The CHAIRMAN. You serve in this capacity for a region that involves approximately 35 States? Mr. DOULDER. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Have you examined documents from that region? Mr. DOULDER. Yes, sir; for all enforcement agencies of the Treasury Department. The CHAIRMAN. For all agencies of the Treasury Department? The CHAIRMAN. Which includes what? Mr. DOULDER. It did include the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, Secret Service, Intelligence, Inspection Bureau, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax, Customs, Immigration. The CHAIRMAN. In view of the nature of your testimony, I wanted to be sure the record reflected your qualifications. You may proceed. Mr. DOULDER. I have been an examiner of questioned documents for the Treasury Department for the past 13 years, and before that did similar work as a member of the Milwaukee Police Department for approximately another 5 years. Thus I have a total of 18 years' experience in this field of forensic science. I am a past chairman of the Questioned Documents Division of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences (1966-67). I am a former chairman of the Questioned Document Section of the International Association of Identification (1965-66). I have qualified and testified as a document examiner some 200 times in Federal and State courts, military courts-martial, and Federal Tax Court cases, throughout the country. The CHAIRMAN. You are called in frequently to give testimony in criminal cases and in other cases where the Government interest is involved? Mr. DOULDER. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Since you are a Government employee, I wonder if you have ever had the occasion where you are called by the defense? Mr. DOULDER. No sir. The CHAIRMAN. You can't be retained by the defense because you are a Federal employee? Mr. DOULDER. That is correct. The CHAIRMAN. Your work has been directly related to the Government interest all these years? Mr. DOULDER. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Very well. Please proceed. Mr. DOULDER. On July 9, 1968, I was requested by my superiors to lend assistance to the staff of this subcommittee in determining the validity of a selection of checks and other documents from the Woodlawn Organization, all dated in the month of May 1968. The CHAIRMAN. You did not become identified or associated with this committee's investigation until July 9, of this year? Mr. DOULDER. That is correct. The CHAIRMAN. Much of the testimony was heard earlier than that? Mr. DOULDER. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Proceed. Mr. DOULDER. I examined them and found numerous examples of fraud. However, it was pointed out that in order to determine the extent of the fraudulent transactions, it would be better that a sub stantial sample be taken for a similar period of time in several consecutive months, at least four or five. Consequently certain original records were subpenaed by this committee from the Woodlawn Organization and delivered to me for examination. The CHAIRMAN. Your first examination was a casual examination of 1 month's records? Mr. DOULDER. The month of May 1968. The CHAIRMAN. For the month of May, you made a complete examination, in your first examination? Mr. DOULDER. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. In other words, after you examined the records for the entire month of May, it was decided that you should make more or less of a spot check for one week in each preceding month to see how it compared with the month of May? Mr. DOULDER. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. And just for this year? You did not go into last year? Mr. DOULDER. That is correct. The CHAIRMAN. What weeks did you take, what period of time? Mr. DOULDER. The last work and pay period of each month. The CHAIRMAN. You just took the last workweek in each month? Mr. DOULDER. Yes, sir; starting with January, February, March, April, and May. The CHAIRMAN. To have done the whole thing would have required quite a long time; would it? Mr. DOULDER. Yes, sir; this took a considerable amount of time. Mr. DOULDER. This took a considerable amount of time. The CHAIRMAN. The findings reflected by these records, and the conclusions you have come to, would be generally applicable to the whole period, do you think, or certainly for the 5 months you have examined? Mr. DOULDER. I am sure they would; yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. All right, proceed. Mr. DOULDER. These records were for the last full week in January, January 22-26, I requested the original timesheets for each trainee to be obtained for centers 1 and 2. The CHAIRMAN. Centers 1 and 2 are the Ranger centers, the Blackstone Ranger centers? Mr. DOULDER. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Not the Disciples? Mr. DOULDER. I did not examine anything from the Disciples. The CHAIRMAN. You have not examined anything for the Disciples, and this is just for the Blackstone Rangers? Mr. DOULDER. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Go ahead. Mr. DOULDER. A timesheet is an approximately 8 by 11 mimeographed form wherein the trainee is supposed to sign in at 9 a.m., sign out again at noon, sign in again after lunch hour at 1 p.m. and sign out at the conclusion of school at 3 p.m. Hence the timesheets contain four signatures for each day. There are 5 days on each timesheet and each would contain 20 signatures for a full training week. The CHAIRMAN. Do we have a form of that? Mr. DOULDER. I will get that a little later, Senator. The CHAIRMAN. I wanted to get it into the record so the record would reflect what you are talking about. You will get it into the record later? Mr. DOULDER. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Proceed. Mr. DOULDER. The paperwork necessary to prepare the attendance payments for the trainees usually took a week. Consequently for attendance at class during the week ending January 26, the check is dated February 2. The check form comes in a carbon-interlaced business form with the check on top and a receipt for the check on the bottom. The trainee is supposed to sign the receipt for the check and then he receives the original check and the original receipt. The yellow carbon copy of the receipt thus contains a carbon of his signature. I have a sample here. The CHAIRMAN. You have a sample of the check and receipt that he signs? Mr. DOULDER. This is a sample not filled out. The CHAIRMAN. That check is not filled out? Mr. DOULDER. That is correct. The CHAIRMAN. But this is what was used to pay the trainee? The CHAIRMAN. This is the check and the receipt? Mr. DOULDER. This is the original check. The trainee keeps the bottom part which states about how many hours. Then we have a carbon, the yellow carbon receipts that I have examined and then they have a pink copy which I did not see. The CHAIRMAN. In other words, they got the original and two copies to the check? Mr. DOULDER. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. The receipts are signed in triplicate? Mr. DOULDER. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. And you examined the yellow copy of the receipt, which is the first copy of the original? Mr. DOULDER. Which they sign in receipt for the check. The CHAIRMAN. Let that be made exhibit 220. (The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 220" for reference and may be found in the files of the subcommittee.) The CHAIRMAN. Proceed. Mr. DOULDER. I requested the complete sets of the yellow receipts for the checks issued for each trainee in centers 1 and 2 made in payment for the workweek January 22-26. These receipts were dated February 2, 1968. The CHAIRMAN. For the last week in January, the checks in payment were dated February 2, and the receipts, of course, are on the same date? Mr. DOULDER. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. You examined all of those receipts? Mr. DOULDER. The yellow copies, yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. The yellow copies, for the last workweek in January? Mr. DOULDER. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Proceed. Mr. DOULDER. I also requested and obtained the canceled checks, after they had been returned from the bank, bearing the endorsement of the person who cashed the check. In summary I obtained three basic documents for each trainee for the last full workweek in January: 1. The original of his timesheet bearing up to 20 signatures. 2. The carbon copy of the yellow check receipt. 3. The original canceled check with endorsement. The same documents were obtained for the last full workweek in February (February 19-23); March (March 25-29); April (April 22-26); and May (May 20-24). With regard to the May payment that was for the last workweek of the program. The check, receipt, and timesheet are thus all dated the same date-May 24. My examination entailed a scrutiny of between 11,000 to 12,000 signatures, and I found over 1,061 separate acts of fraud The CHAIRMAN. In out of the 12,000 signatures? Mr. DOULDER. Approximately; yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. You found over 1,000 separate acts of fraud? What do you mean by separate acts of fraud? Give us a definition of that. What do you mean by an act of fraud? Mr. DOULDER. Senator, I have charts and if I can, I will explain that by using a chart. The CHAIRMAN. What you mean is discrepancies in the signatures that you examined indicating that the signatures were not of the same person? Mr. DOULDER. Right. There would be a discrepancy on the timesheet which would involve the possibility of three different individuals signing the timesheet. Also the check receipt, receiving the check, the signature did not correspond as to the writer of the timesheets. The CHAIRMAN. In other words, on one timesheet where the trainee signed in and signed out, the signatures signing in and signing out would not be of the same person? Mr. DOULDER. This is true; yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. When the receipt was signed for the check, that signature would not correspond with the signatures on the timesheet? Mr. DOULDER. In numerous instances; yes. The CHAIRMAN. When you examined the endorsement on the check, that endorsement would not correspond with the receipt for the check. Mr. DOULDER. That is correct. The CHAIRMAN. Are those factors what you are describing and referring to here as instances of fraud? Mr. DOULDER. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. I wanted to clarify it so we would know what we will be talking about. Mr. DOULDER. And I will illustrate those with charts. Mr. DOULDER. I found over 1,061 separate acts of fraud, some of which may entail as many as 20 signatures on one document. This will be covered in a chart which I will introduce a little later and which will show that 89 percent of all of the sets of documents that I examined contained one or more elements of fraud by forgery. To illustrate these forgeries and frauds that were practiced it was necessary to search for certain specified types of fraud. I tabulated these for each person in the five separate weekly samples. As I describe each type of fraud I will show you an example of what I mean and then show you the summary chart. On the weekly timesheet I previously described, the signatures of Chester Dunbar on the timesheet for the week of January 26 appear to have been made by more than one person. The CHAIRMAN. Let the chart be received and printed in the record. We will call that chart A. (See chart on next page.) Mr. DOULDER. By using the symbol "A" stating two or more writers it is my opinion that on Thursday this was all written by one writer. Friday a.m. is another writer, and Friday p.m. is another writer. So there we have three separate writers. The CHAIRMAN. Would you repeat that? Mr. DOULDER. I am saying Thursday Chester Dunbar signed in at 9 o'clock, the same individual signed out at 12 signed in at 1 and signed out at 3. However, on Friday, the signing in at 9 o'clock and the signing out at 12 o'clock was another person, an individual different than Thursday, the individual that signed in at 1 o'clock and signed out at 3 o'clock in my opinion was another person. So within Thursday and Friday we have three individuals signing the weekly timesheet. The CHAIRMAN. Can you tell whether they attempted to duplicate the other signature? Mr. DOULDER. In many instances on the timesheet there was a simulation or attempt to simulate another signature The CHAIRMAN. It seems to me as if there was an attempt there, if that is in fact signed by different people. Mr. DOULDER. However, I don't-Î point out on Thursday and Friday, no and we will take the 12 o'clock-we have on Friday a speed type "R," the capital "C" is different than the capital "C" on Thursday, the speed type "R" on Friday does not correspond with the regular "R" on Thursday, such as the "R" in the last name of Dunbar. The CHAIRMAN. You are testifying that based upon your expert knowledge in this field, these are different handwritings, different signatures? Mr. DOULDER. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. And written by different people? Mr. DOULDER. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Let's just take this signature in the last column, Chester D. Take them in the last column, all four of them. You have four signatures in the last column? Mr. DOULDER. For the day of Friday. The CHAIRMAN. No; in the last column. This one at the bottom, Chester Dunbar, the one at the extreme. bottom of the list on Friday, that does not seem to match any of the others; does it? Mr. DOULDER. Yes; I would say it is possible that the Chester Dunbar signing in on Monday, the "P.M." on the top, and signing out at 3 o'clock, is one and the same person who signed on Friday at 1 o'clock and 3 o'clock. |