The
Question of the
Typing
Errors
|
The
1976 release to Alger Hiss of approximately 40,000 pages of
documents about him and about the Hiss case that been locked
away in FBI, Department of Justice, State Department and CIA
files was a major step forward in clarifying underlying Hiss
case issues. It allowed Hiss two years later to return to
court and ask for a writ of error coram nobis - a setting
aside of the guilty verdict because of prosecutorial misconduct.
Here is an extract from Hiss's 1978 coram nobis brief, outlining
what had been learned from the sealed files about whether
Priscilla Hiss had typed the Baltimore Documents.
In
his closing statement at the second trial, Prosecutor Thomas
Murphy [above left] called upon the jury to consider a factual
issue which, he had been advised by his own experts, could
not be determined by an examination of the documents.
On
July 8, 1949, immediately after the close of the first trial,
Frederick Gaffney, one of the jurors in the case appeared
in Murphy's office to discuss the reaction of the jurors to
the case presented by the government. He suggested that another
juror believed that there were several typing errors in one
of the Hiss Standards that also appeared in the Baltimore
Documents, and had attempted without success to convince the
minority of the jurors, who held out for acquittal, that this
was relevant evidence that Priscilla Hiss had typed both documents.
This
theory was submitted to the laboratory of the FBI which submitted
a report "indicating that it would be impossible for an expert
to testify to the fact that because of the similar or common
errors, it followed that Priscilla Hiss actually typed the
questioned doucments." Murphy requested a review of those
common errors stating that "although he probably will not
be able to use this information on the government's case-in-chief,
he might be able to point it out in summation."
No
testimony was submitted on this subject in the second trial,
presumably in deference to the laboratory's decision that
it would be impossible for an expert to so testify. Nevertheless,
Murphy did in fact argue the matter to the jury. He said:
In going over the documents I notice some common
typing errors. When you get these documents inside, these
Baltimore documents and the standards [letters Priscilla Hiss
acknowledged typing in the 1930s], you know the Mercy letter
and the Timmy Hobson thing,
look for similarity of mistakes, and I call to your attention
the following combinations 'r' for 'i', 'f' for 'g', 'f' for
'd' and you will see them. You will see the same mistakes
on the standards, on the Mercy Hospital letter and on the
Timmy Hobson letter, the same characteristics as you do on
the Baltimore exhibits.
It
was improper for Murphy to have made this argument, submitting
to a jury of laymen a question which his own typewriting experts
had said they could not answer. It was an invitation to guess
at conclusions which, as he knew, his own experts could not
reach.
Continue
with the FBI's Report to Murphy
|