Chapter VI: Part 6

Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct. If I were to look at these photographs myself, I couldn't make an identification on them because I wouldn't be able to see enough and I would say this looks like this and this looks like this, but so what?

What about the size of the pigments, what about the size of the scales, what about the thickness of the cuticle? I see a medulla here, I don't see a medulla over here. So you just couldn't see all the characteristics in a photograph.

Mr. EISENBERG. But these characteristics you do see as you change the focus on the microscope?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; these appear by looking through different areas of the hair shaft itself.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, getting to the microscope itself, suppose a person without experience looked through the microscope directly at the hairs. Would he be able to directly interpret the hairs--a known and a questioned hair--to see if they are probably identical, or does it take experience even to interpret what you see through a microscope?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. This takes experience to interpret what you see.

We get quite a few people through the lab on tours and every now and then I will set up some hairs. I had one man making a match with a dog hair and a human hair, and he said they came from the same person, because he couldn't interpret what he saw. He just thought he saw something which he didn't.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Stombaugh, could you tell from these hairs that you found in the blanket, and let me add parenthetically we sometimes have been calling this blanket a rug but we have been talking about the object----

Mr. DULLES. You call it a blanket, technically.

Mr. EISENBERG. Technically a blanket, and it is Exhibit 140. This Exhibit 140, Mr. Stombaugh, could you tell whether these hairs had been pulled out or had fallen out?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. These hairs had fallen out naturally. They have died and fallen from the body. This is a very normal occurrence. When one combs one's hair, ordinarily you will find one or two strands of hair on the comb, because hair is constantly being replaced in most people.

Mr. EISENBERG. How can you tell it had fallen out?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. From the shape of the root.

Mr. EISENBERG. What is the difference of the shape of the root where a hair falls out and the shape of the hair of a root where it has been taken out artificially or unnaturally?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. In Exhibit 667, I have a photomicrograph of a root of a human hair. Now, this hair has died and has fallen out naturally, you can tell by the shape of it here. The follicle has just come right along with it. It is starting to shrivel. If this hair was a healthy hair and had been forcibly removed, this root would have been collapsed and twisted. It is very characteristic, it is easy to tell whether a hair has been forcibly removed or whether it fell out naturally.

Mr. EISENBERG. Suppose it is cut, suppose the hair was cut, can you tell that?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, we can tell from looking at the tip of a hair whether it has been cut, burned, crushed, and whether it has been cut with a sharp instrument, such as a razor, or whether it has been cut with a dull instrument.

Mr. EISENBERG. Were these hairs cut, the hairs in 140, that you found in Exhibit 140?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Some of the tips of the head hairs had been cut, but the limb hairs and the pubic hairs had not.

Mr. EISENBERG. But they all had roots on them?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. They all had roots on them.

Mr. EISENBERG. Getting back to the blanket for a moment, as to the composition, you testified that there were woolen, viscose, and cotton fibers. I don't recall whether you said that there were green and brown fibers of each type of textile?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, each type had green and brown fibers.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, also getting back to the shape of the blanket when you received it, the shape of 140 and its folds, we had discussed a crease which you marked "C," which you said was caused by an object 10 inches long, and we discussed whether the object was 10 inches long or could have been longer.

How long was the crease "C"?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. The crease "C," the hump in the blanket itself, was approximately 10 inches long.

Mr. EISENBERG. And did that run--as the blanket is folded, and looking from "A" to the general area of "D"--and putting "A" at the left-hand side--can you tell us how that crease ran, did it run from left to right or from top to bottom?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. It ran from left to right.

Mr. EISENBERG. It ran from left to right, and about 10 inches long?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Approximately 10 inches long.

Mr. EISENBERG. As I recall, you testified it was caused by a distortion in the fibers, that is to say, the fact the crease was still present even though there was no object in the blanket was caused by a distortion of the fibers?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir; the fibers had been stretched in this area--not the fibers, the yarns.

Mr. DULLES. Can one see that on the blanket itself?

Mr. EISENBERG. Let's take a look at 140, Mr. Stombaugh, and see if it is still present?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. If I can find where it was here. I doubt if it will still be present because the creases on the edges of the blanket are gone. I can't tell. It has been folded so much. No. I can't see it.

When I received the blanket in the laboratory, I noticed, when I put the blanket down flat, it had an area that was humped just like this.

Mr. EISENBERG. You have put a pencil underneath?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes.

Mr. EISENBERG. And you have picked it up an inch or two, you have made a hump of about an inch or an inch and a half up from the rest of the blanket, is that correct?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes. But it was very slight and you could hardly notice it, but I happened to look at the blanket from a distance and saw the hump and went over to measure it. But we tried to photograph it and we just couldn't get it. We tried various ways of lighting.

So I made a notation in my notes regarding that slight hump.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, just to make the record clear, the hump was 10 inches long, and therefore you felt that the object immediately causing the hump must have been approximately 10 inches long, is that correct?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes. The object causing the hump itself.

Mr. EISENBERG. But could it have been attached to an object which was longer than 10 inches, or could it have been attached to an object, running underneath the object causing the protrusion, which was longer than 10 inches?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. Okay. That is what I think was the source of the confusion earlier.

Now, you placed this mark "C" on this paper illustration, Exhibit 663. Does that--does the placement of the mark approximate the general area where you found the hump?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, approximately, according to my notes. It could be to the left a little or to the right a little. This isn't to scale.

Mr. EISENBERG. One last question on the blanket, Mr. Stombaugh. Could you form any opinion as to the quality of the blanket?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Well, the composition of the blanket being mostly viscose, a very cheap synthetic, indicated to me that it was an inferior blanket, relatively inexpensive.

Mr. EISENBERG. Could you determine whether it was a domestic or a foreign product?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. No, I couldn't.

Mr. EISENBERG. It might have been either?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Could have been either, yes.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Stombaugh, I hand you a photograph which is labeled on the bottom "C 11, Commission Exhibit 150." It is a color photograph of a brownish textured shirt, long-sleeved, with a hole in the right elbow, and I ask you whether you recognize the shirt that is pictured in that photograph?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, I do.

Mr. EISENBERG. Can you see your mark anywhere on that?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, my mark is in red, initials "PMS" are in the collar of the shirt.

Mr. EISENBERG. "PMS" being your initials, Paul M. Stombaugh?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this photograph admitted?

Mr. DULLES. It will be admitted, 673.

(The photograph referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 673, and was received in evidence.)

Mr. EISENBERG. Let me state for the record we are introducing the photograph at this point rather than the shirt itself because depositions are being taken in Dallas simultaneously with the testimony being elicited today, and the shirt is being used by those members of the staff who are in Dallas.

Mr. DULLES. I understand.

Mr. EISENBERG. When did you receive this shirt that is pictured in Exhibit 673, said shirt being Commission Exhibit 150?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. I received this shirt the same day I received the blanket, which was November 23, 1963, approximately 7:30 a.m.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, did you conduct an examination to determine the composition of this shirt?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, I did.

Mr. EISENBERG. When did you do that?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. I did this later on that morning.

Mr. EISENBERG. What were your conclusions as to the composition, Mr. Stombaugh?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. The shirt is composed of gray-black cotton, dark blue cotton, and orange-yellow cotton fibers. The dark yarn in the shirt is composed of a mixture of dark blue and gray-black cotton fibers twisted together, and the light yellowish orange looking colors here, the yarns in this part of the shirt were composed of orange-yellow cotton fibers.

Mr. EISENBERG. Did you examine the shirt to determine--pardon me, Mr. Dulles, were you going to put a question on the composition?

Mr. DULLES. No.

Mr. EISENBERG. Did you examine the shirt to determine the presence of hairs or other debris?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. No, I didn't.

Mr. EISENBERG. You did not?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. No, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. Neither then or at any subsequent time?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. No, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. Could you take a look at your notes on that, Mr. Stombaugh, to make sure about that?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. No, sir; I did not remove the debris from the shirt. I noted in my notes the two buttons from the top were forcibly removed, the right elbow area was worn through, the bottom front inside of the shirt was ripped forcibly, and that I had made a known sample of this shirt.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Stombaugh, I had been under the impression you found some wax on that shirt.

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; down the face of the shirt I did find some wax adhering to it, and this wax I removed and delivered to the spectrographic unit for a spectrographic examination.

Mr. EISENBERG. Does that show in your notes?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; I was looking for debris and hairs. I knew I had not scraped the shirt.

Mr. EISENBERG. I am using the wrong term, I guess.

Mr. STOMBAUGH. I recall doing this. This was later in the afternoon when I removed this wax and took it to the spectrographic unit. This was after I had conducted other examinations on some other items.

Mr. EISENBERG. For the record, we had an earlier discussion, and you had mentioned this to me in an earlier discussion, as I recall----

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; that is correct.

Mr. EISENBERG. Which prompted me to ask you the question. Did you find any body hairs on this shirt--or any hairs, I should say?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. I didn't look for hairs on this shirt. This type of examination had not been requested. It seemed unnecessary.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Stombaugh, were you able to determine the quality of the shirt or did you form any opinion as to the quality of the shirt?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; it was an inexpensive shirt. I found no labels in it indicating the manufacturer.

Mr. DULLES. Any indication that labels had been torn out?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Not that I recall, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. Were you able to determine, Mr. Stombaugh, whether this was a domestic, whether this was of domestic or foreign origin?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; there are so many different shirt manufacturers in this country, that there is little value in trying to trace down a particular source unless we can find a manufacturer's marking in the shirt.

Mr. EISENBERG. Any laundry marks which you attempted to trace down?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. I found no laundry marks. The shirt was well worn and appeared to have been hand laundered.

Mr. EISENBERG. If there are no further questions on the shirt, I will move on to another item.

Mr. Stombaugh, I now hand you a homemade paper bag, Commission Exhibit 142, which parenthetically has also received another Exhibit No. 626, and ask you whether you are familiar with this item?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; I am.

Mr. EISENBERG. Does that have your mark on it?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. At the time I examined this, it was to be treated for latent fingerprints subsequent to my examination, and in a case like this I will not put a mark on the item itself because my mark might cover a latent fingerprint which is later brought up, and therefore obscure it.

In this particular instance, I made a drawing of this bag on my notes with the various sizes and description of it to refresh my memory at a later date.

Mr. EISENBERG. And it is--looking at those notes and as you remember now--this is the bag?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. This is the bag.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, this bag has an area of very light-brown color, and the greater portion of the area is a quite dark-brownish color. What was the color when you originally received it?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. When I originally received this it was a light-brown color.

Mr. EISENBERG. Which is at one end of the bag?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. One end of the bag.

Mr. EISENBERG. The tape is also two colors, one a lightish brown and the other a darkish brown. What color was the tape when you received it?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. The tape also was light brown.

Mr. EISENBERG. Could you turn the bag over? Was it the color that shows as a lighter yellowish-type of brown?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; a yellow-brown shade.

Mr. EISENBERG. When did you receive it, by the way, Mr. Stombaugh?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. This was received on November 23, 7:30 a.m., 1963.

Mr. EISENBERG. Did you form any opinions as you examined it, concerning the construction of the bag?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. When I looked at the bag and examined it, it struck me as being a homemade bag such as I could make. Occasionally I will have a need for something like this at home. Therefore, I will take some brown paper and a strip of tape home with me. Then when I get home I will fold the tape--fold the paper rather--in the shape I need--and to seal it up I will tear strips of the sealing tape from the little piece I have.

Here we find that this tape has been torn at several places, such as one would do in an instance like that. Due to these torn edges, I was under the impression, from looking at the bag, that it was a homemade bag which someone had made at home and they did not have a tape dispenser which machine-cuts tape. Therefore, they had to tear it, which they did--or cut it, of course--with a knife. And this is the case where pieces of tape were torn.

Mr. EISENBERG. You were pointing to various torn edges as you testified, is that correct?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; that is correct.

Mr. EISENBERG. How many, if any, square-cut edges did you notice?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. I found--according to my drawing--two machine-cut edges.

Mr. EISENBERG. Would that indicate--well, do you form any opinion as to, on the basis of that, as to the origin, possible origin, of the tape?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. The origin of the tape as far as the manufacturer----

Mr. EISENBERG. What I am referring to is this: on the basis of that would you draw an inference that the person had taken--whoever made this bag--had taken two lengths of tape from a dispensing machine and had subsequently torn it up into smaller strips, or do you think he had one length of tape from a dispensing machine which he subsequently tore up into smaller strips?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. From the ends that I could see, now I don't know whether there were any ends underneath which I did not have a chance to look at, I don't have anything in my notes, but from what I can see it would appear he took a strip of tape, machine-cut from a dispenser, and used that entire strip, thus using up both ends of the tape because we have two machine-cut ends.

Mr. EISENBERG. In other words, it would be a machine-cut strip at the beginning of the tape which the person pulled out, left over from the last cut?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is right.

Mr. EISENBERG. And a machine-cut at the end, where the person himself ripped the tape from the machine?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct.

Mr. EISENBERG. And you infer that he then divided it into smaller strips on the occasion when he made the bag?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir; he pulled one strip, of course, he could have pulled two or three strips, I don't know, but it would appear he took one strip of tape and tore it into smaller pieces to be used on the bag.

Mr. EISENBERG. Did you notice any bulges or creases or folds apart from the fold used in making of the bag?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; I didn't. I noticed that one end of the bag had been torn.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, would you say that the absence of bulges would be inconsistent with the carrying of a heavy object or an irregularly shaped object in the bag?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Well, I don't believe I am qualified to answer that question, because I actually am not an expert in paper.

Mr. EISENBERG. All right. We will leave that to the questioned document examiner and we will take it up with him.

Did you notice anything else about the bag relating to its gross physical characteristics and its shape, apart from any debris which you may have found inside or outside the bag?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. No, sir; just an oblong homemade bag was the impression I received from looking at it.

Mr. EISENBERG. Do you think it was, if it was in fact a homemade bag, do you think it was a well-made bag, Mr. Stombaugh? Did you form any opinion as to that?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. In my opinion, just a personal opinion, the person was aware as to how to make a bag, to seal the ends by folding both corners in and then folding them flat.

Mr. EISENBERG. You just demonstrated that both corners originally were folded by the crease lines, and you folded it over again to show how it was made?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; this makes a neat and also a secure corner or end to the bag, to prevent losing any of the contents.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Stombaugh, did you examine the outside of this paper bag----

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; I did.

Mr. EISENBERG. Exhibit 142 and also 626, to see if there were any foreign items on the surface?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; I did.

Mr. EISENBERG. And what did you find?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. I found that the bag had previously been dusted for latent fingerprints because I found traces of what appeared to be fingerprint powder on it.

I was using white gloves at the time I examined this and the gloves became quite soiled from the fingerprint powder.

Mr. EISENBERG. Did you find anything else?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; nothing on the outside of the bag.

Mr. EISENBERG. How did you conduct that examination, by the way?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. With a low-power microscope.

Mr. EISENBERG. Did you find any cotton fibers on the outside of the bag at all, Mr. Stombaugh, white or colored?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. There were white cotton fibers on the outside but I was using a pair of white cotton gloves, so these would be of no value. White cotton is the most common thing we have in the way of textiles, and therefore it just doesn't have sufficient individual characteristics to be of value for comparison and identification purposes. It is for this reason that we use gloves of this material.

Mr. EISENBERG. And those fibers may have come from your white cotton gloves?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; they could very easily have come from my gloves from handling the object with a pair of gloves on.

Mr. EISENBERG. Did you proceed to examine the inside of the paper bag to see if there were any foreign objects?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; I did.

Mr. EISENBERG. What were your conclusions?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. I removed the debris from the inside of the bag by opening the bag as best I could, and tapping it and knocking the debris on to a small piece of white paper, and I found a very small number of fibers. Upon examining these fibers, I found a single brown, delustered, viscose fiber and several light-green cotton fibers from the inside of the bag. I also found a minute particle of wood and a single particle of a waxy substance.

Mr. EISENBERG. Did you attach any significance to the particle of wood, Mr. Stombaugh?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; it was too minute for identification purposes. It could have come from any surface, including the bag itself. Sometimes all of the wood used in the manufacture of paper doesn't go into a pulp, and this might be a very tiny such fragment.

Mr. EISENBERG. Did you examine the wood fragment?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. I looked at it microscopically.

Mr. EISENBERG. Did you attempt to compare it with the wood of the Exhibit 139, which is a rifle?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; the wood particle from the bag was too minute for comparison purposes. There wasn't much you could do with it, it was very small.

Mr. EISENBERG. Did you attach any significance to the body wax--or to the wax, I should say?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. The wax particle I noticed, and I recalled having seen wax on the shirt, Exhibit No. 673, so therefore I put that aside for a spectrographic examination and comparison of the wax particle from the inside of the bag with the wax from the shirt.

Mr. EISENBERG. And what were the results?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. They were entirely different.

Mr. EISENBERG. Was there any analysis made of the wax in the bag as to its origin, do you know?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. It was examined by the spectrographic examiner and he found it was just common wax.

Mr. EISENBERG. When you say common wax, do you mean the kind you wax a floor with?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; more like that which could have come from a candle, candle wax.

Mr. EISENBERG. What about the wax on the shirt as to origin?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. It was paraffin.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now you also said there were several fibers, Mr. Stombaugh?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir; I did. There was a single brown delustered viscose fiber and several light-green cotton fibers.

Mr. EISENBERG. Did this single brown viscose fiber match the fibers from the blanket, Exhibit 140?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; it did.

Mr. EISENBERG. In what characteristics were they matched?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. The fibers in the blanket had a large number of brown viscose fibers, delustered and one fiber I found in the bag was also a viscose fiber of the same type and color as seen under a low-powered microscope. The delustering spots seen on the fiber were the same size, and both fibers were approximately the same diameter.

Mr. EISENBERG. How common is viscose, Mr. Stombaugh, as a fiber?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Viscose is fairly common. It is used in many types of garments; it depends on the quality of the garment.

Mr. EISENBERG. And this was delustered viscose, did you say?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes.

Mr. EISENBERG. How common is delustered viscose?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. It is most common, I would say. It is more common than lustrous.

Mr. EISENBERG. Generally speaking, how many variations of diameter would a delustered viscose come in?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. This is entirely up to the manufacturer. He can make viscose any diameter he wants, and there could be hundreds of variations in the diameter of viscose fibers.

Mr. EISENBERG. But the fiber you found in the paper bag, 142, matched the fibers you found in the Exhibit 140?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir; but the viscose fibers in the blanket varied in size also.

Mr. EISENBERG. To what extent?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. There were 10 to 15 different diameters of viscose in this blanket. It appeared to me as if the blanket was made of scrap viscose, scrap fibers.

Mr. EISENBERG. So that the diameters would be random?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. They were random; yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, what about the color, was the color a match between the fiber found in 140--in 142--and the fiber which is in the composition of 140, the blanket?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; the color matched some of the viscose fibers, the brown viscose fibers in the blanket. Of course, these colors also varied slightly but not to any great extent, not like the diameter.

Mr. EISENBERG. Were there any other common characteristics between the viscose fibers found in the blanket and the viscose fibers found in the paper bag?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. The viscose fiber I found in the bag matched in all observable microscopic characteristics some of the viscose fibers found in the composition of this blanket. This would be the diameter, the diameter of that same fiber would have the same size of delustering markings, same shape, same form, and also same color.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, what about the green cotton fiber that you found in the paper bag, Mr. Stombaugh, how did that compare with the green cotton fiber--was it a green cotton fiber that your testimony mentioned?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; there were several light green cotton fibers.

Mr. EISENBERG. How did they compare with the green cotton fibers which are contained in the composition of the blanket?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. These matched in all observable microscopic characteristics.

Mr. EISENBERG. And those were what?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. The color and the amount of twist of the cotton fibers were the same as the color and twist found in these. Mainly the color is what we go by on cotton.

Mr. EISENBERG. Were they mercerized or unmercerized?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. They were not mercerized.

Mr. EISENBERG. How common is cotton as a fiber, Mr. Stombaugh?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Cotton is the most common fiber used.

Mr. EISENBERG. And what about nonmercerized cotton, as to commonness?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. You would find more unmercerized cotton in use than mercerized, because to mercerize cotton is an added production factor used in cotton.

Mr. EISENBERG. How great a variation do you get in degree of twist?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. You are referring to between mercerized and un----

Mr. EISENBERG. No; within unmercerized cotton.

Mr. STOMBAUGH. This would depend on the quality of the cotton and the length of the cotton also.

Mr. EISENBERG. But I mean as samples come across your desk in your office, or as you read about them in books, is there a great variation in twist or a small variation?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. It depends--there is a small variation but this would depend on the type of cotton. There are different types of cotton, and each is determined from the length of the individual cotton fiber.

Mr. EISENBERG. Could you tell what kind of cotton you were dealing with in the blanket?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; because here we are not dealing with a full-length cotton fiber. We are dealing with a fragment of a single fiber.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, could you determine whether there was a variation in the twist of the cotton fibers within the blanket itself as there was, you say, in the diameter of the viscose fibers?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. The twist seemed to coincide with the twist found in the cotton from the blanket.

Mr. EISENBERG. Yes. But looking just to the blanket now for a second, you said the brown viscose or the viscose generally in the blanket itself varied as to diameter. Did the cotton in the blanket vary within itself as to twist or was the cotton of a fairly uniform twist?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; it was fairly uniform twist.

Mr. EISENBERG. And you said the fibers you found, the green cotton fibers you found, in the bag were the same twist as the twist of the cottons which composed the blanket?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. That is correct.

Mr. EISENBERG. And just to tie this into the questions I was asking a few seconds ago, would this degree of twist be significant, that is can you determine under the microscope 4 different kinds of degrees of twist or 20--how many different degrees of twist can you determine under a microscope, just approximately?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Are you referring to the same type of cotton----

Mr. EISENBERG. Well, when you get a piece of cotton?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Or cotton as a whole?

Mr. EISENBERG. When you get a piece of cotton under the microscope and you don't know what type it is? I am referring to cotton as a whole.

Mr. STOMBAUGH. I see. The degree of twist could be--now if we are dealing with fresh cotton, cotton running right from the plant, then the degree of twist, this varies, and this could be used in the identification of the type of cotton. But in the manufacturing process quite frequently when the cotton is spun into yarns then this twist is affected.

Mr. EISENBERG. Well, at this point I am not interested in determining the type of cotton. What I am interested in is determining how significant the degree of twist is as an identifying factor.

Mr. STOMBAUGH. I would say no significance at all as far as the sole identifying characteristic goes, whether or not this cotton of this cotton has the same twist. The twist we use is for identification purposes only, supplementing other identifying characteristics.

Mr . EISENBERG. That is the only purpose I am interested in.

Mr . STOMBAUGH. Yes; that is the only purpose.

Mr . EISENBERG. But in getting to that, how valuable is it for identification purposes? I am curious as to how many--how much a twist can vary. As you pick up a random fiber, and put it under your microscope, I am interested in how much the twist can vary. For example, if there are only two possibilities, then it isn't too helpful that you get a match in twist, but if there are great variations in twist in cotton fibers as they come under your microscope, it would be helpful in making your identification.

Mr . STOMBAUGH. I see what you are getting at. There are great variations. Sometimes in a cotton fiber, the twist will be rather far apart. Other times it will be rather close together. This piece----

Mr. EISENBERG. So that the fibers, the cotton fibers, to begin with, matched in twist, that is, the cotton fibers you found in the paper bag matched the twist of the ones that are contained in the blanket, and you said they also matched in color?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. I would like to ask you the same question as to color that I asked you as to twist. How many different shades do you think you can distinguish under the microscope in a green cotton? Would the range be just 2 or 3 different shades, or do you think you could distinguish between 20 or 30 different types of green cotton if you laid them next to each other under the microscope?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; the range in green cotton fibers, for that matter in any color, is tremendous. This could go to 50 sometimes 100 different shades which you can distinguish under a microscope. To the naked eye, it would look as if it is just green. But you could take, say five different fabrics of the same type that have been dyed exactly the same color or rather you think they are the same shade, and put the individual fibers under the microscope and there will be a big difference noted in shades.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now were the green cotton fibers in the blanket uniform as to shade between themselves?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; these varied.

Mr. EISENBERG. To what extent?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. They go from a green to a very pale green.

Mr. EISENBERG. So that the----

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Might be seven or eight different shades.

Mr. EISENBERG. So when you say there is a match, you mean the green cotton fibers you found in the paper bag were within the spectrum of shades that are laid out in the green cotton fibers from the blanket--is that correct?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. No. I forget how many different shades of green I found in this blanket. Under the circumstances, I considered the exact number of no particular significance. But we will say it might be possibly eight different separate shades, and the fibers I found from the blanket matched some of these shades. Not all of them; but there might be a medium-green fiber that I found in the bag, which I matched with a medium-green fiber from this blanket. It might have been one that had a yellowish-green tinge to it, which I also matched with the yellowish-green tinged cotton fibers from the blanket.

So unless the colors match absolutely, there is no match.

Mr. EISENBERG. Do you recall how many green cotton fibers you found in the paper bag?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. I have here in my notes "several"--

Mr. EISENBERG. Yes?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. I have here in my notes "several light green cotton fibers," which would be approximately two or three.

Mr. EISENBERG. Do you recall whether they represented two or three different shades?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; they were all different from each other but each matched the cotton fibers in the blanket.

Mr. EISENBERG. So you had two or three cotton fibers of two or three shades of green in the bag, and they matched against these two or three of the seven or eight shades of green cotton which were in the blanket, is that a correct recapitulation?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes.

Mr. EISENBERG. And you say there are 50 to 100--approximately--green shades of cotton that can be distinguished under the microscope?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; I would say that is true. This would vary from dark green, of course, all the way up to light-pale green.

Mr. EISENBERG. Did you find anything else within the bag, Mr. Stombaugh?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. No, sir; that is all I found inside the bag.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, what do you think the degree of probability is, if you can form an opinion, that the fibers from the bag, fibers in the bag, ultimately came from the blanket?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. When you get into mathematical probabilities, it is something I stay away from, since in general there are too many unknown factors. All I would say here is that it is possible that these fibers could have come from this blanket, because this blanket is composed of brown and green woolen fibers, brown and green delustered viscose fibers, and brown and green cotton fibers.

Now these 3 different types of fibers have 6 different general colors, and if we would multiply that, say by a minimum of 5 different shades of each so you would have 30 different shades you are looking for, and 3 different types of fibers. Here we have only found 1 brown viscose fiber, and 2 or 3 light green cotton fibers. We found no brown cotton fibers, no green viscose fibers, and no woolen fibers.

So if I had found all of these then I would have been able to say these fibers probably had come from this blanket. But since I found so few, then I would say the possibility exists, these fibers could have come from this blanket.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, let me ask you a hypothetical question, Mr. Stombaugh. First, I hand you Commission Exhibit 139, which consists of a rifle found on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository Building, and I ask you, 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.

Mr. EISENBERG. Are there any further questions as to the blanket?

Mr. DULLES. Do you have any, Mr. Murray?

Mr. MURRAY. I have none, Mr. Dulles.

Mr. EISENBERG. Do you recognize Exhibit 139? Are you familiar with that?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; I am.

Mr. EISENBERG. Did you examine that in the laboratory?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; I did.

Mr. EISENBERG. Do you know when you made that examination?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. On the morning of November 23, 1963.

Mr. EISENBERG. Is your mark on it?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir; here is my mark.

Mr. EISENBERG. Which consists of your initials?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. My initials, and the date 11-23-63. Do you mind if I check to see if this is unloaded?

Mr. EISENBERG. Did you examine the rifle to determine whether it contained on its surface or crevices any hair or other debris?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; I did.

Mr. EISENBERG. Can you tell us how you made that examination?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir. The gun was to be treated for latent fingerprints also, so I wore a pair of white cotton gloves to protect any latents that might be present on the gun. I placed the gun under a low-powered microscope and examined the gun from the end of the barrel to the end of the stock, removing what fibers I could find from crevices adhering to the gun.

I noticed immediately upon receiving the gun that this gun had been dusted for latent fingerprints prior to my receiving it. Latent fingerprint powder was all over the gun; it was pretty well dusted off, and at the time I noted to myself that I doubted very much if there would be any fibers adhering to the outside of this gun--I possibly might find some in a crevice some place--because when the latent fingerprint man dusted this gun, apparently in Dallas, they use a little brush to dust with they would have dusted any fibers off the gun at the same time; so this I noted before I ever started to really examine the gun.

Mr. EISENBERG. Were you unhappy at all about that?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. I was; however, it is not uncommon for fingerprint processing to be given priority consideration. They wanted to know whether or not the gun contained any fibers to show that it had been stored in this blanket, and with all the obstructions and the crevices on the metal parts of this gun, ordinarily a fiber would adhere pretty well, unless you take a brush and brush it off, and then you brush it on the floor and it is lost.

Mr. EISENBERG. Who was "they," you said "they" wanted to know?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Well, this is our Dallas office. They sent the gun in wanting to know this fact.

Mr. EISENBERG. Proceed.

Mr. DULLES. It was dusted by the Dallas police, was it, first?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. I don't know who dusted it.

Mr. EISENBERG. For the record, I believe that will be shown later that it was dusted by Dallas police.

As far as you know, did it come into your office, into your laboratory before it went to the identification division, latent fingerprint section?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; I received this gun from Special Agent Vincent Drain of the Dallas FBI office. It was crated very well. I opened the crate myself and put my initials on the gun and at that time I noted it had been dusted for latent prints.

So I proceeded to pick off what fibers were left from the small crevices and small grease deposits which were left on the gun.

At this point of the butt plate, the end of the stock----

Mr. EISENBERG. Let's get that a little more specific if we can. Can you point to that again?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. In this area, the butt plate of the stock, this is a metal butt plate, you can see the jagged edge on it.

Mr. EISENBERG. That is on the left side of the butt plate?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. It is on the left side; yes.

Mr. EISENBERG. In approximately in the middle there is a jagged edge, jagged inside edge, where the butt plate comes into contact with the wood, is that what you are referring to?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; there is a jagged edge there. This area right here, according to my notes.

Mr. EISENBERG. Yes.

Mr. STOMBAUGH. I found a tiny tuft of fibers which had caught on that jagged edge, and then when the individual who dusted this dusted them, he just folded them down very neatly into the little crevice there, and they stayed. These I removed and put on a glass microscope slide, and marked this particular slide "No. 2," because this little group of fibers--little tuft of fibers, appeared to be fresh.

The fibers on the rest of the gun were either adhering to a greasy, oily deposit or jammed into a crevice and were very dirty and apparently very old.

You can look at a fiber and tell whether it has been beaten around or exposed much. These appeared to be fairly fresh.

Mr. EISENBERG. "These" being the ones that you found in the butt plate crevice?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; adhering to this small jagged edge.

Mr. EISENBERG. Before we get to those, were there any other fibers of value on the rest of the Exhibit 139?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; the other fibers I cleaned up, removed the grease and examined them but they were of no value. They were pretty well fragmented.

Mr. EISENBERG. You could not make a determination as to their nature?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. I could tell what type they were.

Mr. EISENBERG. Meaning textile type?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; such as wool, cotton, what-have-you, but the grease and the dirt had changed the colors which ruined the characteristics for comparison purposes.

Mr. EISENBERG. Could you tell whether they were old or new?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. They all appeared old.

Mr. EISENBERG. What about----

Mr. DULLES. What do you mean by old, 2 or 3 months old, 2 or 3 weeks old?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Well, a length of time, I would say that in excess of a month or 2 months.

Mr. DULLES. In that area?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. In that area or longer. They weren't recently put in there. Let's say that.

Mr. EISENBERG. What about the grease, did you attempt to examine the grease?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. No.

Mr. EISENBERG. Why was that?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. I could see no need of it at that time.

Mr. EISENBERG. Let's return then to the fibers which you referred to as being fresh, which you said you found in the crevice of the butt plate, and I will ask Mr. Dulles' question in reverse: What do you mean by fresh, why do you call these fresh?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. In the first place, this was just a small tuft. They were adhering to the gun on a small jagged edge. In other words, the gun had caught on a piece of fabric and pulled these fibers loose. 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. They were folded very neatly down in the crevice.

Mr. EISENBERG. Were these fibers in a position where they could have easily been knocked off by rough use?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; they were adhering to the edge rather tightly.

Mr. EISENBERG. In the crevice?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Well, it had the jagged edge sticking up and the fibers were folded around it and resting in the crevice.

Mr. DULLES. I think you testified, though, that might have been done in part by the dusting?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir; I believe when the fingerprintman dusted it he probably ran his brush along the metal portion here.

Mr. EISENBERG. Of the butt plate?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Of the butt plate, and at the time the brush folded these down into the crevice.

Mr. EISENBERG. What led you to the particular conclusion that they had been folded into the crevice by the dusting?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Because of the presence of fingerprint powder being down in and through the crevice here. It looked as if it had been dusted with a brush. You could make out the bristlemarks of the brush itself.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now assuming your conclusion is accurate that they were dusted into the crevice, and had not been in the crevice originally but had merely adhered to the jagged edge, how much--how rough a handling would it have taken to have gotten them loose from that jagged edge?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Well, I would imagine if one took a brush and started brushing pretty hard these would have worked loose and come out.

Mr. EISENBERG. Would the use of the weapon itself have jarred them loose?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. I doubt it. I doubt it.

Mr. EISENBERG. I am talking now about the jagged edge position, and not the crevice position.

Mr. STOMBAUGH. You mean breaking them loose? They were adhering to the jagged edge.

Mr. EISENBERG. Yes.

Mr. STOMBAUGH. It might, of course--there are a lot of factors here you don't know, but they were adhering pretty tightly to the gun. I believe through ordinary handling of the gun eventually they would have worked loose and fallen off.

Mr. EISENBERG. What I can't understand is, when you are talking about the handling of the gun are you talking about the position in which you found them, or are you talking about the position which you deduced they were in before you found them brushed into the crevice?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Well, both. The position I found them in. I had to take a pair of tweezers and work them out.

Mr. EISENBERG. Yes?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. And after I had the fibers lifted up which could have been the original position they were in, then I had to pull them off. They were wrapped around rather snugly to the sharp edge.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, returning once more to this question of freshness. Would you say they had been placed there within 1 hour, or 1 day, or 1 week of the time when you received the rifle or longer?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. I couldn't say in that regard to any period of time. I refer, by saying they appeared fresh, to the fact that the other fibers I removed from this gun were greasy, mashed, and broken, where these were fairly good long fibers. They were not dirty, with the exception of a little bit of fingerprint powder on them which I cleaned off, and the color was good. They were in good shape, not fragmented. They could conceivably have been put on 10 years ago and then the gun put aside and remain the same. Dust would have settled on them, would have changed their color a little bit, but as far as when they got on the gun, I wouldn't be able to say. This would just be speculation on my part.

Mr. EISENBERG. In other words, you concluded they were fresh--well, you said you thought they were fresh, Mr. Stombaugh, and I don't quite understand now whether you seem to be backing off a little from that?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; I am not trying to do that. I am trying to avoid a specific time element, since there are other factors which may enter. I couldn't--this is something that I won't even attempt to do, just say this was on here for 1 hour or 10 minutes, something like that.

But I would say these fibers were put on there in the recent past for this reason. If they had been put on there say 3, 4, 5 weeks or so ago, and the gun used every day, these fibers would have come off.

Am I making myself a little more clear?

Mr. EISENBERG. Yes; you are making yourself clear; yes.

Now, looking at Exhibit 139, the weapon, and Exhibit 140, the blanket, do you think it is possible that the bulge you described before, which you marked "C," might have been caused by some component part of 139, the rifle?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes. At the time I found the hump in the blanket which I believed you have marked point C.

Mr. EISENBERG. That is point C on the replica piece of paper you have folded up, marked Exhibit 663?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. I checked the telescopic sight on Exhibit 139, and noted that the approximate length and general shape of the scope----

Mr. DULLES. Exhibit 139 being the blanket?

Mr. EISENBERG. Being the rifle.

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Were approximately the same so far as length and shape went, and at the time I thought to myself it is quite possible the hump in the blanket could have been made by that telescopic sight.

Mr. EISENBERG. Did you attempt to match up the rifle into the blanket to see if that could be true?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; I didn't want to handle the rifle any more than possible. I took a ruler and measured the scope and then compared the measurement with the hump in the blanket and it was approximately the same.

Mr. EISENBERG. What about the relationship, the spatial relationship of the scope to the end of the gun, as compared with the spatial relationship of the hump in the blanket to the end of the blanket? Were those matching?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. From the way the blanket was folded at the time, and from measuring this, and not using the gun itself and putting it in contact with the blanket, just from measurements, I determined it is possible that the scope could have made the hump. In other words, the gun could have fitted in there. But I couldn't be absolutely certain on any of this. This is just from measurements.

Mr. EISENBERG. And visual comparison?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. And visual comparison; yes.

Mr. EISENBERG. Is there any further information you would like to give us concerning your examinations of the paper bag, the rifle, the blanket, or the shirt which we have discussed this morning?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Just the fibers I removed.

Mr. DULLES. Are you going to go into the relationship of the fibers that were found in the jagged edge?

Mr. EISENBERG. Yes. Mr. Stombaugh, did you attempt to determine the origin of the fibers which were caught in the butt plate of the rifle?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir; I did. I tried to match these fibers with the fibers in the blanket, and found that they had not originated from the blanket, because the cotton fibers were of entirely different colors. So I happened to think of the shirt and I made a known sample of the shirt fibers.

Mr. EISENBERG. What does that mean?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. I removed fibers from the shirt to determine the composition of it and also the colors. I found that the shirt was composed of dark-blue, grayish-black, and orangish-yellow cotton fibers, and that these were the same shades of fibers I had found on the butt plate of the gun.

Mr. DULLES. Did you find all three shades?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. All three shades; yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. All three shades were found on the fragments that were found in the butt of the gun?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes.

Mr. EISENBERG. Have you made photographs showing these, color photographs showing these?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir. Color photographs are very difficult to make microscopically because the color isn't always identical to what you see in the microscope. So these colors are slightly off.

Mr. EISENBERG. You have shown a chart captioned "Microphotograph Showing Match Between Orange-Yellow Cotton Fibers From Butt Plate of Assassination Rifle and Orange-Yellow Cotton Fibers From Oswald's Shirt." Did you take this photograph?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; it was taken under my supervision.

Mr. EISENBERG. It was taken under your supervision.

Mr. Chairman, may I submit this as 674.

Mr. DULLES. It will be admitted, 674.

(The item referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 674, and was received in evidence.)

Mr. EISENBERG. What is the magnification?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. I believe this was 400 also. I am not certain of this, because the shot itself has also been enlarged.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now you were discussing the reproduction of the color in the photomicrograph?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes, sir. These are the orangish-yellow fibers. The color is not exactly the same as what one would see under the microscope.

However, you can see that the fibers on both sides, namely, the fiber from the rifle here, and this----

Mr. DULLES. On the right-hand side----

Mr. STOMBAUGH. On the right-hand side.

Mr. DULLES. Of Exhibit 674?