Oswald in the doorway: the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, by Ralph Cinque

This is a followup to my post about Nick McDonald. First, he said that Oswald had the gun tucked in his belt. That's the word he used: belt. It so happens that I own a Smith and Wesson snub-nose 38 revolver, like Oswald's. 

I have to think that although McDonald said "belt" but that Oswald had the gun tucked in his pants. I've tried it both ways, and it is much more secure being tucked into the pants than the belt. I also observe that it's much more common for it to be tucked into the pants than the belt. 

Second, as told in the video, McDonald said that they were grappling over the gun and then Oswald punched him in the nose with his left hand, but in other accounts that he gave, McDonald said that the punch came first.

Third, McDonald's claim of wedging the web of his hand between the hammer and the primer to prevent it from firing I now categorically reject. I say: no way, no how. And it's because I tried it. 

Note that it's impossible until you start pulling the hammer back because there's no space there; there's no opening.  It is inconceivable to me that McDonald would have, in the midst of all the chaos and the speed of it, the presence of mind to wedge his hand in there. He wouldn't even have had time to think that fast. Furthermore, he couldn't see what he was doing. You're talking about a very small space, and the idea that he could wedge the web of his hand into it without looking is preposterous. All that's left is to assume that it happened spontaneously and accidentally, but that too seems pretty far-fetched and awfully lucky.  

But, I don't buy it because I tried it, and it is too painful. I was holding the hammer back with my thumb, but as soon as I started releasing it, and I don't mean very much but rather in a controlled and limited way, IT HURT. It hurt a lot. 

But supposedly, Oswald wasn't doing that; he just pulled the trigger, which would have meant that the full force of the hammer would have slammed into McDonald's delicate thin skin. THAT WOULD HAVE HURT LIKE HELL. He would have reacted. He would have screamed. He definitely would have had an audible and startled reaction. But, he didn't say anything about that, and neither did anyone else, even though at that point in time, other cops were right there.  

So, this "wedging of the web" of his hand story is a lie. I'm sure of that. He didn't get his hand between the hammer and the primer. That wouldn't have stopped Oswald from squeezing the trigger, and that hammer would have slammed into his skin with excruciating pain, which obviously didn't happen.

And remember that the original story was that the gun misfired. But then the testimony of FBI firearms expert Courtland Cunningham straightened that out.

Mr. Eisenberg

Mr. Cunningham, returning to Exhibit 145, do either of the two cartridges in Exhibit 145 bear any signs of having suffered an impact from the firing pin in the revolver, Exhibit 143?

Mr. Cunningham

An examination of these two cartridges, the primers of these two cartridges, reveals no marks that could be associated with the firing pin in Commission Exhibit 143, or any other weapon.

Mr. Eisenberg

Are there any nicks on either of those cartridges?

Mr. Cunningham

Yes. There is a small nick, an indentation, up near the edge of the primer in the Remington-Peters .38 Special cartridge.

Mr. Eisenberg

Could this nick have been caused by the firing pin?

Mr. Cunningham

There was no indication, from an examination, that that nick had been so caused by a firing pin. First of all, it is in the wrong position, it is not in the centre of the primer. And, also, a microscopic examination of that nick gave no indication that it was made by a firing pin.

So despite the DPD’s assertion that the hammer of “Oswald’s” revolver had struck the firing pin and misfired, Cunningham could find no evidence that this was the cause of the nick on the cartridge in question. So if the firing pin didn’t cause the nick, then what did? In my opinion, the DPD deliberately added the nick to the cartridge, to make it look as if Oswald had tried to shoot McDonald. Unless of course, we are to believe it was just a coincidence that the aforementioned witnesses heard what they believed to be the snap of the hammer, and there also just happened to be a nick in one of the cartridges. If you ask me, I think that notion is completely absurd.  

So, the bottom line is that the wedging of the web of the hand story is a lie, and the claim that the gun misfired is a lie, and it means that Oswald never tried to shoot Officer McDonald. I know that several people claimed to hear such a thing, which was usually described as a "snap." But, whatever they heard, it was something else relating to the scuffle. It was not Oswald's gun being fired.