.
But an investigation by The Tampa Tribune raises serious questions with that defense. The Tribune collected and examined hundreds of pages of JQC documents and military papers, including the disputed photocopy, then retained three outside experts to review them independently, a common practice in court cases when complex facts are in dispute. .
The experts came to the same conclusion: The paper in question almost certainly is not a forgery. Fabricating it would have required a level of sophistication beyond many foreign intelligence agencies, one said. Another said forging it is ``technically possible, but highly unlikely.'' .
The Paper In Question .
The case against Holder began with a seminar he took at MacDill Air Force Base in 1997-98 under the auspices of the Air Force's Air War College. Holder had to write a research paper for it. He was allowed to choose its subject from a list. He picked the Allied bombing campaign of Europe during World War II. .
The disputed photocopy turned up in 2002. A federal prosecutor says someone left it for him anonymously under his office door in a plain envelope, along with a short note and a photocopy of a second paper on the same subject - the one Holder is alleged to have copied from. That paper was written by E. David Hoard, a Holder friend. Holder used it to duplicate its format. Part of his grade depended on getting the format right. .
The fact that someone left the disputed document for the federal prosecutor buttresses their contention that Holder is being framed, his attorneys say. .
``We know that there is an unknown third party that put those papers together,'' said Greg Kehoe, a former federal prosecutor now on Holder's defense team. ``Who is that person?'' .
No one has been able to answer that yet. It might not be relevant. .
If the disputed paper wasn't a forgery, then the mystery person was more likely a whistleblower, not a conspirator. .
The three experts the Tribune retained specialize in forged documents.