◆ SpookStack

Veet ( ( ) -— 1975 B\ istics and Firearms Exhi. A Tests an e@-examinatior: Court Order Issued to Seven Ballistics Experts On September 18, 1975, Superior Court Judge Robert Wenke signed an 1%-page court order calling for the retesting and examination of the ballistics and firearms exhibits. Included in the exnibits to be tested were the Sirhan weapon, and the evidence bullets and Wolfer test fired bullets, including the autopsy reports, and the packages containing Senator Kennedy's clothing. The principal questions that the panel of seven independent firearms experts were asked to answer were: 1. Is the condition of the exhibits at the present time such that a reliable firearms identification can now be made? 2. If the exhibits are no longer in a condition which permits a reliable firearms identification, what accounts for that conciusion? 3. If a firearms identification can now be made, does such an examination confirm the original identification made at the trial of Sirhan? yy, Do the exhibits in any way support a conclusion that a second weapon was fired at the time of the assassination? Included in this fourth question were the following questions: a. De all the bullets recovered after the assassination have the same number of cannelures? Ae ££ =F Otto - 2p Kane Vek e seen mts weS b. are the rifling angles of tne DuLlets recovered after the assassination consistent with the proposition that each bullet was fired from the same gun? The test procedures provided that each expert was to perform his own individual classical bullet comparison identification using a comparison microscope with a stereomicroscope. Finally, very detailed procedures were provided for in the court order which outlined the analysis of tne various bullets and the procedures to be followed. Other more sophisticated and elaborate tests, such as micro measurements of the bullets, trace metal analysis, and powder residue examination, and the test firing of the Sirhan weapon were also provided for in the court order, if so agreed upon by the experts. One important provision that would later become a subject ‘during cross examination of the experts in November was a section of the court order, on page two, that provided that if the experts determined that additional exhibits in the clerk's custody required examination, they could seek a court order that such items be pro- duced. However, during their 10-day examination, the experts never requested any other exhibits which might have gone to the issue of trajectories,, bullet pathways, and so-called missing bullets. - 61 -