Lee’s Signatures

One of the key pieces of evidence for Oswald being in Mexico is his signature at the Hotel Comercio. According to G Robert Blakey and others this is definitive evidence that he was there because hand writing experts have stated that this is Lee Oswald’s signature.

Whew, well, that’s it, we can all go home. Case closed.

I don’t doubt that the signature is Lee Oswald’s signature; what I doubt is who signed it.

Is it that difficult to fake an autograph? I’m not sure about that. There are plenty of forgeries that have fooled the experts over the centuries.

And who’s to say that Lee Oswald didn’t sign his autograph in a different way at different times. I can show you plenty of examples of my handwriting where I have changed the letters in their configuration.

How many of you are one trick ponies? How many of you have consistently written your signature the same way, every day in perpetuity?


Here is Oswalds’s signature on line 18.

Let’s look at three other signatures.

Now, let’s bring into focus their signatures.

Finally, the signature at Hotel Commercio.

As anyone can clearly see, the signatures have slight variations.

It should be simple enough for anyone who has practiced to forge Lee Oswald’s signature.

At any rate, much has been made of the comma after Lee’s name. It is odd, and not just because it’s there, but because of where it is located. It sits too far to the right of Lee. If you were planning to write “Lee, Harvey Oswald” the comma would be located almost immediately after Lee.

It is possible that the comma was an attempt to write the downstroke of the H, but was written too low and so was abandoned.

Or maybe the scribe was using the alias “Harvey Oswald Lee”.

The comma could also reflect the mind of an individual who suffered stage fright when writing the signature. This scenario seems more likely.

Let’s look at the problem from the opposite direction. Let us stipulate that the handwriting experts stated that this signature was a forgery. In that event, what would the Warren Commission disciples say? They would say that it was Oswald and that he was just having a bad day. He was up all night on the bus. He couldn’t sleep, and that’s why the signature is a little off.

Experts, Schmeck-sperts.

Let’s take a look at the register more closely. Let’s point out some things. To begin with notice how all the writing looks very similar.

Also note that this register at the Comercio is not a chronological register of when they signed in. Rather, it is a register of which rooms the residents are domiciled in. It must be because of the following memo which lists Mario Rezendiz in Room 21 and Gabriel Contreras in Room 14. Lee Oswald was in Room 18. However, Mario Resendiz and Gabriel Contreras checked in the day before, on 9/26/63. Also noticed that the name above Oswald’s in slots 16 and 17 has the same signature, that of Rodolfo Rodrigues. This indicates that these numbers are the rooms in which the customers were staying, not the order in which they checked in. Rodolfo Rodrigues must have reserved two rooms. It would not make sense for him to sign his name twice if this were just a chronological register.

This makes sense because if the names were listed in the order in which they checked in, Oswald would’ve been the 18th person to check in that day at approximately 10:30 or 11:00 in the morning. That doesn’t make sense as most people check in during the afternoon. Any traveler in the United States understands this.

Also notice that the initials DF which stands for Distrito Federal (Mexico City), are written in the same handwriting in slots 4 and 22. Also notice that the word Monterrey in slots 25 and 29 has the same handwriting. This would indicate that an individual behind the counter filled in this data.

Since Mario Rezendiz and Gabriel Contreras checked in the day before, on 9/26/63, are we to believe that the guests have to sign a register every single day?

Also notice how the rhythm and appearance of the names appears similar. Yes, there are differences, but the overall flow of the letters looks the same. The size and the spacing of the lettering looks very similar. This is not what you find on a typical sign in sheet. In a typical people make mistakes. People scratch things out. People write small. People write large.

Now look at the similarity of the “J”s in lines 1, 10, and 28. Then gaze at the similarities of the “F”s in lines 6 and 8. The “R”s in lines 13, 16, 17, 22, and 24 are close enough.

Let’s say for the sake of argument though that the signatures are legitimate and that they weren’t all written by one person; since this is not a chronological entry, how do we know that no one was in room 18 during that last week in September and that this register was taken out of the country and delivered to Lee Oswald in Dallas (or South Texas where he was spotted) where he signed it after which the register was returned. Who is going to notice?

As with all other evidence in the JFK assassination, something is not right here.

It’s possible I suppose that the register here is a daily register of room occupancy where the incoming visitor signs once after which the clerk writes the name down on subsequent days. That might explain why the other names appear more uniform while Lee Oswald’s signature is more distinct. Even if that is the case, it still does not rule out the possibility that the register on slot 18 was completed by Oswald at a later date. Why would Oswald do that? Because he was in on the plan to have someone pose as him in Mexico so that he could be somewhere more important.

If you will notice, slots 23, 27 and 30 are empty. This supports the concept that the daily register is not only a log of who is in the room but also a mechanism for knowing which rooms are vacant. So I imagine that when a new day begins, the person who is checking out is NOT placed on the list. That spot remains vacant until the incoming client appears.

Well, suppose someone slipped the hotel manager $100 USD to keep Room 18 vacant.

It’s important to understand at this point the tight relationship that the CIA has with the leadership of Mexico. I don’t want to say that the CIA owns Mexico; I think it’s far better to say that the leadership of Mexico buys into the CIA. The leadership of Mexico may talk tough and play the “gringo card” to their people, but for the most part their leaders are educated in the United States at elite universities. As such the leadership can ensure that if an objective is important to the CIA, that objective will be accomplished. Thus, while you and I may find it extraordinary to have a register flown out to Oswald in Dallas to sign the register, it’s not a difficult feat to accomplish in 1963. There were jets in 1963, and a person could travel from Mexico City to Dallas in about 2.5 hours. A hotel register diary could be shipped to Dallas and back in a day and no one would be the wiser.

Copyright 2022 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

Copyright 2022 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: