Part 59

Mr. COLE. Well, in this area there is also in addition to typewriting already mentioned, there is evidence of a rather sharp indentation of typewritten material, which could result from the blow of a typewriter key against this paper without the interposition of any ribbon at all. Most typewriters have an adjustment called "stencil" whereby you can prevent the ribbon from coming up in front of the type bar, and there is a complete line of indentations along there which reads "Alek James Hidell," and one very interesting feature is that just to the left of the indented name "Alek" there is a capital letter "O."

I don't say at that particular point there was any completion of a name following the letter "O" but we do have this clear indentation of the letter "O."

Mr. EISENBERG. Have you prepared a photograph which brings out those details a little more clearly than in the original, 795?

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; I have. This photograph was made by a very low angle of illumination, a raking light across the document which shows up the indentations.

Mr. EISENBERG. This was prepared by you and under your supervision?

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. It is a true and accurate reproduction of 795?

Mr. COLE. It is.

Mr. EISENBERG. May this be admitted as 798?

Representative FORD. It may be admitted.

(Commission Exhibit 798 was marked and received in evidence.)

Senator COOPER. Could I ask a question? You referred to an indentation representing the letter "O." Could you point that out and indicate the exhibit upon which you identified the letter "O"?

Mr. COLE. Here. I point to an area approximately two typewriter spaces on the left of the visible letter "A" of "Alek."

Senator COOPER. On Commission Exhibit 795?

Mr. COLE. Yes; correct.

Senator COOPER. Were you able to determine whether that indentation representing "O" was made by a typewriter or does it represent a letter which was still visible from the original card of selective service classification?

Mr. COLE. That is a typewritten letter "O," sir. I think that nothing is visible on that line from the original.

Mr. EISENBERG. Referring to your photograph, 798, there seems to be--the word "James" seems to be printed more than once, as does the name "Hidell," in stencil. Is that your observation, Mr. Cole, also?

Mr. COLE. Yes; that is true.

Mr. EISENBERG. Is there any other material that was printed in stencil, on the stencil setting, of the typewriter?

Mr. COLE. Yes; there is a writing of the serial number which is also in stencil form.

Mr. EISENBERG. Anything else? We are referring now just to the front of the card.

Mr. COLE. Yes. The date of mailing also shows an indentation.

Mr. EISENBERG. Can you think of any reason why the use of the typewriter on stencil may have been done?

Mr. COLE. I can mention reasons that I have observed on other documents which might apply to this one, and that would be an effort on the part of the operator of the machine to find a correct place for beginning typewriting, but I am obliged to say that on those other examples I have never seen such extensive stenciled writing. I would say that a single letter should give a person a pretty good idea of the position for beginning writing, and it should not be necessary to write out this material in full.

Now another theory for applying indentations to this type of material might be, say, previous experience with trying to write on a glossy surface, and knowing that you don't get enough ink from a ribbon on such a surface and possibly an intention to apply a rather sharp indentation and later fill that in with pigment. I am a little doubtful if it would be successful but one might attempt to try it, because various kinds of printing are made in that way, first by producing an indent, and then working a pigment down into the indentation. I would say on this particular document, I don't see there was any evidence that the preparer of the document went through with any such plan.

Representative FORD. For the record, I do have to leave to attend the House session, and Senator Cooper, will you preside as chairman?

Senator COOPER. Yes; I will be glad to do so.

(At this point Representative Ford departed the hearing room.)

Mr. EISENBERG. Referring to your photograph 798 again, the word "James" in "Alek James Hidell" seems to have been printed twice, as you stated before, and the second time it seems to have started--at least twice--and the second time it seems to start after the first "James" has stopped. Is that your observation?

Mr. COLE. Yes.

Mr. EISENBERG. Referring back to your theories or the possible theories you mentioned as explanations of the printing by stencil, would the placement of the two "James" on the upper line indicate whether or not either of those theories might be applicable?

Mr. COLE. Well, of course, the repetition of these names is somewhat opposed to the theory that a person might prefer to ink it in later. But, of course, it is possible that he could not see it very well, and that he might think he could make a selection of either one or the other for inking in.

Mr. EISENBERG. Does the word "James" appear to have been stenciled more than twice?

Mr. GORE. Well, there is some overlapping or superimposition of indentations in the first record of the indented name "James." It could have been as many as three times in the stencil operation.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Cole, have you produced a photograph of the reverse side of the selective-service card----

Mr. COLE. I have.

Mr. EISENBERG. That is, 795?

Mr. COLE. I have.

Mr. EISENBERG. And was this taken by you or under your supervision?

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. And is it a true and accurate photograph of 795?

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may this be admitted as 799?

Senator COOPER. It will be admitted.

(The document referred to, previously marked as Commission Exhibit 799, was received in evidence.)

Mr. EISENBERG. This is an additional photograph of the reverse side of 795?

Mr. COLE. That is correct. The one last mentioned was also made with a very low angle of illumination raking the light across the document.

Mr. EISENBERG. The "one last mentioned" being 797 or 798?

Mr. COLE. 799 was made with the low-angle illumination to bring out the indentation.

Mr. EISENBERG. That is as opposed to 797, which is the reverse side of the photograph introduced as 795?

Mr. COLE. Yes.

Mr. EISENBERG. And that had a normal illumination?

Ir COLE. Yes., correct.

Mr. EISENBERG. By use of this 799 photograph, could you read to us what was stenciled, insofar as possible?

Mr. COLE. Opposite "Color of Eyes" there is discernible the indented typewritten letters "CT." This is just to the left of the visible letters "GR." Then opposite the "Color of Hair" there is an indentation of the word in capital letters "BROWN." Just above the visible "9" for the inch figures of height, there is a second indented "9." Opposite the word 'weight" there is a small letter "i" as an indentation.

Mr. EISENBERG. Is "i" the lower case of the figure in the typewriter which produces "1" in upper case?

Mr. COLE. No; it is the lower case "l" which is used for the "1" on most typewriters. In the frame above the wording "Local Board Stamp" there is visible typewriting and indentations but I think this is probably all one typewriting act, the ink coming down from the ribbon only in a rather irregular fashion. Just outside the frame on the right side there is an indentation of the abbreviation "ST."

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, did you have occasion to examine these cards at a subsequent time--this card, I am sorry, the Selective Service notice of classification, or spurious Selective Service classification, 795?

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; I did.

Mr. EISENBERG. At that time did you examine the negatives which I now hand to you?

Mr. COLE. I did.

Mr. EISENBERG. For the record, these are a set of negatives which were found at one of the premises inhabited by Lee Harvey Oswald. Mr. Chairman, may I have them admitted as 800? I would like these negatives which Mr. Cole examined and which were found in one of the residences of Lee Harvey Oswald to be received as 800.

Senator COOPER. It is so ordered.

(The negatives referred to were marked as Commission Exhibit 800 and received in evidence.)

Mr. EISENBERG. Did you also examine this card which I now hand you, which for the record is a Selective Service System notice of classification in the name of Lee Harvey Oswald, found in the wallet of Lee Harvey Oswald following his apprehension after the assassination and the murder of Officer Tippit?

Mr. COLE. I did examine this card.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may this card, which is Oswald's actual Selective Service System notice of classification, be admitted as 801?

Senator COOPER. So ordered.

(The document referred to was marked as Commission Exhibit 801, and was received in evidence.)

Mr. EISENBERG. Now what did your examination of the negatives and the card show, in relation to your earlier examination, conducted simply of the Exhibit 795?

Mr. COLE. May I say something off the record.

(Discussion off the record.)

Senator COOPER. Back on the record.

Would you please state on the record your reasons for making your prior answer to the question of counsel?

Mr. COLE. I have some question whether this is actually the card which I had previously examined, although I am sure I did examine a Selective Service card, and it will take just a moment of close examination of this one to determine that, and I would suggest that if there are any other Selective Service cards available belonging to this group or grouped with this card that I should see them at the same time.

Senator COOPER. Your statement is then that you just desired to examine----

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir.

Senator COOPER. This card and any other Selective Service card that may be available?

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir.

Senator COOPER. I suggest that the Commission recess for a sufficient time to permit the witness to examine the Selective Service card.

Mr. EISENBERG. Before that recess, let me introduce another card relating to the Selective Service System, which is the registration certificate of Lee Harvey Oswald. Did you examine--did you examine this registration certificate, Mr. Cole? And perhaps you can now, Mr. Reporter, note a recess while he examines both the registration certificate and the Selective Service System notice of classification.

Senator COOPER. So ordered.

(Short recess.)

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; I did examine this registration certificate.

Mr. EISENBERG. Did you examine the Selective Service System notice of classification?

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; I did. I did examine the notice of classification.

Mr. EISENBERG. That is 801. May I have the registration certificate admitted as 802?

Senator COOPER. Let it be admitted.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit 802, and was received in evidence.)

Mr. EISENBERG. This was also found in the wallet of Oswald following his apprehension. Now, on the basis of your examination of these cards and the negatives, did you find yourself reinforced in your earlier conclusion, Mr. Cole?

Mr. COLE. I did. This confirmed my earlier conclusion which was formed at a time I had only the photographic prints. Exhibit----

Mr. EISENBERG. No. 795, together with photographs thereof, is that what you are referring to now?

Mr. COLE. That is correct; yes.

Mr. EISENBERG. Can you discuss the negatives, Exhibit 800, that you referred to in your examination?

Mr. COLE. Yes; there are two negatives which are of Selective Service System notice of classification. Both of these negatives show extensive retouching, sometimes called opaquing, for the purpose of preventing certain material which appeared on an original from printing on a photographic print. The two negatives are apparently related to a single original. One of them has a somewhat greater amount of retouching than the other. It is my view that the second negative, that is, the one showing the smallest amount of retouching, was probably made from a photographic print of the first one. In other words, the retouching operation has involved two steps which resulted in the production of two separate negatives. A possible reason for the second step was that on the negative showing the most extensive retouching there is still some material remaining from the original document, namely the lower extensions of two letters "f" which pass through certain wording at the right side of the document, reading "local board," and another word reading "violation." Now on the second negative of the pair a successful operation in touching out those particular parts was accomplished.

Mr. EISENBERG. Do you believe that the second negative was prepared from the first, or they were prepared separately from the Selective Service card itself?

Mr. COLE. I believe that the second negative was prepared from a photographic print of the first one.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, for ease of discussion, I would like to take out the "first negative" from Exhibit 800 and give it a separate number, 803, if I may. Is that all right, Mr. Chairman?

Senator COOPER. Yes.

(The negative referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 803, and was received in evidence.)

Mr. COLE. The negative I hand you now is the one I referred to as the first negative, and the one having the most extensive retouching or opaquing.

Mr. EISENBERG. That is the one with the portion of the signature appearing over the word "violation"?

Mr. COLE. That is right. A portion which has not been retouched out of the negative.

Mr. EISENBERG. And does that same portion appear in the original of Oswald's card, 801?

Mr. COLE. It does.

Senator COOPER. Is that a part of the record?

Mr. EISENBERG. Yes, sir. Now, there is a good deal of red material on the reverse side of this "first negative." That is the opaquing material, is it?

Mr. COLE. Correct.

Mr. EISENBERG. I would like to make the "second negative" referred to 804, Mr. Chairman.

Senator COOPER. Very well. You want that made a part of the record?

Mr. EISENBERG. Yes, sir.

Senator COOPER. Let it be made a part of the record.

(The negative referred to, marked Commission Exhibit 804, was received in evidence.)

Mr. EISENBERG. We are extracting that from 800 for ease of discussion.

Now, Mr. Cole, I call your attention to the fact that the words appearing on the face of the original 801, the printed material beginning "The law requires you, subject to heavy penalty for violation, to carry this notice in addition to your Registration Certificate," and going on for two full paragraphs of small or ordinary Roman lower and upper case, and ending in solid caps "FOR ADVICE, SEE YOUR GOVERNMENT APPEAL AGENT," this language in the original spreads across the bottom of the card from left to right, starting slightly to the right of the dotted line running up and down the card and marked "registrant must sign here," and extending quite close to the right margin.

Does it appear in the same fashion, approximately, on the "first negative," which is Exhibit 803?

Mr. COLE. Yes; but, of course, this negative includes a section along the left side which is not shown on the original.

Mr. EISENBERG. Which is actually a blank section, is that correct?

Mr. COLE. Correct.

Mr. EISENBERG. Is the negative slightly enlarged, apart from that blank section?

Mr. COLE. I think it is the same size.

Mr. EISENBERG. I call your attention to the "second negative," which is Exhibit 804, and this same language, "The law requires you," and so forth, until "FOR ADVICE, SEE YOUR GOVERNMENT APPEAL AGENT" appears in a much smaller compass, that is to say it starts substantially to the right of the margin or the signature line and is separated from the signature line by another dotted line.

Mr. COLE. That is correct.

Mr. EISENBERG. And does that correspond to the forged card, 795?

Mr. COLE. It does.

Mr. EISENBERG. Has that created a space on the forged card which does not exist on the original?

Mr. COLE. That is correct.

Mr. EISENBERG. And is that the space into which the photograph has been inserted on the forged card?

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG. I call your attention to a small strip of negative which appears to bear this language, and I ask you whether you believe that this negative might have been used in the preparation of the forged card?

Mr. COLE. Yes, sir; I believe this negative was used for producing the forged card which is a photographic print.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may that be made 805?

Senator COOPER. Let 805 be made a part of the record.

(The negative referred to was marked and received in evidence as Commission Exhibit No. 805.)

Mr. EISENBERG. In your opinion, can you account for the reduction in size of that printing, "The law requires you" and so forth?

Mr. COLE. Well, it would seem that it had to be reduced in size to accomplish the obvious purpose on the card, Exhibit 795, of providing extra space for a photograph.

Mr. EISENBERG. How would that be done?

Mr. COLE. This can be done photographically. When a photographic camera is set up to take a picture of a document you have a considerable range for making either enlargements or reductions on the negative.

Mr. EISENBERG. Is this whole process one which requires a great deal of skill, and when I say "whole process" I refer to the re-creation of a new card by use of opaquing material and the reduction in size of a portion of the text on the original card?

Mr. COLE. No; I wouldn't say that it requires a great skill. I would say an elementary knowledge of photography, especially the photographic techniques used in a printing plant, would be enough for such a purpose.

Senator COOPER. On that point, would it require study to learn to make, to exercise these techniques, either from a textbook or information from someone else or by observation of the practice?

Mr. COLE. I think observation and association with other people, or being in a place where such techniques were going along in the normal operation of a photographic laboratory or printing plant, would be enough. A person wouldn't have to consult a text. As a matter of fact, similar things are done for normal printing operations.

Senator COOPER. That is the question I wanted to ask. Would this type of technique in an average shop or plant be normal?

Mr. COLE. Oh, yes.

Senator COOPER. Would it require much practice on the part of an individual before such technique could be successfully accomplished?

Mr. COLE. No; I would say a moderate amount of practice.

Senator COOPER. How much, would you say? How many times would a person have to, if it is possible to say, practice this kind of a technique before he could do it reasonably well?

Mr. COLE. On a trial-and-error basis. I would say that a half dozen attempts on a trial and error basis of going through such an operation, perhaps making an error, finding how to correct it, doing it again, achieving more success, would certainly be enough.

Senator COOPER. You would say then, assuming that Lee Oswald made these changes, that he would have had to practice them several times before he could have successfully made the changes which were indicated by the exhibits that have been introduced?

Mr. COLE. Well, sir; I would say he would not necessarily have to practice on this particular document, but if he had some practice, he or any other person, had had some practice in normal operation, similar operations in a printing plant, then he could accomplish this result.

Senator COOPER. Would these changes have required the assistance at the time of another person----

Mr. COLE. I think not.

Senator COOPER. Or could they be accomplished by one person?

Mr. COLE. One person could easily do it.

Senator COOPER. Thank you.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now on these questions which Senator Cooper has been asking, I ask you to refer back to Exhibit 800, consisting of a group of other negatives not related to the selective-service card, and ask you whether those negatives bear any evidence of opaquing and similar techniques as were used in the creation of Exhibit 795?

Mr. COLE. They do. All of them show evidence of opaquing, that is, touching out certain information, letting other information come through.

Mr. EISENBERG. Do you think this might have constituted sufficient practice to produce the 795 result?

Mr. COLE. Yes; I think so.

Senator COOPER. Would it have been necessary for a person making these changes to have had for his use any kind of special equipment, or what kind of equipment would be required to make these changes?

Mr. COLE. Well, sir; in a printing plant there are usually what they call light tables, a table with a transparent surface with a light under it, which are used for making up, for assembling various materials to be included in a single plate. But that wouldn't be essential. A person could take a negative ready for retouching right to the window there, place it against the window and touch out material in that manner.

Senator COOPER. My question really goes to this point: Would it have been necessary for a person who made these changes to have done the work in a shop or printing plant or could it be done outside of a printing shop?

Mr. COLE. It would not have to be done in a printing shop. It could be done easily in this room or any ordinary living accommodations.

Senator COOPER. That is all.

Mr. EISENBERG. Would you need, Mr. Cole, in your belief, the type of equipment you are likely to find in a printing plant, or could this be done with home equipment?

Mr. COLE. I would say it could be done with home equipment, but I think it is unlikely with respect to the actual preparation of the negative that one would get a successful result from home equipment. I believe that for the preparation of the negative, that is, apart from the retouching operation, that one would need a very accurate camera such as are found in photographic laboratories and printing plants.

Mr. EISENBERG. Could the opaquing have been done off the printing premises?

Mr. COLE. Yes; the opaquing could be done almost anywhere, in any ordinary living accommodation, needing only a source of light to pass through the negative, the liquid opaquing material, and a small brush.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cole, if you were going to prepare a forged Selective Service System notice of classification, and if you did not have access to blanks of the Selective Service System itself, how would you go about preparing such a forgery?

Mr. COLE. I would use a method similar to that already described here with one modification; namely, that in preparing the original negative, I would make an enlargement directly on the negative, then go through the opaquing operation, and in making the final print I would reduce it back to original size. That would produce a somewhat better quality of print, and it gives somewhat more freedom in the opaquing operation, that is, in working with a larger negative there is not as much danger of running the opaque into some material that you want to save, and we see on these negatives there are a few places where the person doing the opaquing has actually permitted this material to run into a part that should be saved on the original.

Mr. EISENBERG. Would you use the same type of photographic paper?

Mr. COLE. I would not. I would use a dull-surfaced paper which would look more like an original document.

Mr. EISENBERG. When you said that the person who produced the negatives let his opaque run into areas which he wanted to save, what areas are you referring to, what type of areas?