Robert Prudhomme

Hello Jon

This is precisely the misconception that got SA Robert A. Frazier into trouble with the 6.5mm Carcano ammunition.

The main Japanese infantry weapon of the Second World War was the 6.5x50mm Arisaka rifle. Being a 6.5mm calibre rifle, it had a bore diameter of .256" and a bullet (groove) diameter of .264".

In contrast, .25 calibre rifles have a bore dia. of .250", and a bullet (groove) dia. of .256".

Coincidentally, the .25 calibre bullet has the same bullet (groove) dia. as the bore diameter of the 6.5mm calibre rifle (.256"), and this is why you see uninformed people blabbing on the Internet about the two rifles being the same.

They are not, and Frazier, the great FBI expert, was not aware of this.

Some of the .25 calibre North American rifles include the .250-3000 Savage, the .257 Roberts, the .25-06 Remington and the .257 Weatherby Magnum. Notice how confusing North American designations are, with some of these models quoting the bore diameter, and others quoting the groove (bullet) diameter.

As to the availability of .25 calibre FMJ ammo in the early 60's, I really can't say how widely available it was.

Jon

Think of this for a second. If your scope is mounted directly above the receiver and chamber, the line of sight of the scope is directly above the path of the bullet through the barrel. Once the scope is sighted in, it should be accurate in the lateral plane (side to side impact) out to infinity.

However, due to the peculiarities of the Carcano, you cannot mount a scope directly above the receiver. It must be mounted off centre, out to the left side of the receiver, making the line of sight and the path of the bullet two converging, parallel or diverging lines; all depending on how well the rifle is sighted in.

How do you think this affects lateral accuracy of this rifle?

Hello Jon

Yes, all of these factors are taken into account when one enters data into a ballistic calculator. Every bullet has something known as a "ballistic coefficient" which is a determination of that bullet's ability to counteract the frictional force or "drag" that you speak of.

Frazier clearly states, in his testimony to the WC, that he determined the muzzle velocity of WCC 6.5mm ammunition, fired from C2766, to be, on average, 2165 feet per second.

We do not need to know the angle of the rifle barrel. We only need to know at what range the rifle is zeroed to be accurate, or sighted in at. In this case, it is impossible to determine this from Frazier's testimony, as it would appear that C2766 is zeroed to be accurate at several different ranges. This, of course, is impossible. However, the solution is to enter, into the ballistics calculator, many different zeroed ranges, in order to create many different models, and use these to determine an accurate picture of what the rifle was or was not doing during the FBI tests.

It is not accurate to say a bullet follows a parabolic curve. In the shooting world, everything is calculated from the line of sight of the shooter, whether that line of sight is horizontal, at a 45° angle, or vertical, and we are only concerned about bullet drop from that line of sight.

DVP is, of course, attempting to mix the pristine bullet CE 399, allegedly found on a stretcher at Parkland Hospital, with the completely mangled bullet CE 573, allegedly removed from the Walker residence following the attempted shooting of Gen. Edwin Walker.

Please, let's deal with one bullet at a time. We'll come to CE 399 soon enough.

The reason CE 573 had to be substituted for the real bullet fired at Walker is very simple, and one of those "nitpicking" little details that gets Dave so upset. You see, the real Walker bullet looked nothing like CE 573. Here is a link to the Supplementary Offense Report written by the DPD officers who investigated the shooting. Note that the bullet is described as "...of unknown caliber, steel jacket....". It is an established fact that 6.5mm Carcano ammunition, manufactured by the Western Cartridge Co., is jacketed with a copper alloy, bearing a distinct copper colour.

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?absPageId=333529

Would any of you have described CE 573, seen below, as being steel jacketed?

Edwin Walker stated, without equivocation, that CE 573 was NOT the bullet he was shown by police as the one having been fired at his home.

Therefore, simply "proving" that CE 573 was fired from Carcano rifle serial number C2766 is not conclusive proof that it was Oswald who shot at Walker. Since the history of CE 573 is in question, it matters not whether it was fired from C2766. And the question of who fired CE 573, and the question of who fired at Walker's home, then, become two separate questions.

Questions which have not been answered beyond a reasonable doubt.

"Someone in authority said it, I believe it, end of story" is great for religion; it shows great faith. Faith is NOT evidence. Mr. Von Pein is apparently a man of great faith; that is beyond question. But I firmly believe that a competent defense attorney would put Walker on the stand and introduce VERY reasonable doubt that CE 573 was the bullet from the Walker shooting. Once the link between the Walker shooting and the JFK shooting is in doubt, much of the other evidence then becomes questionable.

So...now there are THREE questions that should be answered: 1) If CE 573 is not the bullet from the Walker shooting, why is it in evidence? 2)Who pulled the trigger when CE 573 was fired...and why [a two-part question]? And 3)Who actually fired the shot at Walker's home?

Hello Mark

SA Robert A. Frazier testified that he found the diameter of the Walker bullet by measuring one land impression and one groove impression on the recovered bullet, adding them together, multiplying by four (no. of lands and grooves) and dividing the resulting number by pi (3.1416) to obtain the diameter.

First, the land and groove measurements are not even close to those of a 6.5mm Carcano M91/38.

Second, the numbers he uses, if calculated as he did, give us the bullet diameter of a .25 calibre rifle, .256", not of a Carcano 6.5mm rifle, .268".

Third, Frazier mistakenly believed .25 calibre rifles to have the same diameter of bullet as a 6.5mm Carcano rifle; .256" as opposed to .268".

The question you should be asking is, is the Walker bullet in evidence, CE 573, a bullet fired from a .25 calibre rifle?

You're on the right track, Jon. However, it is much worse than you think. I originally attempted to solve this problem using algebra, but the intricacies of ballistics required a formula with much more finesse. Luckily, there are on line ballistics calculators that will do all of our thinking for us.

The mistakes (or otherwise) we are concerned with here are mainly with the elevation of the shots, or where the bullets land vertically on the targets at different ranges. The lateral spread of the bullets, at different ranges, will be a constant number. While it may vary at different ranges, the peculiarities of a side mounted scope predetermine where the bullets will land laterally. Any variation from this predetermined constant will indicate serious tampering with the shooting results, or results made up without even shooting the rifle.

Be prepared for some mind numbing figures, but it should be fun, too.

As we have discussed, SA Robert A. Frazier was the FBI's leading firearms expert, performed all of the FBI's tests on the alleged assassination weapon and presented his findings in testimony to the Warren Commission in 1964.

It has been my experience that it is remarkably easy to find glaring mistakes in Mr. Frazier's testimony, to the point I have begun to suspect he almost wanted someone to see through the FBI's charade.

What I am going to show you I have already presented in another thread. It is buried at the back of that thread, however, and the importance of it may not be readily apparent to a reader whose head is already swimming with other data.

Anyways, here is the testimony:

From Wikipedia:


"FBI tests[edit]
The FBI tests of the Carcano's accuracy showed:
1) FBI firearms expert Robert A. Frazier testified that "It is a very accurate weapon. The targets we fired show that."^[61] From 15 yards (14 m), all three bullets in a test firing landed approximately 2½ inches high, and 1-inch (25 mm) to the right, in the area about the size of a dime.^[62] At 100 yards (91 m), the test shots landed 2½ to 5 inches (130 mm) high, within a 3 to 5-inch (130 mm) circle. Frazier testified that the scope's high variation would actually work in the shooter's favor: with a target moving away from the shooter, no lead correction would have been necessary to follow the target. "At that range, at that distance, 175 feet (53 m) to 265 feet (81 m),^[63] with this rifle and that telescopic sight, I would not have allowed any lead — I would not have made any correction for lead merely to hit a target of that size."

Can anyone spot the outrageous error in the above testimony?

Stick around, Dave, and I will show you. It's a shame the FBI didn't set the IQ bar a little higher for their "experts". A child could follow their mistakes.

P.S. Aren't you going to try to prove me wrong about the Walker bullet, or does Langley's firearms expert have the weekend off?

So, would you like to see some lies Frazier told about the shooting tests he did with C2766? They are just like the one he made with the Walker bullet. Frazier 's own arguments mathematically show him to be full of crap.

2067?? No kidding? Man, he must have been privy to a few hot items.

If all else fails, the trolls fall back on having the "experts" on their side.

I'm still waiting for that logical rebuttal, Dave. I'd have you a battle of wits, but it's clear you're unarmed, and that would hardly be sporting.

Let's see --- I have a choice:

Should I believe Robert A. Frazier, a person with 23 years of experience as a firearms identification expert as of 1964?

Or should I place my faith in a self-appointed firearms identification "expert" and conspiracy hobbyist named Robert Prudhomme?

Oh gosh....what a tough choice that is.

No, don't believe either one, Dave. The mathematics speak for themselves. Robert Frazier measured a .25 calibre bullet, not a 6.5mm Carcano bullet.

Want to see some more screw ups by Frazier? I have lots of them.

P.S. I'm being generous calling them screw ups. Some might call them outright lies.

"Oh, Mrs. Kennedy, oh my God, oh my God. I didn't mean to do it, I didn't hear, I should have swerved the car, I couldn't help it. Oh, Mrs. Kennedy, as soon as I saw it I swerved. If only I'd seen it in time!"

Vince, I would pay a lot of money to find out what "it" was, and how swerving the limo would have been a good defense to "it".

Think Dave is phoning Langley right now to get advice on how to deal with this "problem"?

There is no "problem". Never was. You're looking for a "problem" and (naturally) finding one to suit your needs. Par for the CT course, as per usual.

Aww, gee, Dave, am I talking over your head again?

As I said, let me know when you have a genuine rebuttal. Until then, go away.

Cliff,

Can one be sure no bullets or fragments of bullets attributable to the back wound or the throat wound were recovered at the autopsy?

Didn't some SS or FBI agent sign a receipt for a "missile", sign the receipt in the autopsy room? If so, could not the missile in question have been attributable to one or the other of the wounds?

Jon, I believe it was a fragment from the head wound.

The throat wound wasn't examined and the back wound was found to be shallow.

Remind me again how the back wound was determined to be shallow. I haven't had a good laugh in a few days.

Maybe you need to work on your sense of humor. Just say'n...

From the Sibert/O'Neill FBI report on the autopsy:

During the latter stages of this autopsy, Dr. HUMES located an opening which appeared to be a bullet hole which was below the shoulders and two inches to the right of the middle line of the spinal column.

This opening was probed by Dr. HUMES with the finger, at which time it was determined that the trajectory of the missile entering at this point had entered at a downward position of 45 to 60 degrees. Further probing determined that the distance travelled by this missile was a short distance inasmuch as the end of the opening could be felt with the finger.

Here's what Roy Kellerman told the WC:

Mr. KELLERMAN. There were three gentlemen who were performing this autopsy. A Colonel Finck--during the examination of the President, from the hole that was in his shoulder, and with a probe, and we were standing right alongside of him, he is probing inside the shoulder with his instrument and I said, "Colonel, where did it go? He said, "There are no lanes for an outlet of this entry in this man's shoulder."

Cliff

Listen REAL close. I know you are thick headed, and I'm only going to tell this to you once.

I measured my little finger at the first knuckle, and found it to be 3/4 inch in diameter. A 6.5mm Carcano bullet is just a shade over 1/4 inch in diameter, or 1/3 the diameter of my baby finger.

Unless Humes had fingers like a four year old girl, tell me how he could probe the back wound with a finger.

Take your time, I have all day.

What do you make of Greer saying he swerved, Vince? Did anyone ever follow up on this? Considering a number of witnesses claimed to have seen the limo swerve to the left, as well as stop, I'm surprised no one ever pressed him on this matter.

Oh, good Lord. Help us in time of great need. (Such as when Bob P. shows up with nonsense like the above post.)

Laugh it up, boy. When you come up with a genuine rebuttal, let me know.

General similarities between the bullets, Dave? Uh, d-uh, let's see. They're both copper coloured, and both have rifling marks on them. Boy, that sure narrows it down.

Good thing for you most people here don't know their butts from their elbows when it comes to firearms.

David,

I will not be drawn in this thread to discussing in details the Walker note,

I asked you questions in the hope of furthering my understanding of the note.

In a separate diary I'll post what I know about the note. Before I do so, I had hoped to have the benefit of your knowledge.

I'm sure your knowledge concerning "the Walker note" is much more extensive and detailed than my own. I know the basic facts regarding the note, however. And those basic facts indicate that Marina Oswald found the note (with a post office key on the top of it) in Lee's "study" (i.e., closet) at the Neely Street apartment in Dallas on the night of 4/10/63.

MARINA OSWALD'S HSCA TESTIMONY RE: THE WALKER INCIDENT

Marina saved the note by stashing it inside a book. (I've always wondered why Lee didn't demand that Marina give him the note back so he could burn it, but evidently he didn't do that; so the note survives as CE1.)

And the Russian writing we see in that note was determined to be the writing of Lee H. Oswald (sourced previously via an appropriate official FBI source--Cadigan).

And Marina has never recanted her story about Lee telling her on April 10 that he had just shot at Walker.

Those two things--the note and Marina's testimony--are corroborative of one another and form the proof, IMO, that Lee Oswald did, indeed, fire a shot at General Walker.

Plus, the Walker bullet looks very much like CE399 (which we know came out of Oswald's rifle). The FBI could not say that CE573 (the Walker bullet) positively came from Oswald's C2766 Carcano, but on the other hand, the FBI said there was nothing to indicate that 573 did not come from that gun. And as a layperson, just looking at these two bullets, I'm struck by the general similarities in the bullets. I'm sure you can see the similarities as well. (Who couldn't?)....

Special Agent Robert A. Frazier of the FBI was considered a firearms expert. He gathered most of the ballistics evidence in the JFK assassination and presented his findings in evidence to the Warren Commission. However, a careful examination of his work and evidenvce reveals a plethora of errors.

One such error is revealed in the excerpt from his testimony below, and this error will explain why the bullet shown in the evidence photo and known as CE 399 could never have been fired from Oswald's rifle, or any other 6.5mm Carcano.

"Mr. EISENBERG - Well, no; not at this time.

Can you explain the American equivalent to the 6.5 mm. caliber?

Mr. FRAZIER - That is the same as .25 caliber. Such weapons in the United States as the .25-20 Winchester, .25-35, the .250 Savage, and the .257 Roberts, are all of the same barrel diameter, or approximately the same barrel diameter. So a decimal figure of .257 inch is the equivalent of 6.5 mm."

This is a popular misconception in the shooting world regarding .25 calibre and 6.5mm calibre rifles. Mr. Frazier is 100% wrong in his belief.

The bore diameter of a .25 calibre rifle is .250"; the bore diameter of a 6.5mm calibre rifle is .256".

The groove diameter (also bullet diameter) of a .25 calibre rifle is .257"; the groove and bullet diameter of a 6.5mm calibre rifle is .264" (.268" in a Carcano).

The confusion between the two calibres stems from the bore diameter of the 6.5mm and the groove diameter of the .25 calibre both being .257".

This misconception plagued Frazier throughout his investigation and shows up again in his testimony about the Walker bullet.

"Mr. EISENBERG - Can you describe the general rifling characteristics which you referred to?

Mr. FRAZIER - Yes. They consist of impressions from four lands and grooves. The bullet is mutilated on a portion of its surface. However, it can be determined that there were four land impressions and four groove impressions originally on this bullet.

The width of the land impression is 7/100ths of an inch, that is 0.07 inch--whereas the width of the groove impression is 0.13 inch, or 13/100ths of an inch.

The bullet is flattened so that it was not possible to measure its diameter. However, by adding the land width to the groove width, and multiplying by the number of lands and grooves, you can determine the circumference of the bullet and mathematically determine its diameter, which in this case corresponds to 6.5 mm. ammunition, or approximately .267 inch."

As I pointed out in another thread, adding the measurements from the Walker bullet of a land impression (.070" or 1.778 mm) and a groove impression (.130" or 3.302 mm) and multiplying by 4 to determine circumference, and then dividing by pi (3.1416) to obtain diameter, does not produce .267".

(.070 + .130) x 4 = .800 divided by 3.1416 = .255"

Amazingly, this is almost exactly the diameter of a .25 calibre bullet.

The REAL specs for the lands and grooves of a 6.5mm Carcano rifle are lands = .085" (2.159 mm) and grooves = .125" (3.175 mm). With these specs, let's try Frazier's formula again.

(.085 + .125) x 4 = .840 divided by 3.1416 = .267" (the correct diameter for a Carcano bullet)

P.S. I should point out the actual diameter of a Carcano 6.5mm bullet , to four decimals, is .2677". It is often rounded off to .267 or .268, and this leads to confusion.

Cliff,

Can one be sure no bullets or fragments of bullets attributable to the back wound or the throat wound were recovered at the autopsy?

Didn't some SS or FBI agent sign a receipt for a "missile", sign the receipt in the autopsy room? If so, could not the missile in question have been attributable to one or the other of the wounds?

Jon, I believe it was a fragment from the head wound.

The throat wound wasn't examined and the back wound was found to be shallow.

Remind me again how the back wound was determined to be shallow. I haven't had a good laugh in a few days.

It seems odd that the three camera cars, of which Jackson and Couch were in the third, would come to a halt up at the corner of Elm and Houston, when the assassination took place much further down Elm St.

It is more likely they were stopped there by the cars stopped in the motorcade ahead of them, and if press people jumped out there, they only did so because their drivers could not get them closer to the assassination site.

Robert,

Didn't Jackie subsequently in private conversation dismiss Greer as being no more effective than her children's nanny?

She might have, I don't know. I'm more interested in this "swerve" he spoke of. It was observed by some witnesses but, of course, is not in the Zapruder film.

"P.S. as I was writing this, Don posted a link to Palamara's list of "limo stop" witnesses. Those thinking the limo actually came to a dead stop, should go through that list and highlight the comments of those closest to the limo, and throw out the comments of witnesses from far back in the pack who said the motorcade stopped. When one does so, it becomes 100% clear that Don's assumption these witnesses all said the limo stopped is incorrect."

From the FBI interview with Charles Brehm, close eyewitness to the assassination:

"BREHM expressed his opinion that between the first and third shots, the President's car only seemed to move 10 or 12 feet. It seemed to him that the automobile almost came to a halt after the first shot, but of this he is not certain. After the third shot, the car in which the President was riding increased its speed and went under the freeway overpass and out of his sight."

"Oh, Mrs. Kennedy, oh my God, oh my God. I didn't mean to do it, I didn't hear, I should have swerved the car, I couldn't help it. Oh, Mrs. Kennedy, as soon as I saw it I swerved. If only I'd seen it in time!"

SS agent and limo driver William Greer, as quoted in William Manchester's "The Death of a President"