"-=jd=-" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun 12 Sep 2004 12:01:09a, "Gandalf Grey"
wrote in message
m:


"-=jd=-" wrote in message
...
On Sat 11 Sep 2004 11:16:29p, Dan wrote in message
:

On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 19:06:25 -0700, "Gandalf Grey"
wrote:


It's beginning to look like the docs are legitimate. The raised
"e"'s can't be duplicated without a lot of effort in Word.


What "raised e's"? I don't see any.

Dan


There is a single occurrence of an ever so slightly raised "e" in the
word "Colonel" in one of the documents

That's only one instance. There's also the word "interference" in the
18 August memo. Same thing in the word "me" in second line. In the
case of that word, it may be a matter of the "m" falling slightly below
the line.

In both case, it's inconsistent with a word processor.


You're asserting it's consistent with a typewriter? If the typewriter had
some defect to cause a letter to misregister, that misregistration would
be consistent, which it is not in these docs.

Again it becomes apparent that you never used a Selectric II.

And I think I'll take the word of a document expert over yours.