PV's Bullet Weights, Fletcher and Vanezes

[Patti]

P Vanezes = Pathologist Maclom Fletcher = Forensic Scientist. (18) = The Rifle

Notes: M Fletcher 1/10/1986 said that (18) was found to occasionally malfunction in that the breech block would stay in the open position or a fired cartridge case would become trapped in the ejection port. This was probably due to the effect of dirt in the mechanism and/or damage due to mishandling.  Not very precise is he?

[Patti]

PV 2

Confused, you will be after reading this....

PV 2 weight 37.45

One document says this bullet was taken from RBs arm. This is incorrect for the arm shot was an exit shot, there was no bullet to be found there. 

Fletcher in his confusion must have made a mistake by putting that PV 2 was from the left arm of RB.

PV2 was from the left shoulder and he says the bullet was virtually intact.  It was fired from approximately 2 feet away in a downward position.

This is where I am confused. He describes this bullet as being virtually intact on one side, whole, flattened.   

[Patti]

PV 3

PV 3 weight 29.72  1.968 grms strongly suggestive being from (18)  ( When compared to PV2 it is less in weight)

This bullet was nearly whole.  (The weight of this bullet suggests it was not) ??

This bullet was a head shot , fwd to the ear left temperal. It was fired within a couple of inches. ( It appears that Fletcher does not know his left from his right, for this bullet was received on the right side fig. 1 in diagram.)

The nose of the bullet was extensively damaged.

[Patti]

PV4

Pv4 weight 32.28  2.0999grms 

Vanzes is unsure if this is PV4 or PV5 Bullet was fired at top of the back of the skull. See fig 4. in shots received in archives and cross-referenced with the General examination records.

Fletcher describes this bullet as whole.

But then goes on to report the bullet was badly mushroomed. Suggestive as being fired from (18)

Nothing wrong with this bullet, but no determination to find out if this was PV4 or PV5

[Patti]

PV5

Weight 29.66

According to Vanezes PV5 is a fragment form the left hand side jaw of NB.

From the General examination record it is known as PV5/11 although it is a fragment form another bullet, Fletcher says it is nearly whole.  However, on a different record he clearly states it is a small fragment unable to match up if it came from (18)  (Why weren't these fragments matched up)

It is fig. 6 on the diagram (drawing can be viewed in the photo section in the archives)

? Which bullet did this fragment belong too. We see two shots to the jaw of NB but it is obvious fig 6 is not a shot it is a fragment.  Thus making shots fired to NB as being 7.

It appears that this fragment is quite heavy, yet Fletcher claims it was small.....?  Nearly as heavy as PV3  which was nearly whole.

[Patti]

PV8

Weight 25.12  1.63grms. 

Found in left hand side of skull see fig 3

This bullet was flattened and was mushroomed

Nearly whole.

Not able to match if it was fired from (18)

[Patti]

PV9

Vanezes describes this as a bullet found in the top of the brain on the left hand side.  It has no weight.


On the general examination list PV9  found in fig 2 which is above 1 and found in the left ear...(Suddenly PV9 has changed direction from the brain to the left ear)   (Also the bullet has now become a fragment) Yet Fletcher was able to establish that this fragment had been fired at close range of a couple of inches.  How?

Unable to match if this bullet/fragment was fired by (18)

If you are able to follow this you will see that 8 shots have now become 6?

[Patti]

PV10

Weight 17.56  1.14gms

Vanezes  says Bullet removed from left of neck. On one document when he lists all the PV's.

On the General ex list the neck has now become the lip.  See fig 5.

Fletcher says that this bullet/fragment was a piece of badly mangled and distorted lead.  It is probably a bullet ( Is this am assumption then? )

Fletcher goes on to say it is now half a bullet.....not suitable for matching or testing that it was fired from (18)

[Patti]

Finally PV11

See PV5.....

[Patti]

From this it is possible that NB was only shot 5 times not 8 times as suggested.  Note fig 8 is not recorded because it was an exit wound......

Hartley waht do you think.....you asked me to bring it on! 
 

[Reader]

Where are you getting your figures from? Some of the values differ from those posted elsewhere and the gram/grain conversion factor seems to vary slightly.

[Patti]

Where are you getting your figures from? Some of the values differ from those posted elsewhere and the gram/grain conversion factor seems to vary slightly.

Hi Reader

The figures are from the General Examination list done by Mr Fletchera and Vanezes and cross referenced to the PV list provided by the pathologist. I also used another list which was an examination list of the result in the lab done by Fletcher.  It was difficult to do, but they are the weights that were provided by Fletcher....From doing this, I have doubts that NB was shot 8 times, it is more likely that he was shot 5 to 6 times....because some of the bullets were small fragments and what they failed to do was to use those fragments to make a whole bullet....

[Reader]

PV2 was from the left shoulder and he says the bullet was virtually intact.

The wording above is "Appears to have hit a curved surface side-on. Nose - base and one side virtually intact", which is consistent with one side being flattened.

The initial examination of PV/3 described it as having extensive damage, which is consistent with it having around 80% of the weight of a whole bullet. An added note states "General & some detail match. Very Strongly suggestive of having been fired in (18)."

Fletcher describes this bullet as whole.

But then goes on to report the bullet was badly mushroomed.

Where does Fletcher describe it as whole? The wording in the general examination record is "Received: one fired .22 bullet:- damaged. . . . Bullet badly mushroomed".

PV/5 is described as "Very small fragment of bloodstained lead. NOV for matching purposes.
[NOV = Nothing Of Value, presumably.] This is from the General Examination Record that doesn't mention PV/11.

A separate record for PV/11 states "Virtually no detail suitable for matching . . . Unable to establish whether or not fired in (18)".



PV/8 is described as "badly damage", and its weight indicates it is far from whole. Where is it described as "nearly whole"?

You refer to a "fig3", "fig 5" and "fig 2 which is above 1", but you haven't posted any images above.

From its weight, PV/10 would have been about half of a bullet. On the record I have seen, the word "half" is not used, but a comment states "NO rifling suitable for comparison."

[-Harters-]

Hartley waht do you think.....you asked me to bring it on! 

I think that in all likelihood, you are more than a little mistaken with some of your conclusions.

I'd suggest that the pathologist was quite able to tell the difference between being shot 8 times as opposed to being shot 5 times. Even if he was unable to distinguish particular bullet fragments, I'd expect him to be fully capable of identifying individual wounds, if he was unable to do so, he would have stated that he was unable to do so.

There is a reason why some bullets are heavier than the figures given by Mike for a whole bullet, the simplest conclusion would be that Mikes figures are innaccurate.

[Reader]

There were a number of bullets recovered "whole" that weighed from 2.42 - 2.44 grams. This makes one wonder how accurate the word "whole" was when applied to one (or two?) bullets that weighed 2.29 grams, and also how accurate the weighing was. Various bullets were lighter still, causing mike tesko to speculate that they came from a different batch of bullets. For the moment, I'm not sure how many of those were described as whole.