Interior Ballistic Markings

[Erik Narramore]

A comment from Mike Teskowitz on the Blue Forum:

One thing which becomes astonishingly clear, is that a total of five ammunition cartridge cases recovered from the scene by police, had got double magazine insertion marks on them, ,all the other 20 casings only had one set of such marks!

What this suggests to me, the prior to the shootings a possibility that at least five live rounds were either loaded into the ammunition magazine belongint to the .22 Anshuzt rifle, then removed, and subsequently reloaded and potentially fired in the self same rifle, or that at one time or another, these 5 double marked bullet cases, might possibly have been loaded in the ammunition magazine belonging to Anthony Pargeters .22 bolt action rifle, or as the case may be, been loaded but unfired in one of the two rifles, unloaded and reloaded into the other .22 rifle..

Alternatively, there now exists a very strong possibility, that at least 14 (crime scene) spent cartridge cases, were deliberately substituted with the purpose of hiding the fact that at least one other gun was used in this shooting trajedy - collected from behind one of the barns where Jeremy and Anthony Pargeter took part in shooting practice on the penultimate week-end before the date of the shootings!

There exists a batch of 14 spent cartridge cases (MDF/100) in storage at Huntingdon Laboratory - the 14 cartridge cases, belong to one of the other guns used in the farmhouse massacre...

This relates to part of Malcolm Fletcher's statement, which is as follows:

The twenty-five cartridge cases (24) to (44) and (47) and (48) are the same type as the cartridge cases used in the cartridges (part of 51) and (93).  After a successful microscopical comparison I am satisfied that these twenty-five cartridge cases were fired in the rifle (18).  Furthermore, the cartridge cases (29), (38), (41), (42) and (44) bear marks consistent with them having been loaded into the magazine of the rifle (18) twice.

I have some observations to make:

(i). I am open to correction, but it appears that the rifle magazine has not been separately exhibited.  I am surprised at this given what Mr Fletcher states above.

(ii). Mr Fletcher does not tell us on what basis he has decided that the twenty-five cartridges were fired from the rifle using a microscopical comparison.  A cartridge would bear various tool marks, as well as unique/random markings that occur by chance, but some of these must have been marks that prove the cartridge was fired at all, never mind from a particular weapon: including breech face marks, firing pin impressions and chamber marks.  No mention is made of these.

(iii). Mr Fletcher does not refer to "double magazine insertion marks".  Rather, he refers to markings on five of the cartridges that are consistent with them having been loaded into the magazine of the rifle twice.  The difference between 'double' and 'twice' is that 'double' implies a replication of the forensic markings, whereas twice need not imply this, though could.

(iv). In regard to the cartridges marked twice, referred to above:

(a). Mr Fletcher does not tell us exactly what these markings were.  It's likely they were striated markings on the periphery of each cartridge in two different places, but he doesn't say, nor does he provide a comparison with markings found on the other twenty cartridges;

(b). I'm not sure we can assume that the other twenty cartridges were loaded in the magazine only once.  It is surely possible that some of them were loaded in the magazine more than once, and any of the twenty-five could even have been loaded more than twice.  It all depends on whether multiple markings would be apparent under microscopic examination, of which we cannot be certain given that there is a minimum peripheral space on each cartridge and markings could overlap.  But again, we do not know what Mr Fletcher found, since he does not tell us;

(c). there is also the question of how the magazine would make the markings.  Markings would be made due to loading the cartridge on the magazine, but must also be made due to the mechanical action of stripping the cartridge up through the magazine before it is chambered.  Mr Fletcher makes no mention of this.  Can we assume that 'stripping' marks from the magazine would more or less replicate exactly the 'loading' marks, hence the 'stripping' and 'loading' markings would be more or less indistinguishable from each other?  That seems possible but it is not certain.