Lease this WebApp and get rid of the ads.
Michael
Re: Looking at the trim board
Tue Oct 2, 2018 08:00
2001:558:6027:18:e5f8:3aff:471f:669

Just a little reminder concerning what you accused me of:

The reason for it is that you are closed minded, you do not like forensic evidence, and you scoff at scientific method.

So if what you write above is true it would be very convincing. But its not. First, I do not "scoff" at it. Next, I realize its imperfect to the point where two "experts" could, have, and do conclude in a wide range of ways concerning the EXACT same document. The extreme would be arriving at opposite conclusions such as: "did write" and "did not write." I've done enough research over the years to see examples of two experts drawing opposite conclusions.

Looking at it through that lens, while its a good thing to consider all of the various reports from these people, it would be foolish to "like" one then use that to "prove" something. So I don't know how but you are missing my point about the Ramsey case. You are representing to me that your opinion would be the right one, whatever it may or will be, while those who see it differently wouldn't be a "good" examiner.

That doesn't work for me.

And so I choose to look at everything - most especially what everyone else blew off, or avoided. Once considering everything and I feel there's enough to draw a personal conclusion then I do. So here you are having already drawn one now face the terrible situation of refuting documentation you've never laid eyes on. There's a profession for that too ... a Magician.

So while I am not saying you aren't good at your profession, I am saying its the profession itself that is flawed. It is not a "true" science.

A handwriting examination, fingerprint examination, polygraph examination, etc., is only as good as the examiner or forensic technician.


Yes and no. First, you make it sound as though whoever you agree with is a "good" examiner or that you too are a "good" examiner. Those who disagree are ALL "bad" ones then? Next, concerning a polygraph, there are "good" examiners and "bad" examiners... but there are also people who can "beat" the test, and there are those who fail that are innocent. So, you see, trying to paint something "black" or "white" just doesn't work. Fingerprints are something else because that is a true science. For example, there is an accepted guideline - ridge counts are ridge counts - there is no "educated" guessing involved.

Concerning Oehler I never said he was famous. Why must he be? And I think you've got "Graphology" on the brain. No where does he mention anything attached to that field about personalities or what have you. I read what he wrote, and viewed his exhibit. Back when I discovered this I did not "like" it because it hadn't fit with what I thought could be true at the time. So I then went to the Archives to look at the trim to see if I could see what he wrote about. And I did. Once combined with all of the other documentation and evidence then using it ALL that's what led to my personal conclusion.

You say there should be other evidence that compliments or refutes the handwriting evidence. This is a good thing and there usually is other evidence. Finding a Lindbergh ransom bill in Hauptmann's wallet and finding Lindbergh ransom money well hidden in Hauptmann's garage is complimentary evidence. Isn't it?

This is a great example that you have no idea what I am talking about. It is also a window into your mind which I believe shows what might possibly "influence" you. No - the other evidence I refer to involves the actual evidence we are discussing. Possessing a ransom bill has nothing to do with the forged phone number.

I honestly don't think there is anything more to discuss. And if I don't get V3 done there will be quite a lot of important information that no one will ever know about. If one doesn't know about it then they can never consider or apply it to their own research. So I am going to have to stop here or I will never get it finished.







  • Re: Looking at the trim boardMichael 5260, Mon Oct 1 14:58
    Why MUST I agree with the examiners that opined that Patsy Ramsey wrote the ransom note, or, why MUST I agree with the examiners that said she did not write the ransom note. I haven't examined the... more
    • Re: Looking at the trim board — Michael, Tue Oct 2 08:00
      • Re: Looking at the trim boardMichael 5260, Tue Oct 2 13:11
        Are you comprehending what I write? I'm starting to have some doubts. What did I say about the Ramsey case? I don't have any opinion about the Patsy Ramsey handwriting. How could I have one when I... more
        • Re: Looking at the trim boardMichael , Tue Oct 2 15:17
          Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in! You are all over the place and it would take me about an hour to counter what you've written and I just don't have the time. I do like discussing... more
          • Re: Looking at the trim boardMichael 5260, Tue Oct 2 21:06
            I see you have completely avoided the three handwriting reports I mentioned. Your response to them is avoidance? Funny, at the time Dr. Baier gave his opinion you were in nirvana. I'm talking about... more
            • Re: Looking at the trim boardMichael, Wed Oct 3 08:23
              By the way... If this is the guy the QDE says wrote those notes that should be YOUR "cup of tea" since a its coming from a fellow "expert." Remember, I'm the guy who doesn't believe its a real... more
              • Re: Looking at the trim boardMichael 5260, Wed Oct 3 10:38
                The person that made the claim about Thomas Wolfe is a "woman" not a "man" or as you say a "guy." I guess you didn't know this because it didn't have a "footnote" with it and it wasn't found in the... more
                • Re: Looking at the trim boardMichael, Wed Oct 3 11:29
                  So a QDE can be either a man or a woman. But they are only "good" ones if they conclude as you do. Got it. I see you agree with Gideon Epstein. Why? Because he believes Hauptmann wrote the notes. So... more
                  • Re: Looking at the trim boardMichael 5250, Wed Oct 3 13:04
                    Did I say I agreed with Gideon Epstein? I most certainly did not. I posted the three handwriting reports for you to read. Don't be putting me down that I believe Patsy Ramsey wrote the ransom note.... more
                    • Re: Looking at the trim boardMichael, Wed Oct 3 13:59
                      So if you do not agree with Epstein do you still believe he's "good?" And if so, how could you both be "good" and still come to different conclusions IF you are both "experts" in this "science?" Or... more
            • Re: Looking at the trim boardMichael, Wed Oct 3 08:21
              Not going to work Script. I am not going to be consumed by a wild goose chase based upon your misrepresentation of what you think I believe or believed. You want to know what that is you read both... more
              • Re: Looking at the trim boardMichael 5260, Wed Oct 3 10:52
                You have qualms about being consumed by a wild goose chase? You have been on one for 18 years. You have this idea that a "footnote" is some kind of powerful weapon of truth. It isn't. All a footnote... more
                • Re: Looking at the trim boardMichael, Wed Oct 3 10:58
                  You have qualms about being consumed by a wild goose chase? You have been on one for 18 years. And you would know this how exactly? I think it would require actual research, but then again, that's a... more
                  • Re: Looking at the trim boardMichael 5260, Wed Oct 3 11:20
                    I know it because you said so. You mentioned it on you board. Does it require a footnote?
                    • Re: Looking at the trim boardMichael, Wed Oct 3 11:42
                      Of course it does. You have a history of taking things out of context or misunderstanding even the most basic ideas. Was I playing "Devils Advocate," testing a theory, or looking for challenges to a... more
      • Re: Looking at the trim boardsteve romeo, Tue Oct 2 09:52
        in my experience with this case don't compare this case with any other
Click here to receive daily updates