◆ SpookStack

t . . ow N (. Lack of Unity Among Wolfer's Critics Wolfer's three critics, Harper, Bradford and MacDonell, have not unanimously expressed the same. conclusion nor underlying rea- sons, in support their mutual position critical of Wolfer's findings. There is only one common denominator among Wolfer's critics. All three have publicly rendered an opinion, after con- sidering certain material, which had the minimum effect of raising a question regarding the accuracy of Wolfer's conclusion. At Baxter Ward's hearing, Bradford expressed the opinion that the photographs he considered disclosed insufficient evidence of any specific identification characteristics requisite to a con- clusion that only one gun was involved. Therefore, in stating "no positive conclusion," Bradford in effect was saying nothing more than what any legitimate ballistics expert would have said after reviewing only photographs, even if those photographs depicted a number of bullets which had actually been fired from the same gun. Harper and MacDonell, however, concluded that two guns fired the bullets under consideration after alleging that photographs of such bullets (47 and 54) disclosed differences in certain identi- fication characteristics. These opinions are obviously critical of Wolferts conclusion and differ from the position expressed by Bradford. But both opinions of Harper and MacDonell were based upon photographs and not upon recognized and accepted identi- fication principles of microscopic examination. Criteria Espoused, Including Rifling Angles and Canneélures Only two criteria had been advanced by any "twogun" advocates intending to prove that People's 47 and 54 were not fired from the Same gun. These two criteria consist of rifling angles and can- nelures. The only criteria ever advanced by Harper was that Balliscan photographs of People's 47 and 54 disclosed a difference in the rifling angles of those bullets, and that this difference showed they could not have been fired by the same gun. The only support Harper ever obtained for this allegation regarding rifling angles came from MacDonell. This support was expressed in MacDonell's affidavit, which was prepared and presented at Baxter Ward's hearing in 4974. However, at Ward's hearing, unlike Harper, both Bradford and MacDonell, personally testified, with Bradford being first to so testify. During his testimony, Bradford expressly stated that he eould not discern any differences between rifling angles in photographs of People'ts 47 and 54. Then, when MacDonell testified, he stated he had noted a difference. But MacDonell equivecated as to whether or not any significance should be attached to this alleged difference in rifling angles. This was obviously a retreat by MacDonell from the emphasis he had placed on rifling angles in his prior affidavit, even though that affidavit, when read carefully, equivocates, because it establishes that MacDonell made numerous assumptions regarding the photographs he considered. . - 17 -