PART 1 --- PART 2 --- PART 3


In 1964, Robert A. Frazier was a firearms identification expert
working for the Federal Bureau of Investigation. He examined much of
the ballistics and firearms evidence connected with the assassination
of President Kennedy and the murder of Dallas policeman J.D. Tippit.

Conspiracy theorists often attempt to cast doubt on the validity of
the physical evidence (i.e., the ballistics evidence) that was tested
and examined by Mr. Frazier, with some conspiracists coming right out
and calling Frazier a liar when it comes to the extensive testimony
that he supplied the Warren Commission in 1964. Naturally, the
conspiracists who enjoy calling Mr. Frazier a liar can't prove the

Plus, there's the fact that Frazier certainly wasn't the only firearms
expert to examine the ballistics evidence in the JFK and Tippit murder
cases. Multiple other FBI agents tested the evidence as well, in
addition to an independent (i.e., non-FBI) investigator, Joseph D. Nicol.

So, if Frazier was telling one falsehood after another regarding Lee
Harvey Oswald's rifle and the bullets that Frazier said came out of
that rifle, it means that several other people must have been telling
lies about the evidence too, because each one of the firearms experts
came to the same overall conclusions with respect to the two murder
weapons in the Kennedy and Tippit cases, with those conclusions
positively verifying that Lee Harvey Oswald's weapons were the weapons
that killed President John F. Kennedy and Officer J.D. Tippit on
November 22, 1963.

Below are some highlights taken from Robert Frazier's Warren
Commission testimony. (Frazier's complete testimony can be found
at the three links at the top of this post.)

These excerpts below paint a very clear picture with respect to the
firearms and ballistics evidence connected with JFK's assassination,
and it's a picture that almost all conspiracy theorists have no choice
but to either ignore or misrepresent in some fashion (if those conspiracists
actually want to continue to believe that Lee Oswald was just a "patsy").

My comments have been inserted in a few points below, denoted by a
"DVP" reference; and relevant Internet articles and photographs of
pertinent Warren Commission exhibits have been linked (or shown) in
various places as well:


MELVIN A. EISENBERG -- "Mr. Frazier, will you give your name and

ROBERT A. 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 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."

JOHN J. McCLOY -- "Have you written any articles on this subject?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes. I have predated 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 Major 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 -- "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

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 22nd [1963]. 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-millimeter Mannlicher-Carcano.
It is a bolt-action clip-fed military rifle." ....

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 -- "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 -- "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."

[DVP -- Many conspiracy theorists strongly disagree with Bob Frazier's
above "Yes, it is" answer regarding the "C2766" serial number that was
unique to Lee Harvey Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle. But, to date,
nobody has come up with a single Model 91/38 Carcano rifle, other than
CE139, that is stamped with the serial number C2766.]



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 -- "The cartridge cases which were...found next to the
window of the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository; can you
tell us when you received those cartridge cases?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir; I received the first of the exhibits, 543
and 544
, on November 23, 1963. They were delivered to me by Special
Agent Vincent Drain of the Dallas FBI Office. And the other one I
received on November 27, 1963, which was delivered by Special Agents
Vincent Drain and Warren De Brueys of the Dallas Office." ....

MR. EISENBERG -- "After receiving the cartridge cases, did you examine
them to determine whether they had been fired in Commission Exhibit

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir."

MR. EISENBERG -- "When did you make the examinations?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "On the dates I mentioned, that is, November 23, 1963,
and November 27, 1963."

MR. EISENBERG -- "And what were your conclusions, Mr. Frazier?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "I found all three of the cartridge cases had been
fired in this particular weapon."


MR. EISENBERG -- "Mr. Frazier, I now hand you Commission Exhibit 399,
which, for the record, is a bullet, and also for the record, it is a
bullet which was found in the Parkland Hospital following the
assassination. Are you familiar with this exhibit?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir. This is a bullet which was delivered to me
in the FBI laboratory on November 22, 1963, by Special Agent Elmer
Todd of the FBI Washington Field Office."

MR. EISENBERG -- "Does that have your mark on it?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, it does."

MR. EISENBERG -- "The bullet is in the same condition as it was when
you received it?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir; except for the marking of my initials and
the other examiners. There is a discoloration at the nose caused
apparently by mounting this bullet in some material which stained it,
which was not present when received, and one more thing on the nose is
a small dent or scraped area. At this area the spectographic examiner
removed a small quantity of metal for analysis."

MR. EISENBERG -- "Did you prepare the bullet in any way for
examination? That is, did you clean it or in any way alter it?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "No, sir; it was not necessary. The bullet was clean
and it was not necessary to change it in any way."

MR. EISENBERG -- "There was no blood or similar material on the bullet
when you received it?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Not any which would interfere with the examination,
no, sir. Now there may have been slight traces which could have been
removed just in ordinary handling, but it wasn't necessary to actually
clean blood or tissue off of the bullet."

MR. EISENBERG -- "Did you examine this exhibit to determine whether it
had been fired in Exhibit 139?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir."

MR. EISENBERG -- "And what was your conclusion?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "It was. Exhibit 399 was fired in the rifle 139."

MR. EISENBERG -- "That is to the exclusion of all other rifles?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir."




MR. EISENBERG -- "Mr. Frazier, did you determine the weight of the
exhibit-that is, 399?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir. Exhibit 399 weighs 158.6 grains."

MR. EISENBERG -- "How much weight loss does that show from the
original bullet weight?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "We measured several standard bullets, and their
weights varied, which is a normal situation, a portion of a grain, or
two grains, from 161 grains--that is, they were all in the vicinity of
161 grains. One weighed---160.85, 161.5, 161.1 grains."

MR. EISENBERG -- "In your opinion, was there any weight loss?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "There did not necessarily have to be any weight loss
to the bullet. There may be a slight amount of lead missing from the
base of the bullet, since it is exposed at the base, and the bullet is
slightly flattened. There could be a slight weight loss from the end
of the bullet, but it would not amount to more than 4 grains, because
158.6 is only a grain and a half less than the normal weight, and at
least a 2-grain variation would be allowed. So it would be
approximately 3 or 4 grains."

[DVP -- The weight of CE399 when it was examined by the FBI's Robert
Frazier (158.6 grains) is perfectly consistent with the sum total of
evidence in the JFK case relating to the "Single-Bullet Theory", in
that only a very small amount of metal fragments were discovered
inside the bodies of either of the two men that Bullet 399 struck on
November 22, 1963, in Dallas' Dealey Plaza.

The total weight of the bullet fragments that CE399 deposited in the
bodies of President Kennedy and Governor Connally was certainly far
less than 2.4 grains (which would be the approximate amount of lead
missing from CE399, based on the average weight of 161 grains for an
unfired Mannlicher-Carcano/Western Cartridge Company bullet).]



MR. McCLOY -- "As a result of all these comparisons, you would say
that the evidence is indisputable that the three shells that were
identified by you were fired from that rifle [CE139]?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir."

MR. McCLOY -- "And you would say the same thing of Commission
Exhibit 399, the bullet 399 was fired from that rifle?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir."

MR. McCLOY -- "And the fragment [Commission Exhibit] 567...was
likewise a portion of a bullet fired from that rifle?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir."

MR. McCLOY -- "You have no doubt about any of those?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "None whatsoever."


MR. EISENBERG -- "Mr. Frazier, did you examine this bullet fragment
[Commission Exhibit 569] with a view to determining whether it had
been fired from the rifle, Exhibit 139?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir."

MR. EISENBERG -- "What was your conclusion?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "This bullet fragment, Exhibit 569, was fired from this
particular rifle, 139."

MR. EISENBERG -- "Again to the exclusion of all other rifles?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir."

MR. EISENBERG -- "Did you weigh this fragment, Mr. Frazier?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, I did. It weighs 21.0 grains." ....

MR. EISENBERG -- "Can you determine whether this bullet fragment, 567,
and 569 are portions of the originally same bullet?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "No, sir."

MR. EISENBERG -- "You cannot?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "There is not enough of the two fragments in
unmutilated condition to determine whether or not the fragments
actually fit together. However, it was determined that there is no
area on one fragment, such as 567, which would overlap a corresponding
area on the base section of 569, so that they could be parts of one
bullet, and then, of course, they could be parts of separate bullets."


MR. EISENBERG -- "Mr. Frazier, did you examine this bullet [Commission
Exhibit 573
, a bullet connected with the assassination attempt against
General Edwin Walker in Dallas, Texas, on April 10, 1963] to determine
whether it was or might have been fired in Exhibit 139?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, I did."

MR. EISENBERG -- "And what was your conclusion?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "I was unable to reach a conclusion as to whether or
not it had been fired from this rifle. The conclusion went slightly
further than that, in that we determined that the general rifling
characteristics of the rifle 139 are of the same type as those found
on the bullet, Exhibit 573, and, further, on this basis, that the
bullet could have been fired from the rifle on the basis of its land
and groove impressions.

"And, second, that all of the remaining physical characteristics of this
bullet, 573, are the same as Western 6.5-millimeter Mannlicher-Carcano
bullets of the type normally loaded in ammunition made for this rifle, 139.

"However, the mutilation of the nose of the bullet has eliminated the
length characteristics, and it cannot be definitely stated that Exhibit 573
is, in fact, a Western Cartridge Company product, but all of the remaining
characteristics of base shape, distance from the base to the cannelure,
the width of the cannelure, and the overall appearance, coloration, and so
forth, are similar to Western ammunition."

MR. EISENBERG -- "Is this a jacketed bullet?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, it is a copper-alloy jacketed bullet having a
lead core."

MR. EISENBERG -- "Can you think of any reason why someone might have
called this a steel-jacketed bullet?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "No, sir; except that some individuals commonly refer
to rifle bullets as steel-jacketed bullets, when they actually in fact
just have a copper-alloy jacket." ....

MR. EISENBERG -- "But you do conclude that this was fired from a
Mannlicher-Carcano 91/38, or a rifle with similar barrel characteristics?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir." ....

MR. McCLOY -- "When you say you were able to determine it was fired
from this type of rifle or one similar to it, that would include a
number of different kinds of rifles besides the Mannlicher-Carcano?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir. It could include a variety of weapons with
which I am not familiar in the foreign field."

MR. McCLOY -- "But it is definitely, according to your best judgment,
a 6.5-millimeter bullet?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir."

MR. McCLOY -- "And the bullet, such as we find it, has now
characteristics similar to the type of bullet which was our Exhibit
No. 399?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, it does. Placing them side by side [see photo below],
the cannelure, which is really the only physical characteristic apparent,
comes to exactly the same place on both 399 and 573, indicating that
this bullet was loaded to exactly the same depth in the cartridge--the
two bullets, both 399 and 573."


CHAIRMAN EARL WARREN -- "Do the evidences that you see on this shirt
[CE394 -- FRONT AND BACK] 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."

MR. WARREN -- "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."


ARLEN SPECTER -- "May the record show at this point that Mr. Frazier
is examining the shirt [worn by Texas Governor John B. Connally on
11/22/63] heretofore identified on the back side with a photograph
marked Commission Exhibit 685 and on the front side with a photograph
marked Commission Exhibit 686. Now, referring to that shirt, Mr.
Frazier, what, if anything, did you observe on the rear side by way of
an imperfection, hole, or defect?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "I found a hole which is very ragged. An L-shaped tear
actually is what it amounted to in the back of the shirt near the
right sleeve, 2 inches from the seam line where the sleeve attaches to
the shirt, and 7-and-a-half inches to the right of the midline of the
shirt, the right side being as you look at the back of the shirt. This
tear amounted to a five-eights of an inch long horizontal and
approximately one-half inch long vertical break in the cloth, with a
very small tear located immediately to its right, as you look at the
back of the shirt, which was approximately three-sixteenths of an inch
in length. This hole corresponds in position to the hole in the back
of the coat, Governor Connally's coat, identified as Commission No. 683."

[DVP -- Frazier actually meant to say Commission Exhibit No. 684 above,
instead of CE683, because CE684 is a picture of the back of Governor
Connally's suit coat; whereas CE683 is a photo of the front of Connally's

MR. SPECTER -- "Were there sufficient characteristics observable to
formulate a conclusion as to the cause and direction of that hole?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "No, sir. There were no characteristics on which you
could base a conclusion as to what caused it, whether or not it was a
bullet and if it had been, what the direction of the projectile was."

MR. SPECTER -- "Could it have been caused by a 6.5-millimeter bullet
coming from the rear of the wearer toward his front?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir."


MR. FRAZIER -- "We found three small lead particles lying on the rug
in the rear seat area. These particles were located underneath or in
the area which would be underneath the left jump seat." ....

MR. SPECTER -- "May we assign to this group of particles Commission
Exhibit Number 840?" ....

ALLEN W. DULLES -- "It shall be admitted as Commission Exhibit Number
." ....

MR. SPECTER -- "Will you describe the three pieces of metal which are
contained within this vial, please?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "The three pieces of metal are lead. They were weighed
immediately upon recovery and were found to weigh nine-tenths of a
grain, seven-tenths of a grain, and seven-tenths of a grain,
respectively. Since that time, small portions have been removed for
spectrographic analysis and comparison with other bullets and bullet

MR. SPECTER -- "Has that comparison been made with a whole bullet
heretofore identified as Commission Exhibit 399 which...has been
identified as the bullet from the Connally stretcher?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir. The comparison was made by comparing Exhibit
399 with a bullet fragment found in the front seat of the Presidential
limousine and then comparing that fragment with these fragments from
the rear seat of the automobile."

MR. SPECTER -- "For identification purposes, has that fragment from
the front seat been heretofore identified during your prior testimony?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, it has. It bears Commission Number 567."

MR. SPECTER -- "Now, what did the comparative examination then
disclose as among Commission Exhibits 399, 567, and 840?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "That examination was performed by a spectrographer,
John F. Gallagher, and I do not have the results of his examinations
here, although I did ascertain that it was determined that the lead
fragments were similar in composition."

MR. SPECTER -- "...So that the fragments designated 840 could have
come from the same bullet as [the] fragment designated 567?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir."


MR. SPECTER -- "Mr. Frazier, is it possible for the fragments identified
in Commission Exhibit 840 to have come from the whole bullet
heretofore identified as Commission Exhibit 399?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "I would say that based on weight, it would be highly
improbable that that much weight could have come from the base of that
bullet, since its present weight is--its weight when I first received it was
158.6 grains...and its original normal weight would be 160 to 161 grains,
and those three metal fragments had a total of 2.1 grains as I recall--
2.3 grains. So it is possible but not likely since there is only a very small
part of the core of the bullet 399 missing."


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-and-a-half 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

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

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

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 -- "I now show you Commission Exhibit Number 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 23rd 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. 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

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."


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

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir; it would."

MR. SPECTER -- "Do you have an opinion as to how far it would have

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 [sic; 1,779?] 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. SPECTER -- "Were any metallic fragments brought to you which were
purported to have been found in the head of President Kennedy?"

MR. DULLES -- "Or body?"

MR. SPECTER -- "Or body of President Kennedy?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, they were. On November 23, 1963, at 1:45 a.m.,
the two metal fragments in this container were delivered to me in the
FBI laboratory by Special Agent James W. Sibert, and Special Agent
Francis O'Neill of the Baltimore office of the FBI who stated they had
obtained these in the autopsy room at the Naval Hospital near
Washington, D.C., where they were present when they were removed
from the head of President Kennedy."

MR. SPECTER -- "Is there any specification as to the portion of the
President's head from which they were removed?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "No, sir. They told me that there had been numerous
particles in the head but only these two had been removed, the others
being very small."

MR. SPECTER -- "May it please the Commission, I would like to have
those marked and admitted into evidence as Commission Exhibit Number

MR. DULLES -- "It shall be so marked and admitted under those



MR. SPECTER -- "Did you participate in the onsite tests at Dallas on
May 24, 1964?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes."

MR. SPECTER -- "What was your position during most of the time of
those onsite tests?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "I was stationed at the window on the sixth floor of
the Texas School Book Depository Building at the southeast corner of
the building."

MR. SPECTER -- "How far was that window open at the time the tests
were being conducted?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "I estimated it as approximately one-third. It was
somewhat less than halfway open."

MR. SPECTER -- "Is that the distance depicted on Commission Exhibit
No. 482
, which has heretofore been introduced in evidence?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir."

MR. SPECTER -- "Is the distance open on that window about the same as
that which you had it open at the time these tests were run?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, I would say that this is very close. The window
was placed according to information already furnished to the
Commission as to how much it had been opened at that time."

MR. SPECTER -- "Did you handle the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle during the
course of the onsite tests?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir."

MR. SPECTER -- "The rifle previously identified as Commission Exhibit
Number 139?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir; I did."

MR. SPECTER -- "...What was the basis for your positioning of that
rifle during those tests?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "To position the rifle, we selected boxes of the same
size and contour as boxes shown in a photograph or rather in two
photographs, reportedly taken by the police department at Dallas
shortly after the assassination. We placed these boxes in their
relative position in front of the window spacing them from left to
right, according to the photographs which were furnished to us, and
also placing them up against the window, with one of them resting on
the window ledge as it was shown in the photographs."

MR. SPECTER -- "In addition to the placement of the boxes, were there
any other guides which you had for reconstructing the position of the
rifle to the way which you believed it to have been held on November
22, 1963?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir. There was one physical obstruction in the
building which could not be moved consisting of two vertical pipes
located just at the left side of the sixth floor window. These prevented
me or anyone who was shooting from that window from moving any
further to the left.

"The position of the rifle, of course, had to be such that it could be
sighted out through the window, using the telescopic sight high enough
above the window ledge so that the muzzle of the weapon would clear
the window ledge, and low enough in position so that the bottom of the
window, which was only partially raised, would not interfere with a view
through the telescopic sight, which is approximately 2 inches higher than
the actual bore of the weapon."

MR. SPECTER -- "Did you position the rifle further, based on information
provided to you concerning the testimony of certain eyewitnesses at the
assassination scene concerning what they observed?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir. We attempted to put the muzzle of the weapon
sufficiently far out the window so it would have been visible from below."



MR. SPECTER -- "I now hand you Exhibits Numbers 889, 890, and 891,
and ask you if you had the view on each of those depicted in the
"photograph through rifle scope"?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir. Commission Number 889 represented by
[Zapruder Film] frame 166 is the adjusted position to account for the
fact that the Presidential stand-in on May 24 was actually 10 inches
higher in the air above the street than the President would have been
in the Presidential limousine."

MR. DULLES -- "Would you explain to us simply how you made those

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir."

MR. DULLES -- "I mean how did you get him down 10 inches as a
practical matter."

MR. FRAZIER -- "They had marked on the back of the President's coat
the location of the wound, according to the distance from the top of
his head down to the hole in his back as shown in the autopsy figures.
They then held a ruler, a tape measure up against that, both the back
of the Presidential stand-in and the back of the Governor's stand-in,
and looking through the scope you could estimate the 10-inch distance
down on the automobile. You could not actually see it on the President's
back. But could locate that 10-inch distance as a point which we marked
with tape on the automobile itself, both for the Presidential and the
Governor's stand-in."

MR. DULLES -- "Thank you."


MR. SPECTER -- "I now hand you Commission Exhibits Numbers 892 and
893, and ask you if you observed the views depicted in the "photograph
through rifle scope" on each of those exhibits?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "On Commission Exhibit Number 892, also marked
[Zapruder] frame Number 207, the car was moved forward under the tree
to the point where the spot on the Presidential stand-in's back just
became visible beyond the foliage of the tree. I had the car stopped
at that point so that this photograph could be made there.

"On Commission Exhibit Number 893, also marked frame 210, we have
the photograph made at the adjusted position to accommodate the
10-inch difference in height between the stand-in and the actual position
of the wound above the street and on the President's body."

MR. SPECTER -- "What was the alinement of President Kennedy's stand-in
with Governor Connally's stand-in at frames 207 and 210?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "They both are in direct alinement with the telescopic
sight at the window. The Governor is immediately behind the President
in the field of view. Was that your question?"

MR. SPECTER -- "Yes."

MR. FRAZIER -- "Alinement of people?"

MR. SPECTER -- "Yes, sir."

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir." ....

MR. SPECTER -- "Based on the Governor's position then in frames 207
and 210, was he lined up so that a bullet fired from the sixth floor
would have passed through his body in about the way that the entry and
exit holes were described to you?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes. I would say that this could have happened at these
two frames. However, this would assume that the path of the bullet
through the Governor's body was the same as the path of the bullet
before it struck, that is, there was no appreciable deflection in the body
itself. Since I have no actual technical evidence available to me that
there was no deflection, I can only say that it is a possibility under the
circumstances as set up in these photographs."

MR. SPECTER -- "You would state that as a possibility based upon the
observations you made and the facts provided to you?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir."

[DVP -- So, as can be seen in CE893 and CE894, President Kennedy and
Governor Connally, who were both shot in their respective upper backs
on 11/22/63 by a rifle bullet, were in a perfect position within the
President's limousine to be hit by the same bullet that was fired from
the sixth-floor window of the Book Depository at a point which is the
equivalent of frames 210 to 222 of the Zapruder Film.

My own opinion is that the single bullet hit both victims at precisely
Zapruder frame #224, which is a frame that is also within the Warren
Commission's "bracketed" range of Z-Film frames that the Commission
concluded was the approximate time that the "SBT" shot was fired from
Lee Harvey Oswald's rifle. The Commission's "range" was Z210 to Z225.]


MR. SPECTER -- "Now, assuming certain factors, Mr. Frazier, to wit:
That the President and Governor Connally were seated in an open
automobile in the approximate positions taken by the President's stand-
in and the Governor's stand-in during the onsite tests, that a bullet
passed through President Kennedy entering at a velocity of 1,900 feet
per second, striking 14 centimeters below the right mastoid process and
14 centimeters to the left of the right acromion process, which is the
tip of the right shoulder; that the bullet passed through a fascia
channel, hitting no bones, and proceeded in a straight line, exiting
through the lower one-third of his neck, passing out of his shirt at
the position which you observed personally from your inspection of the
President's shirt, nicking the knot on the President's tie in the way
you observed from your examination of that tie -- do you have an
opinion as to whether it is probable, based on the fact which I have
asked you to assume, that a bullet could have gone through the
President and missed the interior of the limousine and all of its
occupants between frames 207 and 225?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "I can give you my opinion based on this reconstruction,
as I understand your question. All of these things refer to the reconstruction
and assuming particularly that the path of the projectile to the President
was also the same path, the same angle as it went through his body and
then on, and in that connection, yes, in my opinion the bullet had to strike
in the car, either the car itself or an occupant of the car."

MR. SPECTER -- "And is that a probable opinion of yours based on what
you saw during the tests and the facts I have asked you to assume?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, it is. And in fact, I think it is rather--it is obvious
when you look at the photographs themselves that the crosshair of the
telescopic sight actually would give you the point of impact of the bullet
if the weapon is sighted in and if there is no change in the line of sight,
the bullet had to strike the car shown in each of these photographs which
is frame 225 on this end of this series, and frame 207 on the other end
of the series. It shows that there would be no chance for the bullet to
miss the car at all...if it had no deflection in its path."

MR. SPECTER -- "Did you have an opportunity to examine the car shortly
after the assassination?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, I did; on the early morning of November 23, 1963."

MR. SPECTER -- "The record will show you have testified about it
heretofore, but will you again state at this juncture whether or not
you found any indication within the car that the interior of the car
was struck by a missile proceeding at a high velocity such as 1,775
feet per second?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "No, sir; we found none. We examined in particular the
passenger's section, the rear seat area of the back of the automobile
clear up to the back of the rear seat, the rear seat itself, the
floorboards and the back of the front seat, the backs primarily of the
jump seats, and other areas in the front of the car, the windshield
and the chrome and the front hoods and fenders and sides of the
automobile and we found no evidence of a bullet impact having those
characteristics you mentioned."


MR. SPECTER -- "Based on the position of Governor Connally as depicted
in the Zapruder slides at frames 222 and 225, could he have taken a
shot, assuming the firing point to have been the sixth floor of the
Texas School Book Depository Building, which entered and exited from
his body in accordance with the known medical evidence?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "I have not made a very thorough study of the Zapruder
film which I understand you mentioned in this particular question with
reference to the Zapruder film itself."

MR. SPECTER -- "We will take it with reference to the reconstructed
positions of Governor Connally in frames 222 and 225, which you have
testified you did observe at the time the measurements and photographs
were taken."

MR. FRAZIER -- "I would say, yes, under the conditions that I mentioned
previously, that the reconstruction would represent the Governor as it was
in November, then he could have been struck anywhere in that frame area
of from 207 to 225."

MR. SPECTER -- "How about the same question in frames 231, 235, 240
and thereafter?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "There is only one position beyond frame 225 at which
the Governor could have been struck according to the information
furnished to me and from my examination of his clothing that he was
struck near the right sleeve seam and that the bullet came out through
the inside pocket of his jacket. At frame 231 the Governor is, as I
saw it from the window on that date, turned to the front to such an
extent that he could not have been hit at that particular frame."

MR. SPECTER -- "Why not, Mr. Frazier?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "The angle through his body, as I measured it on the
coat is approximately 20 degrees from the right toward the left. On
May 24 in our reconstruction I found that the Governor had turned
farther to the front from a position slightly facing the right than he
was in at frame 225. He had turned back to the front so that a shot
which struck him in this [right] shoulder in the back...near the seam
would have come out much further to his right than the actual exit
hole described to me as being just under the right nipple."


MR. McCLOY -- "As I get it, Mr. Frazier, what you are saying is there
is only a certain point at which the bullet could pass through the
President, could have hit Mr. Connally, and that is at a point when he
[Governor Connally] is not sitting full face forward and at a point
when he is not too far turned around."

MR. FRAZIER -- "That is exactly right."

MR. McCLOY -- "Somewhere when he [Connally] is turning to the right."

MR. FRAZIER -- "He was placed approximately 20 degrees to the
right. .... That is 20 degrees according to my examination of his
clothing, but I don't know the exact figures of the angle through his


MR. SPECTER -- "Mr. Frazier, assuming the factors which I have asked
you to accept as true for the purposes of expressing an opinion
before, as to the flight of the bullet and the straight-line penetration
through the President's body, considering the point of entry and exit,
do you have an opinion as to what probably happened during the interval
between frames 207 and 225 as to whether the bullet which passed
through the neck of the President entered the Governor's back."

MR. FRAZIER -- "There are a lot of probables in that. First, we have
to assume there is absolutely no deflection in the bullet from the
time it left the barrel until the time it exited from the Governor's
body. That assumes that it has gone through the President's body and
through the Governor's body. I feel that physically this would have
been possible because of the positions of the Presidential stand-in
and the Governor's stand-in, it would be entirely possible for this to
have occurred.

"However, I myself don't have any technical evidence which would permit
me to say one way or the other, in other words, which would support it
as far as my rendering an opinion as an expert. I would certainly say it
was possible, but I don't say that it probably occurred because I don't
have the evidence on which to base a statement like that."

MR. SPECTER -- "What evidence is it that you would be missing to
assess the probabilities?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "We are dealing with hypothetical situations here of
placing people in cars from photographs which are not absolutely
accurate. They are two dimensional. They don't give you the third
dimension. They are as accurate as you can accurately place the people,
but it isn't absolute.

"Secondly, we are dealing with the fact that...I don't know technically
whether there was any deviation in the bullet which struck the President
in the back, and exited from his front. If there were a few degrees
deviation then it may affect my opinion as to whether or not it would
have struck the Governor.

"We are dealing with an assumed fact that the Governor was in front of
the President in such a position that he could have taken. So when you
say would it probably have occurred, then you are asking me for an opinion,
to base my opinion on a whole series of hypothetical facts which I can't

MR. McCLOY -- "Let me put it to you in another way -- from your best
judgment about what you know about this thing, what was the sequence
of the shots, and who was hit, and when in relation to---?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "I will say this--I have looked at the film and have
seen evidence of one shot occurring which struck the President in the
head. That was at frame 313. .... Commission Exhibit No. 902.

"I have seen evidence in the film of the President with both arms up
clutching at his throat, and having examined his clothing and having
seen the hole in his shirt and his back, I might assume that he is
clutching his throat because a bullet exited from his throat. I don't
have the technical knowledge to substantiate that. There was no metal
on this hole in front, and there is no way for me to say from my own
examination that it actually was a bullet hole. Nowhere else in this
film have I seen any indication of a bullet striking."

MR. SPECTER -- "The President?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Either the President or the Governor. Because I do not
know the reaction time which would exist from the time a bullet struck
until someone made a move. It may be a half second, it may be a full
second. It may be a tenth of a second. It depends upon the intensity
of the pain, and actually what happened.

"And therefore, in looking at the film, you can't say a bullet struck right
here because he started to move his hands here. It may have been a full
second, a half second behind that spot. I would say that two bullets at
least struck in the automobile.

"I cannot say that three bullets did not strike in the automobile from my
examination, but it appears and due to the reconstruction at Dallas, it
appears that if the one bullet did strike the President, then it landed in
the automobile, and if it landed in the automobile, and we found no
evidence of it having hit the car itself, then I say it is possible that it
struck the Governor.

"Now, as to the sequence of the shots, that one obviously was before
the head shot. If there was a third shot fired, I could not tell you from
anything I know whether it was the first, the second, or the third."

MR. McCLOY -- "It is possible, according to your analysis of it, that
the first shot could have gone through the back of the President and
exited through the front of his neck, and the second shot could have
hit Connally, and the third shot could have hit the President."

MR. DULLES -- "Where would the first shot have gone under that thesis?"

MR. McCLOY -- "I just say I don't know where it could have gone."

MR. FRAZIER -- "From what I know from my examination that is true,
because I have seen bullets strike small twigs, small objects, and
ricochet for no apparent reason except they hit and all the pressure
is on one side and it turns the bullet and it goes off at an angle. If
there was no deviation from the time the bullet left the rifle barrel
until the time it exited from the Governor's body, then the physical
setup exists for it to have gone through the President, and through
the Governor."

MR. SPECTER -- "You mean from the time it exited through the
Governor's body?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "That is right. Otherwise, you have nothing to base a
conclusion upon. If you have deviation anywhere along the line then
you both affect the position at which the Governor could have been
shot--for instance--if the bullet entered the Governor's back and
immediately took a 20-degree leftward angle, then the Governor could
have been shot when he was facing straightforward in the automobile.

"Now, I can't tell that, and therefore I can only say that my opinion
must be based on your assumption that there was not a deviation of
the bullet through the President's body and no deviation of the bullet
through the Governor's body. No deflection. On that basis, then you can
say that it is possible for both of them to have been hit with one bullet."

GERALD R. FORD -- "Does that opinion rule out the possibility or cast
doubt on the possibility of a third shot?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "It does not rule out the possibility of a third shot
-- no, sir. Because I can only base my opinion on what I saw and my
own experience, and that is that a bullet could have struck the
President, if it had deflection in the President's body it could have,
and he happened to be in a certain position in the car which would
affect the angle, the bullet may have exited from the automobile."

MR. FORD -- "As I understood your assumptions there was no deviation
and no deflection, and I thought I phrased my question based on your
opinion under those facts, it might rule out a third shot."

MR. DULLES -- "Do you mean rule out a third shot entirely or just rule
out a third shot hitting in the car?"

MR. FORD -- "Rule out a third shot in one instance or establish the
possibility of a third shot that missed everything."

MR. FRAZIER -- "As I understand your question, I am now assuming
these various factors to exist, that there was no deviation, no change
in the path of the bullet."

MR. FORD -- "The bullet went through the President and through the

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, then under that premise and the reconstruction
showing the position of the car with reference to the path of the
bullet, then it is entirely possible that these two individuals were
hit with one bullet and that there was not another bullet that struck
in the car other than the one that struck the President in the back of
the head and exited from his head."

MR. FORD -- "Under these assumptions, there is a possibility there was
not a third shot or there was a third shot that missed everything."

MR. FRAZIER -- "That missed everything; yes, sir."

MR. DULLES -- "Is there any way of correlating the time of the shot
with the position of the car so as to know whether possibly the first
shot was fired before the car was out from the tree and it might have
hit a branch of the tree and be deflected so it didn't hit the car? If
he had fired too soon. I guess it is impossible."

MR. FRAZIER -- "It is possible. I don't have any evidence to support
it one way or the to whether or not a limb of the tree may
have deflected one shot. However, I think it should be remembered that
the frame 207 is just as he exits under the tree. From there to frame
225 to where the President shows a reaction is only a matter of one
second. He is under the tree in frames 166 until frame 207, which is
about two seconds. So somewhere in that three-second interval there
may have been a shot--which deflected from a limb or for some other
reason and was never discovered." ....

MR. FORD -- "Again, making those same assumptions we made a moment
ago, is there any evidence that a third shot hit the car or any occupant
of the car?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Assuming all those assumptions we had before--no. I
would say that, and again I have not the technical evidence to back
this up one way or the other, but you make these assumptions and I
would say under those conditions only two shots hit the occupants or
the car because the one through the President had to cause Connally's
wound otherwise it would have struck somewhere else in the car and it
did not strike somewhere else. Therefore, it had to go through Governor
Connally. And the second shot had to strike the President in the head."

MR. McCLOY -- "How about these shots you spoke of, one of the
fragments, at least, hitting the glass, the windshield and one
possibly hitting the chrome. Was there anything, could it have been
any fragmentation of the first shot which didn't hit, the first shot
that hit the President, let's say, but didn't hit Connally, might that
again make the possibility of three shots, one of them hitting the
President and fragmenting as you indicated, and a second one hitting
Connally, and the third one hitting the President for the lethal

MR. FRAZIER -- "Under that circumstance, the bullet exiting from the
President would have had to strike something else in the car to break
it up."

MR. McCLOY -- "Break it up inasmuch as it was broken up?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir. There was no evidence that the bullet which
exited from the President was in any but complete condition; that is,
there was only one hole through the shirt, there was only one hole
through his coat or shirt actually and the testimony of the medical
examiners was that it made a relatively straight path through the
body." ....

MR. DULLES -- "There has been a certain amount of testimony indicating
there was a longer pause between the report of the first shot or what
is believed to be the report--explosion--of the first shot and the second
and third shots. That is not absolutely unanimous, but I would say it is
something like 5 to 1 or something of that kind, what would you say,
2 to 1, 3 to 1?

"Is it possible that the assassin attempted to fire when the car was
behind the tree or going into the tree, that that shot went astray, and
that that accounts for, if there was a longer delay between one and two,
that would account for it, and then the lethal shots were fired or...the
one shot that was fired that hit the two and then the lethal shot was
fired immediately after. It is speculation."

MR. McCLOY -- "I think that must be speculation because there certainly
is conflicting evidence as to the intervals between the first and the
second shot and the second and the third shot."

MR. DULLES -- "I think if you will read the testimony you will find it at
least 2 to 1, except for the people in the car."

MR. McCLOY -- "Maybe, but what weight do you give these? I don't know.
I think that is quite possible that a bullet was deflected by that tree,
but there is no evidence whatever of the bullet landing anywhere in the
street or among the crowd. And yet there seems to be no doubt at all
that three shots were fired."

MR. DULLES -- "That seems to be the evidence."

MR. McCLOY -- "At least three shots were fired, and probably three
shots were fired because of the three shells that were found."

MR. DULLES -- "Three shells?"

MR. McCLOY -- "Yes."

MR. DULLES -- "We probably won't settle that today."

MR. FRAZIER -- "I don't know how to answer that question except
possibly to go back to the frame numbers of the Zapruder film and you
will find they are about equally spaced from frame 161 just before the
tree to frame, say, 220, which is just a few frames after the tree.
That is 59 or approximately 60 frames, from that point.

"But from frame 222 to the last shot of frame 313 is 78 and 13, 91
frames, so there is more time between the second and third than the
first and second, assuming that the second one actually occurred and
that it occurred at about the middle of that interval."

MR. McCLOY -- "In the middle of that frame, yes. I think that is
pretty persuasive."

MR. DULLES -- "I didn't quite follow that."

MR. McCLOY -- "There seemed to be more frames between, going
backwards, between the third shot, that is between the time that---"

MR. DULLES -- "The first shot went astray, you don't know whether it
was fired. You have no way of getting at that."

(Discussion off the record.)

MR. McCLOY -- "Thank you very much, Mr. Frazier."



Even though FBI Agent Robert A. Frazier didn't specifically testify in front
of the Warren Commission about any of the ballistics evidence concerning
the investigation of policeman J.D. Tippit, it should be noted that Frazier
himself did, indeed, examine several pieces of evidence connected with
Officer Tippit's murder, including the four spent cartridge casings (i.e.,
bullet shells that Lee Harvey Oswald was seen removing from his Smith &
Wesson revolver after Oswald shot Officer Tippit four times on Tenth Street
in the Dallas suburb of Oak Cliff less than one hour after President Kennedy
was assassinated.

FBI firearms identification expert Cortlandt Cunningham provided extensive
testimony to the Warren Commission regarding the ballistics evidence in
the Tippit case. [See Warren Commission volumes 2, 3, and 7 for
Cunningham's complete testimony.]

Here's a pertinent excerpt from Cunningham's testimony, relating to the
Tippit bullet shells and relating to Robert A. Frazier:

CORTLANDT CUNNINGHAM -- "I first marked these cartridge cases
[Commission Exhibit 594] upon receiving them. There were four. I would
like to state, first of all that Special Agents [Robert] Frazier and
[Charles] Killion also independently examined these four cartridge
cases, and made the same comparisons that I am going to state. I am
telling you what I found--although they independently arrived at the
same conclusion.

"The cartridge cases were first marked and examined for the presence
of any individual characteristic marks on these cartridge cases whereby
it would be possible to identify them as having been fired in a weapon.

"I then test-fired Commission Exhibit 143 [Lee Oswald's Smith & Wesson
revolver], using similar ammunition, and microscopically compared the
four cartridge cases--one at a time, that is Commission Exhibit 594--with
the tests obtained from the revolver, Commission Exhibit 143." ....

MR. EISENBERG -- "Did you examine the cartridge cases in Exhibit 594
in an attempt to determine whether they had been fired in Exhibit 143,
the revolver, to the exclusion of all other revolvers?"

MR. CUNNINGHAM -- "I did."

MR. EISENBERG -- "Can you tell us your conclusion?"

MR. CUNNINGHAM -- "As a result of my examination, it is my opinion
that those four cartridge cases, Commission Exhibit 594, were fired in
the revolver, Commission Exhibit 143, to the exclusion of all other


David Von Pein
May 2009
September 2010