The John F. Kennedy Assassination Homepage

Navigation

  » Introduction
  » The Report
  » The Hearings

Volumes

  » Testimony Index
 
  » Volume I
  » Volume II
  » Volume III
  » Volume IV
  » Volume V
  » Volume VI
  » Volume VII
  » Volume VIII
  » Volume IX
  » Volume X
  » Volume XI
  » Volume XII
  » Volume XIII
  » Volume XIV
  » Volume XV
Warren Commission Hearings: Vol. II - Page 384« Previous | Next »

(Testimony of Lt. Col. Pierre A. , Physician, U. S. Army Finck)

Representative Ford.
bullet, for a missile in this circumstance as shown in 388, to fragment to the degree that this one apparently did?
Colonel FINCK. Yes, it is quite common to find a wound of exit much larger than the wound of entrance for weapons commonly used.
Representative Ford.
But is it typical for the missile to fragment to the degree that this one did as shown in Exhibit 388?
Colonel FINCK. Yes; it is.
Representative Ford.
Is it typical to find only a limited number of fragments as you apparently did in this case?
Colonel FINCK. This depends to a great extent on the type of ammunition used. There are many types of bullets, jacketed, not-jacketed, pointed, hollow-nosed, hollow-points, flatnose, roundnose, all these different shapes will have a different influence on the pattern of the wound and the degree of fragmentation.
Representative Ford.
That is all.
The Chairman.
Thank you, Colonel, very much for your help.
Colonel FINCK. You are welcome, sir.
Representative Ford.
May I ask just one question?
The Chairman.
Yes; Colonel, we would like to ask just one more question.
Representative Ford.
Do these two wounds represent the same or a different kind of bullet?
Colonel FINCK. You are referring to one wound and this other wound here?
Representative Ford.
I am referring to the wound shown in Exhibit 388 identified as point of entry A, and wound in Exhibit 385 identified as C.
Colonel FINCK. Due to the difference in the nature of the tissue, difference in the nature of the target, it is perfectly possible that these two wounds came from the same type of bullet, that one hit bony structures and the other one did not, and that explains the differences between the patterns of these two wounds.
Representative Ford.
Why one fragmented and one did not.
Colonel FINCK. Yes.
(Discussion off the record.)
The Chairman.
Gentlemen, again thank you very much. (Whereupon, at 3:45 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.)
The Chairman.
Wednesday, March 18, 1964

Testimony of Michael R. Paine

Testimony of Ruth Hyde Paine

The Chairman.
The President's Commission met at 9 a.m. on March 18, 1964, at 200 Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C.
Present were Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman; Senator John Sherman Cooper, Representative Gerald R. Ford, John J. McCloy, and Allen W. Dulles, members.
Also present were J. Lee Rankin, general counsel; Wesley J. Liebeler, assistant counsel, Albert E. Jenner, Jr., assistant counsel; Dr. Alfred Goldberg, historian; and Charles Murray, observer.

Michael R. Paine

Testimony of Michael R. Paine

The Chairman.
The Commission will be in order.
Mr. Paine, I will just read a brief statement concerning the purpose of the meeting today which is our practice.
The purpose of this hearing is to take the testimony of Mr. and Mrs. Michael R. Paine. The Commission has been advised that Mr. and Mrs. Paine made the acquaintance of the Oswalds during 1963, and that Mrs. Marina Oswald lived in the Paine home from late September 1963 up to the time of the assassination.
« Previous | Next »

Found a Typo?

Click here

Partner Links

In Association with Amazon.co.uk

In Partnerschaft mit Amazon.de

Copyright by www.jfk-assassination.comLast Update: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 21:56:32 CET