Jump to content
The Education Forum

Reaping a false harvest: The Planting of CE 399


Recommended Posts

For many years now I've argued in forums and newsgroups that there was NOTHING that connected the bullet allegedly found on a stretcher at Parkland Hospital, Commission Exhibit 399, with the shooting in Dealey Plaza.

I base this opinion on the fact that no blood, no bones particles, no clothing fibers and no tissue particles from either victim were on the bullet when the FBI received it.

Now I find confirmation of this in a parallel case involving the court-martial of a Marine Corporal during the Vietnam War.

In this case, a Vietnamese civilian had been shot to death, Lance Corporal Douglas R. Collard was seen to have fired a rifle from a truck in which he and others were riding, seemingly drunk and in high spirits. He acknowledged firing a shot, but recalled it as having been fired in the air.

The prosecution presented an expended bullet that matched the rifle Collard was allegedly holding at the time of the killing. The bullet was found on the floor inside the dead man's house.

The prosecution contended that this was the bullet that killed the man.

But Leland Jones, who at the time was the former head of the Los Angeles Police Crime Lab ( retired ), testified that the bullet could not possibly have entered a human body, because during his examination he found no blood or tissue particles on it. The significance of the absence of both of these substances left no doubt, because according to Jones, blood and tissue residue would have remained on the bullet for years.

Collard was acquitted.

Compare this with the condition of CE 399 when it was received at the FBI lab for examination:

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.

( Testimony of Robert Frazier in 3 H 428 )

Keep in mind that Frazier received the bullet from agent Elmer Todd on November 22, 1963, the same day of the assassination ( ibid.) and the bullet was clean !!!!

This wasn't years afer the assassination, this was the same day !!!!

Edited by Gil Jesus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

Compare this with the condition of CE 399 when it was received at the FBI lab for examination:

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

...

Anybody else scratch their head after reading that question from Eisenberg?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Damn good post, Gil.

I look forward to the lone nut "explanation".

Thanks. I find it unbelievable that the FBI would have received bullets and bullet fragments for examination, then not properly examine them.

Mr. EISENBERG. Getting back to the two bullet fragments mentioned, Mr. Frazier, did you alter them in any way after they had been received in the laboratory, by way of cleaning or otherwise?

Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir; there was a very slight residue of blood or some other material adhering, but it did not interfere with the examination. It was wiped off to clean up the bullet for examination, but it actually would not have been necessary.

Mr. EISENBERG. Is that true on both fragments?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. You also mentioned there was blood or some other substance on the bullet marked 399. Is this an off-hand determination, or was there a test to determine what the substance was?

Mr. FRAZIER. No, there was no test made of the materials.

( 3 H 437 )

Wasn't this supposed to be be part of the examination ? They receive a bullet with a foreign substance on it, and they don't test it to find out what it was ? They don't try to determine what it is, they just wipe it off ?

LOL

The troubling part of this is that while this was going on, Oswald was still alive. He was going to have his day in court. Wouldn't they be interested in building a case against him ? Wasn't the only way to do that by determining what was on the bullet ?

At the very least, it was their responsibility to identify what that substance was.

Edited by Gil Jesus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

... I find it unbelievable that the FBI would have received bullets and bullet fragments for examination, then not properly examine them.

Mr. EISENBERG. Getting back to the two bullet fragments mentioned, Mr. Frazier, did you alter them in any way after they had been received in the laboratory, by way of cleaning or otherwise?

Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir; there was a very slight residue of blood or some other material adhering, but it did not interfere with the examination. It was wiped off to clean up the bullet for examination, but it actually would not have been necessary.

Mr. EISENBERG. Is that true on both fragments?

Mr. FRAZIER. Yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. You also mentioned there was blood or some other substance on the bullet marked 399. Is this an off-hand determination, or was there a test to determine what the substance was?

Mr. FRAZIER. No, there was no test made of the materials.

( 3 H 437 )

Wasn't this supposed to be be part of the examination ? They receive a bullet with a foreign substance on it, and they don't test it to find out what it was ? They don't try to determine what it is, they just wipe it off ?

LOL

The troubling part of this is that while this was going on, Oswald was still alive. He was going to have his day in court. Wouldn't they be interested in building a case against him ? Wasn't the only way to do that by determining what was on the bullet ?

At the very least, it was their responsibility to identify what that substance was.

This exchange between an FBI "Expert" and his WC interviewer defies even the most twisted logic.

We are left with a few unsettling choices to explain Fraziers actions:

1) He deliberately destroyed crucial evidence on the bullet that was claimed to have hit the President, or

2) He was a fool who actually thought he should clean the bullet before examining it.

3) There was never any "material" on the bullet in the first place.

I don't want to single out Frazier unjustly. His interview was par for the course for the Warren Commission "Investigation".

edit: left out #3 in original post

Edited by Richard Hocking
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just the smallest of wrenches...

Now I've been mentioning this passage as evidence against ce399 for a while.. it read very strangely

yet... Wasn't Frazier the Ballistics expert and not a blood expert? "Firearms Identification Expert, FBI."

Would it have been his call to examine the bullet for blood and residue, or would that have been ... ?? Hey wait,

not a single person on the witness lists is an FBI BLOOD/Bodily Fluid expert... isn't that a bit strange in a murder?

Questioned document expert, FBI.

Polygraph operator, FBI

Fingerprint expert, FBI

Agent / Inspector, FBI

Photography expert, FBI

Hair and fiber expert, FBI.

who would have been given the role of blood typing the residue on ce399 or any of the evidence if there was any?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This exchange between an FBI "Expert" and his WC interviewer defies even the most twisted logic.

We are left with a few unsettling choices to explain Fraziers actions:

1) He deliberately destroyed crucial evidence on the bullet that was claimed to have hit the President, or

2) He was a fool who actually thought he should clean the bullet before examining it.

3) There was never any "material" on the bullet in the first place.

My guess is # 3. It's difficult to believe that the FBI would have cleaned the bullet and destroyed evidence. Standard procedure would have been to examine the residue that remained on the bullet to identify it. One reason NOT to examine it would have been if no residue had existed. It's also possible that they DID examine it, that it WASN'T human matter and to hide that fact they lied and said that they never checked it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For many years now I've argued in forums and newsgroups that there was NOTHING that connected the bullet allegedly found on a stretcher at Parkland Hospital, Commission Exhibit 399, with the shooting in Dealey Plaza.

I base this opinion on the fact that no blood, no bones particles, no clothing fibers and no tissue particles from either victim were on the bullet when the FBI received it.

Now I find confirmation of this in a parallel case involving the court-martial of a Marine Corporal during the Vietnam War.

In this case, a Vietnamese civilian had been shot to death, Lance Corporal Douglas R. Collard was seen to have fired a rifle from a truck in which he and others were riding, seemingly drunk and in high spirits. He acknowledged firing a shot, but recalled it as having been fired in the air.

The prosecution presented an expended bullet that matched the rifle Collard was allegedly holding at the time of the killing. The bullet was found on the floor inside the dead man's house.

The prosecution contended that this was the bullet that killed the man.

But Leland Jones, who at the time was the former head of the Los Angeles Police Crime Lab ( retired ), testified that the bullet could not possibly have entered a human body, because during his examination he found no blood or tissue particles on it. The significance of the absence of both of these substances left no doubt, because according to Jones, blood and tissue residue would have remained on the bullet for years.

Collard was acquitted.

Compare this with the condition of CE 399 when it was received at the FBI lab for examination:

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.

( Testimony of Robert Frazier in 3 H 428 )

Keep in mind that Frazier received the bullet from agent Elmer Todd on November 22, 1963, the same day of the assassination ( ibid.) and the bullet was clean !!!!

This wasn't years afer the assassination, this was the same day !!!!

I don't believe the bullet was "planted". Parkland processes over a thousand gunshot victims per year and the one Tomlinson found may have come from a victim who was not in DP that day. Of course it was not the one that wounded Governor Connally or JFK. The best explanation I can find for CE399 is that it was later fired into cotton wadding or water by the FBI and swapped out with Tomlinson's bullet.

This article goes into a LOT of detail about CE399 and the actual bullet that wounded Connally. Of course, if the perps had planted a bullet from Oswald's rifle there would have been no need for the FBI to wake up Tomlinson in the middle of the night and tell him to keep his mouth shut.

http://jfkhistory.co...ellArticle.html

Edited by Robert Harris
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't believe the bullet was "planted". Parkland processes over a thousand gunshot victims per year and the one Tomlinson found may have come from a victim who was not in DP that day. Of course it was not the one that wounded Governor Connally or JFK. The best explanation I can find for CE399 is that it was later fired into cotton wadding or water by the FBI and swapped out with Tomlinson's bullet.

I don't believe that I ever said that the bullet was planted on the stretcher. When I use the term "planted", I'm referring to it being planted as evidence. Maybe I should have used the term "swapped" instead. I agree with you. CE 399 was not the bullet found on the stretcher. All 4 of the people who handled the stetcher bullet refused to identfy CE 399 as the bullet they handled, destroying it's chain of custody. But the point I'm trying to make in proving that the bullet was "swapped" is that there is no physical evidence linking CE 399 with either victim.

Edited by Gil Jesus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...