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.
(The document referred to was marked Cadigan Exhibit No. 21.)
Mr. EISENBERG. Cadigan Exhibit No. 21 includes the selective service
registration certificate we have been discussing, is that correct?
Mr. CADIGAN. No; it includes an enlargement of the original Selective
Service System registration certificate issued in the name of Lee
Harvey Oswald.
Mr. EISENBERG. And that is the Selective Service System certificate on
which the forgery in the name of Hidell was based?
Mr. CADIGAN. From which the reverse side of the forged or the
fraudulent and counterfeit notice of classification was prepared.
Mr. EISENBERG. Focusing our attention on the certificate of service,
could you illustrate by use of this photograph and any others you
have already introduced some of the points which led you to your
conclusion----
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. As to Commission Exhibit No. 806?
Mr. CADIGAN. The two negatives in Commission Exhibit No. 812, which
appear on Cadigan Exhibit No. 20, show the areas of retouching.
Examination of the negatives themselves in Commission Exhibit No. 812
shows that the original entries on the face and reverse side can be
seen. It appears in red. The face reads "Lee Harvey Oswald, 1653230."
And the reverse side bears his signature.
From a study of the negatives and from the enlarged photographs,
Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 15, 16, 17, and 18, I wish to point out some of
the evidence that links these three items together. On Cadigan Exhibit
No. 16, on the reverse side in the printed word "signature," the "u" is
misshapen, due to some of the retouched substance crossing the letter,
and this is exactly in the area where the upper portion of the name
"Lee" appears on the original card. This is seen on Cadigan Exhibit No.
21.
Also on the line below, in which appears the printed wording "signature
of certifying officer," in the letter "n" in "certifying" can be seen
a long line which at first glance might appear to be a part of the
signature "A. G. Ayers, Jr.," but which corresponds exactly to the
ending stroke of the letter "y" in "Harvey."
Also, in the printed word "officer" on the same line can be seen the
effects of the retouch in that the upper part of the first "f" has been
cut off by the retouch substance. So that by a study and a comparison
of the Commission Exhibit No. 806 with the negatives, with particular
reference to where the retouching fluid has cut into lines or printing,
and further comparing the same negative with the original card, as
shown in Cadigan Exhibit No. 21, I determined and it can be seen that
the Commission Exhibit No. 806 was produced from the negatives in
Exhibit No. 812, which, in turn, were produced from the original card
of which Cadigan Exhibit No. 21 is a photograph.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cadigan, in either the fraudulent selective service
notice of classification or certificate of service, have attempts been
made to reinstate portions of printed lines which were blocked out by
the opaque substance?
Mr. CADIGAN. No; I didn't notice that, particularly. I noticed from a
technical standpoint that the opaquing was rather crudely done, in that
the opaquing of negatives is a common photographic technique, and with
reasonable care you can avoid cutting into lines. I didn't particularly
observe any areas where the lines had been put back in.
This does not eliminate the possibility, because it is a very simple
matter of scratching through the opaque emulsion to produce such a line.
Mr. EISENBERG. Where the line is thickened, as is visible in Cadigan
Exhibit No. 15, how would you account for that, Mr. Cadigan? I am
looking now at Cadigan Exhibit No. 15 in the block, that portion of the
rectangular block surrounding the number "224," and particularly the
bottom of the block.
Mr. CADIGAN. A study and examination of Cadigan Exhibit No. 19 shows
that these areas correspond to the figures "114" which appear in the
second block of the Selective Service number, and which were not
retouched off.
Mr. EISENBERG. So you feel that, rather than the bottom of that block
being thickened in the retouching, what you have is a residue from the
typed-in portion----
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Which appeared on the original card?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; and this can be further seen. The right-hand side of
the block for the first two letters of the selective service number
shows a thickened area which corresponds to the numeral "1" on the
original card of Oswald.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cadigan, returning now for a moment to Commission
Exhibit No. 795, were you able to identify either of the two signatures
written in ink on that card, the one being "Alek J. Hidell," and the
other a signature written over the caption "Member or clerk of local
board"?
Mr. CADIGAN. No; I did examine the "Alek J. Hidell" signature appearing
as the signature of registrant, but the known writings available of
Lee Harvey Oswald were not sufficiently comparable with the signature
to reach a definite opinion. I did note, however, some similarities in
the letter "A" and in the last name, the letter "H" and the ending "l."
But these were not of sufficient weight nor of sufficient number nor of
sufficient combination to warrant a definite opinion.
Mr. EISENBERG. You say you compared this item, this signature with
the known standards. Did you compare the signature with questioned
documents which you already identified?
Mr. CADIGAN. No.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cadigan, I wonder whether after this deposition
would you compare this signature with those questioned signatures of
"Alek J. Hidell" which you have now identified?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; certainly.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cadigan, I now hand you Commission Exhibit No. 817,
consisting of a portion of an application for a post office box 30061
in New Orleans, POD Form 1093, and ask you whether you have examined
that item?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. And have you attempted to determine whether that item,
Commission Exhibit No. 817, was prepared by Lee Harvey Oswald, whose
known writings we have introduced previously?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; I have.
Mr. EISENBERG. And what was your conclusion?
Mr. CADIGAN. On Commission Exhibit No. 817 the hand printed names, "A.
J. Hidell," and "Marina Oswald," and the signature "L. H. Oswald," were
written by Lee Harvey Oswald, based on a comparison with his known
standards of writing.
Mr. EISENBERG. Have you prepared a photograph of Commission Exhibit No.
817?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. And does that also include a photograph of another item,
apparently another part of the application?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Did your identification of the Commission Exhibit No.
817 depend in any way upon your identification of the other part of the
item which is shown in your photograph?
Mr. CADIGAN. It did not.
Mr. EISENBERG. I will mark the photograph Cadigan. Exhibit No. 22. (The
document referred to was marked Cadigan Exhibit No. 22.)
Mr. EISENBERG. Was this prepared by you or under your supervision?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. And it is an accurate photograph?
Mr. CADIGAN. It is.
Mr. EISENBERG. We haven't been going over that with all the other
photographs, but is that true of all the photographs we have introduced
so far?
Mr. CADIGAN. That is correct.
Mr. EISENBERG. And any other photographs you may introduce during the
balance of this deposition?
Mr. CADIGAN. That is true.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cadigan, by use of that photograph and by use of
the photographs of the standards, could you explain some of the points
which led you to your conclusion concerning Commission Exhibit No. 817?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; here again, it is the presence of the same
combination of characteristics in the hand printing and signature on
Cadigan Exhibit No. 22 and on Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 4 through 10. For
example, the word "Marina" on Cadigan Exhibit No. 22 can be compared
with the same word or the same name on Cadigan Exhibit No. 10, the "M"
being characterized by a rather long beginning stroke, the center of
the letter is high, giving the letter somewhat the appearance of the
numeral "3" tipped on its side. The "A" is similar to or made in the
same way as previous "A's," with a pointed top, with the beginning
stroke about two-thirds of the way up the staff. The "i", again, is
very small in relation to the letters coming before and after it.
In the "N" there is a curve at the base of the letter. It is more
pronounced on Cadigan Exhibit No. 22 than in the name "Marina" in
Cadigan Exhibit No. 10, but in the name "Lillian," on the same exhibit,
the same kind of curve is observed.
In "Oswald," again in the signature "L. H. Oswald," I find the same
characteristics and combinations of characteristics. In the questioned
signature in Cadigan Exhibit No. 22 as in the various known signatures
in Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 4 through 10, here I think the ending "ld,"
the narrow pointed loops used for the "l" and "d" are very small, and
with a rather misshapen body or upper stroke.
Again, it is the presence of the same combination of handwriting and
hand printing characteristics which led me to the opinion that this
exhibit had been prepared by Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cadigan, I now hand you Commission Exhibit No. 813,
a vaccination certificate, a purported vaccination certificate, signed
by "A. J. Hidell," and I ask you whether you have examined that item?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; I have.
Mr. EISENBERG. Now, this bears writing on the outside and the inside.
Have you attempted to determine whether that writing is the writing of
Lee Harvey Oswald?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. What is your conclusion?
Mr. CADIGAN. That the hand printing and the Oswald signature were
written by Lee Harvey Oswald, again based on the presence of the same
combination of individual handwriting and hand printing characteristics.
Mr. EISENBERG. Have you taken photographs of this exhibit?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Those will be Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 23 and 24.
(The documents referred to were marked Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 23 and 24.)
Mr. CADIGAN. I would point out that these represent only a portion
of the original document, since for demonstration purposes the lower
printed blank is not included in these exhibits.
Mr. EISENBERG. Now, the document as we see it now exhibits extremely
faint writing. Can you explain the reason for that?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; this is due to treatment of the card for latent
fingerprints by chemical process which bleaches and makes inks run.
Mr. EISENBERG. Was the document treated to restore the original color
after it had been treated for fingerprints?
Mr. CADIGAN. No; from looking at this, it has been desilvered, but it
has not been completely desilvered since parts of the stains of the
chemical treatment remain.
Mr. EISENBERG. When you first saw the document and made your
examination, was the document in its original condition, that is, had
it been treated yet for fingerprints?
Mr. CADIGAN. I never saw the original.
Mr. EISENBERG. You never saw the original?
Mr. CADIGAN. No; I had a Xerox copy of the original exhibit. I did not
see this original exhibit.
Mr. EISENBERG. You said before you had examined this exhibit?
Mr. CADIGAN. To be more exact, I examined a Xerox copy of this exhibit.
Mr. EISENBERG. Do you know who prepared the Xerox copy?
Mr. CADIGAN. It was submitted by our Dallas office.
Mr. EISENBERG. Was this a copy of the front and the back?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. And are your photographs of the Xerox or of the original?
Mr. CADIGAN. They are made from the Xerox.
Mr. EISENBERG. Is this the first time you saw the original?
Mr. CADIGAN. I believe it is.
Mr. EISENBERG. Based upon your examination of the original at this
point, and a comparison of the photograph of the Xerox copies, would
you conclude that the Xerox copies had been made before the document
had been treated for fingerprints?
Mr. CADIGAN. Very definitely.
Mr. EISENBERG. Could you note a few of the points which led you to your
conclusion concerning the handwriting appearing on the documents you
photographed as Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 23 and 24?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; the handwritten signature "Lee H. Oswald" is written
in a very distinctive manner. The "L" with its rather long beginning
stroke, and its narrow upper, and the lower loop, is almost in the
shape of a triangle. The large loop formation at the top of the "O"
leading into the letter "s" and the loop at the base of the "s" is
almost a carbon copy of the same characteristic appearing on Cadigan
Exhibit No. 10, page 2. And again, the narrow "l" and relatively large
"d" with a very pronounced ending stroke on the "d" is typical of the
manner in which this man writes his signature.
So also in the hand printing, on Cadigan Exhibit No. 10, we see the
"LEE" and the "OSWALD," the little hook at the start of the "L" and the
reverse curves at the base of both the "L" and the following "EE's."
Again, we see the use of the lowercase "l" and the lowercase "d" in
the formation of "Oswald," whereas the rest of the letters are capital
letters.
Here, again, the presence of the same combination of characteristics
led me to the opinion that this writing had been prepared by Lee Harvey
Oswald.
Mr. EISENBERG. Does that include the signature "A. J. Hidell"?
Mr. CADIGAN. No; it does not. This signature is distorted, and the
standards, the known standards of Lee Harvey Oswald I had available for
comparison would not justify any opinion concerning this particular
signature.
Mr. EISENBERG. Did you attempt to compare it with the questioned items
which you had, theretofore, identified?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; without reaching any opinion one way or the other.
Mr. EISENBERG. Would you conclude that it was not written by Lee Harvey
Oswald?
Mr. CADIGAN. No; I would not.
Mr. EISENBERG. Does it bear any similarities to Oswald's handwriting at
any point?
Mr. CADIGAN. I didn't observe any that I thought were sufficiently
significant in characteristics to warrant pointing out. It is a
question of judgment as to how you evaluate a given characteristic. I
don't see, and do not see now, any characteristic worthy of mention to
either say Oswald did or didn't do it.
Mr. EISENBERG. I hand you Commission Exhibit No. 115, consisting of
a rubber stamping kit, and ask you whether you have examined that
stamping kit.
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Did you attempt to determine whether the stamping on the
document which you have photographed as Cadigan Exhibit No. 23, was
produced by the rubber stamp kit, Exhibit No. 115?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. What conclusion did you reach?
Mr. CADIGAN. I couldn't reach any conclusion because the exhibit that I
had, and from which Cadigan Exhibit No. 23 was made, is a Xerox copy,
and is not adequate for the rubber stamp examination of this kind.
Mr. EISENBERG. Did you see anything which led you to believe that the
stamp on on the document you examined could not have been made by
Exhibit No. 115?
Rather than answer that question, could you undertake to perform an
examination based upon the original?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. At a subsequent time?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. And you will supply us with the results of that by
letter?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. I now hand you Commission Exhibit No. 819, consisting
of a photograph of a card, "Fair Play for Cuba Committee, New Orleans
Chapter, L. H. Oswald," with Oswald's signature, or a signature
purporting to be Lee H. Oswald's, and the signature "A. J. Hidell";
and Commission Exhibit No. 820, which appears to be similar to the
photograph Exhibit No. 819, except that there is no signature apparent
in the space where the signature A. J. Hidell appears in Exhibit No
819, and I ask you whether you have examined these two items.
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Is Exhibit No. 819 a photograph of Exhibit No. 820?
Mr. CADIGAN. It is.
Mr. EISENBERG. Exhibit No. 820 is seriously discolored now and does not
have the words "A. J. Hidell" apparent. Can you explain how that came
about?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; the original Commission Exhibit No. 820 had been
treated for latent fingerprints, and this is a chemical process which
has removed the ink of the signature. However, on examination under
strong side lighting and using low-power magnification, portions of the
letters "A," "J," and "H," of the signature of the chapter president
can be discerned, and are in the same place on the photograph,
Commission Exhibit No. 819, as on the original, Commission Exhibit No.
820.
Furthermore, a comparison of the writing and the rubber stamp,
especially with reference to the position of these with respect to
lines and printing and other fixed points on the card, definitely shows
that Commission Exhibit No. 819 is a photograph of Exhibit No. 820, and
made before it was treated for latent fingerprints.
Mr. EISENBERG. Now, apart from this, did you take the photograph,
Exhibit No. 819?
Mr. CADIGAN. No; the photograph was made in our photographic laboratory.
Mr. EISENBERG. But you did see Exhibit No. 820, before it had been
discolored, did you not?
Mr. CADIGAN. I don't recall at this time. It may well be that I did,
but I have no independent recollection of it now.
Mr. EISENBERG. So that your testimony that Exhibit No. 819 is a
photograph of Exhibit No. 820 is based upon your evaluation of the two
items as they exist now rather than upon recollection of Exhibit No.
820 before it was discolored?
Mr. CADIGAN. That is true.
Mr. EISENBERG. Do you know why Exhibit No. 820 was not reprocessed or
desilvered?
Mr. CADIGAN. No, this is a latent fingerprint matter.
Mr. EISENBERG. Can you explain why the signature, "Lee H. Oswald" or
rather L. H. Oswald is apparent, while the signature "A. J. Hidell" is
not?
Mr. CADIGAN. Different inks.
Mr. EISENBERG. Some inks are more soluble in the solution used for
fingerprint tests than others?
Mr. CADIGAN. Definitely.
Mr. EISENBERG. Other Commission Exhibits, specifically Nos. 788, 801,
and 802 also appear to have been treated for fingerprints?
Mr. CADIGAN. That is correct.
Mr. EISENBERG. Exhibit No. 788 has been desilvered?
Mr. CADIGAN. Desilvered, and Exhibits Nos. 801 and 802 are still in
their original silvered condition.
Mr. EISENBERG. Did you see these items before they were treated for
fingerprints?
Mr. CADIGAN. I know I saw Exhibit No. 788 before it was treated for
fingerprints. As to Exhibits Nos. 801 and 802, I don't know at this
time.
Mr. EISENBERG. Are the photographs which you produced photographs of
the items before they were treated for fingerprints or after?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; before they were treated for fingerprints. In other
words, it is regular customary practice to photograph an exhibit before
it is treated for latents for exactly this reason, that in the course
of the treatment there may be some loss of detail, either total or
partial.
Mr. EISENBERG. Did you take the photographs?
Mr. CADIGAN. No.
Mr. EISENBERG. Are you referring to the photographs which you produced
at an earlier point?
Mr. CADIGAN. The photographs that I have produced here today, the
various enlargements, were made from negatives. These negatives, in
turn, were made at the time the original exhibits were photographed,
and this would be before latent fingerprint treatment.
Mr. EISENBERG. I asked you when I introduced those exhibits whether
they had been prepared by you or under your supervision?
Mr. CADIGAN. That is true.
Mr. EISENBERG. You meant, then, that they were prepared under your
supervision, or did you mean that they were prepared by you in the
sense that you made the enlargement from the negative?
Mr. CADIGAN. No; they were prepared under my supervision. In other
words, I maintain all of the negatives in connection with the document
aspects of this file in my room, under lock and key, at all times. I
pull the negatives that I want enlarged, and I prepare a photograph
requisition, take it down to our photographers, tell them what I want,
and then later go back and pick up the enlargements, and check them to
be sure they are just what I want.
Mr. EISENBERG. What about the negative itself? Can you state of your
own knowledge whether the negative itself is of the original?
Mr. CADIGAN. Only, insofar, that I know that on November 23, when the
vast bulk of this material came in, that it was photographed. Some of
these items I saw before they were photographed, and some afterward.
But the exact sequence to select one item out of four or five hundred,
I cannot, in all honesty, say I definitely recall seeing this before it
was photographed.
Mr. EISENBERG. Can you explain what the procedure is when a document
came in involving the assassination?
Mr. CADIGAN. Initially, the first big batch of evidence was brought
into the laboratory on November 23 of 1963 and this consisted of many,
many items.
Mr. EISENBERG. 1963?
Mr. CADIGAN. November 23, 1963. It was a very large quantity of
evidence that was brought in. There were several agent examiners
available to evaluate this material. There were supervisory officials,
there were representatives from our Internal Security Division, all of
whom had an interest in this matter, and it was decided they wanted
certain items treated for latent fingerprints. The basic rule is
always that before an exhibit is treated for latent fingerprints it is
photographed, and that is what was done in this case.
Mr. EISENBERG. What happens to the negative after it is photographed?
Were they all given to you?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; the negatives that pertain to the document aspects
I took over and maintained under my control. Negatives pertaining to
firearms evidence or hairs or fibers, they were turned over to Mr.
Frazier.
Mr. EISENBERG. So under the regular procedure, as soon as the document
came in it would be photographed, before it was treated for latents and
the negative would be turned over to you?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. So at least if the procedure had been followed, any
negative you had would be a negative of a document before it had been
treated for fingerprints, is that correct?
Mr. CADIGAN. That is correct.
Mr. EISENBERG. Now, returning to Commission Exhibits Nos. 820 and 819,
did you prepare a photograph which would show the remnants of the
signature A. J. Hidell on the Commission Exhibit No. 820?
Mr. CADIGAN. No.
Mr. EISENBERG. Is the preparation of such a photograph possible?
Mr. CADIGAN. I doubt it very much, because the indentations are so
faint that the enlargement would serve no useful purpose. Actually,
the best examination is by low-power magnification under the proper
lighting.
Mr. EISENBERG. Did you attempt to determine whether the signature of
Lee H. Oswald on this card was written by Lee H. Oswald?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. What was your conclusion?
Mr. CADIGAN. That the Lee H. Oswald signature on Commission Exhibit No.
820 was written by Lee H. Oswald.
Mr. EISENBERG. What about the signature "A. J. Hidell"?
Mr. CADIGAN. I was unable to reach a conclusion. First of all, at the
time I compared this signature the known standards of Lee Harvey Oswald
were inadequate for this particular comparison.
I did, however, note that there were certain differences in this
signature that indicate the possibility of someone other than Oswald
having prepared it. But in my opinion, the characteristics I observed
were not of sufficient weight for a positive opinion in this regard.
Mr. EISENBERG. Could you note those characteristics?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; I think the capital letter "A" and the capital letter
"H" in "Hidell" are different from the "A's" that Oswald makes, that
appear in the enlarged photographs, Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 4 through 10.
Mr. EISENBERG. Anything else?
Mr. CADIGAN. I think the lower case "d," especially in the rounded
shape of the body of it and the relatively short height of the staff,
so that the staff compared to the body is very short. The "J" is
made different or in a different manner than Oswald regularly makes
or usually makes his "J's" in the known standards, but again it is
a question of judgment as to whether you believe a combination of
characteristics is enough to either eliminate or identify. In this
instance, in my opinion, these differences point to the possibility of
another writer other than Oswald.
Mr. EISENBERG. You indicated before, also, that there was another ink
used.
Mr. CADIGAN. That is correct. This, of course, in and of itself, is of
no consequence, since the same person can use two different pens, so
the color of the ink would not be, in my mind, significant.
Mr. EISENBERG. Does that signature appear to have been written
naturally?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. At normal speed?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Any evidence of retouching?
Mr. CADIGAN. No.
Mr. EISENBERG. Generally, were the signatures and other handwritings
in the questioned documents you have reviewed in this deposition today
written naturally?
Mr. CADIGAN. With the exception of the "Hidell" signature on his
certificate of vaccination. There is, in my opinion, distortion
present there. But, by and large, in fact in almost all of the various
handwritings, hand printings, and signatures, there is no evidence of
disguise or distortion, in my opinion.
Mr. EISENBERG. What type of evidence indicates disguise or distortion?
Mr. CADIGAN. Distortion and disguise can take many forms. It can be
in the form of a change in slant, a deliberate malformation of the
individual letters. It can be shown in broken or interrupted strokes.
It can be shown in waves or wiggles in the line itself which should
not normally be there. It may be occasioned by a person using other
than normal hand, a left-handed person writing with his right hand or
a right-handed person writing with his left hand. All these introduce
elements of distoration or disguise. The extent of it can only be
determined by comparing a given writing with known writings, and
observing the characteristics present, and on that basis you can then
formulate an opinion as to whether or not there is any appreciable
amount of distortion or disguise.
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.
Mr. EISENBERG. And do I understand that if that had happened, the
person would have left evidence behind which you would have detected?
Mr. CADIGAN. In my opinion, yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. And that would be in what form?
Mr. CADIGAN. It would be in many forms. Failure to incorporate into the
writings things that should be there, and including in the writings
things that are not in Oswald's writing, differences in slant, spacing,
proportions of letters, both to other letters and proportions of
letters within themselves, the adoption of the various variations that
you find in the known writings. When the amount of writing approaches
the amount involved here, there is a large, a relatively large volume
of questioned writings. The possibilities of successful or undetectible
forgery, in my opinion, are nil.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cadigan, I now hand you Commission Exhibit No. 1,
which is a note in the Russian language in cyrillic print, and ask you
whether you have examined that item?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. I now hand you Commission Exhibit Nos. 55, 56, and
66, consisting of various notes in the cyrillic language, rather in
the Russian language in cyrillic print, and ask you whether you have
examined those notes?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Who is the purported signer of those notes, Exhibits
Nos. 55, 56, and 66?
Mr. CADIGAN. From the translation that I read these are purportedly
written by Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr. EISENBERG. Now, for the record, these have also been identified by
Marina as having been written by Lee Harvey Oswald.
And these are signed Alek in some or all cases?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; they are signed A-l-e-k, Alek in all three instances.
Mr. EISENBERG. Again, for the record, this is a name which was used for
Oswald during his period of staying in the Soviet Union.
Have you attempted to determine whether Commission Exhibit No. 1 was
written by the person who wrote Commission Exhibits Nos. 55, 56, and 66?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. And what was your conclusion?
Mr. CADIGAN. That Commission Exhibit No. 1 was written by Lee Harvey
Oswald.
Mr. EISENBERG. Have you prepared photographs of Commission Exhibits
Nos. 55, 56, and 66?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes; of the letters contained in those exhibits.
Mr. EISENBERG. I will mark those as Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 25, 26, 27,
and 28.
(The documents referred to were marked Cadigan Exhibits Nos. 25, 26,
27, and 28.)
Mr. EISENBERG. Have you also taken a photograph of Commission Exhibit
No 1?
Mr. CADIGAN. Yes.