The Second of Two Examinations
of the "Killian Memos"

Between September 2004 and December 2005, I examined the documents variously called "Killian Memos" and "Bush Memos" twice. The first study began in September and ended December 3, 2004. The second study began in January 2005 and ended on December 3 of the same year.

The first study examined exceptionally bad examples of the documents. These examples had been photocopied an unknown number of times and faxed at least once and perhaps twice. My hope in this study, was to find representative characters that would indicate the physical source of the memos -- digital printer or typewriter. I hoped to be able to find characters that implied their origins.

The second study was of pre-faxed copies scanned at 9,600 DPI. In this study, I compared my original findings with evidence provided in these much more accessible memos. The second study is almost 200 pages and contains more than 200 high resolution images. It is much too large to post as a PDF. With that in mind, I am posting a PDF that contains the important information in excerpted form from the second report.

The second report supports my findings in my first study. In brief, the memos are almost certainly typed. For reasons which should be clear in the excerpt, the argument that the font is digital cannot be supported. Common wisdom suggests that if they are typed, they are typed in Press Roman on an IBM SELECTRIC COMPOSER. Although Press Roman does share some important characteristics with the texts in the memos, there are some characteristics that do not support a hypothesis the memos were done in that face.

In the end, I am confident I have demonstrated the memos were typed, but I cannot support the argument they were typed on any specific machine.

Second Study

Related Paper

David E. Hailey, Jr., Ph.D.
Associate Professor -- Professional and Technical Communication
Utah State University