Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Handwriting authentication  (Read 19213 times)

Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: Handwriting authentication
« Reply #80 on: July 15, 2022, 01:15:32 PM »
Advertisement
In the new thread "Bogus evidence of bogus evidence" Jerry Freeman quotes from what I believe to be an article written by Earl Golz.

In the article he writes;

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.”

The FBI declined to directly comment on the [Hunt] letter's authenticity. In 1964, the FBI repeatedly identified
handwriting on documents as Oswald's during the Warren Commission investigation. The agency also determined
in several cases that year that signatures of cranks on guest books around the country were not Oswald's.


There seems to be a massive contradiction here. On the one hand, you have an FBI expert confirming Oswald wrote the Kleins' order form documents, while having nothing more available to him than a photocopy of those documents (with limited text), allegedly taken from a, now lost, microfilm.

On the other hand, you have the FBI saying, about the Hunt letter (which contains far more text) that without the original it would be "almost impossible to certify whether it is genuine or not".

If the latter is indeed a quote from the FBI, then why didn't that apply to the documents examined by their expert for the Warren Commission?

Handwriting can easily be forged especially when you don't have an original copy and it's a photocopy that's being presented.

Forged copies are always photo copied trying to make it appear genuine.         

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Handwriting authentication
« Reply #80 on: July 15, 2022, 01:15:32 PM »


Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6506
Re: Handwriting authentication
« Reply #81 on: July 15, 2022, 03:56:18 PM »
Handwriting can easily be forged especially when you don't have an original copy and it's a photocopy that's being presented.

Forged copies are always photo copied trying to make it appear genuine.         

Tell us why Oswald's handwriting would have to be forged.
They already had the little prick dead-to-rights, ffs
He even confessed. And multiple trolls heard it as they kneeled nearby

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


billchapman
« Last Edit: July 15, 2022, 04:31:02 PM by Bill Chapman »

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10812
Re: Handwriting authentication
« Reply #82 on: July 15, 2022, 06:13:26 PM »
Tell us why Oswald's handwriting would have to be forged.
They already had the little prick dead-to-rights, ffs

They didn’t have squat. And neither do you.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Handwriting authentication
« Reply #82 on: July 15, 2022, 06:13:26 PM »


Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Re: Handwriting authentication
« Reply #83 on: July 15, 2022, 06:40:03 PM »
They didn’t have squat. And neither do you.

Please take it easy on our lil Chappie.....  He believes in fairy tales and we should allow for that.

He loves to hiss and boo at Snidley Whiplash when he watches the toons.... Some folks simply have to have an easily identifiable villain.....  And Lee Harvey Ossssswald ( Booooo! Hisss ) fills that need.....

Offline Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7444
Re: Handwriting authentication
« Reply #84 on: July 15, 2022, 07:06:16 PM »
Another fine example of just how shallow the LN mind is.
_ Another fine example of the rampant paranoia that has been washing over CTer/JAQer/TAEer/Oswald Arse Kisser ranks since Day One, and leaving nothing more than crackpot mudslinging behind.

Of course you haven't choir boy, but that's not the point.
_Interested in choir boys I see. Sorry, not on my bucket list

If you start making claims, never mind how pathetic, that are based on a comparison with other documents, your claims is worthless if you can't show that the documents used for the comparision are indeed authentic.
_ You've denied being a CT in the past. So why would you need anything other than what has been forwarded as Oswald docs all these years..

As you can't do that, you've got nothing of any value.
Perhaps you should take it up with the The Portal to Texas History.

_The Portal of Texas History
https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth340016/

Photocopy of handwritten notes by Lee Harvey Oswald. In the notes, Oswald writes of an invitation he received to give a lecture in Russian, his attempts to form a branch of the FPCC, his skills in the field of photography and street agitation, his interests in Communism, his time lived in Russia, and his service in the USMC.
 ----------------------------------------------------------
> Perhaps you would like to share with us where you might find something sinister enough to cause somebody to fake a note about an Oswald lecture that was essentially dripping with braggadocio.

Why you would drag the Patton witnesses into the conversation is a complete mystery to me. None of them can authenticate Oswald's handwriting, right?
_They can all authenticate his face. And just as he was the only gun-toter in sight, I was able to match the handwriting on the MO to the handwriting on the only pertinent docs in sight.

You've denied being a CT in the past. So why would you need anything other than what has been forwarded as Oswald docs all these years..

What a pathetically stupid question to ask. Documents used for comparision for the sole purpose of authenticating other documents should themselves also be authenticated. That's how it works in the real world. It has nothing to do with being either a CT or a LN. Anybody who just blindly accepts something as authentic without actually knowing that it is, is a damned fool.

Perhaps you would like to share with us where you might find something sinister enough to cause somebody to fake a note about an Oswald lecture that was essentially dripping with braggadocio.

Another stupid question. Boy you're on a roll. You've missed the entire point of handwriting authentication. It doesn't matter what type of document you use for comparision, the document - sinister or not - still needs to be authenticated itself before being used.

I was able to match the handwriting on the MO to the handwriting on the only pertinent docs in sight.

Delusions of grandeur aside, now all you have to do is show that those documents were indeed written by Oswald.

It seems LNs like you don't like evidence authentication one bit. Why is that?
« Last Edit: July 15, 2022, 08:44:53 PM by Martin Weidmann »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Handwriting authentication
« Reply #84 on: July 15, 2022, 07:06:16 PM »


Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6506
Re: Handwriting authentication
« Reply #85 on: July 15, 2022, 09:17:07 PM »
You've denied being a CT in the past. So why would you need anything other than what has been forwarded as Oswald docs all these years..

What a pathetically stupid question to ask. Documents used for comparision for the sole purpose of authenticating other documents should themselves also be authenticated. That's how it works in the real world. It has nothing to do with being either a CT or a LN. Anybody who just blindly accepts something as authentic without actually knowing that it is, is a damned fool.

Perhaps you would like to share with us where you might find something sinister enough to cause somebody to fake a note about an Oswald lecture that was essentially dripping with braggadocio.

Another stupid question. Boy you're on a roll. You've missed the entire point of handwriting authentication. It doesn't matter what type of document you use for comparision, the document - sinister or not - still needs to be authenticated itself before being used.

I was able to match the handwriting on the MO to the handwriting on the only pertinent docs in sight.

Delusions of grandeur aside, now all you have to do is show that those documents were indeed written by Oswald.

"You've missed the entire point of handwriting authentication"
No. You missed the entire point of my feasibility study

The document - sinister or not - still needs to be authenticated itself before being used"
'Before being used' you say
Yeah. In court
You are out of order, mister
This is a discussion forum

Offline Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7444
Re: Handwriting authentication
« Reply #86 on: July 15, 2022, 09:37:02 PM »
"You've missed the entire point of handwriting authentication"
No. You missed the entire point of my feasibility study

The document - sinister or not - still needs to be authenticated itself before being used"
'Before being used' you say
Yeah. In court
You are out of order, mister
This is a discussion forum

my feasibility study

LOL

This is a discussion forum

Yes it is, but that doesn't mean that you can make up stuff as you please and make bogus claims.

But thank you for implicitly admitting that your claims, in the real world, are completely without merit.

Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6506
Re: Handwriting authentication
« Reply #87 on: July 15, 2022, 10:19:10 PM »
my feasibility study

LOL

This is a discussion forum

Yes it is, but that doesn't mean that you can make up stuff as you please and make bogus claims.

But thank you for implicitly admitting that your claims, in the real world, are completely without merit.

----------------------
feasible;
aka probable, likely
----------------------

Yes it is, but that doesn't mean that you can make up stuff as you please and make bogus claims.
_ Show us where I 'made stuff up' or made 'bogus claims' in my MO handwriting comparisons.


JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Handwriting authentication
« Reply #87 on: July 15, 2022, 10:19:10 PM »