Mr. Cunningham.

Thank you, but it is not.

Representative Boggs.

How much has this barrel been cut off?

Mr. Cunningham.

About 2 3/4 inches. You measure the length of the barrel from--you see the cylinder---

Representative Boggs.

Yes.

Mr. Cunningham.

And the portion coming out from the frame, that is a portion of the barrel. And the barrel is measured from there to the muzzle. And the barrel now is 2 1/4 inches long. The original barrel was 5 inches long--or at least it is similar to the model that would have a 5-inch barrel.

Representative Boggs.

What is the advantage of reducing the length of the barrel?

Mr. Cunningham.

Two things--sales appeal and concealment.

Representative Boggs.

Does it affect the firing quality of the weapon?

Mr. Cunningham.

It affects your accuracy inasmuch as it cuts down on your sight radius. Your longer barrel will be more accurate than a shorter barrel, due to the longer sight radius. The reason that rifles are inherently more accurate than a hand weapon is due, in part, to the longer sight radius. That is the reason the farther you can get away from the sight when you are firing a revolver, the more accurate. Lengthening your sight radius will increase the accuracy.

Mr. Rhyne.

Based on your experience in your study of these bullets, do you have an opinion as to whether or not they were fired by this gun?

Mr. Cunningham.

No, sir; I cannot determine that.

Mr. Rhyne.

You have no opinion at all?

Mr. Cunningham.

The only thing I can testify to, is they could have, on the basis of the rifling characteristics--they could. have been. However, no conclusion could be reached from an actual comparison of these bullets with test bullets obtained from that gun.

Mr. Rhyne.

Even though there are a lot of similar markings.

Mr. Cunningham.

There are not; no, sir. There are not a lot of similar markings. They are similar. The rifling characteristics, are the same, or similar. But, in the individual characteristic marks, there are not a lot of similarities. There are not sufficient similarities to effect an identification.

Representative Boggs.

Stating Mr. Rhyne's question negatively, these bullets could have been fired by another weapon?

Mr. Cunningham.

That is correct. Either this weapon or another weapon which has the same rifling characteristics.

Representative Ford.

You are limiting that to the bullets now?

Mr. Cunningham.

The bullets.

Mr. Rhyne.

Yes; my question related just to the bullets.

Mr. Cunningham.

I identified the cartridge cases.

Mr. Rhyne.

He was positive about the cartridge cases, but not about the bullets.

Representative Boggs.

Now, would it be likely to find these cartridge cases, which you can positively identify as having been fired from this weapon--would it be likely that these bullets which you cannot identify as having been fired from this weapon--would it be likely that they would be fired from another weapon under those circumstances?

Mr. Cunningham.

Well, that, sir, depends on other extraneous facts other than my comparisons and examinations. In other words, I can only testify to what I actually found from an examination and comparison of those bullets with these test bullets from that gun. And as to anything else, I cannot testify. I mean--that would be based upon other facts.

Mr. Eisenberg.

Carrying some of these questions a little bit further, Mr. Cunningham, you say that this bullet could have been fired from this gun, and was fired from a gun with these rifling characteristics?

Mr. Cunningham.

Yes.

Mr. Eisenberg.

Which you said were five lands, five grooves, right twist?

Mr. Cunningham.

Yes.