The John F. Kennedy Assassination Homepage


  » Introduction
  » The Report
  » The Hearings


  » Testimony Index
  » Volume I
  » Volume II
  » Volume III
  » Volume IV
  » Volume V
  » Volume VI
  » Volume VII
  » Volume VIII
  » Volume IX
  » Volume X
  » Volume XI
  » Volume XII
  » Volume XIII
  » Volume XIV
  » Volume XV
Warren Commission Hearings: Vol. XV - Page 708« Previous | Next »

(Testimony of Alwyn Cole)

Mr. Cole.
does not have a good legibility, might interpret it to be the name which is finally written on the line for signature of member or clerk of local board as it shows on Commission Exhibit No. 795. Now, as to why a name might be removed by opaquing material and then written in in a similar form by pen and ink, it is my view that this might be done in order to have what would appear to be an original, personally written signature on the final card, Exhibit No. 795, instead of having a photographic reproduction of a signature.
Mr. Eisenberg.
Why do you think a person might write back in the same name that he had taken out, rather than a different name?
Mr. Cole.
As I say, in order to have on the final card an actual manually written signature with pen and ink which would, one might suppose, carry more validating effect than a photographic reproduction of a signature.
Mr. Eisenberg.
So that he would not necessarily be interested in changing the name ?
Mr. Cole.
Not necessarily.
Mr. Eisenberg.
Now, on the reverse side of the notice of classification, Exhibit No. 795, there is typed in semilegible form the name and address of the local board which issued the registration certificate, and this seems to correspond to the name and address which had been opaqued out of the Oswald registration certificate, Commission Exhibit No. 802. Is that your observation?
Off the record, please.
(Discussion off the record. )
Mr. Eisenberg.
On the record. Now, I now hand you, in order to help you make this judgment, Commission Exhibit No. 799, which is a side light photo-graph--introduced in connection with your earlier testimony--of the reverse side of Exhibit No. 795, and I wonder whether, with the aid of that side light photograph, you could compare the entry in the space for local beard on Commission Exhibit No. 802, as opposed to the entry in the corresponding space on the reverse side of Commission Exhibit No. 795.
Mr. Cole.
The typewritten information inserted on the reverse side of Commission Exhibit No. 795 is virtually the same as the printed information which appears on the reverse of Commission Exhibit 802, with just some slight differences. On Commission Exhibit No. 795, and as now being read from the side light photograph, Exhibit No. 799, the inserted typewriting which is read partly by an existing scanty deposit of ink and partly by an indent from the striking of the typewriter keys, the wording is "Texas Local Board 114." In other words, on that line the abbreviation, No., for number is omitted.
The next line being read from Exhibit No. 799 is "Selective Service." That means that the word "System" is omitted, which appears on that second line of Exhibit No. 802.
Now, the next line, again being read from Exhibit No. 799, is "Room 2226," differing only as to the last figure. This read "Room 2227," on Exhibit No. 802,
The street is given as 400 instead of 300 as it appears on Exhibit No. 802. The name of the street is the same, "W. Vickery St."
Reading the last line from Exhibit No. 799, there are the words "Fort Worth, Texas," and this means that there is omitted the zone No. 4, which appears on Exhibit No. 802. Except for the differences mentioned, the material is the same.
Mr. Eisenberg.
Do you have any opinion why a person might have gone to the trouble of opaquing out the original name and address and then typing back in a substantially similar name and address?
Mr. Cole.
Yes, sir; I do have an opinion. It is my belief that one might suppose that the insertion of original typewriting on the final blank photographic card would carry more of a Validating force or would give a greater impression of being an original card than would the reproduction, photographic reproduction, of printed material.
Mr. Eisenberg.
Now, Mr. Cole, reviewing the Exhibits which consist of prints

of the negatives we have been discussing, that is, Cole Exhibits Non. 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, and 9, it appears that these prints essentially resemble blank forms, blank printed forms. Can you explain the reason for that?
Mr. Cole.
The reason is that these prints are made from negatives which I believe were a part of a purpose for preparing final photographic prints which appear to be blank forms.
« Previous | Next »

Found a Typo?

Click here
Copyright by www.jfk-assassination.comLast Update: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 21:56:32 CET