as
Commission Exhibit 567?
Mr. FRAZIER. Which is 567?
Mr. SPECTER. 567 is the one which was found on the front seat.
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir; it could have.
Mr. SPECTER. Were the characteristics of the fragment identified as
Commission Exhibit 842 consistent with having come from the fragment
heretofore identified as Commission Exhibit 569?
Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. Would you set forth from the records of the FBI, if
you have those before you, the chain of possession of the fragment
identified as Commission Exhibit 842, please?
Mr. FRAZIER. Commission Exhibit 842, that is the one from Governor
Connally's arm, was delivered to me in the FBI laboratory on November
23, 1963, by Special Agent Vincent E. Drain of the Dallas Office of the
FBI, who stated he had secured this item from Capt. Will Fritz of the
Dallas Police Department.