Chairman STOKES begins the operation of the five minute rule, and himself questions Wecht, he asks, since Wecht was only one of nine forensic pathologists on the committee appointed panel to disagree with the panel's findings what basis other than scientific might these eight other panel members be making their decision - Wecht responds that Stokes would have to ask them but suggests the panel's finding could have been career motivated, saying that two of the panelists have served on other government appointed panels - Wecht can only speculate.
Stokes: "What should the average American believe," Wecht or the panel - Wecht sites poles in which a majority of Americans have found fault with the Warren Commission's findings and says he only hopes that they will believe him.
Representative SAMUEL L. DEVINE asks Wecht if reasonable men can come to different decisions without questioning the motives of the others - Wecht answers yes when the facts allow for different interpretations, however in this case Wecht does not feel the hard scientific facts of trajectories, men's positioning in the car, etc allow for divergent interpretations
Devine ends that he's sure the other members of the panel would disagree with him, that the facts aren't open to interpretation.
Representative CHRISTOPHER DODD asks Wecht if his expertise includes photo analysis and goes on to ask him about his analysis of the Zapruder film and its importance to his perception of what happened.
Dodd asks Wecht if he's ever witnessed a shooting or footage of shootings - Wecht says he's seen some footage of killings.
Dodd asks Wecht to what extent there is a body of knowledge about body movements upon being shot - Wecht responds there is some, that it depends on different factors such as position of the wound and position of the body itself, Wecht concedes that this is not a hard science.
Wecht responds it s all about the bullet's trajectories; the men's reactions don't make any difference.
Representative HAROLD E. FORD asks if Wecht privy to any other evidence that panel wouldn't have seen - Wecht responds no other than a blow up of the Zapruder film at Life magazine headquarters.
Representative MCKINNEY asks of the Zapruder film, the bullet trajectories, and the condition of the bullet which is the most significant to Wecht's disagreement with the single bullet theory - Wecht responds the trajectories would be first, followed by the condition of bullet, followed by the film - but adds that they are all integrated in his analysis.
McKinney confirms that based on the men's positioning in the Zapruder film that it is Wecht's opinion that the bullet's trajectories are impossible - Wecht says he has never heard any testimony of dramatic movement on the men's part to get them lined up so as to make the bullet's path possible.
Fithian asks if evidence becomes available that the fragments in Connally s wrist came from bullet 399 wouldn't this impair Wecht's interpretation - Wecht says test would have to be conducted on all bullet fragments for him to be swayed and other trajectory and damage tests would have to be conducted.
Fithian wants to know if analysis of film and other techniques of Wecht on which he bases his interpretation fall outside of the field of forensic pathology - Wecht responds no and explains that these are legitimate techniques of the field.
Representative HAROLD S. SAWYER asks what happened to the other bullet if there was more than two fired and then asks where this bullet would have been fired from - Wecht answers possibly from a lower floor of the book depository.
Sawyer says he's seen studies that show erratic behavior of bullets when hit twigs. Wecht's response cut off by end of tape.
Opens to Representative FLOYD FITHIAN questioning witness H.B. McCLAIN, Dallas Police motorcycle man, Fithian asks McClain if he saw any activity around the grassy knoll - McClain responds that he saw Officer HARGAS (?) going up the knoll
Dodd asks McClain if the dispatch radio at headquarters could receive two transmissions at once - McClain responds that it would happen often, mixing the transmissions together - Dodd asks McClain if he knew of any bell noises emanating from Dealey Plaza - McClain answers no.
Stokes recognizes McClain's opportunity to supplement his testimony - McClain declines to do so - Stokes calls a recess.
Hearings host PAUL DUKE voices over shot of hearing room with summary of the morning's testimony. Shot changes to Duke in broadcast booth, he introduces his panel CARL OGLESBY of the Assassination Information Bureau and JEREMIAH O'LEARY of the Washington Star who discusses the day's testimony thus far. Duke closes out the morning's coverage.
Shot returns to hearing room.
WETA logo. PBS funding credit. PBS logo. WETA logo. PBS funding credit.
Shot opens up to hearing room, Duke voices over an introduction to the afternoon's hearings, shot soon after switches to him, he goes on to sum up the morning's testimony. Duke again introduces panel, Oglesby and O'Leary, who discuss the conspiracy implications of the morning's testimony.
Duke introduces to the Committee Vice Chairman Representative RICHARDSON PREYER, Duke, Preyer and O'Leary have a long discussion about the morning's testimony, Preyer says he believes it pretty definitively implicates a second shooter and therefore a conspiracy, but he believes this conspiracy not to be planned by any large political organization, rather he suggests it was a conspiracy of "nuts", Preyer also defends the conclusions of the morning's witnesses, E. ASCHKENASY and MARK WEISS, against attacks O'Leary launches against them saying they made huge assumptions and produced results applicable only to laboratory conditions.
Duke introduces the afternoon's testimony and shot returns to hearings room.