New-York tribune., 1906-02-10
EXPERT TANGLED UP.
Rand ConfaSes Hand7criting Wit-
ness for FaIeRtinc Defence.

BENJAMIN r. Valentine. trial At Jamaica
for utterng an alleged forged deed purport'ns
20 transfer property from his wife. Marie ~
Valentine TO his mother. Elizabeth H. Nale"
tine seemed more nervous yesterday than a'
any time during his trial. which started on MOT
day The defence had not progressed appa'-
entity, as he had expected il would. Inc 'u''
ing OF his witness. Mrs mary SUI
Haines who. under cross-eNaminauoh tfe ""'
before had said the signature upon me oeeu
was not that of Mrs Valentine, had been Sc
we're setback Fx-Assistant District Attorney
Rand through his familiarity with expert hano-
writing testimony. was able yesterday to IN
,olve the evidence given by william E Dennis
for the defence so as confuse the minds ol
all persons I'm the courtroom. apparently Eitner
Dennis at one time was not able TO explain 'he
difference between a right curve ana iei'
curve or Rand was skilful enough TO make u"
appear that he could not explain IT,
After spending some time in an endeaVor 10
cause the witness to state the matter TO ms
satisfaction Rand with a shrug of the shoui-
ders said: "Oh. I'm an artist mysei' anu
nassed back Of the jury box and began scrawi-
ing upon the chart many forms of curves ana
angles The Jurors were interested onlookers
Timothy NJ. Grifing. counsel for the defendant
sought to prove by Dennis that the signature
tine the dead wife of the accused lawyer Den
MS talked at length to the jury. explaining that
there were twenty-five characteristics Of Mrs.
Valentines which were prominent in the dis
puted signature and that the signature was
beyond all reasonable doubt. genuine he
agreed with CarvaIho and Kinsley, experts Tor
the prosecution, that the signature had neea
made with a stub per. and with the handle OF
the pen held far TO the right. but said that the
signature was undoubtedly genuine He based
his belief upon standards Of handwriting given
20 him by Valentine.
DO YOU know that those standards were writ
ten I'm 1877. whereas the disputed deed was
signed. it is alleged. in 1882" asked Rand
Il had not known there was that difference,
r~lied the witness
Allowing for the changes that may occur in
handwriting as time goas by. would you ex-
1Dect TO find the same characteristics in writings
sixteen years apart?"
The answer of Dennis did not make his opin-
ION on that pOint clear.
Now. just more question: said Mr.. Rand
Your name is Dennis?"
The banging Of the gavel of Justice Rogers
and almost frantic efforts upon the part OF me
court clerk We're required to stiie the laughter
provoked by Rands sally.
William z. Kelly. another handwriting expert
called by the defence. was also questioned upon
The disparity in years between the standards of
handwriting given him by Valentine and the
date the deed is said to have been signed. He
said that he did not consider il strange for
person 10 have the characteristics at
periods sixteen years apart.
II announced early in the day that there
would he a night session in the hope Of ending
the case before to-day but owing TO the signal
system of the Long Island Railroad in Long
Island City being out Of order, trains were all
TWO hours late, and court delayed by the
Tardy arrival Of counsel The lawyers who had
been striving 10 finish before to-day resigned
themselves to a prOtracted night session, with
the probability of finishing this morning.
ANY one with half that that
signature is that Of Mrs. Valentine. if he
at all familiar with her writing" said the
cused lawyer after adjournment They have
called il poor forgery. If il had been a forgery
AT all, il would have been good forgery, not
poor one. ] shall be able 10 prove my entire
Innocence"