| Daniel
Norman's Affidavit |
Daniel P. Norman's examination of the Woodstock #230,099
offered the first evidence that the typewriter had been altered.
The following is an excerpt from Chester Lane's introductory
affidavit in support of Hiss's 1952 motion for a new trial,
followed by Dr. Norman's report.
...
I finally consulted Dr. Daniel Norman, Director of Chemical
Research of the New England Spectrochemical Laboratories,
of Ipswich, Massachusetts, and President of its subsidiary,
Skinner & Sherman, of Boston, Massachusetts. Dr. Norman's
organization was recommended to me as "the best in the
business," with long and distinguished experience in
the field of metallurgical analysis. Dr. Norman agreed to
examine Woodstock N230,099 for me. He has done so, and his
conclusions are embodied in his affidavit, S-IT-A, which I
attach.
***
In
my original motion papers, I presented evidence to show that
it was possible to construct or alter a machine so
as to make its typing resemble that of another machine so
closely that an expert would be unable to tell the difference,
especially if he applied the criteria used by the Government's
expert at the trials. I attached specimens of typing from
two different machines and invited the Government to have
its experts tell them apart if they could. I do not know whether
the Government's experts can tell them apart, or even whether
the Government will dare accept the invitation to try. However
that may be, my proffered proof is now no longer pointed to
showing how someone could have faked a machine which
would fool the experts; it shows rather that someone did
fake such a machine. Clearer evidence of the plot to incriminate
Alger Hiss falsely could scarcely be desired.
Click
here to see Dr. Norman's affidavit
|
