It’s icing on the cake, imo.

The top of the desktop "f" is quite hooked. Similar…yah, the same? Not so much, imo. Several examples of that f from various POI’s have been shared.

Yeah, that was my take. I sat here last night doing that f thing for a while, realizing that because people were taught how to form their letters almost identically, thanks to less than a handful of nearly indistinguishable methodologies, millions of people would likely form their letters is a very similar way.

As I said, my f’s are written almost identically.

I’m all for reading anything about forensics joberson. My next class…can’t wait:

I’ll pack them up for you. I also have books on lust killing (such as Purcell’s The Psychology of Lust Murder), forensics of every stripe, and hundreds of true crime books. My favorite is Robert House’s Jack the Ripper and the Case for Scotland Yard’s Prime Suspect.

May not be a science, but people go to jail or avoid jail based in part on handwriting examination

Graphology/handwriting analysis is a pseudoscience and should not to be confused with forensic document examination, which is actually considered a science.

May not be a science, but people go to jail or avoid jail based in part on handwriting examination

Graphology/handwriting analysis is a pseudoscience and should not to be confused with forensic document examination, which is actually considered a science.

That’s true – but in fairness Morrill didn’t engage in graphology (if I understand you right here). The latter is pretty much latter-day phrenology or what have you – in other words quackery, reading all sorts of psychological traits into how a person crosses his t’s, etc.

On the same note, when talking about document examination, wills and the like – isn’t that usually a matter of examining signatures?

Similar to what an expert at Christie’s does when someone wants a grotesque amount of money for Hitler’s autograph – that sort of thing. That is a science of sorts – at least a proper area of expertise.

That is, verifying script or cursive (especially in the form of a signature) is very different from comparing the sort of hand printing many people use when they write a letter or a shopping list.

Basic handwriting is taught in school (well, used to be anyway – I suppose it’s a threatened discipline these days), based on some matrix or other. Which means that a huge amount of people will print letters in a similar way, because that’s how they were taught to print them.

It’s my understanding that one of the questions asked in recent years is how unique a person’s normal (not signatures and such) writing/printing actually is – and to what extent it’s possible to soundly compare A and B in a manner which adheres to accepted scientific standards. Part of the reason why handwriting comparisons are frowned upon these days (and inadmissible in court here and there, I think) is precisely a lack of such standards: It’s too subjective, in a word. And thus susceptible to being exploited, i.e. the old “pay an expert for an opinion” game.

That’s true – but in fairness Morrill didn’t engage in graphology (if I understand you right here). The latter is pretty much latter-day phrenology or what have you – in other words quackery, reading all sorts of psychological traits into how a person crosses his t’s, etc.

No, I get you. Morrill was certainly not a graphologist, which is to personality what astrology is to fortune-telling.

On the same note, when talking about document examination, wills and the like – isn’t that usually a matter of examining signatures?

Well, according to the books I’m reading, examination of signatures is no different than he examination of entire documents, e.g., the Hitler Diaries, or the Jon Benet-Ramsey letter. Basically the same principles, or a subset thereof, apply.

Which means that a huge amount of people will print letters in a similar way, because that’s how they were taught to print them.

Exactly.

So I guess, no handwriting expert in your opinion, no writing experts are worth anything?

Clearly, I did not say that. I don’t think Morrill was "always wrong," nor do I think he was "right every time." Somewhere in the middle, I’d say. Probably even 80% + correct.

But I do say that there is room for disagreement. What he was doing is/was more art than science. It’s not at all like fingerprints, DNA, ballistics, or even tire tracks. Those are solid, fact and evidence based, testable things. Handwriting is mere opinion, it really just is.

The Zodiac case is odd in that way too. There are few other cases (no others quickly come to mind) where we have a ‘proposed’ writer sending things to newspapers, police agencies, on a school desk, etc.. that are all somehow lumped together. It’s a weird thing.

I have a good deal of doubt about many of the ‘communications’ that have been tied to Zodiac over the years, and I’d rather not deal with a lot of "iffy" evidence in lieu of a smaller amount of solid evidence. That’s just me, but I, like many others here, tend toward skepticism.

-glurk

(tl;dr version) – A few solid facts are better than a metric tonne of speculative crap.

So I guess, no handwriting expert in your opinion, no writing experts are worth anything?

Clearly, I did not say that. I don’t think Morrill was "always wrong," nor do I think he was "right every time." Somewhere in the middle, I’d say. Probably even 80% + correct.

But I do say that there is room for disagreement. What he was doing is/was more art than science. It’s not at all like fingerprints, DNA, ballistics, or even tire tracks. Those are solid, fact and evidence based, testable things. Handwriting is mere opinion, it really just is.

The Zodiac case is odd in that way too. There are few other cases (no others quickly come to mind) where we have a ‘proposed’ writer sending things to newspapers, police agencies, on a school desk, etc.. that are all somehow lumped together. It’s a weird thing.

I have a good deal of doubt about many of the ‘communications’ that have been tied to Zodiac over the years, and I’d rather not deal with a lot of "iffy" evidence in lieu of a smaller amount of solid evidence. That’s just me, but I, like many others here, tend toward skepticism.

-glurk

(tl;dr version) – A few solid facts are better than a metric tonne of speculative crap.

While trying to do the right thing, publishing that handwriting (imo) was something that hurt the case more than it helped it.

We know it created hundreds of fake letters which just contributed to wasted time and efforts and it could have assisted in clearing someone who was guilty (handwriting didn’t match).

Yep, LE was between a rock and a hard place where publishing those letters was concerned. Zodiac threatened to kill more people if certain parts of the letters were not published. If only they had just typed out the contents instead of images of the actual letters but that may not have satisfied Zodiac.

I highly doubt anyone was cleared on handwriting alone. Although it certainly created plenty of fakes, the police wanted as much info as possible as there wasn’t much to go on. The choice of more insight over a slim chance of being fooled was correct.

I highly doubt anyone was cleared on handwriting alone. Although it certainly created plenty of fakes, the police wanted as much info as possible as there wasn’t much to go on. The choice of more insight over a slim chance of being fooled was correct.

Absolutely not, not handwriting alone. I think part of the problem was Zodiac gave them way too much to go on.

I highly doubt anyone was cleared on handwriting alone. Although it certainly created plenty of fakes, the police wanted as much info as possible as there wasn’t much to go on. The choice of more insight over a slim chance of being fooled was correct.

Absolutely not, not handwriting alone. I think part of the problem was Zodiac gave them way too much to go on.

Are we sure? This report mentions that they took Saxberg’s prints & writing. Then it matches writing didn’t match, and Saxberg was eliminated. Does that mean based on a writing elimination, his prints didn’t get looked at? If so, how many other suspects were ruled out this way?

That’s a damn pertinent question, morf, given what we know about the importance they actually attached to handwriting.

They considered it the most important tool for clearing suspects. That’s right there, in black and white, in the CADOJ report.

Found this odd 1978 story by Zodiac handwriting expert Sherwood Morrill *

It was published in : The San Francisco Examiner (San Francisco, California)
21 Dec 1986
Page 148

It is a huge 1986 article about many aspects of the Zodiac Killer case,
among the many stories this 1978 Sherwood Morrill story apparently story told by himself
2 years before he died.

Quote:

Of course the retired handwriting analyst (Sherwood Morrill) is not without his own theories.
Among the people who have beaten the path to his door were a man and a woman who came to call after the authenticity of one letter was questioned. ( A 1978 Zodiac message was deemed by some experts to have bee written by former police inspector David Toscchi, even though Morrill said it was authentic.)

" I checked him out later. It turned out we couldn’t find anything, including job applications that had been handwritten. Everything was typed." But, he adds, with the axiom of Zodiac investigators, " there wasn’t enough physical evidence to connect him with the murders."

*Sherwood Morrill, here some of his titles:
Head of the Questioned Documents Section of California’s Criminal Identification and Investigation Bureau
Documents examiner for the California Department of Justice

Found this odd 1978 story by Zodiac handwriting expert Sherwood Morrill *

It was published in : The San Francisco Examiner (San Francisco, California)
21 Dec 1986
Page 148

It is a huge 1986 article about many aspects of the Zodiac Killer case,
among the many stories this 1978 Sherwood Morrill story apparently story told by himself
2 years before he died.

Quote:

Of course the retired handwriting analyst (Sherwood Morrill) is not without his own theories.
Among the people who have beaten the path to his door were a man and a woman who came to call after the authenticity of one letter was questioned. ( A 1978 Zodiac message was deemed by some experts to have bee written by former police inspector David Toscchi, even though Morrill said it was authentic.)

"It was out at the time" Morrill remembers. " My wife answered the door, and this beefy man was standing there. He said "Tell your husband he was correct about the letter." He was with a female companion, who my wife insists wasn’t a woman but a man in drag. She was sure she had the Zodiac standing right in front of her.

" He came back, and I visited with him. He had an uncanny knowledge of the case. He knew things only the police knew. He even told me the make of the sewing machine the hood had been stitched on. Not too long ago, he came to see me again, to tell me he had moved from Petaluma to Citrus Heights. I asked him to write down his new address and phone number. He looked at me strangely and said, " I’m not going to write anything down for you"

" I checked him out later. It turned out we couldn’t find anything, including job applications that had been handwritten. Everything was typed." But, he adds, with the axiom of Zodiac investigators, " there wasn’t enough physical evidence to connect him with the murders."

*Sherwood Morrill, here some of his titles:
Head of the Questioned Documents Section of California’s Criminal Identification and Investigation Bureau
Documents examiner for the California Department of Justice

Hi fellow forum members.

I find it odd that not one single forum member replied to this pretty odd/interesting 1978 info/story from Zodiac handwriting analyst/expert Sherwood Morrill.
(published Dec 1986 in San Francisco Examiner)

Please read it and let me know what you think.

"It was out at the time" Morrill remembers. " My wife answered the door, and this beefy man was standing there. He said "Tell your husband he was correct about the letter." He was with a female companion, who my wife insists wasn’t a woman but a man in drag. She was sure she had the Zodiac standing right in front of her.

" He came back, and I visited with him. He had an uncanny knowledge of the case. He knew things only the police knew. He even told me the make of the sewing machine the hood had been stitched on. Not too long ago, he came to see me again, to tell me he had moved from Petaluma to Citrus Heights. I asked him to write down his new address and phone number. He looked at me strangely and said, " I’m not going to write anything down for you"

" I checked him out later. It turned out we couldn’t find anything, including job applications that had been handwritten. Everything was typed." But, he adds, with the axiom of Zodiac investigators, " there wasn’t enough physical evidence to connect him with the murders."

Who was that man? Anybody know his name?