Shoeless Joe Jackson Auto- Fake?

[ThomasL]

Most of this I have already said if you read my posts, some of this I have not posted bc I only thought the strongest point should be made and in an effort to save time and space didn’t feel like getting into the weeds that deep was needed…but here ya go…cant say Im not a good sport even though I don’t like being baited into this (I am not a document expert or authenticator so I guess that can always be thrown out there against my observations which is completely fine)

1 Signature is too large – yes this matter a lot as Jackson signed documents and one paper alongside other signers, he had the opportunity and a visual example right there to write bigger and still chose to write very small. He chose to write small so this would be the only time he ever he wrote a jumbo signature

2 Never signed a photo before or after this one and he had many 5x7 photos later in life he would give out for autograph requests…all signed by his wife.

3 Signature is too smooth and flows too well for Jackson – While it looks shaky, compared to his other signature it is not shaky like they are (the Js in particular).

4 Lack of obvious hesitation points throughout or large ink pools – Jackson could hardly write his own name and as you can see in most of his other signature he stops and starts a lot which leaves hesitation points and larger paths of ink. This one doesn’t have those

5 The Js don’t match at all…too loopy, the space in between the loops too big, no shakiness or hesitation points or what I call dimples in the top left side of the Js and they end with a big tail up and to the left almost as high as the top of the J. All of which is inconsistent with his other signatures

6 space between Joe and Jackson is very large compared to other signatures

7 the A and the C don’t have the same bottom to them here, A has a slight point and the C is curved, whereas if you look at other signatures the A and the C match each other (either both curved or both a slight point)

8 the “cks” section: Jackson’s C kind of hangs over the K or looks like chasing it like it is trying to eat it (pacman), this photo it is not doing that; in his other signatures the C and K are generally at the same level at their high points and they are not here as the K is much taller; the K is closed at the bottom with a loop upward and an ending that looks nothing like his other signatures; the bottom of the S has the same kind of bottom that dips down then back up, this also is not consistent with other Jackson signatures

9 the ending: majority of his other signatures end with a downward stroke with some ending with a straight/even stroke. This one has an obvious up stroke

These are the main points for me and a document expert can probably pick up on things about the E O and A. I think they are the closest letters made that resemble Jackson’s signature so I left those out.

The logistics of when where and how the photo was signed and the bottom line added also throws doubt on it with me…

So what is GOOD about it: The photo is a period photo and came from a person who would be connected with the Indians. That proves provenance of the photo not the signature. Maybe 3 letters kind of match…so when I say the red flags outweigh the green ones with me that’s what I mean. (I hope more will go into what they feel is good about the signature itself)

Richard Simon and Ron Keurajian are well respected experts who have publicly given their opinions, both said fake, I have private messages from two others (one who does post on here from time to time) that also said it was fake and no Im not going to name them bc if they want to say it publicly that is up to them. This also factors in for me.

The financial gain and pressure to pass this could easily be seen as a motivating factor in pushing it from let’s say “questionable” at best to “authentic” and PSA has passed bad signatures before and turned down good ones before so it is more than reasonable to question their judgement and motives here.

Again this is just my opinion on it and my own analysis of it and I am not a forensic document trained expert (I wouldnt mind being one though and will gladly accept an opportunity to get that training).

Thomas L Saunders
(hope I made sense with this)