Michael 5260
Re: My research must be flawed
Sat Aug 4, 2018 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, their testimony, and a demonstration as to why a person wrote or did not write a questioned writing. The judge or jury can see for themselves and understand why you are saying what you are saying and accept or reject your reasoned judgment about the handwriting. It is the province of the judge/jury to make a decision as to the convincingness of the handwriting evidence.

Osborn and Stein being on different sides of the same case? If you can provide me with the name and date of the court case I will look into it for you.

About "hired guns" in court? No need to be nihilistic about it. A person saying what they "believe" and
"proving" what they say are two different things. A person saying they believe something is a mere opinion. It's worthless. Showing someone something, that they can see with their own eyes, is a different story.

All Trendley proved to his counterparts was that he was a pipsqueaking ass. You can have 100 competent and truthful document examiners and have one puke like Trendley and he will ruin it for the other 100 examiners.

By the way, you do not "see" forgeries. You examine and compare them to the known genuine writing. This is how you determine whether or not the writings are authentic or non-authentic. You do not find the correct answer by just staring at the writing and concluding "it looks good to me" or "it looks bad to me".

One of the principles of handwriting identification is that an imitation or simulation of a writing intentionally will resemble in some manner the writing that is imitated. Of course it will. If a person imitates Abraham Lincoln's signature they are not going to write George Washington's signature.

What was the name of the handwriting expert they kept "on ice" because they feared he might "flip" and testify for the Defense? I will look into this for you too.

I do not care about Hauptmann getting his ass kicked or if he was fed Wiener Schnitzel by the police. It was 1934 and you were going to get your ass kicked during an interrogation. I am concerned with Hauptmann's handwriting because he wrote his way into the electric chair with it. This is where the rubber meets the road in this case.

  • Re: My research must be flawedMichael, Sat Aug 4 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... more
    • 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 flawed — Michael 5260, Sat Aug 4 11:00
      • 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