Part 57

A similar mixture is found in the word "Texas." Again referring to the order form of 785, we have all capital letters except the letter "e," and then moving over to the standard writing, see the word "Texas" on chart C, item 1, the use of capital letters except as to the "e" form.

Representative FORD. The same would be true, I gather, on C-7 in the use of "e" in the word "Texas"?

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir. This combination of agreement in the details of forms of letters, proportions, and other features between the writing on Commission Exhibit 785 and various parts of the standard writing constitute the basis for my opinion that the writings are in the hand of the same person.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, in many cases you have either pointed to, or it can be noted, that there are differences or variations within the writing of the standards or in the writing of the questioned documents. Is this unusual?

Mr. COLE. No; as a matter of fact, it is usual to find variations in handwriting, and, of course, that is demonstrated by the various standard writing that we have here, where you find the same combination of letters they are not identical with a photographic sameness, but they have a range of variation. I would say that no part of the questioned writing that we have considered on 785 would go outside of that normal range of variation which is true in the standards.

Mr. EISENBERG. Did you find any differences between 785--or 773, of which 785 is a reproduction--and the standards?

Mr. COLE. I don't find anything that I would regard as a significant difference, but, of course, there are points where there is not a perfect identity. For example, in the combination of letters "Ill." an abbreviation for Illinois, while we don't have that same abbreviation in the standards, we have got the full name written out on chart B, item 5, and item 14. We have a smooth curved connection between the "I" and the following "l" in those particular parts of the standard, but there is an angular connection on 785 between the same letters. That is a difference or variation, but I don't regard it as necessarily being a significant one. It could be merely an accidental feature, a momentary hesitation on 785 before proceeding into the making of the "l."

Mr. EISENBERG. Why don't you conclude on the basis of that difference that the questioned document was written by a different author than the standard documents?

Mr. COLE. Because it is not nearly enough to raise such a question. There would be required for an opinion that this was made by some other person, a similar body of differences corresponding to the similarities that I have talked about. In other words, if in fact this was in the handwriting of some other person, I would expect to be able to make about the same demonstration with respect to differences as I have already made with regard to similarity.

Mr. EISENBERG. Would you need to find as many differences as similarities in order to say there was a different author involved in the questioned and standard?

Mr. COLE. No; depending upon the character of the differences. A fairly small number would prevent a conclusion of identity or show the hand of some other person, if they were really distinctive differences.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, did you find any evidence in 773 that the author attempted to disguise his handwriting?

Mr. COLE. Were you referring to 785?

Mr. EISENBERG. 785 is a reproduction of 773. You can use 785 to answer the question, yes.

Mr. COLE. There is one faint suggestion of that possibility. It doesn't permit a conclusion that that was the purpose. But I refer to the use of a lower case "t" in the word "texas" in the return address in the upper left corner. Since this writer demonstrates a good knowledge about the formation of capital letters, it is possible that the choice to make a lower case "t" was a deliberate one, and it could have been at that particular point for the purpose of disguise. But I say if that was his purpose, it certainly was not maintained, and would be a very faint effort toward disguise.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, do you consider it unusual for a person to use an alias without attempting to disguise his handwriting?

Mr. COLE. No; I would not.

Mr. EISENBERG. Have you had any experience along those lines?

Mr. COLE. Yes; I have observed a number of aliases where there is no particular effort to disguise.

Mr. EISENBERG. In your capacity as questioned document examiner of the Treasury Department, do you receive for examination checks, the endorsements on which have been forged?

Mr. COLE. Yes.

Mr. EISENBERG. And on any occasion does the endorsement, the forged endorsement, does the forged endorsement indicate that no effort, no attempt has been made to disguise the endorsements?

Mr. COLE. That is a rather frequent condition, that the spurious endorsement is made without an attempt to conceal or disguise writing habit or to imitate the writing of any other person.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, do you know on the basis of your experience whether individuals ever resort to handprinting as an attempt at disguise?

Mr. COLE. Yes; it is a rather frequent method of disguise.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, you testified earlier that handprinting can be identified as to author?

Mr. COLE. Yes.

Mr. EISENBERG. Is this common knowledge, that is to say----

Mr. COLE. It is common knowledge among document examiners. I don't think it is common knowledge among others.

Mr. EISENBERG. Might a layman attempt to disguise his handwriting simply by resorting to undisguised handprinting?

Mr. COLE. Yes; he might.

Mr. EISENBERG. What are the usual evidences of disguise, by the way, Mr. Cole?

Mr. COLE. Well, in cursive handwriting the usual evidences of disguise involve some unnaturalness, such as a reduction of writing speed, and other distortions such as writing very large, with an exaggerated freedom, where parts of letters of various words are run together; such as an exaggerated length of lower extensions and upward extensions which tends to intermingle forms and make it difficult to see the details of them; or writing very small, in almost microscopic size where, again, the width of a pen stroke itself tends to conceal details of handwriting; alterations of slant, such as a person who normally writes a forehand slant or slanting to the right, changing to a vertical or a backhand slant. Most efforts at disguise are not well planned. They usually involve a determination to alter the writing along one particular line such as writing very large, very small, or a change in the slant. Other features are the simplification of letter forms. For example, a person attempting to conceal a writing habit may feel that his writing habit is revealed mostly by capital letters so you might have him using printed forms for capitals, but cursive forms for most other letters.

Representative FORD. Can you tell the difference between a right-handed and a left-handed person by either cursive or capital letters?

Mr. COLE. No, sir; not definitely. Left-handed writers tend to write more vertically, and for that particular left-hand writer who holds his hand above the writing line, this gives a reversal of the pressure on what would ordinarily be regarded as upstrokes and downstrokes, and when you see that reversal this is an indication of left-hand writing. But it is only when you have that special circumstance that you get that signal about it.

Representative FORD. Is there anything in any of the writings that you have analyzed of Lee Harvey Oswald of an indication that he was left-handed?

Mr. COLE. Well, I wouldn't say that I could make a determination of whether he was left-handed or right-handed.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, in your expert work do you draw a distinction between a spurious and a forged document?

Mr. COLE. Well, I think of the word "forgery" as having that legal connotation of malice or intent. The production of a false writing with an intention to deceive or defraud somebody else. Spurious writing means a false writing.

Mr. EISENBERG. That is, a writing produced by one hand calculated to look as if it had been produced by another?

Mr. COLE. Well, not necessarily, that situation that you just discussed would involve simulation of the person's, another person's writing. But the word "spurious" could refer to a false writing, the writing of the name of one person by another who had no particular right to do it. But, of course, if the element of an intent to defraud is not there, I suppose in a legal sense it is not forgery.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, what are the elements which you look for to see whether a person, A, has attempted to reproduce the handwriting of another person, B, with intent to deceive or otherwise?

Mr. COLE. Two categories of differences. One, defects of line quality, by which is meant tremor, waver, patching, retouching, and noncontinuous lines, pen lifts in awkward and unusual places. And the other class of differences is details of the forms of letters, by which I mean that when the person attempting to simulate another writing concentrates upon the reproduction of one detail, he is likely not to see other details. He may, for example, be able to imitate the gross form of a letter but he may get proportions wrong or letter connections wrong.

Mr. EISENBERG. What is the probability that person A could imitate the handwriting of person B without leaving a telltale trace in one of these two categories?

Mr. COLE. I think it is only a very remote possibility. But I would add to that the need for having a fairly extensive specimen of writing. Of course the possibility of a successful simulation is better with smaller specimens of writing.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, did you find any evidence in either category that a person had attempted to simulate the writing of the author of the standards in this case in producing either 773 or any of the other questioned documents which you examined?

Mr. COLE. No; I did not find such indications.

Mr. EISENBERG. And you feel, did you say, there would be only a remote probability that in the absence of such indication such a simulation could exist?

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. When you say remote, could you put this in terms of figures?

Mr. COLE. I would say there is no reasonable possibility of it, and I will put it this way: That from my study of these documents, there is no particular element or elements of the handwriting that I can point to and say this could be evidence of simulation.

Mr. EISENBERG. You mentioned before that you need to have a sufficient amount of writing to make that type of determination. Do you feel that the questioned documents provided a sufficient amount of writing for that?

Mr. COLE. They do.

Mr. EISENBERG. Is that individually or collectively?

Mr. COLE. Individually.

Representative FORD. All of the illustrations on 784 A, B, and C are taken from Commission exhibits----

Mr. EISENBERG. 774-783.

Representative FORD. Collectively?

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. Carrying that question forward, on what basis did you select excerpts from 774 to 783 to reproduce 784 A, B, and C?

Mr. COLE. The chief effort was to collect together in a fairly small space items that were appropriate for comparison through repetition of the same material, and in doing that there was kept in mind the general purpose of giving a good representative cross section of all of the writing habit illustrated in the standard writings.

Mr. EISENBERG. Well, that anticipates my next question, which is, whether this is a representative cross section or was selected in order to reproduce those particular characteristics you find in the questioned documents.

Mr. COLE. I think it is a representative cross section, and I say a part of the effort was to bring here some letters and combinations for convenience of comparison. It was in no way an effort to substitute these charts for the originals.

Mr. EISENBERG. Your actual examination was made on the basis of the originals or the charts, Mr. Cole?

Mr. COLE. Yes; all of the--the chief examination was made upon the basis of the originals and all parts of the originals, not limited to the parts shown in the charts.

Mr. EISENBERG. These charts are only for demonstrative purposes, making your testimony easier to follow, is that correct?

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. You discussed briefly, Mr. Cole, or perhaps more than briefly, the use of a photograph as a standard. Now, in the case of 773, a photograph is used as a questioned document, or rather a questioned document consists of a photograph. Are the comments you made on the use of a photograph as a standard applicable to the use of a photograph as a questioned document, that is, can you make a determination on the handwriting in a photograph?

Mr. COLE. With these photographs I think a satisfactory determination can be made. I would not necessarily include all photographs.

Mr. EISENBERG. Yes?

Mr. COLE. Because there is a widely varying quality in photographs.

Mr. EISENBERG. When you say these photographs, do you include the other photographs included among the questioned documents you have examined at my request?

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, I now hand you an item consisting of a U.S. postal money order in the amount of $21.45, payable to Klein's Sporting Goods, from "A. Hidell, P.O. Box 2915, Dallas, Texas." For the record I will state that this money order was included with the purchase order in Exhibit 773 which has just been identified, and was intended and used as payment for the weapon shipped in response to the purchase order, 773. I ask you, Mr. Cole, whether you have examined this money order for the purpose of determining whether it was prepared by the author of the standards?

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. What was your conclusion, Mr. Cole?

Mr. COLE. It is my conclusion that the handwriting on this money order is in the hand of the person who executed the standard writing.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have this money order admitted as 788?

Representative FORD. It may be admitted.

(The document was marked as Commission Exhibit No. 788, and was received in evidence.)

Mr. EISENBERG. Have you prepared a photograph of that Exhibit 788, the money order?

Mr. COLE. Yes; I have.

Mr. EISENBERG. And you have produced that photograph for me just now, Mr. Cole?

Mr. COLE. Yes.

Mr. EISENBERG. Was this prepared by you or under your supervision?

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. Is it an accurate photograph of 788?

Mr. COLE. It is.

Mr. EISENBERG. May this be admitted as 789, Mr. Chairman?

Representative FORD. It may be admitted.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 789, and received in evidence.)

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, before you discuss your conclusion, the handwriting on 788 seems to have a slight blur in some parts. Could you explain that in any way?

Mr. COLE. Yes; it is my view that this document has been in contact with moisture which affected the ink of the handwriting. Such contact might have been through an effort to develop fingerprints.

Mr. EISENBERG. Was it or is it discolored at this point at all, do you think?

Mr. COLE. There are only two small areas of discoloration on this document, one of them being along the upper edge just above the figure "9," and the other along the right edge just opposite the figure "5." This indicates to me that at one time this document was more deeply stained but has been cleared up by some chemical bleach.

Mr. EISENBERG. Was it in the same condition when you examined it as it is now?

Mr. COLE. It was.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, would you explain by use of charts 784 A, B, and C, and the photograph 789, why you conclude 788 was prepared by the author of the standards in this case?

Mr. COLE. On the photograph, 789, I invite attention to the capital "K" of "Klein's," which compares favorably in form to the "K's" of exhibit--of chart A, items 13 and 14, with the exception of a larger circle at the center of that "K" on the right side of 789, which is not reproduced in the standards, but it is my belief that this writer might well produce such a circular form when a letter is somewhat larger and more freely made.

Mr. EISENBERG. On what do you base that belief, Mr. Cole?

Mr. COLE. That that would be a normal result of greater freedom and a larger writing, it would produce a circular form rather than an angle.

Mr. EISENBERG. Is this based upon your experience with questioned documents and making analyses?

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; now, in that----

Mr. EISENBERG. Excuse me 1 second. Just to elaborate on that. Do I take it that your experience is such that you have found you can predict forms of letters based upon the samples you have before you, predict forms which may be used in other samples by the same author?

Mr. COLE. Well, within certain narrow limits. That is, having information about the range of variation in the body of standard writing, it is reasonable to make a small allowance for the production of forms not actually illustrated there, as long as they are consistent with the forms that are actually available for examination. In other words, I would regard it as a consistent thing in this writing to occasionally produce a circle at the center portion of a letter "K"; it does not, in my opinion, represent a difference of writing habit.

Now, in that same word we observe a habit heretofore mentioned of increasing the amount of forehand slant, in the letter "i"--that is in "Klein's" of the photograph 789--which has previously been observed in the standard writing. Several examples have been pointed out. For the present, I will mention the one on chart A, item 1 in the word "obligations," the second letter "i" there shows an increased forehand slant. The same is true of the "i" of the word "firm" on the same line.

The combination of letters in the word "sporting," that is, the combination "port," are illustrated in the standard writing, chart A, item 2 in the word "support," item 3 in the word "port," in item 4 in the word "transportation," and here we find very close agreement in all details of those letter forms. With respect to the letter "p," the absence of an under extension, that is, the absence of any part rising above the arched part of the letter on the writing line, and the circumstance that the body of the letter or arch, as it is shown here on the photograph 789, is not brought all the way into the staff, it is made almost as a pure arch form with no movement in here towards the staff, which is the same movement we have here on chart A, item 3 in the word "port," repeated also on item 4, and in the two "p's" of item 2. Now, there is a distinctive method of making the connection between the letters "o" and "r," by drawing a very straight line, horizontal line almost exactly paralleling the base of the word across from the letter "o" to the "r" on the photograph 789, and this movement is also repeated on chart A, items 3 and 4, in the combination letters "or" also in item 2 in the same combination of letters.

This writing demonstrates the habit in the figure "5" of a considerable exaggeration of the final stroke of the letter, or the cap stroke, a horizontal stroke at the top of the letter observed on the photograph 789, and shown in several places in the standard writing, some of which have already been mentioned, one being on chart C, item 7, and on chart B, items 1 and 9, the figure "5."

Also in this writing, we find that highly distinctive "x" form in the word "Texas," involving the production of a shallow =U=-shaped form with the crossbar passing across the second point of that =U=-shaped form for the word "Texas." This is the basis for my conclusion that the questioned writing on the money order is in the hand of the author of the standard writing.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, I now hand you Commission Exhibit 135, which, for the record, consists of the purchase order to Seaport Traders from "A. Hidell" for the revolver which was used in the murder of Officer Tippit.

Mr. Cole, have you examined Commission Exhibit 135 to determine whether it was produced by the author of the standards in this case?

Mr. COLE. I have.

Mr. EISENBERG. What is your conclusion?

Mr. COLE. It is my conclusion that this handwriting is in the hand of the person who produced the standard writing.

Mr. EISENBERG. Have you taken a photograph of 135?

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; I have.

Mr. EISENBERG. Would you produce that, please?

Was this photograph prepared by you or under your supervision?

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. Is it an accurate reproduction of 135?

Mr. COLE. It is.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have that admitted as 790?

Representative FORD. It may be admitted.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 790, and received in evidence.)

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, could you explain your reasons for your conclusion by reference to the charts 784 A, B, and C, and to the photograph, 790?

Mr. COLE. On the photograph 790 I invite attention to the first line of handprinting, which has a long horizontal line drawn through it. Toward the ends of that line there is an amount which appears to read "$1.35," and I draw attention to the form of the dollar sign, which sign has already been mentioned in other writing, and here we find that same feature of subordinating the =S= part of the dollar sign to the crossbars, the crossbars being, or the verticals being made in such a way as to practically obliterate the =S=-shaped part. There, again, that is a feature of writing habit of the author of the writing on 790 which corresponds with the habit in the standard writing shown on chart B, item 6, second line, in the amount "$2.00."

Next, I draw your attention, in the approximate area as that just discussed on 790 there, to the amount "29.95." Now, with respect to the form of the figure "2" we observe a rounded cap or top to the letter and a rather prominent loop to the base, and it is observed that the leftward extension of the cap of the letter is considerably short of the amount of leftward motion across the base. This corresponds to the form and placement of parts as shown in the standard writing chart B, item 1, in the combination "2915."

In that same amount, on the photograph 790, again we observe the exaggerated length of the cap of the figure "5" which corresponds to the standard writing, chart B, item 1, the figure "5" there.

The dollar sign which was previously described is repeated in the amount "$10.00" on the left side of the photograph 790, and I believe that the treatment of the verticals there is the same, that is, an unusually heavy pressure, but it appears that the pen was not delivering a normal quantity of ink at that point. Nevertheless, there is this same effect of almost obliterating the =S=-shaped part of the dollar sign.

Now, moving on down to the bottom part of the photograph 790, and considering first the form of the "B" in the word "Box" on the address line, here again we observe that tendency of a fairly small upper lobe relative to the size of the lower lobe of the "B," and this is repeated in the standard writing, one place being chart B, item 1, in the "B" of "Box."

The word "DALLAS" on the photograph 790 shows capital "L's" which have a compound curve across the base: that is, instead of a simplified form of letter, where there would be a simple straight line across the base, we have first a rising stroke and then a stroke that curves downward towards the writing line. This compound curve across the base of "L's" is repeated in the standard writing, chart B, item 1 and 9, in the same word "DALLAS."