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.
SenatorCooper. 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?
SenatorCooper. 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 onthe 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?
SenatorCooper. 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.
SenatorCooper. 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.
SenatorCooper. Very well. You want that made a part of the record?
Mr.Eisenberg. Yes, sir.
SenatorCooper. 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?
SenatorCooper. 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.
SenatorCooper. 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.
SenatorCooper. 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.
SenatorCooper. 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.
SenatorCooper. 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.
SenatorCooper. 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.
SenatorCooper. Would these changes have required the assistance at the time of anotherperson——
Mr.Cole. I think not.
SenatorCooper. Or could they be accomplished by one person?
Mr.Cole. One person could easily do it.
SenatorCooper. 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.
SenatorCooper. 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.
SenatorCooper. 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.
SenatorCooper. 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 negativeslet his opaque run into areas which he wanted to save, what areas are you referring to, what type of areas?
Mr.Cole. Well, areas where there is needed a sharp outline of a box which is to receive some printed information, and this, of course, is a very thin line, and it is very difficult to control this liquid on the negative. There are some places where it has run into the line and apparently it was necessary to make some strengthening or correction of that line later.
Mr.Eisenberg. Did you see evidence of correction of the line?
Mr.Cole. Yes; on Commission Exhibit 795 the boxes for selective service number apparently have been strengthened somewhat.
Mr.Eisenberg. Now referring to Commission Exhibit 801, which is the actual card, do the numbers overlap or extend to the borders of the margin at all?
Mr.Cole. There is one figure in particular which runs right along the line of the box. This is the first box on the left, and the figures are "41" and the "1" lies directly over the line on the right side of the box.
Mr.Eisenberg. And does the "4" in "41" and the "3" in "39" overlap the boxes?
Mr.Cole. They do.
Mr.Eisenberg. Would that practically necessitate a correction of the boxes?
Mr.Cole. Yes; it would, in order to repair the line.
Mr.Eisenberg. Mr. Cole, I hand you an item entitled "Certificate of Service Armed Forces of the United States," reading "This is to certify that Alek James Hidell" and so forth, and "Period of Active Duty"—on the reverse side now—"October 1, 1958" to a date which is blurred, and I ask you whether you have examined this item?
Mr.Cole. I have.
Mr.Eisenberg. Mr. Chairman, may this be admitted as 806?
SenatorCooper. Let the exhibit be admitted.
(The document referred to was marked as Commission Exhibit No. 806, and received in evidence.)
Mr.Eisenberg. When did you first examine this item, Mr. Cole?
Mr.Cole. That was also examined in December of 1963, December 6, 1963.
Mr.Eisenberg. Together with the selective service system notice of classification?
Mr.Cole. Yes, sir.
Mr.Eisenberg. And did you have any negatives at that time, or the original?
Mr.Cole. I did not.
Mr.Eisenberg. What was your conclusion at that time, based solely upon the examination of 806?
Mr.Cole. It was my conclusion that 806 is actually a photographic print from a photographic negative. It is not an original document.
Mr.Eisenberg. And on what did you base this conclusion?
Mr.Cole. My familiarity with the appearance of photographic paper primarily.
Mr.Eisenberg. Did you prepare photographs at that time, Mr. Cole?
Mr.Cole. I did.
Mr.Eisenberg. Could you produce those? These photographs are of the front and reverse, respectively, of Commission Exhibit 806?
Mr.Cole. Yes, sir.
Mr.Eisenberg. And these were prepared by you or under your supervision?
Mr.Cole. Yes, sir.
Mr.Eisenberg. And they are accurate photographs of 806?
Mr.Cole. They are.
Mr.Eisenberg. Mr. Chairman, may I have these admitted as 807 and 808, respectively.
SenatorCooper. The exhibits will be admitted to the record.
(The photographs referred to were marked as Commission Exhibits Nos. 807 and 808, respectively, and were received in evidence.)
Mr.Eisenberg. 807 will be the front and 808 will be the reverse. Mr. Cole, could you attempt to decipher the typewriting on the reverse side as shown in the photograph 808?
Mr.Cole. The typewriting reads "October 13 1958," and on the second linethere is some confusion of the typewriting, in other words, there is more than one typing operation on the line reading "To." One of these typing operations reads "October 12, 1961." One of the other typing operations on the line for "To," as determined by a previous examination under the microscope, shows an indent of "23 October 1959."
Mr.Eisenberg. Do you believe that was—yes, go ahead.
Mr.Cole. Also on the line reading "From" there is an indentation of another typewriter operation which reads "24 October 1957."
Mr.Eisenberg. Do you believe those indentations were caused by a typewriter set at stencil?
Mr.Cole. Yes; without the interposition of a ribbon between the type bar and the paper.
Mr.Eisenberg. Did you take photographs with side light, as you had in the case of the selective service card, to attempt to bring out these stencil marks?
Mr.Cole. I did.
Mr.Eisenberg. Could you produce those photographs? You are handing me a photograph of the front side of the certificate of service, and is this a photograph which you took?
Mr.Cole. It is.
Mr.Eisenberg. An accurate reproduction of the Exhibit 806?
Mr.Cole. Yes, sir.
Mr.Eisenberg. May I have this admitted as 809, Mr. Chairman?
SenatorCooper. Let this exhibit be made a part of the record.
(The photograph referred to previously marked as Commission Exhibit No. 809, was received in evidence.)
Mr.Eisenberg. You have also given me a photograph of the reverse side of 806?
Mr.Cole. Yes, sir.
Mr.Eisenberg. This was taken by you or under your supervision?
Mr.Cole. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. And is it an accurate photograph of the reverse of 806?
Mr.Cole. It is.
Mr.Eisenberg. May the photograph of the reverse be admitted as Exhibit 810?
SenatorCooper. Exhibit 810 will be admitted as part of the record.
Mr.Eisenberg. Could you show us what you found in the way of indentations caused by stencils, by referring to these Exhibits 809 and 810?
Mr.Cole. 809 shows the face of the exhibit and in addition to the clearly visible typewriting of the name "Alek James Hidell," there is a repetition of this name somewhat below the visible typewriting in the form of typewritten indentations.
Mr.Eisenberg. Is this similar to the typewritten indentations found in the selective service card, 795?
Mr.Cole. Yes; they are.
Mr.Eisenberg. Do you believe that the name "Alek James Hidell" was stenciled once or more than once?
Mr.Cole. More than once, at least twice, I would say.
Mr.Eisenberg. What is the relative position of the two stenciling operations?
Mr.Cole. They were somewhat below, about one-half to three-quarters of the height of a typewritten character below, the visible typewriting.
Mr.Eisenberg. What is the relationship to each other?
Mr.Cole. They are offset about one-quarter to one-half the height of a typewritten character.
Mr.Eisenberg. From each other?
Mr.Cole. That is right, vertically.
Mr.Eisenberg. Is it accurate to say then that there is a progression upward as comparing the typewritten name and the two stenciled operations, or at least that the three are set in step, so that each one is below the next impression?
Mr.Cole. That is correct, with the visible typewriting having the better position relative to the reproduction of the printed matter.
Mr.Eisenberg. Can you think of the reason why this might have been, why this operation might have been performed in this manner, Mr. Cole?
Mr.Cole. Yes. It could easily result from some difficulty of finding the correct place for typewriting the name on the card. The lowermost indentation wouldhave been an incorrect position since it was run into a part of the reproduction of the printed matter.
Mr.Eisenberg. Now, I refer back to 798, which is a highlight photograph of the selective service card, and ask you whether the stenciled material in 798 appears above the line on which the typewritten material—first name, middle name, and last name—should appear?
Mr.Cole. Yes; somewhat above.
Mr.Eisenberg. In light of that, do you think it is possible that the individual who prepared this card used the stencil to determine at what point the typewriting would be placed so that it was in the correct position in relationship to the line above which it belonged?
Mr.Cole. That is a definite possibility and, of course, he might also have been concerned about the position for the reproduced printed matter—"First name," "Middle name," "Last name."
Mr.Eisenberg. Bringing your attention back once more to 795, the Selective Service System card, was the reverse side of that card prepared in your opinion from Commission 802, which is the reverse side of the registration certificate? I also call your attention to 801 for comparision, that is, the original of the selective service card.
Mr.Cole. Yes, sir. The reverse of the photographic identification card, Commission Exhibit 795, could be a photographic reproduction of the reverse of Commission Exhibit 802, with the performance of certain opaquing operations.
Mr.Eisenberg. Looking at the reverse side of the two cards, 802 and 801, does the reverse side of the card 801 have any information for identifying characteristics of the individual bearing the card?
Mr.Cole. It does not.
Mr.Eisenberg. And what about the reverse side of 802?
Mr.Cole. The reverse side of 802 provides space for a personal description, color of eyes, color of hair, complexion, height, and weight.
Mr.Eisenberg. Did you find among the negatives in 800 a negative which might have been used or was used to prepare the reverse side of the selective service card, 795, the spurious card?
Mr.Cole. Yes; I did.
Mr.Eisenberg. Mr. Chairman, may I have this negative classified separately as 811 for purpose of ready identification?
SenatorCooper. Let it be so classified, and admitted as part of the record.
(The document referred to, was marked as Commission Exhibit No. 811 and received in evidence.)
Mr.Eisenberg. Did you find a negative which might have been used for the preparation of the certificate of service, that is 806?
Mr.Cole. Yes; I did, for both face and back.
Mr.Eisenberg. Were these negatives in your opinion used as the negatives for that purpose?
Mr.Cole. Yes, sir. In my opinion, these are the very negatives that were used for producing the photographic print representing a certificate of service.
Mr.Eisenberg. May these be subclassified as or separately classified as 812, Mr. Chairman, and introduced as 812?
SenatorCooper. Let the document be designated as 812 and admitted as part of the record.
(The item referred to, was marked as Commission Exhibit No. 812 and received in evidence.)
Mr.Eisenberg. Did you reach the same conclusion, by the way, as to the negative 811, that is, that it was definitely the negative used to produce the reverse side of 795?
Mr.Cole. I did. This is the very negative to produce the reverse side of 795.
Mr.Eisenberg. Returning to 795, there are two signatures which appear in 795 in ink, is that correct?
Mr.Cole. Yes, sir.
Mr.Eisenberg. That is, the signature over the caption "Member or clerk of local board," and the signature over the caption "Registrant must sign here"?
Mr.Cole. Yes, sir.
Mr.Eisenberg. The second signature reads "Alek J. Hidell"?
Mr.Cole. Yes, sir.
Mr.Eisenberg. Could you read the first signature?
Mr.Cole. The first signature appears to be the name "Goodhoffer," but that is partly an estimate. In other words, it is not possible to read this in a clear manner. That is a possible spelling of the name but not necessarily the only spelling.
(At this point, there was a short recess, and Mr. McCloy entered the hearing room.)
SenatorCooper. I am now called to the Senate. Mr. John McCloy will act as Chairman.
(At this point Senator Cooper departed the hearing room and there was a further recess.)
Mr.Eisenberg. How does that compare with the signature on the original card, Exhibit 801?
Mr.Cole. It is not the same name and, of course, not in the same handwriting.
Mr.Eisenberg. Now, did you compare the two signatures on Exhibit 795 with the standards in this case to determine whether the signatures have been written by the person who produced the standards?
Mr.Cole. I did compare the signatures on 795 with the standard writing.
Mr.Eisenberg. What was your conclusion, Mr. Cole?
Mr.Cole. With respect to the signature above "Member or clerk of local board," I have not formed any conclusion about authorship. With regard to the writing "Alek J. Hidell," it is my opinion that the author of the standard writing is the author of that name.
Mr.Eisenberg. And referring to the charts of the standards which you prepared, and referring to the photograph of 795, could you explain the reasons for this conclusion?
Mr.Cole. Would you want any copy of this?
Mr.Eisenberg. Yes; if you have a copy.
Mr.Cole. The capital letter "A" of the name "Alek" on 795 is reproduced in the standard writing on chart B, item 6, in the general conformation of the several lower case "a's" in that area. I refer to it as a capital "A" because it begins the name, but actually with respect to size and formation it is closely similar to the lower case "a's" of item 6. Now the similarity is largely in the method that the staff is made, the way it pulls away from the oral body of the letter with only a moderate rate of retracing along the right side. That detail, as I say, is found both in the "A" on 795, and in the several "a's" of item 6. There are three in a row there, each beginning a line of writing.
The letter "k" of the name "Alek" compares favorably with the "k's" of the standard writing, chart A, items 13 and 14. With regard to the middle initial "J" there is not a cursive "J" that is, as distinguished from a printed "J"—shown on the charts of standard writing. But the movement required for producing a "J" is similar to that required for producing the capital letter "I," and we observe a similarity as to movement with respect to the "J" of 795 as compared with the "I" of chart B, item 3.
One characteristic of the capital letter "H" of "Hidell" on 795 is the method of making that formation which stands for the crossbar. Now this is the closed part along the lower half of the right side of the letter, which would represent the crossbar of the letter. This is the general movement used in a number of the signatures of Lee H. Oswald. One good example is that on chart B, item 15, the middle initial "H". Another feature of that "H" is the connection to the following letter by an approximately horizontal stroke passing from the finish of the crossbar of the "H" across to the "i," and we observe a similar method of connection, although not with the same letter, on chart A, items 10 and 11, where the "o" is connected by a straight line, almost horizontal projection of the crossbar, from the "H" to the "o".
The letter "i" again shows a feature, which has previously been mentioned in the standard writing, of an increase of forehand slant, that is a slant to the right with respect to that letter as compared to other letters. This feature is shown in a number of places in the standard writing, one good example being on chart B, item 10, the second "i"—which is there because of a misspelling of the word "Washington" that is spelled, the last few letters, "tion"—andthere we observe that rather extreme increase of the forehand slant of the letter "i".
The letter "d" of "Hidell" compares favorably with the "d's" of the standard writing on chart A, item 5, in the word "discharge," and on the same chart, item 6 in the word "regards."
The final "l's" show a perceptible increase of pressure on the downstrokes, which is also found in the standard writing, chart B, item 6, top line, the word "enroll." This shows a somewhat more extreme increase in pressure on downstroke, but I regard it basically as the same habit. This particular part also shows a very abrupt terminal stroke for the letter "l" as between 795 and compared with the final or last stroke of the "l" on chart B in the last stroke in the word "enrolled."
These constitute my reasons for believing that the author of the standard writing is the author of the signature "Alek J. Hidell" on Exhibit 795.
Mr.Eisenberg. Now concerning the other signature, Mr. Cole, are you unable to or—can you state why you are unable to arrive at a conclusion?
Mr.Cole. Well, partly because of the limited writing we have for comparison. The last part of the name is practically illegible, and the letters are so confused that I believe they do not accurately record writing habit. I would regard it as being a rather unnatural writing. Now there is fair legibility in the letters of the first name, and they do have a moderate rate or amount of similarity to the standard writing, but since it is only a few letters, I think there is not a basis for a conclusion.
Mr.Eisenberg. Is the signature inconsistent with the writing of the standards?
Mr.Cole. No; I wouldn't say there was any—there is certainly no basis for eliminating the author of the standards as being the author of that signature.
Mr.Eisenberg. Does there appear to be any attempt at disguise in this signature?
Mr.Cole. Well, I wouldn't regard it. If there is such an attempt, it is not, it seems to me, not a matter of deliberation or trying hard at it, but only a matter of being extremely careless in the last part of that signature.
Mr.Eisenberg. Is illegibility sometimes used as a method of disguise?
Mr.Cole. Yes, sir; it is.
Mr.McCloy. May I ask some questions about this?
Mr.Cole. Yes.
Mr.McCloy. If that word is "Good," that first word on the Exhibit 796, isit——
Mr.Eisenberg. 795, and the photograph is 796.
Mr.McCloy. 795. If that letter "G" is compared with the capital letter "G" on the standard chart B-5, "Glenview," would you say there is any similarity between the two?
Mr.Cole. Yes; there is, with respect to the size of the upper loop which is on the left side of the letter, and the approximate horizontal motion in passing from that loop over to the right side of the letter.
Mr.McCloy. We have it again in 14 of that same chart?
Mr.Cole. Yes, sir.
Mr.McCloy. The "J" which seems to follow the word "Good," however, does not seem to comport with the "J" on the signature "Alek J. Hidell" does it?
Mr.Cole. No; but, of course, you are getting there to the area where the rather serious corruption or illegibility of forms begins. I think one could say that from the fair legibility of the first name, and the very poor legibility of the last name, that this is a deliberate effort. In other words, you have got a demonstration of the ability of the writer to produce a legible writing and, therefore, to devolve into this very illegible effort could be intentional.
Mr.McCloy. I noticed when you compared the "J" in "Alek J. Hidell" with the standard "I," such as the one on chart B-3, there was a definite similarity, but I notice on chart A, No. 7, there is an "I," a capital "I" presumably, which apparently doesn't have the same conformation as the "J" in the Commission Exhibit 795. Would you agree with that?
Mr.Cole. Yes; that is true, but I think in studying these forms we ought to consider all available "I's," and there would be some others, such as the one onB-4 and one in B-6. It shows a fair range of variation, especially with regard to finishing the lower part of that letter. Now, I would judge the one on B-3 to be definitely a part of his writing habit, because it gives the impression of having been made with a considerable amount of freedom. Generally, a larger form is made more freely, more naturally, than a smaller form.
Mr.McCloy. I see.
Mr.Cole. And you see you have got sort of a cramped effect across the base of the "I" in A-7.
Mr.McCloy. What I am getting at is, you don't suggest that all these "I's" and all these "J's" exactly conform, but you are talking in terms of similarities that turn up in certain of them that you believe are significant?
Mr.Cole. Yes, sir.
Mr.Eisenberg. Mr. Cole, I now hand you an item consisting of a yellowish card entitled "International Certificates of Vaccination as approved by The World Health Organization," and so forth, PHS Form 731, and reading in part, "This is to certify that Lee Oswald, whose signature follows" and with the signature, "Lee H. Oswald," date of birth and so forth, "has on the date indicated been vaccinated or revaccinated against smallpox," with a date appearing in a rubber-stamp printing, what appears to be rubber-stamp printing, "June 8, 1963," and a rubber-stamp signature of "Dr. A. J. Hideel, P.O. Box 30016, New Orleans, La.," with some type of stamp on the right side next to the name, and a signature "A. J. Hidell" over the name; and I ask you whether you have examined this item?
Mr.Cole. I have.
Mr.Eisenberg. Mr. Chairman, may this be admitted as Commission Exhibit 813?
Mr.McCloy. It may be admitted.
(The document referred to was marked as Commission Exhibit No. 813, and received in evidence.)
Mr.Eisenberg. Now, I also will show you Commission Exhibit 115, which consists of a Warrior rubber stamping kit which has already been introduced in evidence in connection with testimony of Marina Oswald, and which was found at one of Oswald's residences, and ask you whether you have examined this Commission Exhibit 115?
Mr.Cole. Yes, sir; I have.
Mr.Eisenberg. Did you attempt to determine whether the signatures "Lee H. Oswald" and "A. J. Hideel" on Commission Exhibit 813 were prepared by the author of the standards?
Mr.Cole. Yes, sir; I did.
Mr.Eisenberg. What was your conclusion?
Mr.Cole. It is my conclusion that the author of the standard writing is the author of the writing you just described.
Mr.Eisenberg. Did you attempt to determine whether the apparent rubber-stamp printing had been produced by use of the Warrior kit, Exhibit 115?
Mr.Cole. I did.
Mr.Eisenberg. What was your conclusion?
Mr.Cole. It is my conclusion that the kit could have been used for producing the rubber-stamp printing on—Exhibit 813 is it?
Mr.Eisenberg. Yes.
Did you prepare a photograph of 813, Mr. Cole?
Mr.Cole. Yes; I did.
Mr.Eisenberg. Will you produce that photograph? You have produced two photographs, one of which shows the outside or exterior portion of 813, and the other one shows the interior portion?
Mr.Cole. Correct; yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. Did you take each of these photographs?
Mr.Cole. I did.
Mr.Eisenberg. And are they accurate reproductions of the Exhibit 813?
Mr.Cole. They are.
Mr.Eisenberg. Approximately what enlargements are these, by the way?
Mr.Cole. About 1½ diameters.
Mr.Eisenberg. These are what size photographs?
Mr.Cole. Eight by ten.
Mr.Eisenberg. Mr. Chairman, may these two photographs be admitted as 814 and 815?
Mr.McCloy. They may be.
(The photographs referred to were marked as Commission Exhibits Nos. 814 and 815, and received in evidence.)
Mr.Eisenberg. 814 will be exterior part of 813, and 815 will be the interior.
Now, the exterior portion of 813 also shows some handprinting "Lee H. Oswald" which came out in this photograph—in 814—a little clearer. Did you identify that handwriting, Mr.Cole——
Mr.Cole. I did.
Mr.Eisenberg. As being—what was your conclusion?
Mr.Cole. It is my conclusion that that handprinting is in the hand of the person who made the standard specimens.
Mr.Eisenberg. Now by reference to those photographs, 814 and 815, and by reference to your charts of the standards, could you explain the reasons for your conclusion on the handwriting and handprinting?
Mr.Cole. With respect to the signature, "Lee H. Oswald," as shown by the photograph 815, this compares favorably with other sample signatures that I have examined, some of which are shown on the charts, namely chart A, item 15; chart B, item 15; and chart C, item 6, second line from the bottom. There is, I think, a closer comparison with certain other standard signatures of "Lee H. Oswald" which I have examined, as appearing on the reverse of certain checks.
Mr.Eisenberg. And those are in evidence, are they, as one of the standards, Mr. Cole?
Mr.Cole. Yes, sir.
Mr.Eisenberg. That was described in the record when you introduced it?
Mr.Cole. Yes; the signatures as endorsements on these several checks show what might be described as an exaggerated freedom and carelessness in the execution of this signature.
Mr.Eisenberg. Excuse me, was that 776, that exhibit consisting of the checks?
Mr.Cole. Yes, sir; the signatures and endorsements of the checks in Exhibit 776 show some variation with respect to the care and formation of letters. There are a few endorsements in that group which show a greatly exaggerated freedom or a carelessness in execution. These signatures appear on, especially on, check numbers 2408 and 2506 of this exhibit, and they compare quite favorably in detail with the signature shown by the photograph, Commission Exhibit 815.
Now with regard to the writing of the name "A. J. Hideel" we observed in the combination of letters "Hi" that that letter is joined by means of a projection of a crossbar into the letter "i"; that in the letter "e," which is separated from the preceding "d," there is a very high placement of the loop, that is, instead of beginning at the writing line, the loop of the letter begins about halfway up on the staff, and this is a form that is very familiar in the standard writing, particularly in the handprinted forms. For example, on chart C, item 3, the final "e" in the word "discharge" shows a similar effect. Also on chart C, item 6, the second line, in the name "Mercedes" we have got two "e's" that show a similar effect.
The final "l" shows this perceptible increase of pressure on the downstroke, and a very abrupt terminal stroke also, which had been previously mentioned as being a characteristic of chart B, item 6, in the word "enroll."
Now with regard to the handprinting as shown by Commission photograph Exhibit 814, and considering particularly the name "Oswald," we have a detailed agreement in every feature of letter forms there, and I will direct attention especially to the use of the lowercase "l" and "d" as associated with the capital or uppercase forms of the other four letters of the name, and I will also mention the method of forming the "d," considering first one of the standards where it can be seen more clearly. On chart C, item 6, the first line, final "d" of "Oswald" shows first a fairly long downstroke, then a stroke rising from the end of that downstroke moving upwards and to the left to form the body of the letter, and this method of formation is also used in the "d" of "Oswald" as shown by the photograph Exhibit 814.
On the next line below there is faintly visible the name "Orleans" and I will direct attention to the base of the "l," which shows a rather deep compoundcurve. That is, here again, instead of having a simple horizontal line to represent the base of that printed letter, there is a fairly deep curve which is found in the standard writing in several places, one example being chart C, item 4.
This word also illustrates the tendency to mix lowercase forms with capitals in the case of the use of the lowercase "e" in "Orleans," and that, of course, is repeated many places in the standard writing, a good place being chart C, item 6, the word "Mercedes." These are the reasons for my belief that the author of the standard writing is the author of the handwritingon——
Mr.Eisenberg. 813?
Mr.Cole. 813.
Mr.Eisenberg. Now, the handwriting and handprinting on 813 is all extremely dim. Do you have any explanation for that?
Mr.Cole. There is evidence that this document has been treated with chemicals, probably for the purpose of developing for fingerprints. Such chemicals are ordinarily included in solvents which dissolve ink, and some bleach out ink. I think that is the reason for the poor legibility of this ink writing. At one time, I think, it probably had a pretty good legibility.
Mr.Eisenberg. Was this the condition of the item when you examined it?
Mr.Cole. Yes; it was.
Mr.Eisenberg. Now, you stated that the apparent rubber-stamp printing could have been produced by the Warrior rubber kit, 115. First let me ask you, is this actually rubber-stamp printing?
Mr.Cole. Yes; I believe it is.
Mr.Eisenberg. That is, the printing on the vaccination certificate. When you say it could have been produced by the print in Exhibit 115, could you elaborate as to your findings on that point?
Mr.Cole. Yes; in considering that question, I made an impression from the stamp, from the type setup in a stamp which is a part of this kit at the present time. Now the typing as set up reads "L. H. Oswald, 4907 Magazine St., New Orleans, La.," and, of course, that text repeats some of the letters, a good many of the letters, which are in the rubber-stamp impression "Doctor A. J. Hideel, P.O. Box 30016, New Orleans, La.," and I made a careful comparison of these letters as taken from the stamped impression with what is shown on 813, and I found that they agree perfectly as to measurements of the type faces, and they agree as to the design of letters. Therefore, I would say that the rubber-stamp type faces from this particular kit could have been used to produce that rubber-stamp impression on 813.
Mr.Eisenberg. Could you produce the two cards which you used to record the impression of the 115 rubber-stamp kit?
Mr.Cole. Yes, sir; the second card is an impression from the date stamp which is a part of this kit, and that too agrees along the same lines with respect to measurements of the letters and the designs of the letters.
Mr.Eisenberg. Mr. Chairman, may these two cards be admitted as Commission Exhibit 816?
Mr.McCloy. They may be admitted.
(The cards referred to were marked as Commission Exhibit No. 816 and received in evidence.)
Mr.Eisenberg. Are there microscopic characteristics on rubber-stamp printing sufficient to make positive identifications?
Mr.Cole. I don't regard any to be present in this particular stamp. But while the type faces could not be regarded as perfect, I don't know of any way to determine whether the imperfections belong only to this kit or whether they would be true of all Warrior rubber-stamp kits.
Mr.Eisenberg. Did you notice any imperfections?
Mr.Cole. Well, I did not actually catalog any imperfections, but in looking at the type I had the general impression that it is not a perfect impression, certainly not as perfect as you would get from metal type in a regular printing operation.
Mr.Eisenberg. Now, you stamped an impression other than the one contained on the card 813. Could you explain the reasons for that?
Mr.Cole. I stamped the material which was already set up in type. Since it repeated a good deal of the material, enough for examination, I did not wanton my own volition to tear down the stamps that were in this in order to set up other type.
Mr.Eisenberg. Did you examine the stamp impression appearing on the right-hand side of the interior of the Document 813?
Mr.Cole. I did.
Mr.Eisenberg. Did you come to any conclusion as to that stamp?
Mr.Cole. Yes; this stamp includes wording which reads in reverse, and there is a double stamping of the wording, and the text is "BRUSH IN CAN" the three words, "BRUSH IN CAN." The word "BRUSH" extends in approximately a semicircle across the upper part of the stamp and the words "IN CAN" in a semicircle across the lower part.
Mr.Eisenberg. Can you think of any explanation of why those words should appear?
Mr.Cole. Yes; a possible explanation is that the object used to make the stamped impression was the top of some container of a solvent or cleaning fluid with raised lettering, and that the top of this can was pressed against a stamped pad, and then pressed against this document.
Mr.Eisenberg. What would the object be?
Mr.Cole. Well, I think it is very common to see rubber-stamped impressions on documents of this particular character. They are so commonplace, I think that it is probably a habit or custom among most people not to read them. They may be regarded as giving a document an official appearance. That may be the purpose of getting some sort of stamp onto the document.
Mr.Eisenberg. Why do the letters appear in reverse, Mr. Cole?
Mr.Cole. Well, they would naturally appear in reverse. If they read correctly in raised letters as the top of some container, if it was intended that they be read correctly there, then they would naturally be in reverse from the stamped impression. Of course, you will observe that in this Warrior stamping kit the material set up in the rubber stamp there is in reverse, which produces correct reading and writing from an impression. There is one more feature of this particular stamp I think ought to be mentioned.
Mr.Eisenberg. Yes, please.
Mr.Cole. There is toward the center of that stamp a rectangle of a deposit of ink in a certain pattern, sort of a spotty mottled pattern of ink, and this corresponds to the pattern of the blank parts of the date stamp.
Mr.Eisenberg. Which date stamp is that?
Mr.Cole. The Warrior stamping kit includes a dating stamp, and on the adjustable bands are certain blank areas. Now, the pattern on those blank areas is similar to the pattern which we have in this rectangle of the stamp just discussed.
Mr.McCloy. May I ask, this Post Office Box 30016, isthat——
Mr.Eisenberg. Yes; thatcorresponds——
Mr.McCloy. Does it correspond to the one he used in New Orleans?
Mr.Eisenberg. I am about to introduce an exhibit which shows Post Office Box 30061, that is, the last two figures reversed, and I imagine his spelling accounts for that.
Mr. Cole, I now show you an item consisting of a part of an application for Post Office Box 30061 in New Orleans, dated June 11, 1963, with a postmark, signed "L. H. Oswald," and in the part of the box captioned "Names of persons entitled to receive mail through box" and so forth, the words are written "A. J. Hidell, Marina Oswald," and I ask you whether you have examined that item?
Mr.Cole. I have.
Mr.Eisenberg. May I have this item admitted, Mr. Chairman, as 817?
Mr.McCloy. Let it be admitted.
(The item referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 817, and received in evidence.)
Mr.Eisenberg. Did you compare this with the standards to determine who wrote the writing on that exhibit, or more accurately, whether the printing and writing was produced by the same person who produced the printing and writing on the standards?
Mr.Cole. I did.
Mr.Eisenberg. What was your conclusion?
Mr.Cole. It is my conclusion that the author of the standard writing is the author of the writing on Commission Exhibit 817.
Mr.Eisenberg. Did you take a photograph of Commission 817?
Mr.Cole. I did.
Mr.Eisenberg. This was taken by you or under your supervision?
Mr.Cole. Yes, sir.
Mr.Eisenberg. And it is a true and accurate reproduction of 817?
Mr.Cole. It is.
Mr.Eisenberg. This is an 8 by 10 photograph. Mr. Chairman, may this be admitted as 818?
Mr.McCloy. It may be admitted.
(Commission Exhibit No. 818 was marked and received in evidence.)
Mr.Eisenberg. By reference to this photograph and by reference to your charts of standards, Mr. Cole, can you explain to us how you came to this conclusion?
Mr.Cole. Yes, sir; with respect to the handprinting of the name "A. J. Hidell," I direct attention to the formation of the letter "d" in the same manner as that previously described in the standard writing, chart C, item 6, first line—a close correspondence as to the construction, writing movement, in forming those letters.
The letter "e" compares favorably not only as to form but the circumstance that here again the lowercase letter is mixed in with capital letters. Of course, that applies to the three letters "ide" associated with the other capital letter of that name, and that is a habit shown in many places in the standard writing.
The "L's" have the compound curve across the base, which has previously been observed in the standard writing.
In the name "Marina," the form of the capital letter "M" compares closely with the capital letter "M" shown on chart C, item 6, second line, the name "Mercedes."
That same name shows the form of letter "A" with the retraced stroke on the left side which exists in many places in the standard writing.
The name "Oswald" again shows this mixture of uppercase and lowercase letters, namely the circumstance that the "l" and "d" are lower-case forms, whereas the previous, the other four letters are upper case.
The signature "L. H. Oswald," agrees with other signatures that I have examined, some of which are shown on the charts, chart A, item 15, chart B, item 15, and chart C, item 6, next to the last line, a close correspondence in all details, except that there is some confusion or overriding in the second letter of the last name in the area of the "s," which may be only an accidental imperfection in that particular area. Otherwise, there is a fairly clear showing of all the letters, and they agree with the standards.
Mr.Eisenberg. Does that "s" that you refer to appear to be two "s's," one printed and one written?
Mr.Cole. Yes; it could be that. They are somewhat intertwined there, and we have got this name just following an instance of making handprinting, so that could be an explanation of it.
Mr.Eisenberg. Next, I show you a photograph of a card reading "Fair Play for Cuba Committee. New Orleans Chapter, L. H. Oswald," signature, "L. H. Oswald," dated June 15, 1963, signed "Chapter President—A. J. Hidell," and I ask you whether you have examined that photograph?
Mr.Cole. I have.
Mr.Eisenberg. May this be admitted as 819, Mr. Chairman?
Mr.McCloy. It may be admitted.
(Commission Exhibit No. 819 was marked and received in evidence.)
Mr.Eisenberg. For the record, this is a photograph of a card that was found in Oswald's wallet at the time of his apprehension.
I now show you a card, a paper card, which appears to be the same as Exhibit 819, except that there is no visible marking where the words "Chapter"—where the signature "Chapter President—A. J. Hidell" is written on Exhibit 819, and the card is seriously discolored with a dark brown discoloration, and I ask you whether you have examined this card I now hand you?
Mr.Cole. I have.
Mr.Eisenberg. May I have that admitted as 820, Mr. Chairman?
Mr.McCloy. It may be admitted.
(Commission Exhibit No. 820 was marked and received in evidence.)
Mr.Eisenberg. In your opinion, is 819 a photograph of the card, 820?
Mr.Cole. Yes; it is.
Mr.Eisenberg. Can you account in any way for the discoloration of the card 820?
Mr.Cole. The discoloration is characteristic of that which has previously been observed as resulting from treating a document with a solution of silver nitrate. Such treatment is sometimes done in the hope of developing latent fingerprints, and this treatment could be, and probably is, the explanation for the elimination of a line of writing on the line for signature above the title "Chapter President."
Mr.Eisenberg. Were you able to make out whether any writing had appeared in the space which is now blank on Exhibit 820, making provision forthe——
Mr.Cole. Yes; itis——
Mr.Eisenberg. Excuse me, making provision for the chapter president's signature?
Mr.Cole. Yes; there is barely enough showing to indicate that there was a line of writing there at one time.
Mr.Eisenberg. Could you tell whether it was the same as the signature "A. J. Hidell"?
Mr.Cole. It conforms generally to the signature "A. J. Hidell," that is, the form shown by the photograph, Exhibit 819.
Mr.Eisenberg. Have you taken a photograph of 819?
Mr.Cole. Yes, sir; I am sorry, sir; I do not have that photograph with me.
Mr.Eisenberg. All right.
Do you want to take a look at this, Mr. McCloy?
Did you compare the signatures "Lee Oswald" and "A. J. Hidell" on 819 to determine whether they had been written by the author of the standards?
Mr.Cole. Yes, sir; may I look at that photograph? Yes, sir; I did.
Mr.Eisenberg. What was your conclusion as to the signature of Lee H. Oswald?
Mr.Cole. It is my opinion that the author of the standard writing is the author of the signature "Lee H. Oswald" on Exhibit 819.
Mr.Eisenberg. What was your conclusion as to the signature "A. J. Hidell"?
Mr.Cole. I find no basis in the standard writing for identification of the author of such standard writing as the author of the name "A. J. Hidell" as shown by 819.
Mr.Eisenberg. Do you think that the author of the standard writing might have produced that signature in a disguised hand?
Mr.Cole. I think that is highly improbable, because this does not appear to be a disguised hand. It looks like a fairly natural handwriting.
Mr.Eisenberg. And that is based upon the items which you enumerated earlier which indicated the presence of a natural handwriting, such as speed and so forth?