Ross Handwriting

[Paul_Averly]

Not much to go with on Ross’s SS app. Figured I would start with the numbers.

The left is Ross, the Right is Z. Everything Z was from known Z letters, mostly Bus Bomb and the 408 cipher letters.
The construction of the numbers is very close. The #8 clearly starts from the upper right in both Z and Ross handwriting samples.

RossNumbers.jpg

[vasa croe]

Nice! I think the 6's and the 2's look very similar.

[morf13]

Worth looking at certainly

[Paul_Averly]

Here is the cursive. The "l" is identical.

RossCursive.jpg

[traveller1st]

The 'l' is certainly created using the same 'loop' method. I would say it's a fairly common trait in a lot of people's cursive but the 'openess' of the loop is similar. As for the other aspects I'm not seeing a match. Zodiac's cursive is more angular and leans more to the right. I've done a quick diagram that makes this easier to see.

As for the numbers I would rule them out on the 5 alone and certainly on the 8. The samples aren't really enough to be conclusive but when it cones to comparisons even the smallest differences can matter and IMHO there are enough differences in these to say it's not a match.

ross-cursive.jpg

[morf13]

Thanks for looking Guys. We should point out,as with all of these SS applications, we don't know for sure who filled these forms out, if it was the POI themselves, or not

[Paul_Averly]

To many factors make it impossible to be 100% accurate, but overlaying the two handwritings looks pretty close.

RossOverlay.jpg

[traveller1st]

I also don't trust the 'sla' cursive as a source. I believe it's from Z but there's no way to know if it's a faithful representation of his actual cursive or if it's a construct in cursive style to 'mess' with examiners if the letter was identified. Mind you if a really close match turned up in a POI's writing that might be an answer to that question.

Ross' writing isn't bad but again there's lots of writing that is in the same category. I never completely rule any of them out but I also don't like to over ascribe importance on similarity alone anymore.

[Norse]

Just something which has been on my mind lately:

Would you agree with the following, trav:

When you examine an exemplar, comparing it to the Z material, and you come across X instances of a clear non-match - this is, and should be, the point where you say: "No, this ain't the guy - next!"

In other words, after such a point has been reached it becomes, in fact, perfectly irrelevant that any number of similarities occur as well. Because the differences are - and should be - the deciding factor. Not the similarites (of which there may be MORE than the amount of differences - but that is, again, irrelevant).

Am I roughly on the right track, stating this?

And, more specifically, how many significant differences are - or should be - sufficient? If A consistently writes a lower case letter differently from our boy - is that sufficient? Or would one need more such instances?

Hope I made myself understood!

N.

[traveller1st]

Yeah norse that's about right.

I had just finished a PM to morf about this very subject albeit a different example. The whole handwriting thing, although within my remit so to speak, is not something I'm qualified in. I am a qualified graphics guy with years of experience in font work and crafting as well as digital and manual work. I know shape and form and I'm probably learning some default graphology skills just doing this stuff.

When I look at an exemplar now it's a stages thing much like what you suggest. Depending on the actual writing I will tend to focus on certain letters first to see if they are interesting. By that I mean not only are they similar to Z's but are they consistent and if he varied his do the examples also vary or even show traits of that. That's if it look interesting to begin with. Usually I do try to decide based on what appear to be Z's ingrained habits. If they aren't there then it's pretty much a bust. If any of them are there then I look at each character individually and decide on their merits. Z did use different styles as we all know but his underlying habits were always there and it's really a matter of deciding are they present in an exemplar and if so then it's on to other factors such as spacing and letter heights, baselines, relationships and so on.

It's a puzzle really with lots of tiny detailed parts but we usually don't have enough parts. The exemplars themselves in that respect can dictate what I look for . If there is a specific letter that look wrong I have to compare it to it's own writing to try and determine if it is in fact a habit and if so and if it's different from Z's then I can usually be quite confident that it's not a match.

On a basic level as well there's simple experience. I've probably looked at enough of these things now to kinda know if something looks interesting and also because of the work that I have done on Z's actual writing I have a clearer set of 'things' to check against. I still check though cause there's so much to compare to and the variations within those.

There's no real cutoff point as such but I can usually jump through a few phases quite quickly and determine if there's anything in it. The one exception to this was Manalli but that was probably due to the amount of material we had and the material itself. It had a lot of shared habits I just don't think that they were in the right places or had consistent relationships with other traits. It still gives me the creeps looking over some of it though but it was probably worth the experience just to work through it.