Part 55

Mr. STERN. Tell us more about what----

Mr. LAWSON. He was brought in through the crowd and through a side door there, through the corridors, brought in, and I believe the chief and the district attorney each gave statements, and Oswald was asked a few questions then by the press, but I don't recall of it except that he was whisked out again fairly rapidly after that.

Mr. STERN. Do you remember what any of the questions were and his responses?

Mr. LAWSON. No, I don't.

Mr. STERN. How many people were in this room?

Mr. LAWSON. It was overflowing. You could hardly hear because everyone was shouting questions. That is why I don't remember what the specific questions were and what his responses were.

Mr. STERN. Do you have any impression why this interview was conducted?

Mr. LAWSON. No; I do not.

Mr. STERN. Do you recall anything else that was said by the eyewitness that Mr. Sorrels had arranged to be brought in for the showup, anything else that he said while he was standing talking to you or Mr. Sorrels or while Oswald and others were on the----

Mr. LAWSON. No; I don't.

Mr. STERN. Then shortly after this showup, or shortly after this interview in the showup room, you left for Washington, I take it?

Mr. LAWSON. Yes; there had been quite a bit of discussion during the evening as to what evidence they had up to this time, the rifle, clothing, et cetera, would be brought to Washington to the FBI lab to be worked on, or whether the police would keep it in their custody for a little while longer for their investigation, and there was quite a bit of discussion by various people all evening long.

And when it was finally decided it would be released by the Dallas police, the rifle and other evidence to return to Washington, Inspector Kelley told me to return on the special plane that was flying the evidence and the accompanying FBI agent back to Washington.

Mr. DULLES. Was the evidence turned over to you or the FBI?

Mr. LAWSON. To the FBI, sir. I just returned on the plane.

Mr. STERN. Was there at one point a reluctance on the part of the Dallas police to release the evidence?

Mr. LAWSON. Yes, sir. They felt, from what I overheard, they felt they might be able to get an identification of the rifle from one of the local gunshops. There were various leads that they wanted to follow out on that rifle that evening and the next day. I believe there was some talk that they couldn't locate some of the gunshop owners, and some of the other things they wanted to do. So they wished to keep this rifle for a day or so and then release it.

Mr. STERN. I am told this has been covered with other witnesses, so there is no need to pursue it. I have nothing further.

Representative FORD. How long was this interview where Oswald was present?

Mr. LAWSON. The press interview, sir?

Representative FORD. How long was he before the press?

Mr. LAWSON. I would say 5 minutes at the most.

Representative FORD. I have no other questions.

Mr. DULLES. I have no other questions.

Representative FORD. Is that all, Mr. Stern?

Mr. STERN. Yes, sir.

Representative FORD. Thank you very much, Mr. Lawson, you have been very helpful.

Mr. DULLES. We appreciate it very much.

(Whereupon, at 5:35 p.m., the President's Commission recessed.)

_Thursday, April 30, 1964_

TESTIMONY OF ALWYN COLE

The President's Commission met at 9:25 a.m. on April 30, 1964, at 200 Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C.

Present were Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman; Senator John Sherman Cooper, Representative Gerald R. Ford, and John J. McCloy, members.

Also present were J. Lee Rankin, general counsel; and Melvin Aron Eisenberg, assistant counsel.

The CHAIRMAN. The Commission will be in order.

The purpose, Mr. Cole, of today's hearing is to take the testimony of Mr. James C. Cadigan and yourself. Mr. Cadigan is a questioned documents expert of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and as we all know, you are a questioned documents expert of the Department of the Treasury. We desire your testimony for technical assistance to the Commission in connection with the papers used in this hearing concerning the assassination.

Mr. COLE. I understand.

The CHAIRMAN. Would you raise your right hand and be sworn, please?

Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give before this Commission shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Mr. COLE. I do.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Eisenberg, you may conduct the examination.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, could you state your full name, please?

Mr. COLE. That is Alwyn Cole.

The CHAIRMAN. I am obliged to spend the morning with the Court. We are hearing arguments today and when I leave, in a short time, Congressman Ford will preside at the meeting and conduct it.

Mr. EISENBERG. What is your position, Mr. Cole?

Mr. COLE. I am employed as examiner of questioned documents with the U.S. Treasury Department.

Mr. EISENBERG. Can you state your specific duties in this position?

Mr. COLE. I am required to examine any document in which the Treasury Department is interested when a question arises about the genuineness of the document or the identity of any of its parts. A good deal of this work includes the identification of handwriting.

Mr. EISENBERG. From what sources is work referred to your laboratory, Mr. Cole?

Mr. COLE. From the several divisions of the Office of the Treasury of the United States, and from the various Bureaus of the Treasury Department, including the enforcement agencies: Secret Service, narcotics, customs, internal revenue service.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, can you tell us how you prepared yourself to carry on this work of questioned documents examination?

Mr. COLE. I served an apprenticeship of 6 years under Mr. Burt Farrar from 1929 to 1935. Mr. Farrar at that time was the document examiner for the Treasury Department, and at the time of my association with him he had had over 40 years of experience in the work.

Under Mr. Farrar's tutelage I studied the leading textbooks on the subject of questioned documents, which includes handwriting identification, and I received from him cases for practice examination of progressively increasing difficulty, made these examinations, prepared reports for his review, and also during this period I had assignments to other Government laboratories, those of the Bureau of Engraving and Printing and the Government Printing Office, and I had close association with other technical workers in the government service.

I succeeded Mr. Farrar in 1935, and I have had daily practical contact with questioned problems from 1929 to the present date.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, are you a member of any associations of persons engaged in questioned documents examination?

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; I am.

Mr. EISENBERG. Could you state those positions?

Mr. COLE. I am a member of the American Society of Questioned Document Examiners, of the International Association for Identification, and of the American Academy of Forensic Science.

Mr. EISENBERG. Do you give instructions to others in this work, Mr. Cole?

Mr. COLE. I do. I am an instructor at the Treasury Department Law Enforcement Officer Training School.

Mr. EISENBERG. Have you had occasion to testify in Federal or other courts?

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; I have, many times.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I ask that this witness be permitted to give expert testimony on the subject of questioned documents.

The CHAIRMAN. The witness is qualified.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, I now show you a photograph of an envelope and a purchase order. The envelope is addressed to Klein's, in Chicago, from one "A. Hidell," and the purchase order, which is included in the photograph, is an order also addressed to Klein's from "A. Hidell," and I ask you whether you have examined this photograph.

Mr. COLE. I have.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have this admitted into evidence as Commission Exhibit 773?

The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted.

(Commission Exhibit No. 773 was marked and received in evidence.)

Mr. EISENBERG. For the record, this photograph was produced from a roll of microfilm in the possession of Klein's, a Chicago firm which sells weapons of various types, and which sold the assassination weapon.

Now, Mr. Cole, I am going to hand you a group of documents which I will identify for the record.

The first is an application form to Cosmos Shipping Co., Inc., signed Lee H. Oswald, and containing handprinting and cursive writing. Have you examined that document, Mr. Cole?

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this admitted as Commission Exhibit 774, Mr. Chairman?

The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted.

(Commission Exhibit No. 774 was marked and received in evidence.)

The CHAIRMAN. I wonder if it might not be better to put the tab on the document itself because someone in handling it might take it out of the envelope.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. EISENBERG. The second document is a letter addressed to the American Embassy, entitled "Affidavit of Support," and signed Lee H. Oswald.

Mr. COLE. I have examined this document.

Mr. EISENBERG. I would like that admitted as 775, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted.

(Commission Exhibit No. 775 was marked and received in evidence.)

Mr. EISENBERG. The third is a group of checks made payable to the order of Lee H. Oswald, and the company listed on the top of the check is Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall, Inc. These checks are endorsed on the back "Lee H. Oswald," and I ask you whether you have examined these documents?

Mr. COLE. I have examined these documents.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may these be admitted as 776?

The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted.

(Commission Exhibit 776 was marked and received in evidence.)

Mr. EISENBERG. Here I would like to mark the envelope.

The fourth item is a library card for the New Orleans Parish, or the Orleans Parish, and the signature is Lee H. Oswald.

Mr. COLE. I have examined this document.

Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this admitted as 777?

The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted.

(Commission Exhibit No. 777 was marked and received in evidence.)

Mr. EISENBERG. The next item consists of photographs of two letters to the Department of State, both concerning payments on loans, repayments of loans, and both signed "Lee H. Oswald," and I ask whether you have examined these documents?

Mr. COLE. I have examined these photographs.

Mr. EISENBERG. May these be admitted as 778?

The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted.

(Commission Exhibit No. 778 was marked and received in evidence.)

Mr. EISENBERG. Next are two pages of writing on lined and holed paper entitled "The Communist Party of the United States Has Betrayed Itself!" and numbered "1" and "2," with some discoloration. Mr. Cole, have you examined those?

Mr. COLE. I have examined these. The discoloration mentioned was on the documents when I first saw them.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may these be admitted as 779?

The CHAIRMAN. Admitted.

(Commission Exhibit No. 779 was marked and received in evidence.)

Mr. EISENBERG. Next is a file entitled "Oswald, Lee Harvey, USMC"--which stands for Marine Corps--serial number or file number 1653230, and then another number appears, 8812, and this has various writing, certain of which are signed by Lee H. Oswald, together with letters to Lee H. Oswald, and I ask you if you have examined this file, Mr. Cole?

Mr. COLE. Yes; I have.

Mr. EISENBERG. May this be admitted as 780, Mr. Chairman?

The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted.

(Commission Exhibit No. 780 was marked and received in evidence.)

Mr. EISENBERG. Next is a passport application signed "Lee H. Oswald," dated in the upper right "Passport Issued June 25, 1963," and there are other dates which appear--principally June 24, 1963--in other portions of the application. Mr. Cole, have you examined that?

Mr. COLE. I have examined this document.

Mr. EISENBERG. May I have this admitted as 781, Mr. Chairman?

The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted.

(Commission Exhibit No. 781 was marked, and received into evidence.)

Mr. EISENBERG. Next is a letter entitled "Dear Sirs: This is in regard to my wife's file" and so forth, addressed apparently to the Immigration and Naturalization Offices in San Antonio, Tex., signed "Lee H. Oswald," together with another such letter addressed to the same--addressed to Dallas, Tex., the Office of Immigration and Naturalization, Dallas, Tex., signed "Lee H. Oswald," and a third letter to Room 1402, Rio Grande Building, 251 North Field Street.

These letters, all signed "Lee H. Oswald", and all having to do with aspects of immigration and naturalization, are entitled or numbered on the backs respectively 00645, dated July 5, 00146, dated--that is July 5, 1962, in the first--00146, dated July----

Mr. COLE. I believe it is 6.

Mr. EISENBERG. July 6, 1962, and 010156, dated July 10, 1962. Have you examined these three documents?

Mr. COLE. I have.

Mr. EISENBERG. May these be admitted as 782A, 782B, and 782C, Mr. Chairman?

The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted under those numbers.

Mr. EISENBERG. And finally, an item consisting of two subitems, one a short note signed "Lee H. Oswald" and beginning, "Please enroll me as an associate member at $2.00," relating to the ACLU, and the second item being an application to the American Civil Liberties Union national office, "Please enroll me as a new member of the ACLU," name printed "Lee H. Oswald," and I ask you whether you have examined these two items.

Mr. COLE. I have.

Mr. EISENBERG. May these be admitted under the common caption 783?

The CHAIRMAN. They may be admitted.

(Commission Exhibits Nos. 782A, 782B, 782C, and 783 were marked and received in evidence.)

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Cole, have you compared the documents 774-783, all signed "Lee H. Oswald," with the document 773, the photograph of a purchase order to Klein's Sporting Goods, for purposes of determining whether the author of the documents 774-783 also authored the document 773?

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; I have.

Mr. EISENBERG. What is your conclusion?

Mr. COLE. It is my conclusion that the author of the standard writing bearing the exhibit numbers which you just related----

Mr. EISENBERG. 774-783?

Mr. COLE. 774-783, is the author of the handwriting on Commission Exhibit 773.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, you referred to the term "standard writing," Mr. Cole. Can you explain that term?

Mr. COLE. I used these as the standard writing, as a basis for comparison.

Mr. EISENBERG. "These" referring to 774-783?

Mr. COLE. Yes.

Mr. EISENBERG. Those standards would be what you would refer to, therefore, what might also be referred to as "known" items?

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. And the Document 773 is the "questioned" item?

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now for the record, in the future I will refer collectively to 774-783 as the standards.

The CHAIRMAN. They were all written by the same person?

Mr. COLE. Yes, Your Honor.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, were these the only standards or potential standards from which you had to draw, or were a larger group of potential standards furnished to you?

Mr. COLE. I saw a larger group of papers of potential standards.

Mr. EISENBERG. Can you state the circumstances under which this larger group was given to you?

Mr. COLE. I came to your office and reviewed a very large group of papers, and I pointed out what I would regard as a cross section or representative sample from that larger group of papers.

Mr. EISENBERG. And can you explain the basis on which you took the actual standards 774-783, that is, on which you selected those documents from the larger possible group of documents which might have served as standards?

Mr. COLE. Well, two bases: One, that the writing is fairly clear and legible; most of these documents are not stained or mutilated in any way; all the writing can be seen clearly. And, two, I think that this group of papers gives a complete, reasonably complete record of the writing habits of the author.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, continuing on these standards for a moment, have you examined other questioned documents besides Commission 773 at my request?

Mr. COLE. I have.

Mr. EISENBERG. Do the standards which you selected, that is, items 774 through 783, in your opinion provide a sufficient basis for comparison of the other questioned documents which you also examined?

Mr. COLE. They do provide a satisfactory basis for comparison.

Mr. EISENBERG. Are they sufficiently close in time, both to 773 and to the other questioned documents which you have examined?

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. Does handwriting change over the course of time, Mr. Cole?

Mr. COLE. Handwriting does change over the course of time, but usually fairly large periods are involved, 5 or 10 years or such.

Mr. EISENBERG. Is there any variation in the writing instruments which were used to produce the various standards?

Mr. COLE. Yes; I think a variety of instruments were used.

Mr. EISENBERG. Does this affect your ability to use the standards as against the questioned documents or as against those questioned documents produced with other writing instruments?

Mr. COLE. It does not adversely affect my ability to make a comparison.

Mr. EISENBERG. That is, you are able to compare a document produced by a ballpoint pen with a document produced by a fountain pen and vice versa?

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. Do the standards show both cursive writing and handprinting?

Mr. COLE. Yes.

Mr. EISENBERG. Can you explain meaning of the term "cursive writing"?

Mr. COLE. Cursive means connected writing, as the term is used, with a running connected hand, whereas handprinting refers to the separate writing of letters without the connection of letters and usually involves a somewhat different style for the formation of letters, that is Roman capital letters or the lower case letters.

Mr. EISENBERG. Cursive writing then is the type of writing which we normally use, which connects--in which the letters are connected, the type which is taught in schools?

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, some of the standards which are in the group 774 to 783 are photographs rather than originals.

Mr. COLE. That is correct.

Mr. EISENBERG. Does a photograph in your opinion provide a sufficient standard on which to base a conclusion as to a questioned document?

Mr. COLE. Well, I believe these particular photographs are satisfactory for that purpose.

Mr. EISENBERG. Would you draw a conclusion as to the origin of a questioned document if your only standard was a photograph?

Mr. COLE. If the photographs were comparable to the photographs we have in this case; yes.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, you examined the standards in their entirety, did you?

Mr. COLE. I did.

Mr. EISENBERG. And you have stated in answer to an earlier question they were all prepared by the same person, as I understood it?

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir.

Representative FORD. What is unique about these photographs that gives you this certainty or----

Mr. COLE. Well, I did not mean to indicate they are of a specially good quality, but I had in mind the possible existence of other photographs which would be much poorer and would not provide a satisfactory basis. I think that on these photographs I can see everything that is necessary to see to appreciate writing habit.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, when you say the standards were all written by one person, that is with the exception of initials put on by law enforcement officers and the like?

Mr. COLE. That is correct.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Cole, returning to 773, the questioned document, can you tell the Commission how you formed the conclusion that it was prepared by the author of the standards, that is, what steps you followed in your examination and comparison, what things you considered, what instruments or equipment you used, and so forth?

Mr. COLE. I made first a careful study of the writing on Commission Exhibit 773 without reference to the standard writing, in an effort to determine whether or not this writing contained what I would regard as a basis for identification, contained a record of writing habit, and as that--as a result of that part of my examination, I concluded that this is a natural handwriting. By that I mean that it was made at a fair speed, that it doesn't show any evidence of an unnatural movement, poor line quality, tremor, waver, retouching, or the like. I regard it as being made in a fluent and fairly rapid manner which would record the normal writing habits of the person who made it.

I then made a separate examination of the standards, of all of the standard writings, to determine whether that record gave a record of writing habit which could be used for identification purposes, and I concluded that it, too, was a natural handwriting and gave a good record of writing habit.

I then brought the standard writings together with the questioned writing for a detailed and orderly comparison, considering details of letter forms, proportion, pen pressure, letter connections, and other details of handwriting habit, and as a part of my examination I made photographs of the standard writings and brought certain parts of them together on a chart for greater convenience in comparing the standards with the questioned writing.

The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen, I think it will be necessary for me to leave now, Congressman Ford, you will preside, will you, please? I appreciate it.

(Discussion off the record.)

(At this point, the Chief Justice left the hearing room.)

Representative FORD. Proceed.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, you mentioned that the writing in both the questioned document, 773, and the standard seem to be produced at a natural speed.

Mr. COLE. Yes.

Mr. EISENBERG. How do you determine that any document is produced at a natural speed?

Mr. COLE. Because that conforms to a large number of other specimens that I have examined over a period of years which I knew to be normal writing. Specifically, it agrees with respect to the quality of the line, which is reasonably good in this handwriting and which I would expect to be quite poor in an unnatural specimen, one that had been made at an abnormally reduced writing speed.

Mr. EISENBERG. Can you expand further on what you mean by "quality of the line"?

Mr. COLE. Well, quality of line is--refers to the sharpness of the edges of lines, to the absence of tremor, waver, patching, retouching, and similar defects.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, could you explain the basis on which you were able to make an identification of a questioned writing as being authored by the person who wrote a standard writing?

Mr. COLE. This is based upon the principle that every handwriting is distinctive, that since the mental and physical equipment for producing handwriting is different in every individual, each person produces his own distinctive writing habits. Of course, everyone learns to write in the beginning by an endeavor to repeat ideal letter forms, but practically no one is able to reproduce these forms exactly. Even though a person might have some initial success during the active period of instruction, he soon departs from these and develops his own habits. It may be said that habit in handwriting is that which makes handwriting possible. Habit is that which makes handwriting efficient. If it were not for the development of habit, one would he obliged to draw or sketch.