In view of the impact on the skull at point A, it is unlikely to be a straight line to B all the way back to the muzzle of the weapon as it is, say, in 385 C-D, all the way back to the muzzle of the gun.
Colonel FINCK. In C-D, Commission's Exhibit 385, due to the fact that there was no fragmentation, I can say that it is a straight line from behind and above, whereas here, due to the fragmentation and to the dual path, I can't give a precise angle, but I can say that the injury is consistent with a wound produced by one bullet producing many fragments.

The Chairman.

Senator, have you any questions you want to ask?

Mr. Mccloy.

May I ask one?

The Chairman.

Yes; go right ahead.

Mr. Mccloy.

Did you examine any of the fragments which were removed from the President's skull?
Colonel FINCK. I only saw one fragment shown to me when I arrived at Bethesda, and it was an elongated black metallic fragment, and that is the only one I saw to my recollection. I was told that it had been removed from the brain of President Kennedy in the anterior portion of his head.

Mr. Mccloy.

From that bullet, that fragment, could you determine, was it sufficiently large to determine from the ballistic evidence the caliber of the bullet?
Colonel FINCK. No, sir; for the reason that to determine the caliber you need the entire bullet, or at least an entire portion. You need a portion of the bullet showing the entire diameter, and I was not shown that. I was shown a fragment which represented a very small portion of the original bullet. Therefore, at that time I could not say anything on the possible original caliber.

Mr. Mccloy.

You examined no fragment which did contain those characteristics?
Colonel FINCK. No, sir; I did not see any entire bullet or bullet showing the entire diameter.

The Chairman.

Congressman Ford?

Representative Ford.

I believe you testified, Colonel, that you concurred in the previous testimony by Commander Humes and Commander Boswell, and that you were one of the co-authors of the autopsy. At any time during this process where you were conducting the autopsy, was there any disagreement between any one of you three, any difference of opinion as to anything involved in the autopsy?
Colonel FINCK. No, sir.

Representative Ford.

There has been complete unanimity on what you saw, what you did, and what you have reported?
Colonel FINCK. Yes, sir.

The Chairman.

Senator Cooper?
Senator COOPER. Colonel, I would like for you to look at Exhibit 388 and at the possible trajectory of the bullet which entered President Kennedy's head at A and then mark it as a possible point of exit by "out". You remember there was testimony about a portion of the bullet from point A to the place on the diagram marked "fragment" where a fragment was found. I would like to ask if it is possible that the trajectory of the bullet, from the point of origin, could have been A to this point marked "fragment" as well as from A to the place marked "Out"?
Colonel FINCK. I don't think so, sir.
Senator COOPER. Why? Would you explain that answer?
Colonel FINCK. I would think that I would consider the midportion of this exit would labeled B, Exhibit 388, as the wound produced by most of the fragments and the major portions of the fragmenting bullet. This is only a small portion of it which makes me say that this is a secondary path.
Senator COOPER. What was the size of the fragment relative to the size of the missile of the 6.5 Mannlicher, fired from the 6.5 Mannlicher rifle?
Colonel FINCK. Approximately one-tenth, or even less.

Representative Ford.

From your numerous case studies, is it typical for a

« Previous | Next »

Found a Typo?

Click here

Last Update: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 21:56:32 CET