[rand1com]

So if Jim's premise that someone got a period check and filled it out to Ruth in order to forge his signature on the reverse to sell it as a forgery, what was the incentive to change the original amount from $5.00 to $500?

Why would the amount make any difference? Especially since obviously the one they would have been trying to replicate which according to Heritage is indeed authentic was for $5.00.

I agree upon a closer look that the two zeroes appear to have been added with a slightly different pen and perhaps as Jim surmised the red blotch covers an attempt to change the amount but again for what reason.

Is a $500 Ruth check worth more than a $5 one if both are perceived to be authentic as to Ruth's signature?

Also, comparing the clearing house stamps on both checks they indeed appear to be a match.

I am not trying to justify that the check is authentic as for close to 15 years I have assumed that it is not.

However, something does not add up in this case and I would just like a plausible answer.

The Ruth signature is clearly live ink. Even if replicated by a laser as Jim guesses, the change to the amount makes no sense to me.