Mr.Eisenberg. Now, in fact, the credit under Shaneyfelt No. 5 says, "Copyright 1964, Detroit Free Press," is that correct?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. That is correct.
Mr.Eisenberg. But is the picture identical in all respects to the Detroit Free Press picture?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. No; the retouching, particularly around the breech of the rifle in Exhibit No. 5, which is the Newsweek reproduction, is different than the retouching on the reproduction in Exhibit No. 4, the Detroit Free Press.
Mr.Eisenberg. Does the reproduction around the breech, that is, just below Oswald's left hand, correspond to anything you have ever seen on a rifle, Mr. Shaneyfelt—that is, the four or five roughly parallel lines?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. No; it doesn't correspond to anything that I recall having seen on a rifle.
Mr.Eisenberg. What do you think the genesis of all those lines would be?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. I believe that they are possibly the artist's interpretation of how the rifle may have looked in that area, since the photograph being retouched was indistinct in that area.
Mr.Eisenberg. Would you say that would be likely to have been done by a person not familiar with rifles?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. That is a possibility, but I wouldn't be able to state that with any degree of certainty. That is one possibility.
Mr.Eisenberg. I also see that Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 4 has an arrow pointing to the revolver, which is not present in Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 5, is that correct?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. That is correct.
Mr.Eisenberg. Can you explain why Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 5 differs from Exhibit No. 4, although it seems to be substantially similar, and in fact Newsweek credits its photo to the Detroit Free Press, which is the Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 4 picture?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. Yes; I would attribute these differences to the differences in retouching. Since it would be normal procedure in publications of this type for each publication to do its own retouching for its own reproductions, they would normally receive the picture in an unretouched condition from whatever source is available, such as the Associated Press, or, as in Exhibit No. 3, the credit to the Detroit Free Press, and after receiving the unretouched photograph, would then add the retouching that they desired to have on the photo before making the halftone reproduction.
Mr.Eisenberg. The area to the right of Oswald's shoulder and head, that is, to the left of the shoulder and head as we look at the picture, appears to be retouched or airbrushed out in the same way in both pictures. Would that be your conclusion?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. Yes; with one exception, that while the airbrushing is generally similar, it appears in the Detroit Free Press, which is Exhibit No. 4, as a light area against a black shirt, while in Newsweek, Exhibit No. 5, it appears as a black area against a rather dark shirt, with a light highlight added along the shoulder to make the area stand out against the background.
Mr.Eisenberg. Is it your conclusion, then, that two separate retouchings were done to accomplish that effect, one retouching by the Newsweek people and one retouching by the Detroit Free Press people?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. I have no foundation on which to base a positive statement in that regard, but this is suggested by the variations that are present.
Mr.Eisenberg. So that the presence of that same feature as a retouch in both photographs might be coincidental, or at least might not have been done by the same person?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. That is correct.
Mr.Eisenberg. And in your mind that similarity of feature does not preclude the possibility that a completely unretouched photo was submitted by the Detroit Free Press to Newsweek?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. That is right.
Mr.Eisenberg. Now, Mr. Shaneyfelt, I hand you page 30 of the New York Times, issue of February 19, 1964, which again contains a photograph similar to those you have been testifying as to—and which page I have marked Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 6—and I ask you whether you have examined that photograph?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. Yes; I have.
Mr.Eisenberg. And what is your conclusion concerning that photograph, Mr. Shaneyfelt?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. I found this to be generally similar in all visible characteristics to the photograph which is Commission Exhibit No. 133-A, and found no differences to suggest that it is other than the same photograph as Exhibit No. 133-A. However, the lack of detail in the halftone reproduction on Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 6 precludes a positive identification with Commission Exhibit No. 133-A.
Mr.Eisenberg. Do you see any retouching in this photograph, Mr. Shaneyfelt?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. Yes, I do.
Mr.Eisenberg. Can you describe that?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. In the photograph reproduced on Exhibit No. 6 this is retouched along the right shoulder and to the right side of the face of Oswald. In this instance, that has been put in in a solid medium gray, to make it appear as the extension of the building or the fence that appears in the background of the original photograph.
There is retouching around the rifle stock—in fact, the stock itself seems to have been lightened all along the lower portion near the butt; a highlight along the top has been retouched along the top from the butt to the breech; some retouching along the butt of the stock, and also along the bottom edge of the stock, running upward toward the trigger.
The highlight that appears in Exhibit No. 1 along the bolt as a two-section highlight or a broken highlight appears in this same general area on the gun in the reproduction on Exhibit No. 6 as a solid highlight and one continuous line. There has been a highlight added along the bottom of the gun just forward of the trigger guard and just below Oswald's left hand. Also a highlight has been added along the top of the gun above Oswald's left hand to show the gun as apart from the dark shirt, so that the gun and shirt do not blend into one continuous tone at that point. There appears to be some retouching of Oswald's shadow, in that it has been toned down to a medium gray shadow so that it will not blend into the lower portion of his legs.
Mr.Eisenberg. Which of the reproductions which you have so far examined does this most resemble, Mr. Shaneyfelt: the Detroit Free Press, the Life, or the Newsweek reproduction?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. This corresponds to both the Detroit Free Press and the Newsweek reproductions of the photograph, in that it contains the two white dots along the right leg, centrally located between the ankle and the knee as they appear in those two reproductions, and, therefore, may be derived from the same basic print, since this characteristic does not appear in Commission Exhibit No. 133-A or in the Life magazine reproductions on Shaneyfelt Exhibits Nos. 2 and 3.
Mr.Eisenberg. What about the retouching in the New York Times photograph, Mr. Shaneyfelt, how does that compare with the retouching in the Detroit Free Press and Newsweek photographs?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. The retouching is different from any of the other Exhibits Nos. 4 and 5.
Mr.Eisenberg. Would you conclude, therefore, that the New York Times, like Newsweek, may have received from its source an unretouched photograph which it proceeded to retouch?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. And that again the similarity in retouching to the upper right of Oswald's shoulder and head might be coincidental?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. Yes; actually, there is considerable difference in the retouching in that area on the New York Times photograph as compared to the Newsweek and Detroit Free Press exhibits. The New York Times has attempted to make it appear as a wall, whereas the other two have merely airbrushed out the line, and it looks like foliage.
Mr.Eisenberg. The stock in all three of these photographs, that is, Detroit Free Press, Newsweek, and New York Times, has also been retouched in a similar manner, that is, so that the top of the stock appears straight, whereas actually the top of the stock is curved—is that correct?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. That is correct.
Mr.Eisenberg. What do you think accounts for the coincidence of the retouching in these two areas—that is, the top of the stock and the area to the upper right of Oswald's shoulder—given the differences you have noted in the details of retouching?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. I would attribute that to a lack of detail in the photographs that they had, and a lack of understanding of the formation of a normal rifle stock on the part of the retoucher.
Mr.Eisenberg. Now, Mr. Shaneyfelt, I hand you the front page of the New York Journal-American, issue of February 18, 1964, which again contains a photograph similar to those you have been discussing, and which I have labeled Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 7, and ask you whether you have examined that photograph?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. Yes; I have.
Mr.Eisenberg. What is your conclusion?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. It is my conclusion that this photograph is the same in all visible characteristics as the photograph which is Commission Exhibit No. 133-A, and I found no differences that would suggest that it is other than the same photograph. However, because of the lack of detail in the reproduction on Exhibit No. 7, it is not possible to positively identify it as the same photograph.
Mr.Eisenberg. Is retouching apparent in this photograph, Mr. Shaneyfelt?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. Yes; it is.
Mr.Eisenberg. Could you describe that in detail?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. Yes; there has been retouching along the right shoulder of Oswald, and to some degree around the head, in order to have the head and shoulder not blend into the background. This appears to have been done by increasing the highlight or lightening the highlight along the shoulder, rather than darkening the background.
There is a highlight added along the top of the rifle stock that runs quite straight toward the bolt, but it is not as strong a highlight as in the other reproductions we have discussed. There is a highlight along the top of the rifle between Oswald's left hand and the point where the rifle passes his left shoulder. There is a suggestion of some retouching around the rifle scope, which is almost lost in the detail or almost lost against the black shirt, but it is barely visible. There is a dark shadow that appears in Commission Exhibit No. 133-A that has been retouched out of Exhibit No. 7 reproduction, that shadow being about halfway between the knee and the crotch of the trousers between the legs. Those are the primary points of retouching.
Mr.Eisenberg. Which of the various photographs which you have examined does this Journal-American photograph most resemble, Mr. Shaneyfelt?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. The Journal-American photograph reproduction on Exhibit No. 7 is different from the Detroit Free Press, Exhibit No. 4, Newsweek, Exhibit No. 5, and New York Times, Exhibit No. 6, in that the white spots along the right leg between the ankle and the knee do not appear in the reproduction in the Journal-American. It very closely corresponds to the reproduction on the front of the Life magazine, which is Shaneyfelt Exhibit No. 2. In fact, the retouching appears to be very nearly the same. The lack of detail in the Newspaper reproduction on Exhibit No. 7 precludes positively saying that it is identical, but it is my feeling that it is probably identical.
Mr.Eisenberg. Could you point out some of the similarities in retouching?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. Yes; the retouching along the top of the rifle stock, the retouching around the right shoulder and around the head, to the right of Oswald's head, the retouching around the top of the rifle above the left hand, the elimination of the shadow between the legs just below the breech of the trousers are the same in both reproductions.
Mr.Eisenberg. Is there any notable difference between those reproductions, the Life and Journal-American reproductions?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. No; no notable difference in the retouching.
Mr.Eisenberg. Do you have any opinion as to the source of the Journal-American photograph?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. Yes; it is not possible to positively state, but I note in examining the Journal-American reproduction, which is Exhibit No. 7, that the face area in particular has a design in the light shadow areas which I recognized as being typical of a halftone reproduction made from another halftone reproduction. And because of the presence of this characteristic in the shadow area of the face, and the manner in which the photograph is cropped or trimmed, I am of the opinion that it is highly possible that the reproduction in the Journal-American, Exhibit No. 7, was made from a Life magazine cover, issue of February 21, 1964, containing the reproduction of the photograph of Oswald.
Mr.Eisenberg. Could you elaborate on your statement that the cropping is a factor in leading to this conclusion?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. Yes; on Exhibit No. 2, which is the Life magazine cover, if a straight line is drawn vertically past the right edge of the Life sign on the front of the magazine, so that the sign is blocked out, and that straight line is continued through a shadow area comparable to the shadow in the reproduction of Exhibit No. 7, the cropping along that edge of the photograph then becomes identical to the cropping on the Journal-American photograph. This would suggest that the picture was purposely cropped in that manner to eliminate the Life magazine printing in the upper left-hand corner of the magazine cover.
Mr.Eisenberg. Does the Life magazine picture, and also the Journal-American picture, show cropping as against the original, that is, Exhibit No. 133-A?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. Yes. The Life magazine photograph does not show all of the photograph that appears on Commission Exhibit No. 133-A, the photograph having been cropped down closer to the head, cutting out some of the overhead area. There has also been considerable cropping on both the right and left margins, when you compare the Life magazine and Journal-American reproductions with Exhibit No. 133-A.
Mr.Eisenberg. Is there any other feature on the Journal-American photograph which leads you to conclude that it was taken from the Life photograph?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. Yes; in the lower right-hand corner of the Life magazine cover, Exhibit No. 2, there is a strip set in, containing the printing "February 21, 1964, 25 cents." If the Journal-American did, in fact, reproduce this picture from a Life cover, it would have been necessary for them to retouch out this strip of printing in the lower right-hand corner of the Life magazine cover, and I find on examination of the reproduction on the Journal-American that there is retouching in this area. The background of the grass is inconsistent, in that it has been darkened around that area, and there is also darkening along the foot and leg, and the shadow area has been altered in between the two feet in a manner to strongly suggest that this strip has been retouched out in order to make the reproduction on the Journal-American, Exhibit No. 7.
Mr.Eisenberg. Mr. Shaneyfelt, do you have anything to add to your testimony?
Mr.Shaneyfelt. I believe not.
Mr.Eisenberg. Well, thank you very much then. That will be all.
The testimony of James C. Cadigan was taken at 3:45 p.m., on April 30, 1964,at 200 Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C., by Mr. Melvin Aron Eisenberg, assistant counsel of the President's Commission.
(The oath was administered by the reporter.)
Mr.Cadigan. I do.
Mr.Eisenberg. Mr. Cadigan, the purpose for which we are here is to go into the facts of the assassination of President Kennedy, and in particular we have asked you to testify concerning analysis of questioned documents. Mr. Cadigan, could you state your full name and your position?
Mr.Cadigan. James C. Cadigan. I am a special agent of the FBI, assigned as an examiner of questioned documents in the FBI laboratory in Washington, D.C.
Mr.Eisenberg. And how long have you been in this field, Mr. Cadigan?
Mr.Cadigan. Twenty-three and one-half years.
Mr.Eisenberg. What was your training in this field?
Mr.Cadigan. Upon being assigned to the laboratory I was given a specialized course of training and instruction which consisted of attending various lectures and conferences on the subject, reading books, and working under the direction of experienced examiners.
Upon attaining a required degree of proficiency, I was assigned cases on my own responsibility, and since that time I have examined many thousands of cases involving handwriting, hand printing, typewriting, forgeries, erasures, alterations, mechanical devices of all types, pens, paper, and ink. I conduct research on various problems as they arise and assist in the training of our new examiners.
Mr.Eisenberg. Have you testified in Federal or other courts, Mr. Cadigan?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes; in many Federal and State courts, and military courts-martial.
Mr.Eisenberg. Mr. Cadigan, I now hand you Commission Exhibit No. 773, and I ask you whether you have examined that item.
Mr.Cadigan. Yes; I have.
Mr.Eisenberg. For the record, that consists of an application to purchase a rifle, addressed to Klein's Sporting Goods in Chicago. Mr. Cadigan, I now hand you an item consisting of a roll of microfilm labeled D-77, and ask you whether you are familiar with that roll of microfilm?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes; I am.
Mr.Eisenberg. That microfilm will be marked Cadigan Exhibit No. 1.
(The article referred to was marked Cadigan Exhibit No. 1.)
Mr.Eisenberg. Mr. Cadigan, was Exhibit No. 773 developed from a negative contained in Cadigan Exhibit No. 1?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes; it was printed from that roll.
Mr.Eisenberg. I now hand you Commission Exhibit No. 780, consisting of the Marine Corps file of Lee Harvey Oswald; Commission Exhibit No. 778, consisting of two letters extracted from Oswald's State Department file; Commission Exhibit No. 781, consisting of a passport application by Lee Harvey Oswald, dated June 25, 1963—at least "Passport Issued June 25, 1963"; and Cadigan Exhibit No. 2, consisting of a letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to John B. Connally, then Secretary of the Navy.
(The document referred to was marked Cadigan Exhibit No. 2.)
Mr.Cadigan. This is in two parts.
Mr.Eisenberg. In two parts, and the second part consists of a letter from Lee Harvey Oswald to a Brigadier General R. McC. Tompkins, dated 7 March 1962, and a group of documents, comprising photographs of the balance of Lee Harvey Oswald's State Department file, labeled Cadigan Exhibit No. 3.
(The documents referred to were marked Cadigan Exhibit No. 3.)
Mr.Eisenberg. I ask you whether you have examined these various items.
Mr.Cadigan. Yes; I have.
Mr.Eisenberg. Mr. Cadigan, can you explain the meaning of the term standard or "known documents" as used in the field of questioned-document examination?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes. Known standards are samples of writings of an individual which are known to be in his writing and which are available for comparison with questioned or suspect writings.
Mr.Eisenberg. You have examined certain questioned writings allegedly prepared by Lee Harvey Oswald, have you, Mr. Cadigan?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. In your examination, what documents did you use as known documents?
Mr.Cadigan. Cadigan Exhibit No. 2, Commission Exhibit No. 781, Commission Exhibit No. 778, Cadigan Exhibit No. 3, and Commission Exhibit No. 780.
Mr.Eisenberg. For the record, during the balance of the examination I will refer to these documents collectively as the known or standard writings. Mr. Cadigan, a portion of the known documents and a portion of the questioned documents are photographs rather than originals; is that correct?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. Are you able to identify the handwriting of an individual on the basis of a photograph of that handwriting?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. Would you make an identification, such an identification, if your only questioned document was a photograph if the photograph was sufficiently clear?
Mr.Cadigan. If the photograph is sufficiently clear, it is adequate for the handwriting comparison.
Mr.Eisenberg. Similarly with standards, if your only standard was a photograph or your only standards were photographs?
Mr.Cadigan. If your standards were also photographs, it is possible to make the comparison and arrive at a definite opinion.
Mr.Eisenberg. And were the photographs in this case, both the standard and the questioned documents, clear enough to form the basis of an opinion?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes. I might point out that some of the known standards are original documents and not photographs.
Mr.Eisenberg. Yes; I am aware of that, but I wanted to set out on the record whether the standards which are photographs areadequate——
Mr.Cadigan. They are adequate.
Mr.Eisenberg. To serve as standards.
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. Returning to Commission Exhibit No. 773, did you compare the handwriting on that exhibit with the writing in the known standards to see if they were written by the same person?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes; I did.
Mr.Eisenberg. And what was your conclusion?
Mr.Cadigan. That the writer of the known standards, Lee Harvey Oswald, prepared the handwriting and hand printing on Commission Exhibit No. 773.
Mr.Eisenberg. Have you prepared photographs or charts which you could use to demonstrate the reason for that, Mr. Cadigan?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. Will you produce them? You are handing me an enlarged photograph of Commission Exhibit No. 773, is that correct?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. This was prepared by you or under your supervision?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. And constitutes an accurate photograph of Exhibit No. 773?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. That will be Cadigan Exhibit No. 3-A.
(The document referred to was marked Cadigan Exhibit No. 3-A.)
And have you prepared photographs of the standards, Mr. Cadigan?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes; I have.
Mr.Eisenberg. The first photograph is an enlargement of the letter to Brigadier General R. McC. Tompkins? Is that correct?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. That will be Cadigan Exhibit No. 4.
(The document referred to was marked Cadigan Exhibit No. 4.)
Mr.Eisenberg. And the second photograph is an enlargement of a letter from the State Department file, is that correct?
Mr.Cadigan. Enlargement of a letter in the State Department file.
Mr.Eisenberg. In the State Department file?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. That will be Cadigan Exhibit No. 5.
(The document referred to was marked Cadigan Exhibit No. 5.)
Mr.Eisenberg. The third is an enlargement of a second letter in the State Department file, the first letter having been dated "Received November 1, 1962," and this letter dated "December 7, 1962, Received December 11, 1962," is that correct?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. That will be Cadigan Exhibit No. 6.
(The document referred to was marked Cadigan Exhibit No. 6.)
(Discussion off the record.)
Mr.Eisenberg. Next is a letter to the State Department without an apparent date, beginning, "Dear Sirs: Please forward receipts to me for final payment of my loan" and so forth, is that correct?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. That will be Cadigan Exhibit No. 7.
(The document referred to was marked Cadigan Exhibit No. 7.)
Mr.Eisenberg. Next is another letter from the State Department file, reading, Dear Sirs, please add this $10.00 to my account No. 38210 dated October 8. Is that also from the State Department file, Mr. Cadigan?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. That will be Cadigan Exhibit No. 8.
(The document referred to was marked Cadigan Exhibit No. 8.)
Mr.Eisenberg. Next is the letter to then Secretary of the Navy John B. Connally and a page from the letter to Brigadier General R. McC. Tompkins, is that correct?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. That will be Cadigan Exhibit No. 9.
(The document referred to was marked Cadigan Exhibit No. 9.)
Mr.Eisenberg. That is in two parts, is that correct?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes; it is two pages.
Mr.Eisenberg. Next is a photograph of the passport application referred to earlier?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. That will be Cadigan Exhibit No. 10.
(The document referred to was marked Cadigan Exhibit No. 10.)
Mr.Eisenberg. And, finally, a photograph of the reverse side of that?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. Which will also be Cadigan Exhibit No. 10.
Now, in each case, Mr. Cadigan, were these photographs prepared by you or under your supervision?
Mr.Cadigan. They were.
Mr.Eisenberg. And are they accurate photographs of the items described as being the subject of the photographs?
Mr.Cadigan. They are.
Mr.Eisenberg. Now, Mr. Cadigan, with reference to your enlargement, Cadigan Exhibit No. 3-A, and your photographs of standards, Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 4 through 10, could you state some of the reasons which led you to the conclusion that Commission Exhibit No. 778, of which Cadigan Exhibit No. 3 is an enlargement, is in the writing of Lee Harvey Oswald, the author of the known documents?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes; on CommissionExhibit——
Mr.Eisenberg. You can refer to your photographs.
Mr.Cadigan. The enlarged photograph, Cadigan Exhibit No. 3-A, contains both handwriting and hand printing which was compared with the known standards, Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 4 through 10. I compared both the handwriting and the hand printing to determine whether or not the same combination of individual handwriting characteristics was present in both the questioned and the known documents. I found many characteristics, some of which I would point out.
On the order blank, in the "A. Hidell" and in the wording "Dallas Texas"which constitutes a part of the return address, the letter "A" in Cadigan Exhibit No. 3 is made in the same manner as the capital letter "A" on Cadigan Exhibit No. 10. The letter is formed with a short straight stroke beginning about halfway up the left side. The top of it is peaked or pointed. The right side is straight, and is shorter than the initial stroke. The capital letter "D" in Dallas is characterized by a staff or downstroke slanting at about a 30° angle. The lower loop in some instances is closed. In the word "Dallas" the loop is closed, and the body of the letter ends in a rounded loop formation. The same characteristic I found in Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 4, 5, and 6 as well as other exhibits. The word "Texas" on Cadigan Exhibit No. 3-A is characterized with the letter "x" made in an unusual manner in that the writer, after completing the body of the letter, makes an abrupt change of motion to the following letter "a." This same characteristic I observed in the known standard on Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 6, 9, and 4.
In the address portion of the envelope, Cadigan Exhibit No. 3-A, appears the word "Dept." I noticed here, again, the same formation of the capital "D." In addition, the entire word "Dept" appears in the known standards on Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 5, 6, and 7. The characteristics I would point out here are in the letter "p" in Cadigan Exhibit No. 3, where the letter is made with a relatively long narrow staff, and the body of the letter is a rounded shape which projects above the staff. The letter "t" ends abruptly in a downstroke. In the handprinting appearing in the exhibit marked Cadigan Exhibit No. 3-A, the wording "Dallas, Texas" contains a number of the same characteristics as Cadigan Exhibit No. 5, where the same wording appears, and on Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 7 and 8. The writer uses a script-type "D," and prints the other letters in the word "Dallas." The "A" again is made in a similar way to the "A" in "A. Hidell," with a beginning of the downstroke approximately three-quarters of the way up the left side of the stroke. The letter is relatively narrow, and the right-hand side of the letter is straight. In the double "L" combinations there is a curve in the lower portion of the letter. The "S" has a flat top, slanting at approximately a 30-degree angle. In the word "Texas" in Cadigan Exhibit No. 3-A the writer has used a small "e" following the letter "T." The same characteristics will be noted on Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 5, 7, and 8.
Additionally, I noted that in addition to the shape of the letters themselves, the relative heights of the letters, the spacing between the letters, the slant of the letters in both the know and questioned documents are the same.
On Cadigan Exhibit No. 3-A, in the portion for address, appears the notation "P.O. Box 2915," and this same wording appears on Cadigan Exhibit No. 5, and on No. 7 and No. 8 except for the "P.O." portion. Here, again, I observed the same formation of the individual letters; the spacing, the style, the slant of the writings in both questioned and known were observed to be the same.
The tail of the "5" is made with a relatively long stroke and the same characteristic appears in the known standards. In the hand printed name "A. Hidell," on Cadigan Exhibit No. 3-A, another characteristic I noted was the very small-sized "i" in the name "Hidell." The writer makes this letter very short in contrast to the other letters in the name. This same characteristic I observed on Cadigan Exhibit No. 10, the passport application. With reference to the "i" dot on Cadigan Exhibit No. 3 in the name "Hidell," in the return portion, the dot is relatively high and between the body of the letter and the following letter "d." In the portion of the word "Chicago"—of the name "Chicago"—in the address portion on Cadigan Exhibit No. 3, the "i" dot is between the "o" and the "g" in "Chicago" and is well above the line of writing. On Cadigan Exhibit No. 4 I observed the same displacement of the "i" dot. In some instances, it is slightly to the right of the body of the letter, as in the word "citizenship" in the sixth line from the bottom, whereas in the word "direct" in the ninth line from the bottom the "i" dot is displaced one and a half letters to the right.
Based upon the combination of these individual characteristics which I have pointed out, as well as others, I reached the opinion that the handwriting and handprinting on Cadigan Exhibit No. 3-A were written by Lee Harvey Oswald, the writer of the known standards, Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 4 through 10.
Mr.Eisenberg. Now, Mr. Cadigan, the photographs which comprise Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 4 through 10 are actually somewhat more limited than the standards,in that they represent in some cases excerpts from the standards, is that correct? Such as excerpts from the Marine Corps file?
Mr.Cadigan. That is correct.
Mr.Eisenberg. Now, when you refer to the standards, Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 4 through 10, do you mean by that that you based your conclusion only on the excerpts shown in Exhibits Nos. 4 through 10?
Mr.Cadigan. No; the exhibits, Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 4 through 10, were merely prepared for demonstration purposes. The original examination and comparison was made using all of the writings, the handwriting and handprinting in the State Department file, the Marine Corps file, the passport application and the two letters, one to Governor Connally and one to Brigadier General Tompkins.
Mr.Eisenberg. That is, the documents which you identified very close to the beginning of the deposition, and which I referred to collectively as the standards?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. Mr. Cadigan, I now hand you Commission Exhibit No. 788, and ask you if you have examined that exhibit?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes; I have.
Mr.Eisenberg. For the record, that is the money order which was included with the purchase order to Klein's. Have you prepared a photograph of that exhibit, Mr. Cadigan?
Mr.Cadigan. I have.
Mr.Eisenberg. That will be Cadigan Exhibit No. 11.
(The document referred to was marked Cadigan Exhibit No. 11.)
Mr.Eisenberg. And this was taken by you or under your supervision?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. And is it an accurate photograph of the money order, Exhibit No. 788?
Mr.Cadigan. It is.
Mr.Eisenberg. Did you compare Exhibit No. 788 with the standards to determine whether Exhibit No. 788 had been written by Lee Harvey Oswald?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. What was your conclusion?
Mr.Cadigan. That the postal money order, Cadigan Exhibit No. 11, had been prepared by Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr.Eisenberg. The postal money order is Commission Exhibit No. 788 and your picture is Cadigan Exhibit No. 11, is that correct?
Mr.Cadigan. That is correct.
Mr.Eisenberg. Could you explain some of the points of identity which led you to the conclusion that you formed?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes; I think that using the wording "Dallas, Texas" appearing on Commission Exhibit No. 839 as an example of some of the handwriting characteristics present on thisexhibit——
Mr.Eisenberg. You mean Cadigan Exhibit No. 11?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes. In the wording "Dallas, Texas," the writing is quite characteristic. I noted, again, the overall size, spacing, slant, and relative proportions of letters on Cadigan Exhibit No. 11 were the same as on Cadigan Exhibit No. 6, and that the letter "D" was characterized on Cadigan Exhibit No. 11 with a relatively short staff, with a rather long retrace on the left side of the staff, the body of the letter ending in a large curling stroke. The small letter "a" is rather narrow and somewhat flat. There is a rather long smooth connecting stroke between the "a" and the double letter "l." The "s" is almost triangular in shape, and has no ending stroke or tail to the right.
Further, on Cadigan Exhibit No. 11, in the word "Texas" I noted again the rather unusual shape of the small letter "x," in that it appears almost as though it were a letter "u." The capital letter "T" in "Texas" has a very long curved beginning stroke and a small eyelet or loop in the lower portion of the letter.
I noted these same characteristics on Cadigan Exhibit No. 6 in the wording Dallas, Texas, and certain of the letters on Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 6, 7, 8, and the entire word "Texas" in Cadigan Exhibit No. 4.
I noted also, again, that the small letter "p" in the word "sporting" on CadiganExhibit No. 11 was made the same as the "p's" in the known standards as well as on Cadigan Exhibit No. 3 in the word "Dept," in that the staff is long, in the form of a long closed loop, and the upper portion of the letter extends above the staff and the body of the letter is not closed to the staff.
I further noted that on Cadigan Exhibit No. 11 the wording "P.O. Box 2915" contained the same characteristics as the same wording in Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 5, 6, and 7. And here again, based on a combination of personal handwriting characteristics in the entire writing, I reached the opinion that Cadigan Exhibit No. 11 had been written by Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr.Eisenberg. Mr. Cadigan, I now hand you Commission Exhibit No. 135, which, for the record, is an order used for the purchase of the revolver that was apparently used to murder Officer Tippit, and I ask you whether you examined that exhibit.
Mr.Cadigan. Yes; I have.
Mr.Eisenberg. And have you taken a photograph of that exhibit?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. Which you now have before you?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes; I have an enlarged photograph.
Mr.Eisenberg. And that would be Cadigan Exhibit No. 12.
(The document referred to was marked Cadigan Exhibit No. 12.)
Mr.Eisenberg. This was taken by you or under your supervision?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. It is an accurate photograph of Exhibit No. 135?
Mr.Cadigan. It is.
Mr.Eisenberg. Mr. Cadigan, did you compare Commission Exhibit No. 135 with the standard or known writings of Lee Harvey Oswald?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes; I did.
Mr.Eisenberg. What was your conclusion as to the origin of 135?
Mr.Cadigan. That it was written by Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr.Eisenberg. And can you give some of the reasons that led you to form that conclusion?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes; here again, it is the presence of the same combination of individual handwriting characteristics, both handwriting and handprinting. For example, again the wording "Dallas, Texas," is handprinted on Cadigan Exhibit No. 12, and the same characteristics appear in the same wording on Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 9, 7, 6, and 8. The formation of the individual letters on Cadigan Exhibit No. 12, the spacing of the letters, the proportions of the letters, were found to be the same as on the known standards.
Additionally, the capital letter "D" in the name "Drittal" on Cadigan Exhibit No. 12 has a rather unusual appearance in the upper portion of the letter in that it is very pointed and wedge-shaped, and I found this same shape present on the reverse side of the passport application on Cadigan Exhibit No. 10, page 2 in the word "Dec."
Again, I noted the rather long tail or ending stroke on the number "5" in the address portion of this exhibit. Again, based on finding the same combination of individual handwriting habits in the questioned and known writings, I concluded that Commission Exhibit No. 135 was written by Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr.Eisenberg. Mr. Cadigan, I hand you Commission Exhibit No. 791, which, for the record, is an application by Oswald for post office box 2915, dated October 9, 1962, and ask you whether you have examined that exhibit?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. And have you prepared a photograph of that exhibit, Mr. Cadigan?
Mr.Cadigan. I have.
Mr.Eisenberg. That will be Cadigan Exhibit No. 13.
(The document referred to was marked Cadigan Exhibit No. 13.)
Mr.Eisenberg. Was this prepared by you or under your supervision?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. And is it a true and accurate photograph of 791?
Mr.Cadigan. It is.
Mr.Eisenberg. Did you attempt to determine whether Commission Exhibit No. 791 had been prepared by the author of the standards, Lee Harvey Oswald?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. What was your conclusion?
Mr.Cadigan. That Lee Harvey Oswald had prepared the hand printing, signature, and date on Commission Exhibit No. 791. This excludes the box number and the wording "Dallas, Tex.," in the lower right portion.
Mr.Eisenberg. Can you give some of the reasons why you came to that conclusion?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes; the reasons are basically the same, the presence of the same combination of both handwritten and hand printed characteristics in the known and questioned exhibits. On Cadigan Exhibit No. 18 we have the hand printedwording——
Mr.Eisenberg. Cadigan Exhibit No. 18?
Mr.Cadigan. Cadigan Exhibit No. 10, excuse me, the passport application, we have the wording "LEE OSWALD." This hand printed signature is quite distinctive in the formation of the individual letters, in the spacing of the letters, and their slant. For example, the letter "L" on both Cadigan Exhibit No. 13 and on Cadigan Exhibit No. 10, there is a small hook in the upper left portion where the downstroke begins, and there is a little tent or hill at the base of the letter. The double letter "E's" also have a curve, a dent at the base of the letter, although not so pronounced. Both letters, both letter "E's," are approximately the same height as the "L."
In the last name "OSWALD" on Cadigan Exhibit No. 13 and on Cadigan Exhibit No. 10 the "O" has a pointed or tented appearance in the upper right portion, and the ending stroke curves down into the body of the letter. The "S" and "W" in both the questioned and known are smaller than the following capital letter "A." This capital letter "A" in both instances is made in the same manner as previously described on other exhibits. The writer uses a lower-case or small "l," and a lower-case or small "d" for the last two letters of his name, the "d" portion or the letter "d" in both instances being made with a straight-slanted stroke, then an abrupt circular stroke to the left.
In addition on this same exhibit I noted the formation of the letter "i." The exhibit I refer to is Cadigan Exhibit No. 13—the "i" being made very small in relation to the other letters adjacent to it.
This document also bears the signature "Lee H. Oswald" which, again, is a very characteristic signature. It appears in Cadigan Exhibit No. 13, the questioned document, and Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10. The signature I noted was written rather rapidly. It is somewhat distorted in appearance. The initial "L" has a rather long curved beginning stroke and relatively narrow upper and lower portions of the letter. The letter "H" is made with two parallel strokes and it can be seen that there is a very little retrace from the base of the first stroke in the letter to the top of the second stroke in the letter.
The "O" combination is rather unusual in that the writer swings into the letter "s" from the top of the "O." Also, as the signature progresses to the right it increases in size, and very noticeably in the "ld" portion where the "d" stands well above the line of writing. And in this particular signature there is a long-swinging stroke from the top of the "d," having a shape similar to a "u" lying on its side. The base of the letter has a very sharp angular formation.
Again, based on a combination of the same individual handwriting and hand printing characteristics, I reached the opinion that Commission Exhibit No. 791 was prepared by Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr.Eisenberg. Mr. Cadigan, I now hand you Commission Exhibit No. 793, consisting of a change-of-address card relating to box 2915. Have you examined that exhibit?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes; I have.
Mr.Eisenberg. And have you prepared a photograph thereof?
Mr.Cadigan. I have.
Mr.Eisenberg. That will be Cadigan Exhibit No. 14.
(The document referred to was marked Cadigan Exhibit No. 14.)
Mr.Eisenberg. This photograph is an accurate reproduction of Commission Exhibit No. 793?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes; it is.
Mr.Eisenberg. Mr. Cadigan, getting back for a moment to Cadigan ExhibitNo. 13, I see that there is another picture shown on that exhibit, apart from the one as to which you testified.
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. Can you describe that?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes. That is a Post Office Department Form 1093, application for post office box, and the post office box number is 6225, and it is signed, Lee H. Oswald.
Mr.Eisenberg. And why is that included on the picture with Cadigan Exhibit No. 13, or rather on the picture with Commission Exhibit No. 791? Is that because they were bothfrom——
Mr.Cadigan. No; it is part of another post office application that does not relate to box 2916.
Mr.Eisenberg. Did you have any particular reason for printing that up with the photograph of Exhibit No. 791?
Mr.Cadigan. No. I think it may have been part of another exhibit which has not as yet been introduced.
Mr.Eisenberg. Does your identification of Exhibit No. 791 in any way depend upon that photograph?
Mr.Cadigan. No; not at all.
Mr.Eisenberg. So we can disregard it for our purposes?
Mr.Cadigan. If you want to, I can take it out.
Mr.Eisenberg. Well, it is in.
Mr.Cadigan. I mean I can just cut it along here.
Mr.Eisenberg. I would rather leave it in, since it is in the record.
Mr.Cadigan. All right.
Mr.Eisenberg. I just wanted to make sure that it didn't need to be discussed as part of the identification of Exhibit No. 791, and I take it it does not?
Mr.Cadigan. No.
Mr.Eisenberg. Now, getting back to Commission Exhibit No. 793 and the photograph thereof, which is Cadigan Exhibit No. 14, did you attempt to determine whether Commission Exhibit No. 793 had been prepared by Lee Harvey Oswald?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. The photograph of which is Cadigan Exhibit No. 14. And what was your conclusion on that?
Mr.Cadigan. Again, that Commission Exhibit No. 793 was written by Lee Harvey Oswald, again based upon finding the same combination of individual handwriting and hand printing characteristics in both the questioned writing and the known standards.
Mr.Eisenberg. Could you discuss some of those common characteristics?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes. Here, again, the entire word "Dallas" and the word Texas is made in a very characteristic manner which I have described before, and which appears on Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 9, 6, 7, and 8.
The signature "Lee H. Oswald" was found to have the same characteristics as the known signatures, although here I noted that in the ending "d" in Oswald the stroke was less cursive than the ending "d" in Cadigan Exhibit No. 13, in that the writer makes a rather narrow loop and does not cross the staff of the letter "d." I noted this characteristic, also, in Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 9 and 10. I would like to point out that here, again, the writer varies his individual characteristics, which is entirely normal and expected, and actually it adds weight to the characteristic to find that it does vary to some degree. All writing, particularly signatures, are never exactly duplicated and some variation is normally expected, and finding the same variations in both questioned and known signatures increases the value of it, so that, again, the presence of the same combination of handwriting and hand printing characteristics in Cadigan Exhibit No. 14 in the known exhibits enabled me to reach the opinion that Commission Exhibit No. 793 was written by Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr.Eisenberg. You used the term "cursive" in respect to this. Can you explain the meaning of that term?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes; the ending "d" stroke is made with a flourish or a sweeping motion on Cadigan Exhibit No. 13, and on Cadigan Exhibit No. 14 the stroke ends abruptly at the staff of the letter.
Mr.Eisenberg. And why do you call one "more cursive"?
Mr.Cadigan. Merely for description.
Mr.Eisenberg. Can you explain the meaning of the term "cursive" apart from your use in this instance?
Mr.Cadigan. I think cursive has also been used to describe the roundness of writing as opposed to an angular shape. I think it also is sometimes used to distinguish between handwriting and hand printing.
Mr.Eisenberg. Mr. Cadigan, I now show you Commission Exhibit No. 795, consisting of an item purporting to be a Selective Service System notice of classification in the name of "Alek James Hidell"; Commission No. 801, a Selective Service System notice of classification in the name of Lee Harvey Oswald; Commission Exhibit No. 802, a registration certificate of the Selective Service System in the name of Lee Harvey Oswald; Commission Exhibit No. 803, a photographic negative; Commission Exhibit No. 804, a photograph negative; Commission Exhibit No. 805, a photograph negative; and Commission Exhibit No. 811, a photographic negative, and I ask you whether you have examined these various items?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. Based on that examination, Mr. Cadigan, could you discuss your conclusions concerning Commission Exhibit No. 795?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes. Commission Exhibit No. 795 is a fraudulent and counterfeit reproduction made from the retouched photographic negatives in Commission Exhibits Nos. 804, 805, and 811 which in turn were made from Commission Exhibits Nos. 801 and 802.
Mr.Eisenberg. And how were they prepared precisely, Mr. Cadigan?
Mr.Cadigan. These are photographic reproductions. What was done was to take a genuine Selective Service System notice of classification, Commission Exhibit No. 801 in the name of Lee Harvey Oswald. From this, a photographic negative was prepared. Then various portions of the information, including the name, the selective service number, the signature of the clerk of the local board were obliterated with a red opaque substance, and I noted that in the course of this the individual preparing the negative had inadvertently cut off portions of the printed letters, had thickened printed lines, and especially I noted in the signature portion had destroyed portions of the printed letters, and I compared the Commission Exhibit No. 795 with the retouched negative itself, and observed that the defects in the Commission Exhibit No. 795 were due to the retouching of the negative. Although the negative has been blotted out, or the information has been blotted out, it is readily visible to the naked eye that on Commission Exhibit No. 893, which was also examined in connection with the examination of Commission Exhibit No. 795, the original writing, the original signature and the typed information "Lee Harvey Oswald" and selective service number is the same as it appears on Commission Exhibit No. 801. The opaquing is merely to remove this information photographically. There was an intervening step where a small negative or a reduced negative of the lower portion of the face of the card which refers to the penalty for violation concerning carrying the card itself was made. The individual responsible made a reduced photograph but, again, the same characteristics are apparent, and by comparing the print, the photographic print Commission Exhibit No. 795 with these negatives, it is possible to determine that the Commission Exhibit No. 795 was produced from the negatives and the negatives in turn were produced from Commission Exhibits Nos. 801 and 802.
In this connection, I would point out that the reverse side of Commission Exhibit 795 is the form used for a registration certificate, and it is not a proper face of a notice of classification. Here, again, the same procedure was followed. The original card is photographed. The unwanted information is painted out with an opaque substance, and then a photographic print is prepared. Then the individual responsible typed in the information "Alek James Hidell" with the selective service number, descriptive data on the reverse, and the number of the local board.
Further, an examination of the Commission Exhibit No. 795 shows the individual had placed the photograph in a typewriter and struck a number of keys which did not print. The indentations from the typewriter keys can be clearlyseen in side lighting. Also, in the selective service number on the face of the card and the data on the back of the card, indentations of typewriter keys were noted.
Mr.Eisenberg. Mr. Cadigan, returning to the negatives, I see that in Commission Exhibit No. 803, as you pointed out, the information that was originally on the card is visible.
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. Whereas, in Commission Exhibit No. 894 it is not visible.
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. Can you explain the difference?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes; because Commission Exhibit No. 804 is an intermediate step. Commission Exhibit No. 803 was first prepared, and a print was made from this exhibit. The photographic print would not have the name "Lee Harvey Oswald" in red on it. In the place of "Lee Harvey Oswald" it would show as a blank. Then using the print, a second negative is prepared, and further retouching is done, and also the warning notice in a reduced form is inserted into the negative, so that the data from the original notice of classification issued in the name of Oswald appears on the first negative and does not appear on the second negative, but both negatives are directly linked to the original card of Oswald and to the counterfeit reproduction.
Mr.Eisenberg. Now, have you prepared photographs of this card showing some of the details you have been discussing?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. That will be Cadigan Exhibit No. 15.
(The document referred to was marked Cadigan Exhibit No. 15.)
Mr.Eisenberg. This CadiganExhibit——
Mr.Cadigan. Actually, there are four different photographs, photographic enlargements that comprise Cadigan Exhibit No. 15, the face and reverse of the notice of classification made in normal lighting, and the face and reverse of the card made with side lighting showing the typewritten indentations.
Mr.Eisenberg. Let's mark those, then, Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 15, 16, and 17, and 18.
(The documents referred to were marked Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 15, 18, 17, and 18.)
Mr.Eisenberg. Now, Cadigan Exhibit No. 15 shows the face with normal lighting?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. Cadigan Exhibit No. 16 shows the reverse with normal lighting?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. Cadigan Exhibit No. 17 shows the face with side lighting?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. And Cadigan Exhibit No. 18 shows the reverse with side lighting?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. These exhibits also contain pictures of another questioned document which we will get to shortly, and that is the certificate of service in the name of Alek James Hidell, is that correct?
Mr.Cadigan. That is correct.
Mr.Eisenberg. Now, starting with Cadigan Exhibit No. 15, could you discuss several of the features on which you base the conclusions you have given us earlier?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes. The observation of this exhibit will show in the blocks for the selective service number fragmentary portions of the original selective service number. The lines have been thickened. In the space provided for "been classified in Class," in the middle, in approximately the middle of the space there is a heavy dotted line. By comparing this with the original card issued in the name "Oswald" is seen the lower portion of the capital letter "I."
Mr.Eisenberg. Have you taken a photograph of the original card?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. That we will mark Cadigan Exhibit No. 19.
(The document referred to was marked Cadigan Exhibit No. 19.)
Mr.Cadigan. On the right-hand side of the card the word "President" appears, and on Cadigan Exhibit No. 15 a portion of the "r" and the "e" is missing, due to the retouching. Examination of the corresponding area on Cadigan Exhibit No. 19 shows that this was due to retouching a portion of the signature of the local board. Similarly, in the wording "heavy penalty for violation" appearing below the signature, the word "violation" is considerably distorted in that portions of the various letters are missing. The negative shows this is due to retouching, and a comparison with the original card of Oswald, of which Cadigan Exhibit No. 19 is an enlargement, shows where the lower loops of the letter "f" cut into the letter, cut into the printed word "violation," which required retouching by the individual to remove it.
Mr.Eisenberg. Have you taken photographs of these negatives to illustrate these points?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. This is that photograph?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. That will be marked Cadigan Exhibit No. 20.
(The document referred to was marked Cadigan Exhibit No. 20.)
Mr.Cadigan. And by referring to the Cadigan Exhibit No. 20, which shows the retouching, examination of the area in the word "President" will show where the portion of the "r" has been cut off. It will show where the capital letter "I" appears in the space provided "been classified in Class," the "I" being part of the classification, Roman numeral "IV-A," which appears on the original card.
Cadigan Exhibit No. 20 shows, also, the intermediate negative where the size of the warning appearing on the bottom of the card was reduced, and the additional retouching made that causes the distorted appearance of the word "violation" on the Commission Exhibit No. 795, so that it was based on my comparison side by side of the negatives, the photographic print, and the original exhibit in the wallet of Oswald, which enabled me to determine that this Commission Exhibit No. 795 was a fraudulent counterfeit made from retouched negatives which, in turn, were made from the original exhibits, Commission Exhibits Nos. 801 and 802.
Mr.Eisenberg. I think that Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 16, 17, and 18 are self-explanatory.
Mr.Cadigan. They merely serve to illustrate the indented typewriting that appears on these exhibits.
Mr.Eisenberg. Mr. Cadigan, I now hand you Commission Exhibit No. 806, purporting to be a certificate of service that Alek James Hidell has honorably served on active duty in the U.S. Marine Corps, and ask you whether you have examined that document?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. And I hand you Commission Exhibit No. 812, consisting of two negatives. Have you examined those negatives?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. Based upon your examination, have you come to any conclusion as to the construction of Commission Exhibit No. 806?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes; again, this is a fraudulent and counterfeit reproduction made from photographic negatives which, in turn, were made from the original card issued in the name of Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr.Eisenberg. Have you taken a photograph of the original card?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.
Mr.Eisenberg. And where does that appear? That is the photograph you are handing me now, which we will label Cadigan Exhibit No. 21?
Mr.Cadigan. Yes.