Handwriting authentication

[Tim Nickerson]

In which court were the opinions of those FBI experts admitted?

That's a disingenuous question from you. You know full well that point I was making.

I don't care much for the selfserving opinions of Cadigan and Cole. Of course they are going to say what they said. If they didn't their own testimony would have been rendered worthless.

Better educate yourself before you write another post, Tim. Contact some real life independent handwriting examiners and ask them. They will tell you that their conclusions are never absolute. They work with levels of probability.

This is the give away that Cadigan is full of it;

Mr. EISENBERG. How would you evaluate the possibility of another person having simulated the handwriting of Lee Harvey Oswald in these questioned documents?
Mr. CADIGAN. I don't think there is any possibility.
Mr. EISENBERG. On what do you base that?
Mr. CADIGAN. I base that on 23 years experience and judgment and the examination of the documents and the various writings involved in this instance.

Even the biggest fool understands that when you have a photocopy, there is always a possibility of manipulation. For him to claim there is no such possibility only discredits everything else he said.

Ok, you don't like Cadigan or Cole. I'll try to remember that. I'm not surprised though. McNally, Purtell, and Scott were all independent handwriting examiners. They all had private practices.

[Martin Weidmann]

That's a disingenuous question from you. You know full well that point I was making.

Ok, you don't like Cadigan or Cole. I'll try to remember that. I'm not surprised though. McNally, Purtell, and Scott were all independent handwriting examiners. They all had private practices.

That's a disingenuous question from you. You know full well that point I was making.

Yes indeed. It was a moot point.


McNally, Purtell, and Scott were all independent handwriting examiners. They all had private practices.

Yes indeed. And they do not support your "a copy is good enough" position, as they compared the handwriting on the back of the original the DeMohrenschildt BY photo with a signature on an original passport application dated June 24, 1963 and an original signature on a fingerprint card, which were both assumed to having been written by Oswald and they concluded that all were written by the same individual.

Ms. BRADY. Mr. McNally, did the handwriting panel compare the writing on the rear of the photograph with the signature on the passport application?
Mr. McNALLY. Yes; we did.
Ms. BRADY. What conclusion was reached by the panel about those two documents?
Mr. McNALLY. We concluded that the writing--particularly the signature of Lee Harvey Oswald on the lower lefthand corner on the back of the photograph and the signature Lee H. Oswald on the passport application--all of these signatures were written by one, the same individual.

Wow!

They had no way of knowing with any certainty that the handwriting on the passport application and/or the fingerprint card were authentic and had indeed been written by Oswald, or by anybody else, and they had no way to authenticate either document, which makes their conclusion, although perhaps true, irrelevant as evidence derived from unauthenticated other evidence can itself not be deemed to be authentic or conclusive.

I may have missed it in McNally's HSCA testimony, but I couldn't find where he actually said that the person who wrote those three documents was indeed Lee Harvey Oswald. Perhaps you can help me out here, Tim?

And btw; did you notice how the findings and conclusions of Charles Scott:

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=961#relPageId=250

It is impossible to determine positively whether the letter to Hunt (item 47) is or is not in the handwriting of the same person as the other writings purporting to be Oswald's.

are along the same lines as what the article said about the position taken by the FBI;

The FBI said without the original letter it would be "almost impossible to certify whether it is genuine or not," the Justice Department source said.

"And they' (FBI) said "that Oswald has a childlike handwriting and it's easily forged,” the source said, "so they
just can't tell.”

[Walt Cakebread]

I believe the Hunt letter is a fake just like the AEC visitor sheet is---

Remember that?

 
Just like I believe the 'Oswald' 1963 passport application was faked and also the passport...'his' Mexico visa application was and the firearms orders were.

I'm disappointed that you believe the "Dear Mr Hunt" note is a fake.     I believe that it is authentic and the "Mr Hunt " is HL Hunt....   
John Currington knew this and wanted us to know that HL Hunt had been in contact with Lee Oswald before the assassination.

Currington didn't want to take his secret to the grave .....   He had information that he felt the people should know.

If Currington had thought the note was a fake, I seriously doubt that he would have included it his book.

[Jerry Freeman]

I'm disappointed that you believe the "Dear Mr Hunt" note is a fake.     I believe that it is authentic and the "Mr Hunt " is HL Hunt....   
John Currington knew this and wanted us to know that HL Hunt had been in contact with Lee Oswald before the assassination.

Why? Why would LHO write this note to HLH [and make sure it was dated]?
The note does tend to incriminate Oswald for a planned crime that he was never aware of.
If JC "wanted us to know that Hunt was in contact with Oswald" then why wait for years to present it?
Withholding evidence is a crime.
Where is that original note? How would Hunt and Oswald ever have met?
Why would Oswald use his real name instead of signing the note with the alleged alias...A J Hidell?
According to the timeline...

November 8, 1963: Frazier drops LHO off at the Paine's home, as usual.

https://www.jfk-assassination.net/parnell/chrono.htm
Perhaps Tommy Graves was right...[A Soviet KGB hoax] Or was it some kind of deep state hoax to jerk us all around?

[Walt Cakebread]

Why? Why would LHO write this note to HLH [and make sure it was dated]?
The note does tend to incriminate Oswald for a planned crime that he was never aware of.
If JC "wanted us to know that Hunt was in contact with Oswald" then why wait for years to present it?
Withholding evidence is a crime.
Where is that original note? How would Hunt and Oswald ever have met?
Why would Oswald use his real name instead of signing the note with the alleged alias...A J Hidell?
According to the timeline... https://www.jfk-assassination.net/parnell/chrono.htm
Perhaps Tommy Graves was right...[A Soviet KGB hoax] Or was it some kind of deep state hoax to jerk us all around?

Why? Why would LHO write this note to HLH [and make sure it was dated]?

Make sure it was dated?.... Isn't it common practice to put the date at the top of a letter?...

The note does tend to incriminate Oswald for a planned crime that he was never aware of.

You're putting the mule behind the plow....  You know that JFK was murdered but you have no idea that, that is what Lee was referring to when he wrote: " I suggest that we discuss the matter------- "  If Currington  wanted us to know that Hunt was in contact with Oswald" then why wait for years to present it?

Currington's first loyalty was to HL Hunt....  After Hunt died....He felt relieved of defending him.

[John Iacoletti]

Since Tim seems to respect the opinion of David Purtell:

“Photocopies have several limitations. They do not reproduce all the fine details in handwriting needed in making an examination and comparison. At best, they do not produce as sharp an image as a properly produced photograph, and they lack tonal gradations, a result of the contrasting process of reproduction. In addition, it is possible to incorporate or insert changes and alterations into copies. A method frequently used is to paste together parts of documents to make one fraudulent document, which is then copied. If the first copy can pass inspection, it will be used; if not, it will be reworked to eliminate all signs of alteration. This amended copy is then recopied for the finished product. This is usually referred to as the "cut and paste" method. Document examiners only render a qualified or conditional opinion when working from copies. They stipulate that they have to examine the original before a definite opinion will be made.”

[Jerry Freeman]

Make sure it was dated?.... Isn't it common practice to put the date at the top of a letter?...

A more formal letter perhaps ...but a brief note and an intriguing one at that?

The note does tend to incriminate Oswald for a planned crime that he was never aware of.

 

You're putting the mule behind the plow....  You know that JFK was murdered but you have no idea that is what Lee was referring to when he wrote: " I suggest that we discuss the matter------- "   

I wouldn't imagine that 'the matter' referred to a birthday party or a football game.
What would a Texas oil millionaire have in common with a lowly school book order filler?

How would Hunt and Oswald ever have met?

Answer would be that doubtfully..they ever did.
T N mentioned the study by Jerry Kroth. Prof Kroth got all excited about the note's spelling of-- concerding
He found that the same spelling is found in some letter that Oswald sent to the American Embassy back in 1961.
The trouble I had with this is that I don't think Oswald penned or typed that letter because the rest of the text was flawless in grammar as well as spelling. I think that someone typed that embassy letter for him.
What about 'concerding'?.... I haven't the foggiest. 

[Walt Cakebread]

A more formal letter perhaps ...but a brief note and an intriguing one at that?   I wouldn't imagine that 'the matter' referred to a birthday party or a football game.
What would a Texas oil millionaire have in common with a lowly school book order filler?Answer would be that doubtfully..they ever did.
T N mentioned the study by Jerry Kroth. Prof Kroth got all excited about the note's spelling of-- concerding
He found that the same spelling is found in some letter that Oswald sent to the American Embassy back in 1961.
The trouble I had with this is that I don't think Oswald penned or typed that letter because the rest of the text was flawless in grammar as well as spelling. I think that someone typed that embassy letter for him.
What about 'concerding'?.... I haven't the foggiest.

 I wouldn't imagine that 'the matter' referred to a birthday party or a football game.

No , Lee didn't want to talk to Mr Hunt about some trivial matter,  I agree , you're right .....  Lee wouldn't have wanted to talk to HL Hunt about some trivial matter.... The very tone of the note indicates that he was worried ......

And we are left to speculate about the subject that Lee wanted to discuss.....  Since we all have 20-20 hindsight and we know that JFK was murdered less than two weeks after Lee wrote the note we can easily suspect that the note was related to the assassination....But there is NOTHING in that note that even hints as such a possibility.

I strongly suspect that Lee had picked up info that The Dallas Birchers or minute men were planning something for JFK's visit to Dallas. I believe that Hunt knew that Lee Oswald had been involved in the hoax attack on Walker and thought that maybe he could recruit Lee to participate in another dumb stunt.