Forensics technical question re drill and tap

[Greg Doudna]

I am in the final stages of editing a paper which will argue that Lee Harvey Oswald had two screw holes of on the Mannlicher-Carcano drill-and-tapped repaired as part of a reinstallation of the original scope at the Irving Sport Shop on Mon Nov 11, 1963. Despite the existence of a written job ticket at that shop showing that kind of work was done for a customer named "Oswald", the Warren Commission concluded it did not happen. I believe my paper will show the Warren Commission erred in that conclusion.

It has occurred to me there could be a technical means of confirmation or falsification of this point. If drill-and-tapping was done on the Mannlicher-Carcano at the Irving Sport Shop on Nov 11, it would be slightly larger screw sizes drilled and tapped in the same screw holes previously drilled and tapped at Klein's in Chicago of slightly smaller size (which had become stripped necessitating the second drill and tapping).

The question: is there technical ability, within present forensic methods, to determine whether a given screw hole was drill and tapped once or twice? To determine whether a larger size screw hole was drilled and tapped over a smaller size, versus virgin drill and tap only once? Is anyone able to answer this question? 

Edited February 1, 2023 by Greg Doudna

[Sean Coleman]

On 1/30/2023 at 12:00 PM, Greg Doudna said:

I am in the final stages of editing a paper which will argue that Lee Harvey Oswald had two screw holes of the Mannlicher-Carcano drill-and-tapped as part of a reinstallation of the original scope at the Irving Sport Shop on Mon Nov 11, 1963. Despite the existence of a written job ticket at that shop showing that kind of work was done for a customer named "Oswald", the Warren Commission concluded it did not happen. I believe my paper will show the Warren Commission erred in that conclusion.

It has occurred to me there could be a technical means of confirmation or falsification of this point. If drill-and-tapping was done on the Mannlicher-Carcano at the Irving Sport Shop on Nov 11, it would be slightly larger screw sizes drilled and tapped in the same screw holes previously drilled and tapped at Klein's in Chicago of slightly smaller size (which had become stripped necessitating the second drill and tapping).

The question: is there technical ability, within present forensic methods, to determine whether a given screw hole was drill and tapped once or twice? To determine whether a larger size screw hole was drilled and tapped over a smaller size, versus virgin drill and tap only once? Is anyone able to answer this question? 

 

Greg, a stripped thread can usually be reinstated using the threaded tool pictured above-it fits into the T-bar and it can be ‘screwed’ into the offending hole to re introduce threads. The tool below it is to introduce an external thread on to, say, a blank bar or rod of metal which is placed in the centre of the device, which is then ‘screwed’ over the bar leaving threads on it.

I’m sure someone more technical may explain tap & die sets more accurately.

Which leads onto…why would the mount holes have to be enlarged when a tap & die set could re-introduce threads pretty easily? 

Need Klein drill hole diameter vs. existing drill hole diameter to establish a re-drill?

keep up the good work!

Edited April 3, 2023 by Sean Coleman

[Greg Doudna]

3 hours ago, Sean Coleman said:

Greg, a stripped thread can usually be reinstated using the threaded tool pictured above-it fits into the T-bar and it can be ‘screwed’ into the offending hole to re introduce threads. The tool below it is to introduce an external thread on to, say, a blank bar or rod of metal which is placed in the centre of the device, which is then ‘screwed’ over the bar leaving threads on it.

I’m sure someone more technical may explain tap & die sets more accurately.

Which leads onto…why would the mount holes have to be enlarged when a tap & die set could re-introduce threads pretty easily? 

Need Klein drill hole diameter vs. existing drill hole diameter to establish a re-drill?

keep up the good work!

Thanks very much Sean. I get the slightly larger screw size drilled and tapped in the hole of the former one from a gun publication article which said that is how it is done. Either way I'm wondering, if it mattered in an investigation, could a police or FBI lab determine whether a given drill and tap was virgin or a second time without the assistance of any external information. If the second was larger size and went deeper than the first, it seems intuitively it might be impossible, but I wish I had real-life examples of this question coming up in court cases or investigations.

[Guest]

This seems like something you could ask a gunsmith.

You probably know : the lab had asked Klein's to make an identical combo (rifle + scope) to compare.   As per Frazier they were the same (threads, screws,...).  

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=207582#relPageId=1&search=carcano_scope adjusting

 

Edited February 10, 2023 by Jean Paul Ceulemans

[Gerry Down]

6 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

I am in the final stages of editing a paper which will argue that Lee Harvey Oswald had two screw holes of the Mannlicher-Carcano drill-and-tapped as part of a reinstallation of the original scope at the Irving Sport Shop on Mon Nov 11, 1963. Despite the existence of a written job ticket at that shop showing that kind of work was done for a customer named "Oswald", the Warren Commission concluded it did not happen. I believe my paper will show the Warren Commission erred in that conclusion.

It has occurred to me there could be a technical means of confirmation or falsification of this point. If drill-and-tapping was done on the Mannlicher-Carcano at the Irving Sport Shop on Nov 11, it would be slightly larger screw sizes drilled and tapped in the same screw holes previously drilled and tapped at Klein's in Chicago of slightly smaller size (which had become stripped necessitating the second drill and tapping).

The question: is there technical ability, within present forensic methods, to determine whether a given screw hole was drill and tapped once or twice? To determine whether a larger size screw hole was drilled and tapped over a smaller size, versus virgin drill and tap only once? Is anyone able to answer this question? 

Looking forward to this paper.

With regard to whether its possible to tell if two previous holes had been drilled for that scope into the barrel, I think the answer is yes. When new threads are made into metal I would imagine the steel undergoes a certain amount of compression at the point where the thin steel blades of the cutting tool make new threads into the barrel. This would create a signature in the steel along where the threads have been made. A laboratory should be able to scan the metal and bring out this signature. Even if the threads become stripped out, the signature (the compression force) would continue on for a certain depth into the surrounding steel. Maybe 1mm or so as a guess. 

Then if two new screw holes were made over these existing holes, you would be introducing a new signature into the surrounding steel which would clash with the existing signature. In other words, if the laboratory picks up two different signatures, then the hole was drilled twice. If there was only one signature, then the hole was only drilled once. 

The only way I could ever see this being examined by a laboratory is if there was a new full investigation into the JFK assassination as such an examination would require highly specialized laboratory material in order to be able to pick up the compression signature in the steel surrounding the screw holes. 

[Gerry Down]

What I'm basing this on is something I saw on a forensic detective program some years ago. It was something like someone filed off the serial number on a handgun so that the serial number could no longer be read. What the detectives did was take the gun to a laboratory and have the metal scanned. When serial numbers are stamped on a barrel in the factory, the compression force from the stamp carries through to the underlying steel, say about 1 to 2mm deep, under the level of the number stamped on the steel. So even if the serial number is filed off, the compression force will exist in the underlying steel for about 1 to 2mm. By simply scanning the steel, the laboratory was able to read the outline of the serial number embedded into the steel even though it was invisible to the human eye. 

Using very sensitive laboratory equipment, the same principle might be able to be applied to seeing if a hole in a barrel was drilled once or twice. I don't think its ever been done, but technically it might be possible. But only a full new investigation into the JFK assassination is likely to be the only circumstances where such an examination would be carried out. 

[Greg Doudna]

1 hour ago, Jean Paul Ceulemans said:

You probably know : the lab had asked Klein's to make an identical combo (rifle + scope) to compare.   As per Frazier they were the same (threads, screws,...).  

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=207582#relPageId=1&search=carcano_scope adjusting

Thanks Jean Paul. Yes, Frazier at 3H396 says the comparison installation from Klein's was the same size holes, same threads, and same kind of screws, which does rule out a larger size over smaller drill and tap. But it does not seem to rule out a same-size redrill and tap, based on Frazier's answer to the question: 

Mr. EISENBERG - Do you think, based on your experience with types of screws used in mounts, that these were the original screws and the original holes for the screws? 
Mr. FRAZIER - I could not say--I could not answer that specifically. However, they appear to be the same type of screw as is present on the rest of the mount--although they are somewhat larger in size than the remaining hole which is present in the lower portion of the mount. 

In other words, it seems the Irving Sport Shop Oswald job ticket question was in the background and there was an attempt to answer the question of whether the CE 139 scope was the original scope installation or if a second drill and tapping had been done. So far as I can read Frazier's testimony, the question is not answered either way: Frazier says it is compatible with having been the original without a second drill and tapping, but Frazier will not say that it is: "I could not answer that specifically".

46 minutes ago, Gerry Down said:

What I'm basing this on is something I saw on a forensic detective program some years ago. It was something like someone filed off the serial number on a handgun so that the serial number could no longer be read. What the detectives did was take the gun to a laboratory and have the metal scanned. When serial numbers are stamped on a barrel in the factory, the compression force from the stamp carries through to the underlying steel, say about 1 to 2mm deep, under the level of the number stamped on the steel. So even if the serial number is filed off, the compression force will exist in the underlying steel for about 1 to 2mm. By simply scanning the steel, the laboratory was able to read the outline of the serial number embedded into the steel even though it was invisible to the human eye. 

Using very sensitive laboratory equipment, the same principle might be able to be applied to seeing if a hole in a barrel was drilled once or twice. I don't think its ever been done, but technically it might be possible. But only a full new investigation into the JFK assassination is likely to be the only circumstances where such an examination would be carried out. 

This is really interesting Gerry. Thanks for this. 

[Gerry Down]

1 hour ago, Greg Doudna said:

Thanks Jean Paul. Yes, Frazier at 3H396 says the comparison installation from Klein's was the same size holes, same threads, and same kind of screws, which does rule out a larger size over smaller drill and tap. But it does not seem to rule out a same-size redrill and tap, based on Frazier's answer to the question: 

Mr. EISENBERG - Do you think, based on your experience with types of screws used in mounts, that these were the original screws and the original holes for the screws? 
Mr. FRAZIER - I could not say--I could not answer that specifically. However, they appear to be the same type of screw as is present on the rest of the mount--although they are somewhat larger in size than the remaining hole which is present in the lower portion of the mount. 

In other words, it seems the Irving Sport Shop Oswald job ticket question was in the background and there was an attempt to answer the question of whether the CE 139 scope was the original scope installation or if a second drill and tapping had been done. So far as I can read Frazier's testimony, the question is not answered either way: Frazier says it is compatible with having been the original without a second drill and tapping, but Frazier will not say that it is: "I could not answer that specifically".

Is this possibly saying that the Irving sports shop did not actually drill new holes but simply got larger size screws and forced them in to the stripped out holes?

I wonder also if there is some technique to simply glue in the old screws into the stripped out holes. Though this would have meant you could no longer remove the scope and insert shims under it. And I think the FBI had no problem removing the scope, so doubt it would have been glued in place.

Due to the cheapness of the rifle, I would imagine Oswald discussed with the Irving sports shop the absolute cheapest way of securing the mount to the rifle, and the cheapest way I think would have simply to force in larger screws. Of course, the Irving sports shop might not have wanted to admit to such shoddy workmanship when reporting to the FBI the work they had done on the rifle. It would be bad for their reputation. Maybe they didn't even tell Oswald that they had resorted to such poor workmanship on his rifle and pretended they had drilled two new holes when in fact they hadn't, but had simply forced in larger screws to the stripped out holes.

[Greg Doudna]

11 minutes ago, Gerry Down said:

Is this possibly saying that the Irving sports shop did not actually drill new holes but simply got larger size screws and forced them in to the stripped out holes?

I wonder also if there is some technique to simply glue in the old screws into the stripped out holes. Though this would have meant you could no longer remove the scope and insert shims under it. And I think the FBI had no problem removing the scope, so doubt it would have been glued in place.

Due to the cheapness of the rifle, I would imagine Oswald discussed with the Irving sports shop the absolute cheapest way of securing the mount to the rifle, and the cheapest way I think would have simply to force in larger screws. Of course, the Irving sports shop might not have wanted to admit to such shoddy workmanship when reporting to the FBI the work they had done on the rifle. It would be bad for their reputation. Maybe they didn't even tell Oswald that they had resorted to such poor workmanship on his rifle and pretended they had drilled two new holes when in fact they hadn't, but had simply forced in larger screws to the stripped out holes.

This is interesting. One of the sticking points on the Irving Sport Shop's Oswald rifle being the Mannlicher-Carcano has been the job ticket gives a charge for drill and taps corresponding to the shop price for three, when only two screws were used on the Mannlicher-Carcano. What you mention about pretending to drill when not, etc. could be considered. It is clear the Oswald job ticket was done as a cash job in which the cash went into the employee's pocket. Oswald walked in on Mon Nov 11 Veterans Day when Ryder was alone in the shop that day (owner on vacation, a woman who usually worked the front counter/office off for the holiday), Oswald walked in and Ryder did a cash job and did not run it through the cash register. Ryder may have padded the ticket in one way, by charging an additional $1.50 for boresighting, according to the job ticket, when Ryder testified to the Warren Commission that the shop normally did boresighting free as a courtesy to customers who paid for drill and tap scope installations. Oswald could have walked in scope and base mount in hand (but rifle still out in the car) asking what it would cost and Ryder quoted a price based on seeing three screw holes on the base mount, then only did the two and still collected the price for three. Then add Oswald may have said he was from out of town (a reason he needed it done while he waited), clueless customer never been in the shop before ... who knows if Oswald received fully what he paid for, or just paid what he was told it would cost to get the scope put on. The Irving Sport Shop's position was that the rifle of the Oswald job ticket was not the Mannlicher-Carcano but that was more founded on wishful thinking than anything else since the only one who had known the rifle was Ryder and Ryder's repeated refrain was "I don't know nuthin'" about that rifle from his memory. Owner Greener did not want his shop known as having put the scope on the rifle that killed the president, so that was not a position the Irving Sport Shop formed disinterestedly. 

[Gerry Down]

It's been a while since I saw the ticket. Is it possible that Ryder and Oswald agreed 3 holes would be drilled and a ticket was made up for this, but half way through the job for some reason or another they decided to just do two holes. Maybe Ryder only then realized that while the mount was for 3 holes, it would be better to stick to just two holes as that's the way Klein's did it. Maybe Oswald felt it was taking too long to make the holes or Ryder was having difficulty making the holes and so talked LHO into just accepting two holes. 

Do gunsmiths write out the receipt there and then in the shop before the work is actually completed?

[Greg Doudna]

50 minutes ago, Gerry Down said:

It's been a while since I saw the ticket. Is it possible that Ryder and Oswald agreed 3 holes would be drilled and a ticket was made up for this, but half way through the job for some reason or another they decided to just do two holes. Maybe Ryder only then realized that while the mount was for 3 holes, it would be better to stick to just two holes as that's the way Klein's did it. Maybe Oswald felt it was taking too long to make the holes or Ryder was having difficulty making the holes and so talked LHO into just accepting two holes. 

Do gunsmiths write out the receipt there and then in the shop before the work is actually completed?

The job ticket is the notes on what work was to be done and charged, written up at the counter when the customer turns in the rifle, it is not the record of payment or receipt or necessarily what was charged and paid in all cases, which could go up or down depending on factors. Ryder could have told Oswald at the counter, good news only two were needed, and lowered the amount charged and then paid. Or he could have Oswald pay for three anyway if Oswald did not know the difference. It isn't known. If the price paid did differ from the amount on the job ticket there would be no reason to change the job ticket which was no longer needed. The actual amount paid would be reflected on the cash register tape or other receipt but since Ryder did the Oswald rifle as a cash job into his pocket there is no cash register record or other store record of it (Ryder told FBI agent Horton on Nov 25 there was no other store record of the Oswald job ticket--no cash register record, as much as admitting directly he did it as a cash on the side job). Ryder could have given a receipt to Oswald if Oswald wanted one which had a carbon which would have told the amount actually paid and then never put the carbon into store records. What Ryder actually collected from Oswald is unknown even though most of the time it would be the same as on the job ticket. I think that is how it worked. 

[Gerry Down]

26 minutes ago, Greg Doudna said:

The job ticket is the notes on what work was to be done and charged, written up at the counter when the customer turns in the rifle, it is not the record of payment or receipt or necessarily what was charged and paid in all cases, which could go up or down depending on factors. Ryder could have told Oswald at the counter, good news only two were needed, and lowered the amount charged and then paid. Or he could have Oswald pay for three anyway if Oswald did not know the difference. It isn't known. If the price paid did differ from the amount on the job ticket there would be no reason to change the job ticket which was no longer needed. The actual amount paid would be reflected on the cash register tape or other receipt but since Ryder did the Oswald rifle as a cash job into his pocket there is no cash register record or other store record of it (Ryder told FBI agent Horton on Nov 25 there was no other store record of the Oswald job ticket--no cash register record, as much as admitting directly he did it as a cash on the side job). Ryder could have given a receipt to Oswald if Oswald wanted one which had a carbon which would have told the amount actually paid and then never put the carbon into store records. What Ryder actually collected from Oswald is unknown even though most of the time it would be the same as on the job ticket. I think that is how it worked. 

But if the job ticket was kept in the shop, then the boss when he came back on Tuesday would see the job ticket? This way Ryder could not keep the cash for the job himself - right? He couldn't hide the job from the boss?

[Greg Doudna]

2 hours ago, Gerry Down said:

But if the job ticket was kept in the shop, then the boss when he came back on Tuesday would see the job ticket? This way Ryder could not keep the cash for the job himself - right? He couldn't hide the job from the boss?

Well, according to all the testimony of Greener (the boss), he never knew of the job ticket until hearing about it on the news on Thanksgiving Thu Nov 28. It was in his shop, Ryder knew where it was, when the FBI knocked on the door at Ryder's home on Monday morning Nov 25 no doubt scaring the daylights out of him he told FBI agent Horton of the job ticket on Mon. Monday the shop was closed but Tue and Wed Nov 26-27 Ryder and Greener worked together and Ryder never told Greener of the job ticket or that he had talked to the FBI Monday. As late as the time of his Warren Commission testimony months later Greener still didn't know, thought the FBI only came out after Thanksgiving with the news stories breaking that day. So yes, on Mon Nov 25 FBI agent Horton did see the Oswald job ticket in the shop, and on Tue and Wed Nov 26-27 Greener in the shop does not know of its existence in his own shop. Somehow it was hidden from the boss inside the boss's own shop at least those two days. 

[Gerry Down]

5 minutes ago, Greg Doudna said:

Well, according to all the testimony of Greener (the boss), he never knew of the job ticket until hearing about it on the news on Thanksgiving Thu Nov 28. It was in his shop, Ryder knew where it was, when the FBI knocked on the door at Ryder's home on Monday morning Nov 25 no doubt scaring the daylights out of him he told FBI agent Horton of the job ticket on Mon. Monday the shop was closed but Tue and Wed Nov 26-27 Ryder and Greener worked together and Ryder never told Greener of the job ticket or that he had talked to the FBI Monday. As late as the time of his Warren Commission testimony months later Greener still didn't know, thought the FBI only came out after Thanksgiving with the news stories breaking that day. So yes, on Mon Nov 25 FBI agent Horton did see the Oswald job ticket in the shop, and on Tue and Wed Nov 26-27 Greener in the shop does not know of its existence in his own shop. Somehow it was hidden from the boss inside the boss's own shop at least those two days. 

I'm confused here. How did the fbi know to go to the home of Ryder on Monday nov 25th?

Is it possible that Ryder was telling people on the weekend of the assassination that he had worked on Oswald's rifle. Word got around which caused the fbi to call to Ryder's home on Mon Nov 25th. This resulted in Ryder going to the rifle shop with the fbi. As the job had been a cash job on the side like you suggest, is it possible that Ryder made up the ticket there and then on Monday nov 25th when the fbi were in the shop? Ryder made up the ticket there and then to hide the fact it had been a cash job. And because he was only making up the ticket now, he accidentally thought he had drilled 3 holes instead of 2 and this is what he put on the ticket.

It's been a while since I studied the Irving sports shop incident so maybe some of my theory might not fit so well with the facts. I don't know.

[Greg Doudna]

43 minutes ago, Gerry Down said:

I'm confused here. How did the fbi know to go to the home of Ryder on Monday nov 25th?

Is it possible that Ryder was telling people on the weekend of the assassination that he had worked on Oswald's rifle. Word got around which caused the fbi to call to Ryder's home on Mon Nov 25th. This resulted in Ryder going to the rifle shop with the fbi. As the job had been a cash job on the side like you suggest, is it possible that Ryder made up the ticket there and then on Monday nov 25th when the fbi were in the shop? Ryder made up the ticket there and then to hide the fact it had been a cash job. And because he was only making up the ticket now, he accidentally thought he had drilled 3 holes instead of 2 and this is what he put on the ticket.

It's been a while since I studied the Irving sports shop incident so maybe some of my theory might not fit so well with the facts. I don't know.

Anonymous calls to WFAA-TV Sun PM Nov 24 and to the FBI that evening Nov 24, saying Oswald had had a rifle sighted-in at the Irving Sport Shop the day before the assassination (Nov 21). That was what caused the FBI to go to Irving Monday morning and find the Sport Shop (closed Mon from the assassination), try to find owner Greener (couldn't reach him, out of town), then knock on the door at home of Dial Ryder. It's long been a mystery the source of the information of the anonymous caller to WFAA-TV and the FBI. It seems not to be a good-citizen motivation from e.g. Ryder's wife tells someone who tells someone who tells someone... because that would account for the FBI call but not WFAA-TV. It is someone who wants to have Oswald incriminated not just by law enforcement (FBI taking over the investigation of the assassination) but in shaping of public opinion (WFAA-TV). Rather than Dial Ryder as the source for the anonymous caller's information could the source be Oswald himself, telling a buyer of the rifle that the rifle was just sighted? There is no evidence the rifle went back into Ruth Paine's garage after it was taken out of that garage the morning of Nov 11, and the only thing that makes sense of Oswald spending money to get the scope put back on a rifle he was not using and that Marina did not like him having, would be to ready it so it could be sold. All that needs to be supposed is Oswald succeeded in that intention (though unknown who or how). The buyer is connected to the people who did the assassination who pin it on Oswald by means of getting the rifle from him and the rifle connection (Pat Speer's and Flip deMay's idea on this last point).

Ryder says he never told anyone of the job ticket. The FBI found him, he didn't go to the FBI. He never went to a reporter. He didn't even tell his boss. It got into the news via local reporter Hunter Schmidt who said he got a tip from someone around the Dallas Police station (where WFAA-TV passed on the anonymous caller tip after they had received it). I cannot see any plausible scenario of Dial Ryder making up the story which caused him only grief. A random hard-working guy who got zapped by an accident of history.