QUESTIONED DOCUMENTS
Two experts gave testimony concerning questioned documents: Alwyn Cole[A10-133] and James C. Cadigan.[A10-134] Cole apprenticed as a questioned document examiner for 6 years, from 1929 to 1935, and has been examiner of questioned documents for the U.S. Treasury Department since then. Cadigan has been a questioned document examiner with the FBI for 23½ years, following a specialized course of training and instruction. Both have testified many times in Federal and States courts.[A10-135] Their conclusions were identical, except as noted.
Both experts examined and testified on the following questioned documents: (1) The mail order to Klein’s Sporting Goods of Chicago, in response to which Klein’s sent the C2766 rifle; the accompanying money order; and the envelope in which the mail order and the money order were sent—all of which bore the name “A. Hidell” and the address “P.O. Box 2915, Dallas, Texas”;[A10-136] (2) the mail order to Seaport Traders, Inc., of Los Angeles, bearing the same name and address, in response to which the Seaport Traders sent the V510210 revolver;[A10-137] (3) part of an application for Post Office Box 2915, Dallas, Tex., opened October 9, 1962 and closed May 14, 1963, and two change-of-address orders relating to that box, dated October 10, 1962 and May 12, 1963—all signed “Lee H. Oswald,” and part of an application for Post Office Box 30061, New Orleans, La., naming “A. J. Hidell” as a party entitled to receive mail through the box, signed “L. H. Oswald”;[A10-138] (4) a spurious selective service system notice of classification and a spurious certificate of service in the U.S. Marine Corps, found in Oswald’s wallet after his arrest, both in the name “Alek James Hidell”;[A10-139] (5) a spurious smallpox vaccination certificate, found among Oswald’s belongings at his room at 1026 North Beckley, purportedly issued to Lee Oswald by “Dr. A. J. Hideel, P.O. Box 30016, New Orleans, La.”;[A10-140] and (6) a card, found in Oswald’s wallet after his arrest, reading “Fair Play for Cuba Committee New Orleans Chapter,” dated “June 15, 1963,” bearing the name “L. H. Oswald” and the signature “Lee H. Oswald,” and signed “A. J. Hidell” as chapter president.[A10-141] Cadigan also examined (7) the unsigned note, Commission Exhibit No. 1, written almost entirely in Russian, which Marina testified Oswald had left for her prior to his attempt on the life of General Walker;[A10-142] and (8) the homemade paper bag found on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository following the assassination.[A10-143]
General principles.[A10-144]—The area of questioned document examination encompasses many types of inquiries, the most familiar of which is the identification of handwriting. Handwriting identification is based upon the principle that every person’s handwriting is distinctive. As Cole testified:
Q. 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 be obliged to draw or sketch.
Some habit would be included even in those efforts. But the production of handwriting rapidly and fluently always involves a recording of personal writing habit. This has been confirmed by observation of a very large number of specimens over a long period of time, and it has further been demonstrated by, on my part, having a formal responsibility for rendering decisions about the identification of handwriting based upon an agreement of handwriting habit in situations where there would be a rigorous testing of the correctness of these decision by field investigators, for example, of the law-enforcement agencies, and a demonstration that these results were confirmed by other evidence.
This is the basis for identification of handwriting.[A10-145]
The same principles are generally applicable to hand printing,[A10-146] and in the balance of this section the term “handwriting” will be used to refer to both cursive or script writing and hand printing.
Not every letter in a questioned handwriting can be used as the basis of an identification. Most people learn to write letters in a standard or “copybook” form: a handwriting is distinctive only insofar as it departs significantly from such forms.[A10-147] Correspondingly, not every variation indicates nonidentification; no two acts are precisely alike and variations may be found within a single document. Like similarities, variations are significant only if they are distinctive.[A10-148] Moreover, since any single distinctive characteristic may not be unique to one person, in order to make an identification the expert must find a sufficient number of corresponding distinctive characteristics and a general absence of distinctive differences.[A10-149]
The possibility that one person could imitate the handwriting of another and successfully deceive an expert document examiner is very remote. A forger leaves two types of clue. First, he can seldom perfectly simulate the letter forms of the victim; concentrating on the reproduction of one detail, he is likely not to see others. Thus, the forger may successfully imitate the general form of a letter, but get proportions or letter connections wrong. In addition, the forger draws rather than writes. Forged writing is therefore distinguished by defects in the quality of its line, such as tremor, waver, patching, retouching, noncontinuous lines, and pen lifts in awkward and unusual places.[A10-150]
To make a handwriting identification, the handwriting in the document under examination (the questioned document) is compared against the handwriting in documents known to have been prepared by a suspect (the known or standard documents). This is exemplified by Cole’s examination of Commission Exhibit No. 773, the photograph of the mail order for the rifle and the envelope in which it was sent:
Q. 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 * * *.[A10-151]
The standards used by Cole and Cadigan consisted of a wide variety of documents known to be in the handwriting of Lee Harvey Oswald, including indorsements on his payroll checks, applications for employment, for a passport, for membership in the American Civil Liberties Union, and for a library card, and letters to the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the Marine Corps, the State Department, and the American Embassy in Russia.[A10-152]
The Mail Order for the C2766 Rifle, the Related Envelope, and the Money Order
The mail order and envelope for the C2766 rifle were photographed by Klein’s on microfilm, and then destroyed.[A10-153] To identify the handwriting an enlarged photograph was made which showed the handwriting characteristics with sufficient clarity to form the basis of an identification.[A10-154] Based on a comparison with the standards, the handwriting on the purchase order and the envelope were identified as Lee Harvey Oswald’s.[A10-155] The money order, which was retained by the post office after having been cashed by Klein’s,[A10-156] was also identified as being in Oswald’s handwriting.[A10-157] These identifications were made on the basis of numerous characteristics in which the writing in both the questioned and standard documents departed from conventional letter forms.[A10-158] For example, in the return address on the envelope, the left side of the “A” in “A. Hidell” was made by a downstroke followed by an upstroke which almost exactly traced the down-stroke, the “i” showed an elongation of the approach stroke and an exaggerated slant to the right, and the second “l” was somewhat larger than the first; the “B” in “Box” had an upper lobe smaller than the lower lobe; the “D” in “Dallas” exhibited a distinctive construction of the looped form at the top of a letter, and the “s” was flattened and forced over on its side; and the “x” in “Texas” was made in the form of a “u” with a cross bar. These characteristics were also present in the standards.[A10-159] In addition, these items, as well as other questioned documents, resembled the standards in their use of certain erroneous combinations of capital and lowercase letters.[A10-160] For example, in the mail order, “Texas” was printed with a capital “T,” “X,” “A,” and “S,” but a lowercase “e”; a similar mixture of capital and lowercase letters in “Texas” was found in the standards.[A10-161]
The writing on the purchase order and envelope showed no significant evidence of disguise (subject to the qualification that the use of hand printing on the mail order, rather than handwriting, may have been used for that purpose).[A10-162] However, it is not unusual for a person using an alias not to disguise his writing. For example, Cole, who is document examiner for the Treasury Department, has frequently examined forgeries evidencing no attempt at disguise. [A10-163]
Mail Order for the V510210 Revolver
Based on a comparison with the standards, the handwriting on the mail order[A10-164] for the V510210 revolver was also identified as Lee Harvey Oswald’s.[A10-165]
Post Office Box Applications and Change-of-Address Card
A post office box application consists of three parts: The first contains directions for use. The second provides applicant’s name, address, signature space, box number, date of opening and closing. The third part provides instruction space concerning delivery of mail and names of persons entitled to use the box.[A10-166] Under post office regulations[A10-167] the second part was retained by the Dallas Post Office for box 2915; it destroyed the third part after the box was closed. Based on the standards, the signature “Lee H. Oswald,” and other handwriting on the application, was identified as that of Lee Harvey Oswald.[A10-168] The postal clerk appeared to have filled in the balance.[A10-169]
The Fort Worth and Dallas post offices retained two change-of-address orders signed “Lee H. Oswald”: One to “Postmaster, Fort Worth, Tex.,” dated October 10, 1962, to send mail to “Oswald, Lee H” at 2703 Mercedes Av., Fort Worth, Texas” and forward to “Box 2915, Dallas, Texas”; the other to “Postmaster, Dallas, Texas” dated May 12, 1963, requested mail for post office box 2915 be forwarded to “Lee Oswald” at “4907 Magazine St., New Orleans, La.”[A10-170] Based on a comparison with the standards, the handwriting on these orders was identified as that of Lee Harvey Oswald.[A10-171]
The New Orleans post office retained the third part of the application for post office box 30061, New Orleans, La., dated June 11, 1963, and signed “L. H. Oswald.” [A10-172] Inserted in the space for names of persons entitled to receive mail through the box were written the names “A. J. Hidell” and “Marina Oswald.” On the basis of a comparison with the standards, the writing and the signature on the card was identified as the handwriting of Lee Harvey Oswald.[A10-173]
The Spurious Selective Service System Notice of Classification and U.S. Marine Corps Certificate of Service
When Oswald was arrested he had in his possession a Selective Service System notice of classification and a certificate of service in the U.S. Marine Corps in the name of “Alek James Hidell,” and a Selective Service System notice of classification, a Selective Service System registration certificate, and a certificate of service in the U.S. Marine Corps in his own name.[A10-174] (See Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 19 and 21, [p. 573].) The Hidell cards where photographic counterfeits.[A10-175] After Oswald’s arrest a group of retouched negatives were found in Mr. Paine’s garage at 2515 West Fifth Street, Irving, Tex.,[A10-176] among which were retouched negatives of the Oswald cards.[A10-177] A comparison of these retouched negatives with the Hidell and Oswald cards showed that the Hidell cards had been counterfeited by photographing the Oswald cards, retouching the resulting negatives, and producing photographic prints from the retouched negatives.
The Hidell Notice of Classification
Face side.—The face of the Hidell notice of classification[A10-178] was produced from the face of the Oswald notice of classification[A10-179] by a two-step process. First, the counterfeiter photographed the Oswald notice, making a basic intermediate negative.[A10-180] He then opaqued out of this intermediate negative all of the information typed or handwritten onto the Oswald notice, including the name “Lee Harvey Oswald,” the selective service No., “41-114-39-532,” the signature of the official of the local board, and the mailing date. In addition, he made another intermediate negative of the lowermost third of the Oswald notice, which contained a printed legend setting forth various instructions relating to draft board procedures.[A10-181] This negative reproduced the printed material exactly, but reduced it in size.[A10-182] The two intermediate negatives were combined to produce a third negative, substantially identical to the basic intermediate negative except that, by virtue of the reduction in the size of the printed legend, a square space had been created in the lower left-hand corner.[A10-183] The counterfeiter then made a photographic print of this third negative, which contained blanks wherever typed or handwritten material had appeared on the original Oswald notice and a new space in the lower left-hand corner. Finally, new material was inserted into the blanks on the Hidell notice where typed or handwritten material had appeared on the Oswald notice.[A10-184] Thus the name “ALEK JAMES HIDELL,” the selective service No. “42-224-39-532,” and the mailing date “Feb. 5, 1962,” were typed into the appropriate blanks on the Hidell notice. Two typewriters were used in this typing, as shown by differences in the design of the typed figure “4,”[A10-185] and by differences in the strength of the typed impression.[A10-186] Probably the counterfeiter switched typewriters when he discovered that the ribbon of his first typewriter was not inked heavily enough to leave a clear impression (a problem which would have been aggravated by the fact that the glossy photographic paper used to make the Hidell notice did not provide a good surface for typewriting).[A10-187] The face of the notice also bore many uninked indentations, which could only be made out under strong side lighting.[A10-188] These indentations were apparently made with the typewriter set at stencil—that is, set so that the typewriter key struck the notice directly, rather than striking it through the inked typewriter ribbon.[A10-189] This may have been done as a dry-run practice, to enable the counterfeiter to determine how to properly center and aline the inserted material.[A10-190] A sidelight photograph showed that the names “ALEK,” “JAMES,” and “HIDELL” had each been typed in stencil at least twice before being typed in with the ribbon.[A10-191] A capital letter “O” had been stenciled prior to one of the stenciled “ALEK’s.”[A10-192] A serial number and a date of mailing had also been typed in stencil.[A10-193]
In addition to the typed material, a signature, “Alek J. Hidell,” was written in ink in the blank provided for the registrant’s signature, and another, somewhat illegible signature, apparently reading “Good Hoffer,” was written in ink in the blank provided for the signature of an official of the local board.[A10-194] This name differed from the name written in ink on the Oswald notice, which appeared to consist of a first name beginning with an “E” or a “G” and the surname “Schiffen.”[A10-195] However, the legibility of the name on the Oswald notice was also quite poor, and the counterfeiter might have been attempting to duplicate it. A possible reason for deleting the original name and substituting another is that if the name had not been deleted it would have been reproduced on the Hidell notice as a photographic reproduction, which would look less authentic than a pen-and-ink signature.[A10-196]
Based on a comparison with the handwriting in the standards, the signature “Alek J. Hidell” on the Hidell notice was identified as being in the handwriting of Lee Harvey Oswald.[A10-197] The signature “Good Hoffer” could not be positively identified, being almost illegible; however, it was not inconsistent with Oswald’s handwriting.[A10-198]
To complete the face of the Hidell notice a picture of Lee Harvey Oswald was inserted into the space in the lower left-hand corner which had been created by reducing the size of the printed legend at the bottom.[A10-199]
Cadigan Exhibit No. 19
Face and reverse sides of the Oswald Notice of Classification.
Cadigan Exhibit No. 21
Face and reverse sides of the Oswald Selective Service System Registration Certificate and the Oswald Certificate of Service in the U.S. Marine Corps.
Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 15 and 16
Face and reverse sides of the Hidell Selective Service System Notice of Classification.
Face and reverse sides of the Hidell Certificate of Service in the U.S. Marine Corps.
In creating the face of the Hidell notice, the counterfeiter left traces which enabled the experts to link together the Hidell notice, the retouched negatives, and the Oswald notice. To retouch the negatives the counterfeiter simply painted a red opaque substance on one side of the negative over the material he wished to delete. When the negative was printed, the opaquing prevented light from passing through, so that the print showed blanks wherever the negative had been opaqued. However, the original material was still clearly visible on the negative itself.[A10-200] In addition, at several points the typed or handwritten material in the Oswald notice had overlapped the printed material. For example, the signature of the official of the local board overlapped the letters “re” in the printed word “President,” “l” and “a” in the printed word “local,” and “viola” in the printed word “violation.” When this signature was opaqued out, the portions of the printed material which had been overlapped by the signature were either removed or mutilated. The consequent distortions were apparent on both the retouched negative and the Hidell notice itself. Similarly, the selective service number typed on the Oswald notice overlapped the margins of the boxes into which it was typed. Although the counterfeiter opaqued out the numerals themselves, the margins of the boxes remained thickened at the points where they had been overlapped by the numerals. These thickened margins were apparent on both the retouched negative and the Hidell notice.[A10-201]
Reverse side.—The reverse side of the Hidell notice, which was pasted back-to-back to the face, was actually a form of the reverse side of a Selective Service System registration certificate. Essentially, it was counterfeited the same way as the face of the notice: a photograph was made of the reverse side of the Oswald registration certificate, the material which had been typed or stamped on the Oswald registration certificate was opaqued out of the resulting negative, and a photographic print was made from the retouched negative. This is shown by the negative, in which the opaqued-out information is still visible, and by defects in the printed material on the Hidell notice at point where typed-in material had overlapped printed material on the Oswald registration certificate.[A10-202]
As the final step, new information was typed on the print in the blanks which resulted from the retouching operation.[A10-203] Thus “GR” was substituted for “Blue” under color of eyes; “BROWN” was substituted for “Brn” under color of hair; “FAIR” was substituted for “Med.” under complexion; “5” [ft.] “9” [in.] was substituted for “5” [ft.] “11” [in.] under height; and “155” was substituted for “150” under weight. The name and address of the local board on the Oswald registration certificate were opaqued out, but substantially the same name and address were typed back onto the Hidell notice.[A10-204] As in the signature of the local board official on the face of the notice, a possible reason for deleting the original draft board name and the address and substituting substantially similar material in its place is that if the original material had not been deleted it would have reproduced as a photographic reproduction, which would look much less authentic than typed-in material.[A10-205]
A limited number of typed uninked indentations are also present. Thus the indented letters “CT” appear before the letters “GR” (under color of eyes) and the indented letters “EY” follow “GR.” An indented “9” appears above the visible “9” for the inch figure of height, and an indented “i” appears before the weight, “155.” Much of the typed material on the reverse side of the Hidell notice was not very legible under ordinary lighting, since it was typed with a typewriter which left a very weakly inked impression.[A10-206] In fact, it is difficult to tell whether some of the material, particularly the word “Brown” under color of hair, was put in by stencil or by ribbon.
The Hidell Certificate of Service
The face and reverse side of the Hidell certificate of service were produced from the face and reverse side of the Oswald certificate of service[A10-207] by photographing the Oswald certificate, retouching the resulting negatives to eliminate typed and handwritten material, and making a photographic print from the retouched negative.[A10-208] As in the case of the notice of classification, this is shown by the negative itself, in which the opaqued-out information is still visible, and by defects in the printed material on the Hidell certificate at points where handwritten material had crossed over printed material on the Oswald certificate. Thus, in the Oswald certificate the upper portion of the name “Lee” in Oswald’s signature crosses the letter “u” in the printed word “signature.” The consequent mutilation of the printed letter “u” can be seen on the Hidell certificate. Similarly, the ending stroke in the letter “y” in the name “Harvey” in Oswald’s signature crosses the letter “n” in the printed word “certifying.” This stroke was not removed at all, and can be seen as a stroke across the “n” in the Hidell certificate.[A10-209] As the final step in producing the Hidell certificate, new material was typed into the blanks on the photographic print. On the face, the words “ALEK JAMES HIDELL” were typed into the blank where “LEE HARVEY OSWALD 1653230” had appeared. A sidelight photograph shows that these words had been typed in stencil at least twice before being typed in with the ribbon apparently to determine proper centering and alignment.[A10-210] In producing the reverse side of the Hidell certificate, the signature “Lee Harvey Oswald,” and the dates “24 October 1956” and “11 September 1959,” showing the beginning and end of the period of active service, had been opaqued out. No signature was inserted into resulting blank signature space. However, just below the word “of” in the printed line “signature of individual,” there are two vertical indentations which fill about three-fourths of the height of the signature blank, and a diagonal indentation which slants from approximately the base of the left vertical to approximately the midpoint of the right vertical—the total effect being of a printed capital letter “H.” Also, just below the second and third “i’s” in the printed word “individual” are two more vertical indentations, which could be the vertical strokes of “d’s” or “l’s”—although the circular portion of the letter “d” is not present.[A10-211] These indentations could have been made by any sharp instrument, such as a ballpoint pen which was not delivering ink, a stylus of the type used in preparing mimeograph forms, or even a toothpick.[A10-212] The indentations are brought out rather clearly in a sidelight photograph, but can also be seen on the card itself if the card is held so that light strikes it at an angle.[A10-213]
Into the space for the beginning of active service was typed the date “OCT. 13 1958.” The space for the end of active service contains several light-impression and stencil typewriting operations. It was apparently intended to read “OCT. 12 1961,” but because of the lightness of the impression and the many stenciled characters, the date is barely legible.[A10-214] Interestingly, one of the stenciled impressions in the blank for end of active service reads “24 October 1959,” as determined under a microscope, while a stenciled impression in the blank for beginning of active service reads “24 October 1957.”[A10-215]
The counterfeiting of the Hidell cards did not require great skill, but probably required an elementary knowledge of photography, particularly of the photographic techniques used in a printing plant.[A10-216] A moderate amount of practice with the technique would be required—perhaps half a dozen attempts. Practicing retouching on the balance of the negatives found at the Paine garage would have been sufficient.[A10-217] The retouching of the negatives could have been accomplished without any special equipment. However, the preparation of the negative, apart from retouching, would probably have required a very accurate camera, such as would be found in a photographic laboratory or printing plant.[A10-218]
The Vaccination Certificate
A government-printed form entitled “International Certificates of Vaccination or Revaccination against Smallpox”[A10-219] was found among Oswald’s belongings at his room at 1026 Beckley Avenue, Dallas.[A10-220] The form purported to certify that “LEE OSWALD” had been vaccinated against smallpox on “JUNE 8, 1963” by “DR. A.J. HIDEEL, P.O. BOX 30016, NEW ORLEANS, LA.” The card was signed “Lee H. Oswald” and “A. J. Hideel,” and the name and address “Lee H. Oswald, New Orleans, La.” were hand printed on the front of the card. All of this material, except the signatures and the hand printing, had been stamped onto the card. The Hideel name and address consisted of a three-line stamp—“DR. A. J. HIDEEL/P.O. BOX 30016/NEW ORLEANS, LA.” A circular, stamped, illegible impression resembling a seal appeared under a column entitled “Approved stamp.”[A10-221]
On the basis of a comparison with the standards, Cole identified all of the handwriting on the vaccination certificate, including the signature “A. J. Hideel,” as the writing of Lee Harvey Oswald.[A10-222] Cadigan identified all of the writing as Oswald’s except for the “A. J. Hideel” signature, which in his opinion was too distorted to either identify or nonidentify as Oswald’s handwriting.[A10-223] The stamped material on the certificate was compared with a rubber stamping kit which belonged to Oswald.[A10-224] In this kit was a rubber stamp with three lines of print assembled: “L. H. OSWALD/4907 MAGAZINE ST/NEW ORLEANS, LA.”[A10-225] Cole found a perfect agreement in measurement and design between the letters stamped on the certificate and the letters he examined from Oswald’s rubber stamping kit. However, he was unable to determine whether the characteristics of Oswald’s rubber stamping kit were distinctive, and therefore, while he concluded that Oswald’s rubber stamping kit could have made the rubber stamp impressions on the certificate, he was unable to say that it was the only kit which could have made the impressions.[A10-226] On the basis of the comparison between the words “NEW ORLEANS, LA.” set up in the rubber stamp in Oswald’s kit, and the words “NEW ORLEANS, LA.” on the certificate, Cadigan concluded that these words had been stamped on the certificate with Oswald’s rubber stamp. However, he could draw no conclusion as to the remaining stamped material, which was not directly comparable to the remaining lines set up on Oswald’s rubber stamp.[A10-227]
On close examination, the circular impression resembling a seal consisted of the words “BRUSH IN CAN,” printed in reverse.[A10-228] Apparently, the impression was made with the top of a container of solvent or cleaning fluid which bore these words in raised lettering. In the center of the impression was a mottled pattern which was similar to the blank areas on a date stamp found in Oswald’s rubber stamping kit.[A10-229]
The Fair Play for Cuba Committee Card
The Fair Play for Cuba Committee card had two signatures: “L. H. Oswald” and “A. J. Hidell.” Based on the standards, both Cole and Cadigan identified “L. H. Oswald” as the signature of Lee Harvey Oswald,[A10-230] but both were unable to identify the “A. J. Hidell” signature.[A10-231] Cadigan noted differences between the Hidell signature and Oswald’s handwriting, indicating the possibility that someone other than Oswald had authored the signature.[A10-232] Cole believed that the signature was somewhat beyond Oswald’s abilities as a penman.[A10-233] On the basis of a short English interlinear translation written by Marina Oswald, Cole felt that she might have been the author of the signature,[A10-234] but the translation did not present enough of her handwriting to make possible a positive identification.[A10-235] In subsequent testimony before the Commission, Marina stated that she was indeed the author of the Hidell signature on the card.[A10-236] Cadigan confirmed this testimony by obtaining further samples of Marina Oswald’s handwriting and comparing these samples with the signature on the card.[A10-237]
The Unsigned Russian-Language Note
Cadigan’s examination confirmed Marina’s testimony that the handwriting in the unsigned note, Commission Exhibit No. 1, was that of Lee Harvey Oswald.[A10-238] Since the note was written almost entirely in the Russian language, which uses the Cyrillic alphabet (as opposed to the Latin alphabet used in the English language), in making his examination Cadigan employed not only Oswald’s English language standards, but also letters written by Oswald in the Russian language.[A10-239]
The Homemade Wrapping Paper Bag
In the absence of watermarks or other distinctive characteristics, it is impossible to determine whether two samples of paper came from the same manufacturer.[A10-240] The homemade paper bag found on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository following the assassination was made out of heavy brown paper and glue-bearing brown paper tape, neither of which contained watermarks or other distinctive characteristics.[A10-241] However, Cadigan compared the questioned paper and tape in the paper bag with known paper and tape samples obtained from the shipping department of the Texas School Book Depository on November 22, 1963, to see if the questioned items could have come from the shipping room.[A10-242] The questioned and known items were examined visually by normal, incidental, and transmitted natural and electric light, and under ultraviolet light;[A10-243] examined microscopically for surface, paper structure, color, and imperfections;[A10-244] examined for their felting pattern, which is the pattern of light and dark areas caused by the manner in which the fibers become felted at the beginning stages of paper manufacture;[A10-245] measured for thickness with a micrometer sensitive to one one-thousandth of an inch,[A10-246] subjected to a fiber analysis to determine the type of fibers of which they were composed, and whether the fibers were bleached or unbleached;[A10-247] and examined spectrographically to determine what metallic ions were present.[A10-248] The questioned and known items were identical in all the properties measured by these tests.[A10-249] (The width of the tape on the paper sack was 3 inches, while the width of the sample tape was 2.975, or twenty-five thousandths of an inch smaller; however, this was not a significant difference).[A10-250] In contrast, a paper sample obtained from the Texas School Book Depository shipping room on December 1, 1963, was readily distinguishable from the questioned paper.[A10-251]
Examination of the tape revealed other significant factors indicating that it could have come from the Texas School Book Depository shipping room. There were several strips of tape on the bag.[A10-252] All but two of the ends of these strips were irregularly torn; the remaining two ends had machine-cut edges. This indicated that the person who made the bag had drawn a long strip of tape from a dispensing machine and had torn it by hand into several smaller strips.[A10-253] Confirmation that the tape had been drawn from a dispensing machine was supplied by the fact that a series of small markings in the form of half-inch lines ran down the center of the tape like ties on a railroad track. Such lines are made by a ridged wheel in a tape dispenser which is constructed so that when a hand lever is pulled, the wheel, which is connected to the lever, pulls the tape from its roll and dispenses it. Such dispensers are usually found only in commercial establishments. A dispenser of this type was located in the Texas School Book Depository shipping room. The length of the lines and the number of lines per inch on the tape from the paper bag was identical to the length of the lines and the number of lines per inch on the tape obtained from the dispenser in the Texas School Book Depository shipping room.[A10-254]