One group of witnesses, however, believed that they observed Lee Harvey Oswald at the Sports Drome Rifle Range in Dallas at various times from September through November of 1963. In light of the number of witnesses, the similarity of the descriptions of the man they saw, and the type of weapon they thought the individual was shooting, there is reason to believe that these witnesses did see the same person at the firing range, although the testimony of none of these witnesses is fully consistent with the reported observations of the other witnesses.
The witnesses who claimed to have seen Oswald at the firing range had more than a passing notice of the person they observed. Malcolm H. Price, Jr., adjusted the scope on the individual’s rifle on one occasion;[C6-660] Garland G. Slack had an altercation with the individual on another occasion because he was shooting at Slack’s target;[C6-661] and Sterling C. Wood, who on a third date was present at the range with his father, Dr. Homer Wood, spoke with his father and very briefly with the man himself about the individual’s rifle.[C6-662] All three of these persons, as well as Dr. Wood, expressed confidence that the man they saw was Oswald.[C6-663] Two other persons believed they saw a person resembling Oswald firing a similar rifle at another range near Irving 2 days before the assassination.[C6-664]
Although the testimony of these witnesses was partially corroborated by other witnesses,[C6-665] there was other evidence which prevented the Commission from reaching the conclusion that Lee Harvey Oswald was the person these witnesses saw. Others who were at the firing range remembered the same individual but, though noting a similarity to Oswald, did not believe that the man was Oswald;[C6-666] others either were unable to state whether the man was Oswald or did not recall seeing anybody who they feel may have been Oswald.[C6-667] Moreover, when interviewed on December 2, 1963, Slack recalled that the individual whom he saw had blond hair,[C6-668] and on December 3, 1963, Price stated that on several occasions when he saw the individual, he was wearing a “Bulldogger Texas style” hat and had bubble gum or chewing tobacco in his cheek.[C6-669] None of these characteristics match those known about Lee Harvey Oswald.
Moreover, the date on which Price adjusted the scope for the unknown person was September 28, 1963, but Oswald is known to have been in Mexico City at that time;[C6-670] since a comparison of the events testified to by Price and Slack strongly suggests that they were describing the same man,[C6-671] there is reason to believe that Slack was also describing a man other than Oswald. In addition, Slack believed he saw the same person at the rifle range on November 10[C6-672] and there is persuasive evidence that on November 10, Oswald was at the Paine’s home in Irving and did not leave to go to the rifle range.[C6-673] Finally, the man whom Price assisted on September 28 drove an old car, possibly a 1940 or 1941 Ford.[C6-674] However, there is evidence that Oswald could not drive at that time, and there is no indication that Oswald ever had access to such a car.[C6-675] Neither Oswald’s name nor any of his known aliases was found in the sign-in register maintained at the Sports Drome Rifle Range, though many customers did not sign this register.[C6-676] The allegations pertaining to the companions who reportedly accompanied the man believed to be Oswald are also inconsistent among themselves[C6-677] and conform to no other credible information ascertained by the Commission. Several witnesses noticed a bearded man at the club when the person believed to be Oswald was there, although only one witness thought the two men were together;[C6-678] the bearded gentleman was located, and he was not found to have any connection with Oswald.[C6-679]
It seems likely that the identification of Price, Slack, and the Woods was reinforced in their own minds by the belief that the man whom they saw was firing a rifle perhaps identical to Oswald’s Mannlicher-Carcano. The witnesses agreed that the man they observed was firing a Mauser-type bolt-action rifle with the ammunition clip immediately in front of the trigger action, and that a scope was mounted on the rifle.[C6-680] These features are consistent with the rifle Oswald used for the assassination.[C6-681] The witnesses agreed that the man had accurate aim with the rifle.[C6-682]
However, the evidence demonstrated that the weapon fired by the man they observed was different from the assassination rifle. The witnesses agreed that the barrel of the gun which the individual was firing had been shortened in the process of “sporterizing” the weapon.[C6-683] In addition, Price and Slack recalled that certain pieces were missing from the top of the weapon,[C6-684] and Dr. Wood and his son, and others, remembered that the weapon spouted flames when fired.[C6-685] None of these characteristics correspond with Oswald’s Mannlicher-Carcano.[C6-686] Price and Slack believed that the gun did not have a sling, but the assassination weapon did have one. Sterling Wood, on the other hand, recalled that the rifle which he saw had a sling.[C6-687] Price also recalled that he examined the rifle briefly for some indication as to where it had been manufactured, but saw nothing, whereas the words “MADE ITALY” are marked on the top of Oswald’s Mannlicher-Carcano.[C6-688]
The scope on the rifle observed at the firing range does not appear to be the same as the one on the assassination weapon. Price remembered that the individual told him that his scope was Japanese, that he had paid $18 for it, and that he had it mounted in a gunshop in Cedar Hills, though apparently no such shop exists in that area.[C6-689] The scope on the Mannlicher-Carcano was of Japanese origin but it was worth a little more than $7 and was already mounted when he received the rifle from a mail-order firm in Chicago.[C6-690] Sterling Wood and Slack agreed that the scope had a somewhat different appearance from the scope on the assassination rifle.[C6-691]
Though the person believed to be Oswald retained his shell casings, presumably for reuse,[C6-692] all casings recovered from areas where it is believed that Oswald may have practiced have been examined by the FBI Laboratory, and none has been found which was fired from Oswald’s rifle.[C6-693] Finally, evidence discussed in chapter IV tends to prove that Oswald brought his rifle to Dallas from the home of the Paines in Irving on November 22, and there is no other evidence which indicates that he took the rifle or a package which might have contained the rifle out of the Paine’s garage, where it was stored, prior to that date.[C6-694]
Automobile demonstration.—The testimony of Albert Guy Bogard has been carefully evaluated because it suggests the possibility that Oswald might have been a proficient automobile driver and, during November 1963, might have been expecting funds with which to purchase a car. Bogard, formerly an automobile salesman with a Lincoln-Mercury firm in Dallas, testified that in the early afternoon of November 9, 1963, he attended a prospective customer who he believes was Lee Harvey Oswald. According to Bogard, the customer, after test driving an automobile over the Stemmons Freeway at 60 to 70 miles per hour, told Bogard that in several weeks he would have the money to make a purchase. Bogard asserted that the customer gave his name as “Lee Oswald,” which Bogard wrote on a business card. After Oswald’s name was mentioned on the radio on November 22, Bogard assertedly threw the card in a trash can, making the comment to coemployees that he supposed Oswald would no longer wish to buy a car.[C6-695]
Bogard’s testimony has received corroboration.[C6-696] The assistant sales manager at the time, Frank Pizzo, and a second salesman, Eugene M. Wilson, stated that they recall an instance when the customer described by Bogard was in the showroom.[C6-697] Another salesman, Oran Brown, recalled that Bogard asked him to assist the customer if he appeared during certain evenings when Bogard was away from the showroom. Brown stated that he too wrote down the customer’s name and both he and his wife remember the name “Oswald” as being on a paper in his possession before the assassination.[C6-698]