skjpm
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Sep-15-04 01:56 PM
Original message |
Could the memos be typed versions of handwritten memos? |
|
I think the memos are authentic, but here's a theory anyway--could someone have simply taken a box full of handwritten memos and typed them onto a computer for easier storage? Like years later? This wouldn't explain the signatures, but it might explain some of the so-called problems.
|
dpbrown
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Sep-15-04 01:59 PM
Response to Original message |
1. That's what I thought, too |
|
Hand-written, later transcribed.
|
Worst Username Ever
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Sep-15-04 02:04 PM
Response to Original message |
2. I think they are also authentic, but the problem with this |
|
theory is that there is a signature with a date. So if the memos were hand written, and in later years typed, the original writer would have had to sign and (falsly) date the memo. Possible, but unlikely in the military...
|
skjpm
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Sep-15-04 02:09 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
3. Maybe they have a signature stamp |
|
There are lots of innocent possibilities. They don't have to outright forgeries.
|
wettap
(66 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Sep-15-04 02:09 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
|
It would be counter productive to produce type-written copies of actual hand written notes... then "signed" and dated and then passed off as actual memos.
I guess I don't know how this can be spun.
|
newyawker99
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Sep-15-04 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
papau
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Sep-15-04 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
5. The author who dated thehandwritten could have date the typed with |
|
the same date - indeed I would use the same date if I were retyping my originals. The Secr recalls the contents as the same contents she knew about in his handwritten - and she retired in 79 - and he died in 81
2 years to retype and sign.
|
wettap
(66 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Sep-15-04 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
6. I'm not a lawyer (a librarian), but |
|
what I know of the law is that when the original is available, copies (even copies made to PROVE FRAUD on a original document) are generally inadmissable in a court of law.
I only know this because a relative of mine tried to prove fraud by producing a copy of an original document made BEFORE it was altered. Judge ruled against its admisability... copies not kosher when original is available.
:mad:
|
mr_du04
(170 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Sep-15-04 02:29 PM
Response to Original message |
7. why even give a little bit of credibilty |
|
Edited on Wed Sep-15-04 02:30 PM by mr_du04
to the nutballs who are calling them fakes? The simple fact is the memos are real and chimpco can not dispute what is in the memo so this will damage bunnypants. I only wish they had surfaced in 2000 so we could have avoided the whole mess. ANd instead we would be discussing what President Gore would be doing in his second term. After another 4 years of peace and prosperity.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri May 03rd 2024, 02:41 AM
Response to Original message |