Re: My research must be flawed
Sat Aug 4, 2018 08:26

You are arguing both sides of the stick. What you should be saying is that you don't like that they were amused by the fact that "Experts" needed to hear the ransom was discovered before their "Science" revealed what they wanted to hear.

What you are saying about reliability is very important. And frankly I agree with you. But the proof is in the pudding isn't it? So why would two guys of equal rank disagree? Like Stein and Osborn being on different sides - which did occur. By your very own argument this should never happen.

Yes Ballistics. Don't get side-tracked by attempting to misdirect the point. Your completely separate and different point does have relevance though. Remember what you said about "hired guns" but apply that to handwriting analysis. Who could accuse one of tampering when whatever they say could be what they believe. And so if its a complete farce what recourse is there? Nothing.

What Trendley did was prove his counterparts weren't good at what they did. They are the ones who are supposed to see forgeries - not authenticate them. So he did everyone a service in exposing this guess-work.

So you don't like tricks huh? And you dislike "dirty" tricks even more?

Well then where are you to speak out against beating someone to get them to confess? Where are you to speak out against an AG who knew about it but lied in Court to cover it up? How about hiring away a Defense Lawyer in order to discover the Defense strategies? Or how about hiring a mole to pretend to be a Defense witness so that the State would know what was being said? Or what about secretly listening to conversations between a Lawyer and their Client? Or what about witness tampering by threatening them with prosecution or bribing Private Investigators to stop working for the Defense? Or how about keeping a Handwriting Expert "on ice" because they feared he might "flip" and testify for the Defense?

These aren't dirty tricks they are crimes. So where are you to speak out against this stuff?

  • Re: My research must be flawedMichael 5260, Fri Aug 3 11:55
    I do not know what the investigators had to laugh about. According to Hauptmann and Scaduto they had just spent the whole night telling Hauptmann how to spell words and teaching him how to write... more
    • Re: My research must be flawed — Michael, Sat Aug 4 08:26
      • handwriting identificationRichard Sloan, Sun Aug 5 10:19
        I recall that the Osbornes (father & son) were originally divided about whether or not Bruno wrote the ransom notes. Son didn't agree with dad that he had written them, until there was more evidence... more
        • Re: handwriting identificationJoe, Sun Aug 5 13:37
          It's hard to argue with the totality of the handwriting evidence against Hauptmann from such a battery of QDE's overall. For the layman, I just shake my head at the obvious similarities between the... more
          • handwritingRichard Sloan, Sun Aug 5 22:49
            Yes, his writing on letters he wrote from jail are a "dead" give away!He DONE WROTE DEM NOTES.
        • it's a small world Richard Sloan, Sun Aug 5 10:24
          Richard Bocker, the contractor we use to work on projects in our house just told me that his grandfather, Albert Bocker, owned the nursery DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM the Bergen Greenhouse... more
      • Re: My research must be flawedMichael 5260, Sat Aug 4 11:00
        I do not care whether or not law enforcement was amused by the Osborns. I do know that a conclusion about a handwriting has to be proven in court. An examiner does this with handwriting exhibits,... more
        • Re: My research must be flawedMichael, Sat Aug 4 11:21
          Thanks for the offer but I don't need you to look into it for me since I've already done it for both. I am telling you it occurred, and it contradicts your position. Unlike some of the other internet ... more
          • Re: My research must be flawedMichael 5260, Sat Aug 4 15:46
            If you have already looked into it you can answer the questions. So, crank up some of that secret, it seems to be secret, archival information you have and answer the questions. No, I don't know of... more
            • Re: My research must be flawedMichael, Sun Aug 5 09:01
              Of course I could answer them as could many others here on THIS Board. Isn't it amazing that we have a whole group of "Experts" over on the Yahoo site that cannot? Why is that I wonder? That insult... more
              • Re: My research must be flawedMichael 5260, Sun Aug 5 10:44
                Okay. If there are many others on this board, I only need one person, that can answer my two questions I look forward to hearing their forthcoming answers. The questions are: * What was the name and... more
                • Re: My research must be flawedAnonymous, Sun Aug 5 13:46
                  As to question number 2: Bert Farrar, QDE, U.S. Treasury Dept. He did believe that Hauptmann wrote the notes, but had a "falling out" with the State Police in 1932. He was subpoenaed to the Hauptmann ... more
                  • Re: My research must be flawedMichael, Tue Aug 7 07:33
                    Someone has been paying attention. The falling out went further than just in '32. And the use of the subpoena was a tactic employed by the State. That tactic was twofold: They never intended to use... more
Click here to receive daily updates