Epstein's Memoir: Priceless exchange

[James DiEugenio]

I am reading Epstein's memoir called Assume Nothing.  I think he is serious about that title.

I had to stop to write down this dialogue with Specter.

Epstein: "When the Secret service did a reconstruction on Dec. 7, 1963, why didn't they arrive at your single bullet theory?"

Specter: "They had no idea at the time that unless one bullet hit both Kennedy and  Connally, there had to be a second assassin."  Epstein then adds that Specter said the FBI also missed this problem.

Well, there you have it.  Specter was going to move heaven and earth to stop any talk of a second shooter.  BTW, before this he talks about how Warren sent him to Dallas to shore up the throat wound being from the front.  

Talk about a confession.   Always nice to have it from the horse's mouth.

[W. Niederhut]

This reminds me of Phillip Zelikow's 9/11 Commission statement that none of the major short-selling of United Airlines and American Airlines stock just prior to 9/11 was linked to the suspects (i.e., Al Qaeda.)

[Benjamin Cole]

15 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

I am reading Epstein's memoir called Assume Nothing.  I think he is serious about that title.

I had to stop to write down this dialogue with Specter.

Epstein: "When the Secret service did a reconstruction on Dec. 7, 1963, why didn't they arrive at your single bullet theory?"

Specter: "They had no idea at the time that unless one bullet hit both Kennedy and  Connally, there had to be a second assassin."  Epstein then adds that Specter said the FBI also missed this problem.

Well, there you have it.  Specter was going to move heaven and earth to stop any talk of a second shooter.  BTW, before this he talks about how Warren sent him to Dallas to shore up the throat wound being from the front.  

Talk about a confession.   Always nice to have it from the horse's mouth.

It is hard to stomach much of what the WC did. 

When asked why the Walker bullet (CE573) was copper-jacketed, when two Dallas Police Department detectives had authored and signed a written report that the Walker bullet was "steel-jacketed", FBI lab guy Frazier, answered "some people" refer to copper-jacketed bullets as "steel-jacketed."

The WC accepted the reply without quibble. 

"Some people"?

The WC did not ask Frazier, "Yes, but do police department detectives filing official reports typically refer to obviously copper-jacketed bullets as "steel jacketed"? 

Or, "Inside the FBI, do you typically, or ever, refer to copper-jacketed bullets as steel jacketed?" 

Who are "some people"? 

I have to say, after a decade of scanning gun boards, in which the hoi-polloi (that includes me) read and write, I have seen many conversations about the merits of steel-jacketed vs. copper-jacketed vs. copper-gilded steel jacketed bullets. I have never seen anyone mix-up copper-jacketed and steel-jacketed bullets. 

I have read dozens if not hundreds of ammo ads, which clearly state if the merchandize is copper-jacketed or steel-jacketed or copper-gilded steel jacketed. 

No one ever seems to indiscriminately mix up "copper jacketed" and "steel jacketed." 

IMHO, the Warren Commissioners were, in fact, "accessories after the fact" and helped to hide the true assassins of JFK. 

 

[James DiEugenio]

Hey, this gets better.  Epstein then asks :

Epstein: "How did you convince the Commission about the single bullet theory?" 

Specter: "I showed them the Zapruder film frame by frame and explained that they could either accept the single bullet theory or begin looking for a second assassin."

This is almost too good to be true.  

Epstein then sells out after this as I knew he would.  More to come.

Edited April 12, 2023 by James DiEugenio

[Pat Speer]

7 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

It is hard to stomach much of what the WC did. 

When asked why the Walker bullet (CE573) was copper-jacketed, when two Dallas Police Department detectives had authored and signed a written report that the Walker bullet was "steel-jacketed", FBI lab guy Frazier, answered "some people" refer to copper-jacketed bullets as "steel-jacketed."

The WC accepted the reply without quibble. 

"Some people"?

The WC did not ask Frazier, "Yes, but do police department detectives filing official reports typically refer to obviously copper-jacketed bullets as "steel jacketed"? 

Or, "Inside the FBI, do you typically, or ever, refer to copper-jacketed bullets as steel jacketed?" 

Who are "some people"? 

I have to say, after a decade of scanning gun boards, in which the hoi-polloi (that includes me) read and write, I have seen many conversations about the merits of steel-jacketed vs. copper-jacketed vs. copper-gilded steel jacketed bullets. I have never seen anyone mix-up copper-jacketed and steel-jacketed bullets. 

I have read dozens if not hundreds of ammo ads, which clearly state if the merchandize is copper-jacketed or steel-jacketed or copper-gilded steel jacketed. 

No one ever seems to indiscriminately mix up "copper jacketed" and "steel jacketed." 

IMHO, the Warren Commissioners were, in fact, "accessories after the fact" and helped to hide the true assassins of JFK. 

 

I have read dozens of books and articles on the history of ballistics and the early literature (pre-assassination) was divided chiefly along the lines of lead bullets vs. jacketed bullets. There was little if any discussion of the difference between a steel jacket and a copper jacket. One runs into the same problem when it comes to high-velocity vs. low velocity. Some have argued that the M/C was a medium velocity weapon, and thereby did not fit the profile for the wounds--which were attributed to a high-velocity rifle. This was nonsense. The discussion at the time was almost entirely high-velocity (supersonic--hunting and military rifles) vs. low velocity (subsonic--handguns and varmint rifles). There was little discussion of "middle-velocity" weapons until the 60's, when the rise of the AK-47 and M-16 (AR-15) forced those studying wound ballistics to differentiate between WWI and WW2 era rifles firing larger bullets at a slower velocity and Vietnam era rifles firing smaller bullets at a greater velocity.

Context is everything. If you go back through the DPD's reports for that era I suspect you will find they regularly called jacketed bullets steel-jacketed, even if they were copper-jacketed. Heck, these guys were from Texas. They might not have even known the difference. 

[Benjamin Cole]

10 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

I have read dozens of books and articles on the history of ballistics and the early literature (pre-assassination) was divided chiefly along the lines of lead bullets vs. jacketed bullets. There was little if any discussion of the difference between a steel jacket and a copper jacket. One runs into the same problem when it comes to high-velocity vs. low velocity. Some have argued that the M/C was a medium velocity weapon, and thereby did not fit the profile for the wounds--which were attributed to a high-velocity rifle. This was nonsense. The discussion at the time was almost entirely high-velocity (supersonic--hunting and military rifles) vs. low velocity (subsonic--handguns and varmint rifles). There was little discussion of "middle-velocity" weapons until the 60's, when the rise of the AK-47 and M-16 (AR-15) forced those studying wound ballistics to differentiate between WWI and WW2 era rifles firing larger bullets at a slower velocity and Vietnam era rifles firing smaller bullets at a greater velocity.

Context is everything. If you go back through the DPD's reports for that era I suspect you will find they regularly called jacketed bullets steel-jacketed, even if they were copper-jacketed. Heck, these guys were from Texas. They might not have even known the difference. 

That's not my experience.

I would like to do that, to review police reports from the 1960s, and the treatment of bullets. Maybe something is online, but I doubt it. 

That is why I said the WC should have asked Frazier the follow-up question, and other experts too, "Is this common practice, in a murder attempt of a high-profile public figure, for detectives casually ID the bullet as "steel jacketed," even though it is obviously a copper-jacketed bullet?" 

I concede internet "gun boards" are at best 20 years old. After the 1960s.

Nevertheless, the gun boards are rife with commentary on the relative virtues of steel-jacketed vs copper-jacketed and steel-jacketed copper-gilded bullets. And lead bullets too. 

Ammo ads always correctly specify ammo type, in the many ads I have read from the 1960s. I did find one Federals ad that showed a copper-jacketed bullet, and referred to it as a "metal-jacketed" bullet. That was about as close as I got to a simple mixing. 

If you have any hard source on police reporting on bullets in the 1960s, and the indiscriminate mixing of "steel-jacketed" vs. "copper-jacketed" bullets bring it on. 

Especially in a high-profile murder case? Really? That bullet is evidence. 

---

I do not know if you will be able to read this 1960s ad:

https://in.pinterest.com/pin/62487513572035923/

It actually specifies "the soft lead core is enclosed in thin jacket of 'nickel silver' composed of copper, nickel and zinc." 

A lot of ads are like that, specifying the virtues of jackets and cores, etc. That was in the 1960s.

I would think even in "early literature" people would want to know the different results of steel vs copper jacketed bullets, copper being softer. How early is this literature you cite? 19th century? 

[Benjamin Cole]

Add on:

"The vast majority of bullets are constructed of a solid lead core and a copper covering (called a "jacket") that contains the lead. Lead is used because it's an extremely dense yet cheap metal, making it perfect for giving projectiles their weight while keeping the overall size small. Copper is used because it is strong enough to keep the softer lead in shape, but is soft enough to allow the rifling to grip the bullet."

I will concede, this is from the 2010s, not from the 1960s. 

But this seems to have been the case all through the history of jacketed bullets. 

If the "vast majority" of bullets are copper-jacketed...why would anyone ever call a mangled, obviously copper-jacketed bullet a "steel jacketed" bullet? In a police report on an attempted murder of a high-profile public figure? Really? 

https://www.maxonshooters.com/blog/ask-foghorn-whats-up-with-bullets#:~:text=The vast majority of bullets,") that contains the lead.

Man, that just does not hold water. I have reasonable doubt that CE573 was the bullet found in the Walker residence on April 10. 

[Benjamin Cole]

Add on:

 

Bullets with metal jackets largely replaced plain lead bullets at about the same time that smokeless propellants replaced black powder in the majority of rifle ammunition. The higher pressures and temperatures produced by smokeless propellants were more than plain lead could support. This was overcome by adding an outer skin of harder metal to lead bullets.

Since pure copper is difficult to cold-work, copper alloys became the standard jacket material. Two copper alloys are prevalent in modern jackets, gilding metal (copper:zinc ratio of 95:5) and commercial bronze (copper:zinc ratio of 90:10). The choice of alloy depends on jacket thickness and the amount of work required to reach that thickness. The stronger bronze alloy is common in thin jackets, which are used to make handgun bullets.

In some parts of the world, soft steel is the more common jacket material. Steel is inexpensive, but more difficult to work. Nearly all steel jackets are treated with a rust preventative to ensure dimensional stability over time. This is typically accomplished with the application of transparent lacquers or by flash plating the steel with copper.

---30---

https://projects.nfstc.org/firearms/module05/fir_m05_t05_06.htm

Jeez, if copper-jacketed bullets were and are the "standard"...why would two DPD detectives write up a police report that a "steel-jacketed" bullet was found at the Walker residence on April 10? 

That seems like a stretch, no? 

Seems like someone shot at Walker with a steel-jacketed bullet. Dallas Police Department detectives noted the unusual nature of the bullet, that it was steel-jacketed, a valuable possible clue in a what appeared to be an attempted murder. 

 

 

 

[Mark Knight]

In regular handgun and hunting ammunition, the term JHP is used to refer to a Jacketed Hollow-Point bullet, with it understood that these rounds are copper-jacketed.

I have yet to see any current ads for STEEL-jacketed handgun or hunting rounds. 

Steel-jacketed bullets are most often found in specialty ammunition used for police and military purposes. Steel-jacketed bullets aren't common here in the US.

"A lead core bullet with a steel jacket is not an uncommon feature for a foreign military surplus round, especially if it originated in the Soviet Bloc. (Steel’s lesser cost than that of copper makes such ammo more economical to produce, but the tradeoff is that harder steel can be harsher on a bore.) " -- What is Steel Core Ammo? - The Broad Side (targetbarn.com)

 

[Lawrence Schnapf]

and when David Belin testified to the Abzug Committee in Novermber 1975, he was specifically asked about the shooting recreation. Here is what he said:

" We reconstructed what hap­pened to the bullet passing through President Kennedy's neck. What we did not do, and what I believe we should have done, was, when we had marksman tests run, we should have run them with a moving vehicle rather than with these stationary targets.”

“The argument against reproducing the exact shots was that we did not have to show that it was necessarily probable; all we had to show was that it was reasonably possible to do what was to do what was done and that is the way the tests were run”.

[James DiEugenio]

These guys like specter and Belin are almost like comic relief in a huge epic tragedy.  

[Joe Bauer]

Trying to bullseye hit targets ( the size of JFK's head at 265 feet away?) that are moving versus stationary is 2 to 3 X more difficult.

And in the case of JFK we are talking "3 different movment dynamics!"

JFK's limo was moving not just farther away from the shooter at 5 to 11 MPH, but also on a downward grade direction as Elm dropped down to go under the overpass.

On top of the limo movement you had JFK himself moving between the 2nd and third shot.

He jumps up with his clenched fists going up to his throat. He then turns in distress to look at Jackie.

Jackie then reaches out and pulls JFK closer to her by two feet to his left.

So, JFK's upper body was also moving significantly between those last two shots.

That's three movement dynamics.

A shooter, even with a scope would have to readjust for all those movements...and in just a few seconds time?

Even with those challenges the shooter gets a perfect bullseye hit on JFK's 10 inch high and 8 inch wide head with all that readjusting for target movement?

And top marksmen had a very tough time just hitting "stationary" targets that size and at that distance?

 

 

Edited April 12, 2023 by Joe Bauer

[Pat Speer]

2 hours ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

and when David Belin testified to the Abzug Committee in Novermber 1975, he was specifically asked about the shooting recreation. Here is what he said:

" We reconstructed what hap­pened to the bullet passing through President Kennedy's neck. What we did not do, and what I believe we should have done, was, when we had marksman tests run, we should have run them with a moving vehicle rather than with these stationary targets.”

“The argument against reproducing the exact shots was that we did not have to show that it was necessarily probable; all we had to show was that it was reasonably possible to do what was to do what was done and that is the way the tests were run”.

Belin wasn't really revealing anything.. This came right from Redlich's memo in which the 5-24-64 SBT re-enactment was proposed.

[Lawrence Schnapf]

Im not sure that Redlich's memo was publicly available at the time of Belin's statement. Regardless, Belin made the statement under oath at a Congressional hearing which is more significant than an internal memo.

[Kishan Dandiker]

3 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

These guys like specter and Belin are almost like comic relief in a huge epic tragedy.  

I think an intelligent screenwriter could write a ‘Death of Stalin’ dark comedy about the foundation and activities of the Warren Commission.

I still find it hilarious that guys like Fonzi were pro Warren Commission until they heard Specter try and explain the unexplainable first hand.

Edited April 12, 2023 by Kishan Dandiker