Crossfire: The Plot That Killed Kennedy (93 page)

The Commission apparently made no effort to resolve the matter. It
instead presented the belated palm print as strong evidence of Oswald's
guilt. Like so much of the "hard" evidence in this case, the closer one
looks, the softer it becomes.

After considering the rifle, the empty shells, and palm print, one must
again consider the "hero of the Warren Commission"-CE (Commission
Exhibit) 399 or the "magic bullet."

The discovery of CE 399 has been dealt with earlier, in "Two Hospitals." Now consider the highly technical studies of this bullet and other
bullet fragments involved in the assassination.

The Commission attempted to duplicate the feat of CE 399-passing
through seven layers of skin and muscle, striking bones in two male
adults, and emerging in near-perfect condition-but with no success.
Similar ammunition fired into goat carcasses, human bodies, and gelatin
blocks all showed more deformity than CE 399.

In an attempt to explain away the unscathed condition of this bullet,
members of the forensic pathology panel of the House Select Committee on Assassinations argued that other bullets had done similar damage and
remained in pristine condition.

However, one member of the panel, Dr. Cyril Wecht, challenged the
group to produce even one single bullet that had broken two human bones
and remained unchanged. Dr. Wecht concluded: "It is clear to me that
their reluctance was based upon their knowledge that such studies would
further destroy the single-bullet theory."

Since neither the Warren Commission nor the House Select Committee
on Assassinations were able to convincingly prove the feat ascribed to CE
399, the emission spectrography tests assume more importance. These
spectrographic tests are a scientific means of determining if the various bits
of bullet metal taken from both Kennedy and Connally came from the
same bullet. These tests could have provided what is missing from all
assassination investigations-clear, irrefutable proof that metal found in
the victims could be traced to CE 399. The tests failed to do this and the
handling of this evidence raised a great deal of suspicion toward federal
authorities.

Under such testing it is a simple matter to determine if two bits of metal
do not have the same percentage of basic elements, such as lead, copper,
atimony, etc. It is much more difficult to prove that such bits are from the
same source.

Concerning the tests, the Warren Commission chose not to ask one
single question of the spectrographic expert who conducted the tests. They
were content to simply report that several bullet fragments were "similar
in metallic composition," which proved nothing.

In the years following the assassination, researcher Harold Weisberg
sought unsuccessfully to obtain the spectrographic test results from the
U.S. government. Government attorneys argued that revealing the results
was not in the "national interest," although they would not explain why it
was not.

Then in 1973, a batch of Warren Commission documents were released
to the public that contained letters from FBI director J. Edgar Hoover. In
these, Hoover reported that composition of the fragments was "similar"
and "that no significant differences were found."

The fact that differences-no matter how "significant"-were found
means they are not from the same source.

The real significance in this matter is that the results of these spectrographic tests have been kept from the public all these years. Obviously, if
the tests proved conclusively that the fragments and CE 399 all came from
the same ammunition, the case against Oswald would have been strengthened considerably. In fact, the opposite occurred. And by concealing the
tests results, the Commission raised further suspicion about government
handling of the case.

Unreported in the Commission's report or volumes was an account of
even further scientific testing-this time using neutron activation analysis, a sophisticated method of determining differences in composition by bombarding the test object with radiation.

In referring to this test in a letter made public in 1973, Hoover wrote:

While minor variations in composition were found by this method, these
were not considered to be sufficient to permit positively differentiating
among the larger bullet fragments and thus positively determining from
which of the larger bullet fragments any given small fragment may have
come.

This wording is suspiciously deceptive, since any difference in composition is evidence that the fragments are not from the same ammunition.

Faced with scientific evidence that Kennedy and Connally were not
struck by the same bullet, the House Select Committee on Assassinations
decided to conduct their own tests. But researchers' hopes for a final, clear
determination on this matter dimmed with the Committee's selection of
Dr. Vincent P. Guinn to conduct the tests. Guinn admitted he had been an
informal consultant to the FBI even prior to the Kennedy assassination.
And predictably, Guinn concluded that it was "highly probable" that
fragments taken from Connally's wrist came from CE 399.

This seemed to be the strong clear evidence researchers had been
looking for, even though it appeared to support the single-bullet theory.
Guinn's conclusions were warmly embraced by the House Committee. But
it was later learned that the wrist fragments originally tested in 1964 were
missing. And Guinn admitted publicly that the fragments he tested were
not the originals from the National Archives.

Author Henry Hurt quoted Guinn as admitting how fragments from CE
399 could have been substituted for the missing fragments:

Possibly they would take a bullet, take out a few little pieces and put it
in a container, and say, "This is what came out of Connally's wrist."
And naturally if you compare it with [CE) 399, it will look alike . . . I
have no control over these things.

Guinn also reported that he had examples of the ammunition from the
four production runs in 1954 made at Western Cartridge Company, manufacturers of the Mann] icher-Carcano bullets. ". . . Reportedly those are
the only lots they ever produced, and we have boxes from each of those
lots," Guinn told the Committee.

If this was indeed the only ammunition ever produced, the results of Guinn's
tests gain credibility. However, a Warren Commission document dealing
with an interview of a Western Cartridge representative reveals this comment:

The Western Cartridge Company . . . manufactured a quantity of 6.5
.. . Mannlicher-Carcano ammunition for the Italian government during World War II. At the end of the war the Italian Carcano rifle, and no
telling how much of this type of ammunition, was sold to United States
gunbrokers and dealers and subsequently was distributed by direct sales
to wholesalers, retailers and individual purchasers.

If the ammunition supposedly used in the Oswald rifle came from this
World War II batch, then Dr. Guinn tested the wrong bullets. This is
another example of how seemingly indisputable evidence in the assassination diminishes upon closer examination.

Another major piece of evidence against Oswald was a brown paper bag
reportedly discovered in the Texas School Book Depository on the afternoon of the assassination-although it is not depicted in any of the crime
scene photographs. The Warren Commission claimed the bag was used by
Oswald to transport the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle from a home in Irving,
Texas, to the Depository on the morning of November 22, 1963.

If this bag indeed belonged to Oswald and if it could be traced to the
Depository, it becomes strong evidence of Oswald's guilt. But again, upon
closer inspection, this piece of evidence becomes highly questionable.
First, while the Oswald rifle was found to be well oiled, there is absolutely
no trace of gun oil on the paper bag.

Second, federal authorities claimed to have found cloth fibers on the bag
that matched those of a blanket used to wrap the rifle at the Irving home.
However, a Dallas police photograph of assassination evidence shows the
bag touching the blanket, thus producing the incriminating fiber evidence.
To add credence to this idea, the FBI found no traces of paper bag
particles on the rifle.

When the Dallas evidence was shipped to the FBI laboratory early on
November 23, there is no mention of the paper bag. Instead, Dallas FBI
agent-in-charge J. Gordon Shanklin mentioned the blanket, which he
suggested was used to carry the rifle into the Depository.

Both Wesley Frazier and his sister, Linnie Mae Randle, testified that
Oswald took a paper bag to work with him on the morning of the
assassination. However, both said they did not believe the bag they saw
was like the one showed them by the Warren Commission. Frazier said
Oswald told him the bag contained curtain rods for his room in Dallas.
Frazier also said Oswald carried the package into the Depository tucked
under his arm, with one end cupped in his hand and the other under his
armpit.

Since the disassembled rifle measured thirty-five inches long, it would
have been impossible for someone of Oswald's height to carry it in this
position.

Jack Dougherty, a Depository employee who saw Oswald arrive for
work, said he had seen no bag.

Yet the paper bag was a necessary piece of evidence, for if Oswald did
not carry the rifle into the Depository on November 22, then it must have gotten there in some other manner. This possibility opened too many areas
of investigation. But if Oswald fashioned the bag from wrapping paper at
the Depository-as the Warren Commission concluded-how did he get it
to the Irving home, where he spent the night before the assassination?

Frazier, who drove Oswald to Irving, repeatedly said Oswald had no
package with him at that time. The Commission decided Oswald must
have hidden the paper bag in his jacket, although there was no reason to do
so and despite the discomfort and rustling noise sure to have been made by
a 42-inch-by-l8-inch folded paper bag.

This whole issue is further clouded by the discovery of a duplicate FBI
report that claims two opposite facts concerning the paper bag.

In a November 29, 1963 report released with other FBI documents
in 1968, Agent Vincent Drain wrote:

This paper was examined by the FBI laboratory and found to have the
same observable characteristics as the brown paper bag shaped like a
gun case which was found near the scene of the shooting on the sixth
floor of the Texas School Book Depository building.

In 1980, researcher Gary Shaw discovered what appeared to be this
same FBI report in the National Archives. It bore the same dates and the
same identification number-Dallas 89-43.

However, in this version of Drain's report, it stated: "This paper was
examined by the FBI laboratory and found not to be identical with the
paper gun case found at the scene of the shooting."

When pressed for an explanation of the two opposite versions of the
same report, William Baker, the FBI's assistant director of the Office of
Congressional and Public Affairs, told researcher Edgar F. Tatro the
version that states Depository paper and the paper bag are not the same
was "inaccurate." Baker said the inaccuracy in Drain's original report was
caught at FBI headquarters and the Dallas office was instructed to "make
corrections at that time." He added that the "inaccurate" report was
mistakenly passed along to the Warren Commission. Baker concluded:
"We hope the above explanation resolves the problem."

Far from resolving the problem of identical FBI reports that state
opposite facts, this incident raises the question of how many other assassination documents stated one thing and were subsequently "revised." And
if there do exist "revised" documents in federal files, how would anyone
know unless the originals accidentally slip out, as in this case?

Considering all of the above and considering that not one of the lawmen
who searched the Depository mentioned finding the bag in their testimony,
the evidence of the paper bag must be viewed skeptically.

Two other observations should be made concerning primary pieces of
evidence-the presidential limousine and the rifle.

Even while the limousine was parked at the emergency-room door of Parkland Hospital, federal agents and even Dallas police apparently mopped
up blood, picked up bullet fragments, and otherwise tampered with this
important piece of evidence, contrary to basic crime scene protection
procedures. Within forty-eight hours the limousine was shipped to the Ford
Motor Company in Detroit and completely dismantled, thus destroying any
important bloodstains, bullet holes, or more bullet fragments that could
have shed light on the assassination.

While the Mannlicher-Carcano was checked for fingerprints, apparently
it was never given the simple test by Dallas police or the federal authorities
to determine if it had been recently fired. This normal testing might have
proved conclusively whether the rifle had been used in the assassination.
The failure to conduct such a test is viewed by researchers as strong
evidence of fabrication in the case against Oswald.