I. The blanket fibers in the bag

“Inside the bag were…a single brown delustered viscose fiber and several light-green cotton fibers….The fibers found in the bag were compared with brown viscose and green cotton fibers taken from the blanket. The brown viscose fiber found in the bag matched some of the brown viscose fibers found in the blanket….Each green cotton fiber found in the bag matched some of the green cotton fibers from the blanket…..” ( Report, pg. 591 )

In it’s section, Hairs and Fibers, although the Report was quick to note that the fibers in the bag matched some of the fibers taken from the blanket, it failed to mention that there weren’t enough fibers to conclude they came from the blanket.

FBI agent Paul M. Stombaugh testified that he found only 3 or 4 fibers total. ( 1 brown viscose fiber and 2 or 3 light green cotton fibers ). ( 4 H 81 )

Because he found too few fibers in the bag, he could not positively identify them as having come from the blanket.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, in your mind what do you feel about the origin of the fibers you found in the bag ?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. I didn’t find enough fibers to form an opinion on those. ( 4 H 88 )

The Commission never told us how the blanket fibers got into the bag

In its Report, the Commission never tells us how the blanket fibers got into the bag. But in its 26 volumes, it leaves the reader to speculate that the rifle picked up the blanket fibers. Then, while it was in the paper “gunsack”, the rifle released them into the bag. This conclusion relied on a “hypothetical question” asked of Stombaugh and his opinion:

Mr. EISENBERG…..if the rifle had lain in the blanket, which is 140, and were then put inside the bag 142, could it have picked up fibers from the blanket and transferred them to the bag ?
Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes. ( 4 H 81 )

It could have, but did it ?
Did the rifle pick up fibers from the blanket and release them into the bag ? And if it did, how many fibers would it pick up ? Would it release all of the fibers into the bag or would some remain on the rifle ?

These questions could have been answered with a simple test. But the Commission never ran any tests in order to prove this is what happened.

In addition, the Commission provided no evidence that the blanket fibers were ever on the rifle.

No blanket fibers were found on the rifle

One would think that the Commission concluded the rifle transferred the fibers from the blanket to the bag because blanket fibers remained on the rifle. But the fact is that the rifle, when examined by the FBI, contained no fibers from the blanket.

“no fibers were found on the K1 gun that could be associated with the Q12 blanket” ( FBI file # 105-82555, Sec 21, pg. 177 )

If the rifle was the transfer vehicle for the blanket fibers, shouldn’t there be evidence for that ? Shouldn’t there be fibers still on the rifle ?

Why was the rifle able to hold onto the cotton fibers from the shirt, but not the cotton fibers from the blanket ?

Why was the rifle, bound tightly with twine and in contact with the blanket for months and allegedly moved from Dallas to New Orleans back to Dallas, not able to hold onto the blanket fibers but was able to hold the shirt fibers so tightly, that they had to be removed with tweezers ?

More speculation, but no proof

Once again, the Commission turned to its fiber expert, Stombaugh, who testified that any blanket fibers loosely adhering to the rifle, “could have been dusted off” during the processing by police for fingerprints. ( 4 H 88 )

This was the Commission’s “explanation” for the absence of blanket fibers on the rifle. More “could have been” speculation without proof. Of course, the Commission could have had that proof had it run tests with the blanket and the rifle.

But it didn’t.

Therefore, the Commission’s conclusion that the rifle transferred the fibers from the blanket to the bag was based on an opinion rather than evidence obtained from a test.

The Commission provided no evidence that the rifle picked up fibers from the blanket. Absent blanket fibers on the rifle, there was no evidence that the blanket fibers were ever on the rifle. Without a test to see if blanket fibers could have been brushed off the rifle, it provided no evidence that blanket fibers were dusted away during the processing for fingerprints.

And while the reader is left to speculate that the rifle transferred fibers from the blanket to the bag, there was more on that blanket that apparently never got transferred.

No hair is found on the rifle or inside the bag

The Commission reported that the FBI’s examination of the blanket revealed it contained limb and pubic hairs. But no such hairs were found in the bag. In fact, during its examination, the FBI found no hair in the bag or on the rifle. ( 25 H 386 )

So how does the rifle pluck secure fibers out of the blanket but can’t pick up loose hair ?

The FBI also found evidence that Oswald had not handled the blanket in the 72 hours preceding his death, something he would have had to do in order to retrieve the rifle. It’s post-mortem examination of Oswald’s body revealed that he had no blanket fibers under his fingernails. ( ibid. )

This means that there is no evidence that Oswald had contact with the blanket on or after November 21st.

This information never made it into the Commission’s Report.

And there is a question whether there were blanket fibers in the bag when it left the TSBD. The way police handled the bag with the open end facing down, suggests that there were no fibers in the bag when it left the Texas School Book Depository.

Photographs show police leaving the TSBD carrying the bag with the open end facing down

Famous news photographs taken outside the Texas School Book Depository of Detective Robert L. Montgomery with the paper “gunsack” show that he carried the bag with the open end pointed down.
If you look closely to the photo on the right, you’ll see Det. Montgomery making an obscene hand gesture to the news photographer with his left hand behind the bag.

If he knew there was something inside the bag, no detective worth his salt would handle an open ended bag with the open end facing down. Even if he didn’t know for sure there was something inside, he would not handle the bag that way.

The only reason he would handle the bag with the open end down is if he knew the bag had nothing in it and there was no danger of losing evidence that might be inside.

The fact that police handled the bag with the open end down suggests that there were no blanket fibers in it when it left the Texas School Book Depository.

No evidence the rifle was ever in the bag

In order for the rifle to have been the transport vehicle of the blanket fibers from the blanket to the bag, there must be evidence that the rifle was in the bag.

Without evidence that the rifle was ever in the bag, there’s no evidence that it transferred the fibers into the bag. When FBI expert John Cadigan examined the inside of the bag, he could find no evidence that the bag had ever contained a rifle.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cadigan, did you notice when you looked at the bag whether there were—that is the bag found on the sixth floor, Exhibit 142–whether it had any bulges or unusual creases?
Mr. CADIGAN. I was also requested at that time to examine the bag to determine if there were any significant markings or scratches or abrasions or anything by which it could be associated with the rifle, Commission Exhibit 139, that is, could I find any markings that I could tie to that rifle.
Mr. EISENBERG. Yes?
Mr. CADIGAN. And I couldn’t find any such markings. ( 4 H 97 )

Cadigan hints the rifle was never in the bag

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, was there an absence of markings which would be inconsistent with the rifle having been carried in the bag?
Mr. CADIGAN. No; I don’t see actually, I don’t know the condition of the rifle. If it were in fact contained in this bag, it could have been wrapped in cloth or just the metal parts wrapped in a thick layer of cloth, or if the gun was in the bag, perhaps it wasn’t moved too much.

I did observe some scratch marks and abrasions but was unable to associate them with this gun. The scratch marks in the paper could come from any place. They could have come from many places. There were no marks on this bag that I could say were caused by that rifle or any other rifle or any other given instrument. ( ibid. )

Cadigan would not say that the rifle was never in the bag because he didn’t know if the rifle was wrapped in cloth while it was in the bag ( which it wasn’t ). He also didn’t know how much the rifle had moved in the bag.

The rifle SHOULD have left marks inside the bag

Cadigan testified that only two ways the rifle could have been in this bag and left no markings:

a.) if the metal parts were wrapped in cloth preventing them from having contact with the bag, or

b.) if the rifle had been nearly still in the bag.

“it could have been wrapped in cloth or just the metal parts wrapped in a thick layer of cloth, or if the gun was in the bag, perhaps it wasn’t moved too much.” ( ibid. )

Neither of these were the case. The rifle was never wrapped in cloth while it was in the bag.

And a broken-down 34 inch rifle would have had 4 inches to move around in a 38 inch bag. It would have moved around in the bag as Oswald hand carried it to the Randle residence. It would have bounced around in the back seat of Wesley Frazier’s car as he drove through the dirt parking lot of the TSBD. Then it would have moved around as Oswald removed it from the back seat and hand carried into the building. A lot of sharp edges moving around inside the bag from it being carried, sliding and bouncing around in the back seat, picked up and carried again. Yet no markings.

So the absence of markings is proof that the rifle was never in the bag. Because the rifle was never in the bag, it was never the transfer vehicle of the blanket fibers into the bag.

A question of contact

The Commission’s speculation that the rifle was the “mechanism” that transferred the fibers from the blanket into the bag was based on the fact that the bag and the blanket never had contact. This photograph found by researcher John Hunt in the National Archives shows that not to be true.

While the photograph shows contact between the bag and blanket, the contact is in the middle of the bag, not on the open end. While some researchers are convinced that this shows how the fibers got into the bag, I am not. What I see is a possibility that blanket fibers could have been found on the OUTSIDE of the bag.

This leaves only two possibilites in my mind: either the rifle transferred the fibers into the bag, ( which the Commission never proved ) or the fibers were intentionally plucked from the blanket and placed into the bag by authorities.

II. Shirt fibers found on the rifle

On the evening of November 22nd, part of the evidence turned over to FBI agent Vincent Drain included the rifle, blanket, gunsack, and Oswald’s shirt.

The FBI found a “tuft” of six or seven cotton fibers which were caught by a jagged edge of the butt plate of the CE 139 rifle. The fibers were orange-yellow, grey-black and dark blue. When compared to the cotton fibers from the CE 150 shirt, they matched in shade and twist.

As it had offered no evidence on how the blanket fibers got in the bag, it offered no evidence for how the shirt fibers got on the rifle. Was it before, after or during the shooting sequence ?

Snugly wrapped around

Its fiber expert Stombaugh testified that the fibers were “wrapped around rather snugly to the sharp edge”. ( 4 H 83 ) How were they wrapped ? Were they wrapped clockwise or counter-clockwise ? The direction of wrap would tell which direction either the rifle or the shirt was moving when the fibers were caught.

What part of the shirt did the fibers come from ? Did they come from an area of the shirt ( shoulder ) that was consistent with firing the rifle, or did they come from the front pocket, or the back of the shirt ?

The Commission never asked.

Stombaugh testified that the fibers were adhering so tightly to the gun, “I had to take a pair of tweezers and work them out.” ( ibid. )

Would this have required more than a normal rubbing between the shirt and the butt plate ?
The snugly wrapped and tightly adhering of the fibers to the jagged edge suggests that an abnormal amount of pressure was exerted on the shirt at the time of contact with the butt plate. Could the shirt have been rubbed by hand against the jagged edge of the butt plate in order to catch fibers from the shirt ?

The Commission never ran any tests to find out.

The Commission fails again

Not only did the Commission fail to ask questions, it failed to conduct experiments. For example, firing the rifle while wearing the CE 150 shirt could have helped determine whether the fibers were caught during the shooting sequence.

Another test the Commission could have run would be to strongly rub the shirt against the butt plate and see if the jagged edge caught any fibers. An examination of how the fibers were wrapped on the jagged edge could determine whether it caught the fibers legitimately or if the fibers were planted by police.

Stombaugh’s testimony suggests that the fibers may have been caught AFTER the rifle was dusted for fingerprints.

The laying of the fibers

Video taken at the scene shows Lt. Day dusting the rifle at the time of discovery, inside the Texas School Book Depository.

The laying of the fibers with regard to the fingerprint powder is crucial in determining when the fibers were caught by the jagged edge.

If the fibers were on the rifle before it was dusted for fingerprints and were pushed into the crevice by the fingerprint brush, there should be no fingerprint powder in the crevice. The pushing of the fibers into the crevice should prevent the powder from getting into it.

But if there WAS fingerprint powder in the crevice, then the fibers were caught on the jagged edge AFTER the rifle was dusted.

Stombaugh testified that there was fingerprint powder, “down and through the crevice there”. ( 4 H 83 )

This is an argument that researcher Pat Speer and myself have made on several occasions.
The fact that there was fingerprint powder IN THE CREVICE suggests that the fibers were caught by the jagged edge AFTER it had been dusted for fingerprints.

The “fresh” fibers

Stombaugh testified to the condition of the fibers:
“They were clean, they had good color to them, there was no grease on them and they were not fragmented. They looked as if they had just been picked up.” ( 4 H 83 )

Stombaugh testified that his idea of “old” fibers was in the area of 1-2 months. ( 4 H 82 ) So although he declined to give an estimation of how long the fibers were on the rifle, he would only say that, “these fibers were put on there in the recent past.” ( 4 H 84 )

Stombaugh described the fibers a being, “fairly fresh” ( 4 H 82 )
But the Commission provided no evidence that the CE 150 shirt had contact with the rifle in the two month period before November 22, 1963.

The “star” witness

The only witness who connected Oswald’s shirt with the rifle on November 22nd was bus passenger Mary Bledsoe, who claimed to have seen Oswald wearing the shirt after the assassination. Bledsoe was a stroke victim who couldn’t remember what bus she was on ( 6 H 408 ) and who testified from notes because she couldn’t remember “what I have to say” ( ibid. ). She also couldn’t remember what day she made those notes ( ibid. ).
But she remembered Oswald and the shirt he was wearing and was able to positively identify him even though “his face was so distorted” that she “didn’t look at him”. ( 6 H 409 ).
This was the Commission’s star witness connecting the CE 150 shirt with the rifle.

None of Oswald’s co-workers identified the CE 150 shirt as the shirt Oswald wore to work that morning.

The Commission drops the ball on the blanket fibers

In many of the areas in this case, the Commission failed to produce any physical evidence. The Commission provided us with, “could-have-beens”, “might-have-beens”, “possibilites” and theories.

One of those areas was the fiber evidence.

The Commission failed to prove that the rifle was capable of picking up fibers from the blanket. It failed to prove that fibers from the blanket were retained by the rifle and transferred into the bag. It failed to answer key questions that would have proved its case. What part of the rifle picked them up ? How many fibers were picked up ? Were they all released into the bag or did some remain on the rifle ?

Because there were so few fibers found, could the blanket fibers have been plucked out of the blanket by police or the FBI and placed inside the bag ?
All of these questions could have been answered had the Commission run tests.

But it didn’t.

The Commission drops the ball..again

Likewise, it failed to run tests to see if the rifle could pick up fibers from the CE 150 shirt.
The Commission also failed to prove that Oswald wore the CE 150 while in the building on November 22nd. Oswald’s co-workers testified that he usually worked in his t-shirt. None of them identified the CE 150 shirt as the shirt he wore while working that morning.

The Commission provided no evidence with regard to when, where or how the shirt came in contact with the rifle.

Was the shirt rubbed against the rifle intentionallly by police or the FBI ?

Tests, like rubbing the shirt against the butt plate to see if the jagged edge picked up fibers that were “snugly wrapped” in the same fashion as the fibers found by the FBI, would have exposed the possibility that the shirt fibers were planted.

So tests were never done.

Because they weren’t interested in finding the truth. They were interested in finding evidence against Oswald.

Conclusion

And to add insult to injury, the FBI found NO EVIDENCE that ANY RIFLE was ever in the bag. 

“There were no marks on this bag that I could say were caused by that rifle or any other rifle or any other given instrument.” ( Testimony of John Cadigan, 4 H 97 )

Cadigan testified that only two ways the rifle could have been in this bag and left no markings:

a.) if the metal parts were wrapped in cloth preventing them from having contact with the bag, or b.) if the rifle had been nearly still in the bag.

“it could have been wrapped in cloth or just the metal parts wrapped in a thick layer of cloth, or if the gun was in the bag, perhaps it wasn’t moved too much.” ( ibid. )

Neither of these were the case. The rifle was never wrapped in cloth. And a broken-down 34 inch rifle would have had 4 inches to move around in a 38 inch bag. It would have moved around in the bag as Oswald hand carried it to the Randle residence. It would have bounced around in the back seat of Wesley Frazier’s car as he drove through the dirt parking lot of the TSBD. Then it would have moved around as Oswald removed it from the back seat and hand carried into the building.

With all that moving around it certainly would have left some marks inside the bag.

A final word

So the absence of markings is proof that the rifle was never in the bag. And because it was never in the bag, it never transferred the blanket fibers into the bag. How do you get the fibers from the rifle into the bag if you can’t prove that the rifle was ever in the bag ?

Now you know why the Commission never stated in its Report HOW the fibers got in the bag.