Within Truman Memo
Freehand Vs Reproduc
The crucial question in the Truman–Forrestal signature dispute is not whether the disputed signature merely looks like Harry Truman's handwriting. Genuine signatures by the same person are expected to resemble one another.
Page outline Jump by section
Introduction
The crucial question in the Truman–Forrestal signature dispute is not whether the disputed signature merely looks like Harry Truman’s handwriting. Genuine signatures by the same person are expected to resemble one another. The more revealing question is whether two signatures reproduce the same underlying pattern so closely that ordinary freehand writing becomes an implausible explanation.
That distinction matters because handwriting naturally varies from one execution to the next. Forensic examiners therefore expect repeated genuine signatures to share habits while differing in fine details. In the MJ-12 case, critics argue that the signature on the alleged 24 September 1947 Truman memorandum and the signature on an authentic 1 October 1947 letter to Vannevar Bush correspond at a much finer level — reportedly including an accidental pen mark. MJ-12 defenders have disputed whether the images are truly identical and have proposed mechanical signing as an alternative. The evidential issue is therefore best understood as freehand variation versus reproduction of a pre-existing signature image, not simply “matching handwriting”.[nist.gov]nist.govForensic Handwriting Examination and Human Factors: Improving the Practice Through a Systems Approach | NISTJune 1, 2021…
How Similar Can Two Genuine Signatures Be?
A person’s signatures are neither random nor photographic duplicates. Habit and motor memory produce recurring features: characteristic letter forms, proportions, connections, starting and finishing strokes, slant and movement. At the same time, each fresh act of writing introduces variation. NIST’s account of modern forensic handwriting examination stresses the importance of obtaining multiple known specimens precisely because they reveal the writer’s range of variation. As one examiner quoted by NIST puts it, a person is “not a robot”, so successive signatures look different.[NIST]nist.govforensic handwriting examination and human factorsForensic Handwriting Examination and Human Factors | NISTMay 1, 2021…
Natural variation can arise from mundane changes in speed, writing position, available space, physical condition and writing materials. Research published by the Journal of the American Society of Questioned Document Examiners has found that even constraints such as placing a signature within text can alter letter shape, flow, line quality and other visible characteristics. Historical questioned-document literature likewise describes natural variation as an unavoidable feature of handwriting rather than an abnormality that needs explaining.[Quality Development Journal]journal.asqde.orgQuality Development JournalThe Effects of Constraint on a Signature’s Static and Dynamic Features | Journal of the American Society of Qu…
This means that two genuine Truman signatures could readily look remarkably similar. A practised signer may repeat the same overall architecture thousands of times: the same broad sweep, relative proportions and habitual letter construction. Similarity at that level is exactly what one would expect from common authorship.
But forensic comparison is not simply a contest to find the closest-looking pair. Examiners consider how writing was executed as well as its pictorial appearance — including connections, pen lifts, stroke direction, line quality, proportions and the writer’s observed range of variation. NIST also cautions that handwriting conclusions have limitations and that difficult evidence can properly produce an inconclusive finding rather than a categorical attribution.[NIST]nist.govHandwriting Examiners in the Digital Age | NISTHandwriting Examiners in the Digital Age | NIST…
That caution is particularly important here. The scientifically defensible proposition is not that two genuine signatures can never be extremely similar in any measurable respect. Rather, independent freehand executions normally contain natural variation. As NIST’s 2025 discussion of forensic findings puts it more carefully, given sufficient natural writing, different writers are unlikely to produce the same combination of handwriting characteristics. There is no universal numerical threshold of matching points that by itself decides authorship.[NIST TSApps]tsapps.nist.govNIST TSAppsCommunicating Forensic Findings: Current Practices and Future Directions Workshop ProceedingsJanuary 24, 2025…
Why Exact Path Correspondence Is Different
A reproduced image changes the problem. Suppose a genuine signature is photographed, photocopied, scanned or otherwise transferred. The second appearance is no longer another performance of the same handwriting habit. It is a descendant of the same physical performance.
That distinction produces a different prediction. Independent signatures should preserve habitual similarities while introducing fresh variation. A copied image, by contrast, preserves the spatial relationships already present in its source. Enlarging, reducing, stretching or degrading a reproduction may change absolute dimensions and line appearance without creating a genuinely new sequence of handwriting movements.
This is why the MJ-12 argument does not depend merely on somebody noticing that Truman wrote his name similarly on two documents. Philip J. Klass reported finding the authentic 1 October 1947 Truman letter to Vannevar Bush and comparing its signature with the one appearing on the alleged 24 September memorandum to James Forrestal. Klass said that the signatures shared extremely close stroke correspondence and the same small pen skid on the right-hand vertical stroke of the “H” in “Harry”. He sent the comparison to questioned-document examiner Peter Tytell, whom Klass reported as concluding that the MJ-12 signature was a pasted-on photocopy of the genuine Bush signature.[Center for Inquiry]cdn.centerforinquiry.orgCenter for Inquiry SUN #58S KEPTICS UFO NEWSLETTER By Philip J. Kl…
The claim was contested. Stanton Friedman argued that measurements of different portions did not establish a uniformly enlarged copy, and material preserving his objections gives ratios that differed between portions of “Harry” and “Truman”. That criticism is relevant because a simplistic claim that one whole image was enlarged by one perfectly uniform percentage should be testable against the geometry of the surviving reproductions.[Google Groups]groups.google.comGroups MJ-12 Documents Phony? Truman Signature Analyzed! You decideGroups MJ-12 Documents Phony? Truman Signature Analyzed! You decide
Yet one notable defence actually conceded much of the visual premise. Robert Wood, arguing for MJ-12 authenticity, wrote that after scaling the images using the “White House” lettering, the signatures “fall on top of each other”. Rather than treating that correspondence as proof of copying, Wood proposed that Truman might have used a multi-pen pantograph mechanism capable of mechanically reproducing a signature. He acknowledged that the issue remained unresolved and suggested that finding another similarly matching Truman signature would strengthen that explanation.[Majestic Documents]majesticdocuments.comMajestic Documents MUFONMUFON Symposium Proceedings VALIDATING THE NEW MAJESTICMajestic Documents MUFONMUFON Symposium Proceedings VALIDATING THE NEW MAJESTIC
That exchange exposes the real evidential divide. Once two purported signatures correspond closely enough for reproduction to become plausible, simply saying “Truman signed his name consistently” does not answer the objection. The alternative explanation must account for why the same detailed path appears twice. A genuine mechanical-signature process could potentially do that; independent freehand signing ordinarily would not.
Why Accidental Marks Matter
The most interesting feature in the Truman comparison is therefore not the familiar shape of the name but the reported stray mark associated with the “H” in “Harry”. Klass described both signatures as carrying matching pen “skid-marks”. Later accounts of the dispute similarly identify an extraneous upstroke or scratch as part of the correspondence.[Center for Inquiry]cdn.centerforinquiry.orgCenter for Inquiry SUN #58S KEPTICS UFO NEWSLETTER By Philip J. Kl…
An accidental mark has different evidential value from an habitual feature. Truman might repeatedly form an “H” with a similar height, slant or stroke sequence because those characteristics belong to his established signature habit. A transient skid created during one particular signing is not expected to recur at precisely the corresponding location simply because the same person signs again.
This provides a useful way of thinking about the evidence:
- Repeated letter form can be explained by handwriting habit.
- Similar proportions and overall rhythm can also be consistent with common authorship.
- Fine correspondence throughout a complete stroke path increasingly raises the possibility of reproduction rather than independent execution.
- A matching incidental defect or accidental mark is especially important because it can function like an imperfection carried from a source image into its copy.
The last point does not mean that every little stroke beside a letter is necessarily random. A mark that appears accidental to a lay observer might actually be a recurring feature of the writer’s normal movement. That is one reason forensic comparison ordinarily requires numerous known signatures rather than a single reference specimen. The proper question is whether the mark belongs to Truman’s habitual range or instead represents an idiosyncrasy of one particular execution. NIST emphasises precisely this need for multiple, suitably comparable known specimens when establishing natural variation.[NIST]nist.govHandwriting Examiners in the Digital Age | NISTHandwriting Examiners in the Digital Age | NIST…
The MJ-12 defenders made essentially that counterargument. Friedman’s published defence maintained that other Truman signatures showed a similar extra mark, challenging Klass’s characterisation of the feature as unique. That objection prevents the stray stroke alone from serving as an unquestionable fingerprint of the Bush signature. But it does not dispose of the broader issue: the evidential weight comes from the accidental-looking feature appearing together with unusually extensive correspondence across the rest of the signature.[Google Groups]groups.google.comGroups MJ-12 Documents Phony? Truman Signature Analyzed! You decideGroups MJ-12 Documents Phony? Truman Signature Analyzed! You decide
The Bush Letter Adds Another Reproduction Clue
Tytell’s reported analysis identified a second, more document-specific feature. On the authentic Bush letter, Truman’s signature followed the typed complimentary close “Sincerely yours”. According to Klass’s account of Tytell’s examination, part of the “T” in “Truman” touched the end of that typed wording. In the questioned MJ-12 image, the corresponding portion of the “T” appeared thinner. Tytell interpreted this as consistent with somebody removing the unwanted typed material around a donor signature before reproducing it.[inquiry201.rssing.com]inquiry201.rssing.comSkeptical InquirerSkeptical Inquirer
This allegation is more consequential than ordinary handwriting resemblance because it proposes a physical sequence:
authentic Bush signature → removal of surrounding unwanted material → placement with different text → reproduction of the assembled page.
If that reconstruction is correct, the slight thinning is not an independent signature variation at all. It is an artefact of preparing a donor image for transplantation.
There is an important limitation. Researchers are dealing with reproductions rather than an undisputed original Truman–Forrestal sheet carrying examinable ink. Copying can alter line width, contrast, scale and small details, and NIST’s broader guidance stresses the importance of evidence quality in forensic handwriting work. Claims about subtle thinning therefore deserve less confidence than they would if an examiner could inspect original ink and paper microscopically.[NIST]nist.govForensic Handwriting Examination and Human Factors: Improving the Practice Through a Systems Approach | NISTJune 1, 2021…
Even so, the proposed alteration matters because it is independently intelligible within the reproduction hypothesis. A copied donor signature predicts both preservation of distinctive stroke geometry and possible artefacts where unwanted neighbouring material was removed.
Could a Mechanical Signature Explain the Match?
The strongest alternative to image transplantation is not ordinary freehand signing but mechanical duplication. Robert Wood argued that Truman had used a pantograph-type multi-pen signing device earlier in his career and suggested that such a mechanism might account for the close Bush–Forrestal correspondence. His 2000 presentation explicitly treated the matching signatures as a genuine authentication problem rather than denying that the images overlay closely.[Majestic Documents]majesticdocuments.comMajestic Documents MUFONMUFON Symposium Proceedings VALIDATING THE NEW MAJESTICMajestic Documents MUFONMUFON Symposium Proceedings VALIDATING THE NEW MAJESTIC
Mechanically generated signatures change the forensic expectation. If the same stored movement or master pattern is reproduced repeatedly, very close paths cease to be surprising. In principle, therefore, evidence that Truman legitimately used the same mechanical signing pattern for both documents could defeat the inference that one image was illicitly transplanted from the other.
The difficulty is evidential. Wood described the Washington-era evidence for the proposed pantograph explanation as “murky” and said his group was searching for another close Truman signature. Klass countered with a Truman letter to Treasury Secretary John W. Snyder dated 26 September 1947 whose signature, he said, did not duplicate the Bush/MJ-12 pattern. That single comparison cannot establish Truman’s complete signing practice, but it illustrates what the mechanical-signature hypothesis needs: independently authenticated documents bearing repeated instances of the same mechanically generated pattern.[Majestic Documents]majesticdocuments.comMajestic Documents MUFONMUFON Symposium Proceedings VALIDATING THE NEW MAJESTICMajestic Documents MUFONMUFON Symposium Proceedings VALIDATING THE NEW MAJESTIC
Without that corroboration, invoking a signing machine establishes a possibility rather than demonstrating what happened on 24 September 1947. The two hypotheses also make different predictions. A genuine recurring mechanical signature should be discoverable on other authenticated documents produced through the same process. A transplanted Bush image, by contrast, predicts an unusually close relationship specifically between the disputed memorandum and its suspected donor.
What the Signature Comparison Can Establish
The signature evidence is strongest when its claim is kept narrow. It does not require proving that Truman’s handwriting never produced two similar signatures. Nor does it require treating every dimensional difference between surviving copies as fatal to the reproduction hypothesis.
The central forensic distinction is simpler: two genuine freehand signatures are two separate motor performances; two appearances derived from one signature image are not. Natural handwriting should therefore contain variation, while reproduction can preserve the detailed geometry — including non-essential or accidental features — of a single execution. Modern forensic guidance supports examining handwriting in terms of ranges of natural variation and combinations of characteristics rather than relying on superficial visual similarity or a fixed number of matching points.[NIST]nist.govForensic Handwriting Examination and Human Factors: Improving the Practice Through a Systems Approach | NISTJune 1, 2021…
Applied to the Truman–Forrestal dispute, the unusually close correspondence with the authentic 1 October Bush signature, the reported shared pen skid and Tytell’s reported observation concerning the altered-looking portion of the “T” form a coherent case for a reproduced donor image. The principal counterarguments — dimensional discrepancies, the possibility that the extra “H” stroke was habitual, and mechanical signing — prevent the issue from being reduced to the slogan that “identical signatures automatically prove forgery”.[google.com]groups.google.comGroups MJ-12 Documents Phony? Truman Signature Analyzed! You decideGroups MJ-12 Documents Phony? Truman Signature Analyzed! You decide
But they do not restore the simpler explanation of two ordinary freehand signatures. Indeed, the pantograph defence implicitly recognises the underlying problem: if the paths correspond too closely for independent handwriting to be persuasive, some mechanism capable of reproducing a prior movement or pattern is required.
That is why the freehand-versus-reproduction distinction remains central to the alleged MJ-12 memorandum. Ordinary stylistic resemblance would support the unremarkable proposition that the signature looks like Truman’s. Correspondence extending to the detailed path and apparently incidental marks asks a different question altogether: whether the document contains a fresh act of Truman signing, or merely another appearance of a signature that already existed elsewhere.
Amazon book picks
Further Reading
Books and field guides related to Freehand Vs Reproduc. Use these as the next step if you want deeper reading beyond the article.
Detecting Forgery: Forensic Investigation of Documents
Detecting Forgery reveals the complete arsenal of forensic techniques used to detect forged handwriting and alterations in documents and...
Scientific Examination of Questioned Documents
Disputed document inquiries encompass extensive and varied technical examinations, unique phases of investigation, and specialized legal...
Forensic Document Examination: Principles and Practice
This book introduces the reader to the basic principles of handwriting and the factors that affect their development. The book discusses...
eBay marketplace picks
Marketplace Samples
Live-tested eBay searches with available results related to this page.
Selected fromTruman memorabilia oneBay.co.uk.
Endnotes
1.
Source: nist.gov
Link:https://www.nist.gov/publications/forensic-handwriting-examination-and-human-factors-improving-practice-through-systems-0
Source snippet
Forensic Handwriting Examination and Human Factors: Improving the Practice Through a Systems Approach | NISTJune 1, 2021...
Published: June 1, 2021
2.
Source: nist.gov
Title: forensic handwriting examination and human factors
Link:https://www.nist.gov/programs-projects/forensic-handwriting-examination-and-human-factors
Source snippet
Forensic Handwriting Examination and Human Factors | NISTMay 1, 2021...
Published: May 1, 2021
3.
Source: nist.gov
Title: Handwriting Examiners in the Digital Age | NIST
Link:https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2021/06/handwriting-examiners-digital-age
Source snippet
Handwriting Examiners in the Digital Age | NIST...
4.
Source: tsapps.nist.gov
Link:https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=958459
Source snippet
NIST TSAppsCommunicating Forensic Findings: Current Practices and Future Directions Workshop ProceedingsJanuary 24, 2025...
Published: January 24, 2025
5.
Source: groups.google.com
Title: Groups MJ-12 Documents Phony? Truman Signature Analyzed! You decide
Link:https://groups.google.com/g/alt.paranet.ufo/c/zl6UqdY2ITw
6.
Source: inquiry201.rssing.com
Title: Skeptical Inquirer
Link:https://inquiry201.rssing.com/chan-16157765/all_p1.html
7.
Source: nist.gov
Title: osac research and development needs
Link:https://www.nist.gov/organization-scientific-area-committees-forensic-science/osac-research-and-development-needs
8.
Source: nist.gov
Title: glossary term
Link:https://www.nist.gov/glossary-term/38241
9.
Source: nist.gov
Link:https://www.nist.gov/publications/forensic-handwriting-examination-and-human-factors-improving-practice-through-systems
10.
Source: nist.gov
Title: osac research
Link:https://www.nist.gov/adlp/spo/organization-scientific-area-committees-forensic-science/other-work-products/osac-research
11.
Source: books.google.com
Title: Forensic Document Examination
Link:https://books.google.com/books/about/Forensic_Document_Examination.html?id=P0Z1AgAAQBAJ
12.
Source: nist.gov
Title: On Demand Video from the Forensic Handwriting Analysis Conference
Link:https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2013/06/demand-video-forensic-handwriting-analysis-conference-now-available-online
13.
Source: groups.google.com
Link:https://groups.google.com/g/alt.ufo.reports/c/80LgbKV7gPU
14.
Source: nist.gov
Link:https://www.nist.gov/publications/search_by_author/1157061
15.
Source: cdn.centerforinquiry.org
Title: Center for Inquiry SUN #58
Link:https://cdn.centerforinquiry.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/29/docs/SUN/SUN58.pdf
Source snippet
S KEPTICS UFO NEWSLETTER By Philip J. Kl...
16.
Source: majesticdocuments.com
Title: Majestic Documents MUFONMUFON Symposium Proceedings VALIDATING THE NEW MAJESTIC
Link:https://majesticdocuments.com/pdf/rmwood_mufon2000.pdf
17.
Source: journal.asqde.org
Link:https://journal.asqde.org/articles/10.69525/jasqde.214
Source snippet
Quality Development JournalThe Effects of Constraint on a Signature’s Static and Dynamic Features | Journal of the American Society of Qu...
18.
Source: journal.asqde.org
Link:https://journal.asqde.org/articles/10.69525/jasqde.283
Source snippet
Quality Development JournalSpecial Topics in Disputed Document Testimony: Part II | Journal of the American Society of Questioned Documen...
19.
Source: centerforinquiry.s3.amazonaws.com
Title: Center for Inquiry S
Link:https://centerforinquiry.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/29/2022/09/26195457/SUN-65-Sep-2000.pdf
Source snippet
KEPTICS UFO NEWSLETTER By Philip J. Klass 404...
20.
Source: en.ikwipedia.org
Title: Philip J. Klass
Link:https://en.ikwipedia.org/wiki/Philip_J._Klass
21.
Source: journal.asqde.org
Link:https://journal.asqde.org/articles/10.69525/jasqde.280
22.
Source: journal.asqde.org
Link:https://journal.asqde.org/articles/10.69525/jasqde.266
23.
Source: journal.asqde.org
Link:https://journal.asqde.org/articles/10.69525/jasqde.263
24.
Source: majesticdocuments.com
Title: documents dated prior to 1948
Link:https://majesticdocuments.com/documents/majestic-documents/documents-dated-prior-to-1948/
25.
Source: studylib.net
Title: forensic handwriting examination
Link:https://studylib.net/doc/27275737/forensic-handwriting-examination
26.
Source: awm.gov.au
Link:https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/C259981
Additional References
27.
Source: youtube.com
Title: Questioned Documents
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F92wsBurvWs
Source snippet
"Forensic document examination" signature simulation OR forgery Questioned Documents - San Diego County Sheriff's Department...
28.
Source: ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Title: NCBIReference Guide on Forensic Feature Comparison Evidence
Link:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK621601/
Source snippet
Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence - NCBI Bookshelf...
29.
Source: govinfo.gov
Link:https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/GOVPUB-C13-d22333832dc799418eab885f95efc3bd
30.
Source: ojp.gov
Link:https://ojp.gov/library/publications/measurement-science-and-standards-forensic-handwriting-analysis-conference
31.
Source: ojp.gov
Link:https://ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/natural-variation-and-relative-height-proportions
32.
Source: youtube.com
Title: How forensic scientists fight crime by analyzing handwriting
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaTBSwds73c
Source snippet
Introduction to forensic handwriting examination part 1...
33.
Source: trumanlibrary.gov
Link:https://www.trumanlibrary.gov/photograph-records/2012-510
34.
Source: researchgate.net
Link:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/404226454_An_Explainable_Cyber-Forensic_Framework_for_Handwritten_Signature_Verification_Using_Behavioural_Biometrics_Pressure-Sensitive_Acquisition_and_Secure_Metadata_Analysis
35.
Source: researchgate.net
Link:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/388939110_Special_Topics_in_Disputed_Document_Testimony_Part_II
36.
Source: researchgate.net
Link:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/388948460_The_Use_of_Simple_Dimensional_Measurements_in_the_Analysis_of_Simulated_Signatures_A_Preliminary_Study