« 이전계속 »
THE VOODLAIN ORGANIZATION YOUTH PROJECT
The CHAIRMAN. You say those two are the same. But the one on Thursday and the one on Wednesday are not?
Mr. DOULDER. That is correct, sir.
The CHAIRMAN. I think you can tell a great difference between the one on Thursday and the one on Friday. Just a layman can tell that difference.
Mr. DOULDER. Yes, sir. However, it is my opinion that on Tuesday, signing in at 9 o'clock and signing out at 12 o'clock, this is the same individual who signed in on Friday at 9 o'clock and signed out at 12 o'clock.
The CHAIRMAN. But these others are different parties?
Mr. DOULDER. Yes, sir. I believe it is safe to say there are three individuals on this timesheet.
The CHAIRMAN. Do you have a number of such charts as this on this particular aspect of it?
Mr. DOULDER. This represents in my schedule or worksheets category No. A, with that type of fraud.
The CHAIRMAN. We will put them in then in the order which you have them and then examine them more thoroughly.
Mr. DOULDER. Another type of fraud I examined was whether on the weekly timesheet a number of the signatures appeared to have been made at the same time. That is what we call continuous writing.
This is an example of Fred Watley's timesheet for the week of February 23d, where part of the timesheet was signed at the same time by the same person. I reached this opinion on the basis of the instrument used to do the writing, the line quality, size of the letters, the alinement and other factors which make it apparent to an expert that the writing was done at the same time. This
is known as continuous writing. This is symboled by illustration B. It is my opinion that on Wednesday for the 9 o'clock, 12 o'clock, 1 o'clock, and 3 o'clock, and on Friday for 9 o'clock, 12 o'clock, 1 o'clock, and 3 o'clock, this was al' written at one time.
It could have been written at any time but it was written at one sitting, continuous writing, at one time. It was not written at 9 o'clock, it was not written at 12 o'clock, and again at 1 o'clock and again at 3 o'clock.
The CHAIRMAN. In other words, somebody just sat there and wrote it all at one time, signed in and signed out, not according to the procedures established and which were supposed to be followed?
Mr. DOULDER. That is correct. This is a partial timesheet with 2 days filled out at one time.
The CHAIRMAN. How about the two on top? Can you illustrate the difference there for Monday and Tuesday?
Mr. DOULDER. For illustration, there is the possibility-I believe that Monday "A.M.” is a different writer than Wednesday and Friday. Again this would be, on my worksheets, two separate frauds. In other words two or more writers on the timesheet, plus a continuous writing.
The CHAIRMAN. In other words, somebody just caused the Government to pay out more money because he sat down and filled out the two bottom days. What I can't understand is why they did not fill out Thursday. Mr. DOULDER. It was a holiday.
The CHAIRMAN. I understand. I have a better understanding.
Mr. DOULDER. The third type of fraud was where the entire timesheet, in this case Ronald Wright's, appeared to have been written at the same time for the entire week by the same person. This is the same
The CHAIRMAN. That is chart B?
(The chart follows on page 2668.) Mr. DOULDER. This is a type of worksheet I previously described where part of the worksheet was written continuously. However, in my opinion, this entire worksheet was written at one time, this entire timesheet was written at one time.
The CHAIRMAN. How can you arrive at that conclusion? You are the expert. Laymen might disagree with you. I want to know if it is a fact and how you arrived at it, how we can accept your conclusion based upon facts that substantiate or support that conclusion.
Mr. DOULDER. There are a number of factors, such as size of letters, as I previously described, the alinement of the letters, the line quality, the pressure, the formation of the letters, and, as you notice, it starts off with very good writing and then, as it deteriorates down to the last Friday p.m., which is in a hurry, rather a haste to fill out the entire sheet.
There are a number of factors involved.
The CHAIRMAN. You used factors in arriving at these conclusions that are accepted and used by people in your profession?
Mr. DOULDER. Yes, sir.
The CHAIRMAN. That is the profession you represent in serving the Government.
Mr. DOULDER. Yes, sir.
The CHAIRMAN. Do I understand later you will have checks and receipts showing the signatures there being different even to these?
Mr. DOULDER. Yes, sir.
I also examined to determine whether the person who receipted for the check on the carbon copy of the yellow check receipt-whether that signature, Robert Harris, corresponded with any signature on the weekly timesheet. That was for the week ending January 26.
The CHAIRMAN. That will be chart C. It may be printed in the record.
(The chart follows on page 2669.)
Mr. DOULDER. When it did not—that is to say the person who received the check was not any person who signed the attendance rerord—this was marked as a separate act of fraud.
On my left on chart C, this is the weekly timesheet signing in at 9 o'clock and again signing out and so on.
On the right is the yellow check receipt. There we have the signature of Robert Harris which signs his name to obtain the original check.