Skip to main content

Part 16: Gun – Physical Aspects


Parts 12 and 13 looked at the evidence, released by the authorities, about where the gun was found and how it got there. 

In Part 14 we saw how the Crown Office contradicted itself over the number of bullets recovered from McRae during his post mortem.

In Parts 15 and 16 we look at what else the released documents have to say about the gun itself, the bullets and spent cartridges.

Part 15 dealt with one key point in particular but also raised other points of interest (to me at least).

Here Part 16 will deal with physical aspects of the gun, the post being split into four sections,
- what gun is it?
- how this gun works
- the gun worked but ….
- implications for McRae case

What Gun Is It?

macrae 2

In their 1990 book published 15 years before Northern Constabulary released photographs of the gun and details of the  firearms testing, Scott and Macleay claimed that the revolver was from 1948 or earlier. [Tartan Terrorism and the Anglo-American State by Andrew Murray Scott and Iain MacLeay, Mainstream Publishing (1990); the relevant chapter is available here]

They were correct that it was earlier than 1948 but were much further out than they could ever have imagined.

The gun was at least 117 years old when it was used to kill Willie McRae.

I am utterly confident that the revolver found was a Smith & Wesson Model 1, 2nd issue, produced no later than 1868 [between 1860 and 1868].

I’ll explain soon why I am so confident but I am not alone.  In early January this year, and totally independently, Robert Lewis blogged about McRae and came to a very similar conclusion.  He wrote,

The pistol MacRae is alleged to have owned, and shot himself with, turns out to be a Smith and Wesson Model 1, of the first or second run. That means it was at least 117 years old.

I believe we can rule out the 1st issue of the Model 1.

What Led Me to this Model?
Strathclyde Police’s firearms report was critical.  They described the gun as,

A 7 chamber, top hinged, external hammer, single action revolver of American manufacture (Smith & Wesson) designed to chamber .22 short rim fire cartridges. It bore the serial number 90686 and was in fair outward condition.

A Google search for
Smith and Wesson 7 chamber .22 top hinged single action
gave me the Wikipedia’s page on the Model 1 as the top hit.  When I saw photos I knew I had found the gun.  Had I searched with ‘Smith & Wesson’ I would have taken longer to get home.

The next image – of an Model 1 2nd issue - was on that page and below that pic 6 of McRae's gun, shown above, tweaked to show just the revolver.

Part 16 SW M1 2I Mike HelmsA
Part 16 Macrae 2MOD
Other than the engraving and the handle in the McRae gun they look identical.

On the next two images I have highlighted 7 small features which are identical.

Part 16 SW M1 2I Mike HelmsARinged
Part 16 Macrae 2MODRinged
Don’t be put off by the engraving on the McRae gun.  Smith & Wesson made specials.  For every two hundred or so standard Model 1 revolvers, one or two were factory original full silver plated finish and/or ivory grips. 

Beyond this too were some which were factory engraved.  Many photos of such are around, for example,
SmithWessonModel12ndIssueA
this gun which is engraved and has a pearl handle.

Welsh described the McRae gun as

His partner Welsh was aware that Macrae possessed a small calibre, possibly .22 revolver, which was chrome, silver finish with a pearl handle.[Macrae A syn]

Unfortunately, the McRae photo quality is so poor that we cannot tell if the handle is light wood, ivory or pearl.

But handle apart I hope you’ll agree that the McRae gun matches those displayed here.

The Model 1 was manufactured between 1857 and 1882, there being three variants - 1st, 2nd and 3rd issues.

The 1st issue can be ruled out for two reasons.  Firstly the hammer, in the 1st issue, was of two part construction whereas the 2nd issue was a one-piece hammer

Part 16 SWModel1I1 Hammer
Part 16 SW M1 I2 Hammer


                



          1st issue                         2nd issue

and secondly on the basis of serial number. 

Only about 12,000 1st issues were made (between 1857 and 1860, serial numbers 1 to abt 12,000) and the 2nd issue serial numbers followed on from those used for the 1st issue (between 1860 and 1868, about 12,000 to about 120,000).

The McRae gun’s serial number, 90686, falls outwith the 1st issue and towards the top of the 2nd issue production.

But the serial numbers for the 3rd issue were reset and they ran from 1 to about 131,000. The McRae gun’s number would fit within this range too.

Fortunately the 3rd issue incorporated a  design change which rules this out as an option.  The grip design was more curved as shown below.

Part 16 SW M1 I3 Grip
Part 16 SW M1 I2 Grip
                 2nd issue                                                                       3rd issue
  
Therefore, I am convinced that the gun which killed Willie McRae was a Smith & Wesson Model 1 2nd Issue 7 shot, top hinged, external hammer, single action revolver designed to fire 0.22 rim fire cartridges made between 1860 and 1868. 

These guns were not the first but were early adopters of self-contained cartridges i.e. where all the components necessary to fire the projectile were contained within one package.

How This Gun Works
The McRae gun is a single action revolver which, possibly counter-intuitively, requires two actions to fire whereas a dual action revolver requires only one action to fire!

The two actions for the Smith & Wesson Model 1 are ,
- pull back the hammer which rotates the cylinder and puts the next bullet to be fired in the correct position (i.e lined up with the barrel)
- squeeze the trigger which releases the hammer.  This initiates the series of actions which result in the bullet being expelled from the cylinder and barrel

In this type of the gun the trigger has only one action, hence single action.

With a dual action gun, squeezing the trigger pulls the hammer back, rotates the cylinder into position and initiates the firing sequence.  Therefore, the trigger alone does the two actions listed above for McRae’s gun.  Hence dual action.

McRae’s gun uses .22 ammunition.  The '.22' refers to the maximum diameter of the cartridge in inches.  Therefore, McRae’s gun uses cartridges which are .22 inch in diameter (i.e. 0.22 x 25.4mm = 5.6mm)

The gun worked but ….
That the gun worked is obvious, unfortunately, but one part was so worn that it didn’t function correctly.

I mentioned in the previous section that pulling back on the hammer should rotate the cylinder and put the next bullet in line with the barrel but that did not work in McRae’s gun.

Part 16 Macrae R E2 Mod 1
Therefore, the killing gun required three actions to fire:
- pull back the hammer
- rotate the cylinder
- pull trigger

Now this extra step is clearly no show-stopper.  Whoever pulled the trigger went through this process.  The gun works.

But there might be another complication.  From the admittedly small amount of reading on revolvers I think there are two aspects of cylinder rotation to consider.  The first I have already described: the cylinder did not move on its own and so had to be manually placed in position.  The second is that there is a mechanical stop which maintains the cylinder in the correct position.  I don’t know if this was part of the Smith & Wesson Model 1 2nd issue and, if it was, I don’t know if it was working.

Why is this important?

Well, if it worked then once the cylinder was rotated into position it would be held there and the alignment of cartridge and barrel would be maintained.  If not present, or present and not working, would mean that there was no fool-proof way of aligning the cylinder correctly and no way of keeping it in that position until fired.

The diagrams below show the three possibilities proper alignment, large misalignment, and slight mis-alignment.

Part 16 Misaligned Cartridge
Part 16 Aligned Cartridge 1
Part 16 Partially Misaligned Cartridge

With proper alignment the orange cartridge is symmetrically aligned with the green barrel and the hammer’s pin (black spot) strikes the cartridge on the rim (hence rim fire cartridges) and detonation and firing occur properly.

When the cartridge and barrel are badly misaligned the  pin misses the rim of the cartridge and, clearly, no detonation can occur.

With partial misalignment the rim can be struck with the possibility of detonation and firing.  What happens then, I don’t know.


Implications for the McRae Case
There is nothing about the gun, its age, type, mechanism or flaws which favour suicide over murder or the reverse.  I’ve researched it out of interest rather than with any hope or expectation that I would uncover an important fact.

The gun killed McRae.

There are many unanswered questions though:
- why did he have a gun?
- why such an old gun?
- why such a small and low-powered gun?
- where did he get it?
- when did he get it?
- where did he get the ammunition




[originally posted 9 February 2015]
__________________________________________________________________
If you have thoughts, or more, feel free to:
email me at calumsblogATgmailDOTcom or
tweet me at @calumcarr
 

© CalumCarr 2015
__________________________________________________________________
COPYRIGHT
Copyright over this article is retained by me, CalumCarr

Please feel free to reproduce extracts and provided you attribute the words and images to me taking into account the provisos below.

If you wish to use more than one quarter of the article then contact me for permission at calumsblogATgmailDOTcom.

I, CalumCarr retain the rights to the three diagrams of cartridge and barrel
The rights to the other images used remain with Police Scotland (McRae gun and documents), Mike Helms (where shown) and other unknown.

____________________________________________________________


Popular posts from this blog

Part 1: Introduction

Willie McRae: born 18 May 1923; died 7 April 1985 This we know for certain but much else in his life and death is open to conjecture. What is fact or fiction? Truth or lies? Openness or obfuscation? Will we ever know? Probably not but in this series – may be 1 post or 20 posts depending on my enthusiasm – I want to look back and review his story.  The best way to ensure I keep going with my review is to write and post as I go on.   You, my readers, are key to my continuing! I must have read about Willie in the 80s but I only became aware of him on Sunday past when the Sunday Express published a story more than 24 years after his death. [ Original source ; archived source ] Of course, we note the very important, … it was claimed last night. There’s nothing definite here but you can start to see that McRae’s life might not be straightforward. Within the rest of the article there is more. So here we have claims that he was killed: - by drug smugglers - by security services...

Part 25: Special Branch – Official View

Introduction In Part 24 I said that I believed any active involvement of the Special Branch* with Willie McRae was sufficient for an FAI to be held. (* see end of post)   In Part 26 we’ll look at evidence from a retired policeman, Donald Morrison, who claims Special Branch were involved up to, at least, the day McRae left Glasgow, 5 April 1985. Here you get to see what the police and Crown Office have said about Special Branch and McRae. Before we go there, I invite you to read Part 23, if you haven’t yet done so.  Last Sunday, 29 March, the Sunday Herald published an article highlighting the new campaign for a Fatal Accident Inquiry to be held into McRae’s death.  The article was light on information until the last sentence in which the Crown Office appears to have set its face against holding an FAI …. ever.  The Crown Office is quoted as saying, Crown Counsel are satisfied with the extensive investigations into the death of William Macra...

Part 5: Which Site?

Strange as it may seem there is even doubt about where Willie McRae’s car came off the road. In this 5th post, but first post of any real depth, we shall - look in great detail at all possible roadside features which could be close to the crash site, - see the sites themselves in aerial and streetview mode, - see old video of the two sites, - see what physical evidence there is to tie each site to the actual crash site, - seen how the official and Coutts site came to be - pose two major questions - and a wee bit more and I will be only scratching the surface of this mystery. Before we start we should probably take a little detour to see how the official and Coutts site came to be. Alex Main in the Scotsman wrote about this [highlighted area] on 7 April 1987. and thus the official and Coutts’ sites were born ….. …. and still we talk of them! Again I must stress that I come to this with no agenda.  I don’t know what happened to Willie McRae: this and subsequent posts are my journey o...