Walker Bullet Errata

[Pat Speer]

While I agree that there is much that is suspicious about the Walker bullet, I have to agree with Mark that the term "steel-jacketed bullet" was often used in place of "full-metal jacketed bullet" and that many if not most of the references to "steel-jacketed" bullets were actually references to copper-jacketed bullets. People are imprecise in their language. It's just a fact. There was a time when people would say they were gonna go out and get a Coke and they would order a Dr. Pepper. Coke had become synonymous with soda pop. When one goes back and reads old books and articles, one finds that the term "steel-jacketed bullet" was frequently used to differentiate old lead bullets and hunting ammo from military ammo, but that it wasn't meant to differentiate these bullets from a "copper-jacketed bullet".  It was just easier to say "steel-jacketed" than "full-metal jacketed." 

I have come across a number of similar issues in JFK-land.

At one point. a number of researchers were aghast that JFK's wounds were described as coming from a "high-velocity" bullet, when the M/C rifle was now described as a 'medium-velocity" rifle. Page after page and post after post feasted on this nothing-burger. The reality was that in 1963 most every supersonic rifle bullet was described as high velocity, and that the current use of the term high-velocity crept into the literature in the late 1960's, as a way to describe smaller yet faster bullets such as those fired by the M-16 and AK-47. 

The language problem creeps into the medical evidence as well. While much hay has been made of the Parkland doctors' use of the term "occipital" it turns out the term "occipital" in everyday use does not mean specific to the "occipital" bone, and that it is instead used as a generic term for the rear part of the head. 

 

 

[Gerry Down]

16 hours ago, Mark Ulrik said:

You're talking about the "Family Physician" column. That (and the small Jesse Curry item) were found in a quickie search at the Texas History portal. It's pretty clear that the good doc is comparing hollow point and FMJ ammo but is using the term "steel-jacketed" instead of FMJ. Searching for 1950-69 articles containing "copper-jacketed bullet" yields 346 hits on newspapers.com compared to 900 for "steel-jacketed bullet". How many of the articles that are using the latter as a generic term for a FMJ (or any type of metal-jacketed) bullet I haven't tried to figure out, but probably more than a few. I'll give you this, though, from The Times, November 30, 1963. It seems (at least to me) that "steel-jacketed" is used generically here, either by Curry himself or by the journalist.

Bedtime for me now. Perhaps more later.

Great find. This put the whole "steel-jacketed" issue to bed for me. 

[Lawrence Schnapf]

@Gerry Down  @Mark Ulrik  This article is not disposiitve.

All the news articles that Mark surveyed show are that reporters may not have accurately distinguished between steel-jacketed and copper-jacketed bullets. It does not stand for the proposition that trained police officers use that term interchangably.

The attached article only means that Curry believed the bullets were steel-jacketed since the type of bullets were not "confirmed" to him. This suggests he had not seen the bullets when he referred to them as "steel" bullets but was told that by some third party  . 

This remains an open issue.    

Edited April 27, 2023 by Lawrence Schnapf

[Gerry Down]

10 minutes ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

@Gerry Down  @Mark Ulrik  This article is not disposiitve.

All the news articles that Mark surveyed show are that reporters may not have accurately distinguished between steel-jacketed and copper-jacketed bullets. It does not stand for the proposition that trained police officers use that term interchangably.

The attached article only means that Curry believed the bullets were steel-jacketed since the type of bullets were not "confirmed" to him. This suggests he had not seen the bullets when he referred to them as "steel" bullets but was told that by some third party  . 

This remains an open issue.    

Ok the article is not bullet proof, pardon the pun, but it does do significant damage to the idea that the Walker bullet MUST have been steel-jacketed. It shows the DPD were mixing up the terms copper jacketed and steel jacketed and shows that CE399 was being incorrectly called a steel jacketed bullet by some in the DPD even if Curry himself did not physically see the bullet. 

[Pat Speer]

FWIW, from looking through some gun forums, I see that there is no real difference in performance of steel jacketed bullets vs. copper jacketed bullets, outside the fact steel jackets are more conductive of heat, and can sometimes start a fire if fired into the woods. The other interesting tidbit I picked up is that, according to these guys, copper-jacketed bullets are rarely made from copper, and are usually made from copper mixed with a small percentage of zinc, and are thereby technically brass jackets, not copper jackets. 

 I suspect this is why they call these bullets "full-metal jacket" bullets. Few people know and even fewer care if the bullets are in a jacket made of steel, copper, or brass. It's metal, of some sort. 

[Lawrence Schnapf]

@Gerry Down You are attaching way too much weight to new articles and you are assuming the DPD officers were "mixing up the terms up the terms copper jacketed and steel jacketed".  Like the WC report, you are overstating the significance of this so-called "evidence". 

The news articles only mean that the reporters MAY have been using the terms interchangibly. We have no way of knowing if the bullets in those articles were in fact copper-jacketed? do we even know what percentage of FMJ bullets in that era were copper vs steel? Do we know the prices of recycled steel and copper which would have been the source material for the bullets?

Nor do we know who was telling Curry that the bullets were steel-jacketed. was it police officers? was it one of the witneseses like Walker or Surrey? 

As previously discussed, none of the officers were asked to clarify why they identified the walker bullet as a steel-jacked bulllet. You know why? Because the smart WC lawyers as well as the FBI did not want to create a record challenging the Walker narrative. This is a trick that lawyers learn early on and the extremely talented WC lawyers knew what areas that were not to be explored.

The documentary record is AT BEST ambiguous on the type of bullet. It clearly is in doubt. If the prosecutors put this into evidence, there would have been more than reasonable doubt about whether the bullet in evidence was the bullet retrieved from the Walker residence.

Does anyone know if any of the DPD officers involved in the Walker shooting are still alive?       

[Lawrence Schnapf]

@Pat Speer  I agree that most lay people would not care what they call bullets but police officers investigating crimes are held to a higher standard. Likewise, the lab would also be expected to be accurate.   

[Gerry Down]

15 minutes ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

@Gerry Down You are attaching way too much weight to new articles and you are assuming the DPD officers were "mixing up the terms up the terms copper jacketed and steel jacketed".  Like the WC report, you are overstating the significance of this so-called "evidence". 

The news articles only mean that the reporters MAY have been using the terms interchangibly. We have no way of knowing if the bullets in those articles were in fact copper-jacketed? do we even know what percentage of FMJ bullets in that era were copper vs steel? Do we know the prices of recycled steel and copper which would have been the source material for the bullets?

Nor do we know who was telling Curry that the bullets were steel-jacketed. was it police officers? was it one of the witneseses like Walker or Surrey? 

As previously discussed, none of the officers were asked to clarify why they identified the walker bullet as a steel-jacked bulllet. You know why? Because the smart WC lawyers as well as the FBI did not want to create a record challenging the Walker narrative. This is a trick that lawyers learn early on and the extremely talented WC lawyers knew what areas that were not to be explored.

The documentary record is AT BEST ambiguous on the type of bullet. It clearly is in doubt. If the prosecutors put this into evidence, there would have been more than reasonable doubt about whether the bullet in evidence was the bullet retrieved from the Walker residence.

Does anyone know if any of the DPD officers involved in the Walker shooting are still alive?       

In court would the defense have to explain where CE573 came from? If so, the defense would be trying to explain to the jury that the DPD and/or the FBI got together and agreed to create CE573 to frame Oswald. 

Wouldn't that make the defense legal team look bad in court? I could imagine the prosecution using this to their advantage to paint the defense team as looking like conspiracy theorists. 

[Lawrence Schnapf]

@Gerry Down  If the prosecution wanted to introduce the walker bullet into evidence, it would have the initial burden of proving its provenance. There are enough holes in story that the defense would likely seek to exclude it. The judge could rule that the bullet was admissible but instruct the jury to consider the questions about its provenance in determining how much weight to give it. The defense would then proceed to either undermine the direct testimony of the witnesses trying to authenicate it and question if this was the bullet they found, and possibly introduce its own witnesses to contradict the testimony. The defense would not required to explain who or how the bullet was interchanged.    

[Benjamin Cole]

6 hours ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

@Tom Gram @Benjamin Cole  Can you imagine what a defense counsel would have down when the government tried to introduce testimony about the walker shooting into evidence... that is if the government survived motion to exclude the bullet.    

LS--You are the ace lawyer, and I only a layman, so I will defer to you. 

To me, even more important than whether the Walker bullet would withstand (very worthy, to ensure justice) legal hurdles, is...is CE573 in fact the slug found in the Walker home? 

That is, OK, suppose the DPD was sloppy, and the chain of evidence broken, and record-keeping a jumble, self-contradictory. That would invalidate the evidence in a court of law, and justifiably and for good reasons.  

But I ask this question rhetorically: The LAPD may have planted OJ's glove at his mansion...but was OJ really guilty? 

The evidence, on whole, strongly suggests CE573 is not the true Walker slug, found on April 10, 1963. 

In fact, CE573 is the very textbook photo of a copper-jacketed bullet, and police investigators would not officially yet blithely describe CE573 as a relatively rare "steel jacketed" bullet, especially in the unsolved case of a murder attempt on a very high profile public figure. 

Other corroborating evidence also points away from CE573 as the true Walker bullet, such as the lack of an original DPD photograph of the slug, and the present-day inability to find the word "Day" on the CE573. 

BTW, I honor your efforts and wish you success in the JFK Records Act case. 

 

 

 

[Lawrence Schnapf]

@Benjamin Cole  Yes- the defense would call into question that CE573 is not the bullet the DPD said it found. Amongthe reasons for  challenging the admissibility (or getting a jury instruction) would be the points you shared above (lack of photo, absence of "Day", etc). 

Thanks for your note about the lawsuit but there is very important thing that all readers of the EF can do to help. I urge each of you to contact your representatives and ask them to sponsor the Justice for Kenedy Act.  It is sitting in 5 House committees with only one sponsor.  we need to get other sponsors for it to gain traction.   

[Benjamin Cole]

2 hours ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

@Benjamin Cole  Yes- the defense would call into question that CE573 is not the bullet the DPD said it found. Amongthe reasons for  challenging the admissibility (or getting a jury instruction) would be the points you shared above (lack of photo, absence of "Day", etc). 

Thanks for your note about the lawsuit but there is very important thing that all readers of the EF can do to help. I urge each of you to contact your representatives and ask them to sponsor the Justice for Kenedy Act.  It is sitting in 5 House committees with only one sponsor.  we need to get other sponsors for it to gain traction.   

One sponsor. What a world. 

How would be against opening up the JFK Records? 

Only everybody in DC. 

[Tom Gram]

Another interesting detail about the Walker bullet is that when it was sent to the FBI lab, Hoover ordered that it be returned to the DPD after the examination. 

The lab concluded that the rifling characteristics on the bullet could not be matched to Oswald’s rifle. One of the reasons cited for the non-match was that the bullet was deformed, but the lab also stated that: “… the individual microscopic marks left on bullets by the barrel of the K1 rifle could have changed subsequent to the time Q188 was fired”

The lab decided to override Hoover and “temporarily retain” the bullet in the lab in case any other bullets were discovered that were fired from Oswald’s rifle around the time of the Walker shooting.  Ivan Conrad even specifically told the FBI liaison with the WC to look for sources of bullets from the earlier part of the year and to interview Marina Oswald about where Oswald took target practice so that the lab could “further attempt to resolve the question of identity”.

Well, this implies that the marks on the Walker bullet were clear enough to match to a specific rifle barrel, and that they didn’t match Oswald’s rifle or any of the test bullets, CE399, etc. that were in possession of the FBI Lab. 

In other words, it’s not a slam dunk, but there’s evidence suggesting that CE573 was fired from a different MC.

The FBI lab report was spun by the FBI and WC into saying that CE573 had “similar characteristics” and that it could have been fired from Oswald’s rifle, but the lab report itself states that the only similarity was that the bullet was fired from a rifle with four lands and grooves and a right twist. 

[Benjamin Cole]

19 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

FWIW, from looking through some gun forums, I see that there is no real difference in performance of steel jacketed bullets vs. copper jacketed bullets, outside the fact steel jackets are more conductive of heat, and can sometimes start a fire if fired into the woods. The other interesting tidbit I picked up is that, according to these guys, copper-jacketed bullets are rarely made from copper, and are usually made from copper mixed with a small percentage of zinc, and are thereby technically brass jackets, not copper jackets. 

 I suspect this is why they call these bullets "full-metal jacket" bullets. Few people know and even fewer care if the bullets are in a jacket made of steel, copper, or brass. It's metal, of some sort. 

Pat Speer--

Yes, the term "full-metal jacket" is used in ammo talk, and almost refers to copper-jacketed bullets (yes, technically copper-alloy jackets. For that matter, there are also cupronickel jackets). 

However, there is great deal of controversy regarding the performance of steel-jacketed bullets, and whether the harder steel "wears down" rifling in gun barrels. 

Western militaries have largely eschewed steel-jacketed bullets, as they have problems with rust. 

As I stated, the US military in fact produced steel-jacketed 30.06 bullet during WWII, largely due to copper shortages. 

Those bullets became obsolete when the US military switched to NATO-compatible bullets in 1954-5, and were sold as surplus. 

So there was a steel-jacketed 30.06 bullet on civilian markets in 1963----precisely what the DPD detectives described as being found in the Walker home. How clear can you get? 

I can tell you there is a great deal of conversation and distinction in ammo circles regarding the jackets, steel vs. copper vs newer exotic jackets.

BTW, cops like ammo. Detectives like ammo. They know about ammo. 

However, back in the 1960s, steel-jacketed bullets were (as now) a rarity. 

And if any bullet ever was a textbook example of copper-jacketed bullet, it is CE573. 

The jacketed has been torn asunder to reveal a solid copper jacket.

Why would two DPD detectives refer to a copper-jacketed bullet as a "steel jacketed" bullet---when collecting evidence in a murder attempt on a very high profile public figure? 

The fact that some people refer to "full metal jacket" bullets is almost meaningless in this context. Sure "some individuals" might conflate the terms "steel" and "copper" (though I do not see that on gun boards).

Are we going to point to the least intelligent conversations on gun boards as proof the two DPD detectives conflated a steel jacketed bullet with an obviously copper-jacketed bullet? 

 

 

 

Edited April 28, 2023 by Benjamin Cole

[Benjamin Cole]

21 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

While I agree that there is much that is suspicious about the Walker bullet, I have to agree with Mark that the term "steel-jacketed bullet" was often used in place of "full-metal jacketed bullet" and that many if not most of the references to "steel-jacketed" bullets were actually references to copper-jacketed bullets. People are imprecise in their language. It's just a fact. There was a time when people would say they were gonna go out and get a Coke and they would order a Dr. Pepper. Coke had become synonymous with soda pop. When one goes back and reads old books and articles, one finds that the term "steel-jacketed bullet" was frequently used to differentiate old lead bullets and hunting ammo from military ammo, but that it wasn't meant to differentiate these bullets from a "copper-jacketed bullet".  It was just easier to say "steel-jacketed" than "full-metal jacketed." 

I have come across a number of similar issues in JFK-land.

At one point. a number of researchers were aghast that JFK's wounds were described as coming from a "high-velocity" bullet, when the M/C rifle was now described as a 'medium-velocity" rifle. Page after page and post after post feasted on this nothing-burger. The reality was that in 1963 most every supersonic rifle bullet was described as high velocity, and that the current use of the term high-velocity crept into the literature in the late 1960's, as a way to describe smaller yet faster bullets such as those fired by the M-16 and AK-47. 

The language problem creeps into the medical evidence as well. While much hay has been made of the Parkland doctors' use of the term "occipital" it turns out the term "occipital" in everyday use does not mean specific to the "occipital" bone, and that it is instead used as a generic term for the rear part of the head. 

 

 

Pat Speer--

As far as you know, did anyone ever---ever!---refer to CE399, also found in 1963, as a "steel jacketed" bullet?

What does that tell you?