Mr. Eisenberg. Do you have an opinion as to why it was impossible to make either type of determination?
Mr. Cunningham. Yes, sir; this weapon, using .38 Special bullets, was not producing marks consistent with each other. Each time it was fired, the bullet would seem to pass down the barrel in a different way, which could be due to the slightly undersized bullets in the oversized .38 S&W barrel. It would cause an erratic passage down the barrel, and thereby, cause inconsistent individual characteristic marks to be impressed or scratched into the surface of the bullets.
Representative Ford. When you say this weapon, will you identify what you mean by "this weapon"?
Mr. Cunningham. This particular revolver, Commission Exhibit 143.
Mr. Eisenberg. So this brings us back to your earlier testimony, that the gun had been rechambered for a .38 Special, which is slightly smaller in one respect than the .38 S&W, but it had not been rebarreled for the .38 Special?
Mr. Cunningham. That is correct.
The original .38 Smith and Wesson barrel is still on the weapon.
Mr. Eisenberg. So that the .38 Special, when fired in that gun, might wobble slightly as it passes through the barrel?
Mr. Cunningham. I don't know if wobble is the correct word. But as the bullet is passing down this shortened .38 barrel, we are probably getting an erratic passage, so the marks won't reproduce.
Mr. Eisenberg. Is it possible to say that the bullets were not fired from this weapon, No. 143?