- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 11/17/17 at 2:04 pm to CommoDawg
quote:
Conclusion
As a discipline routinely accepted under Frye (Frye v. United States, 54 App. D.C. 46, 293 F. 1013, 1014 [1923]), forensic document examination has been consistently accepted in the courts in spite of the challenges generated by the Daubert decision in 1993 (Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 [1993]). Published research demonstrates the validity of the expertise and supports the principle of handwriting individuality. Published standards ensure consistency in methodology. Document examiners in both public (local, state, federal, and international) and private laboratories use these standards. Ongoing academic research continues to support the forensic document examination community in strengthening the scientific basis for handwriting comparison.
The FBI says you are an idiot.
LINK
Posted on 11/17/17 at 2:07 pm to CommoDawg
The analysis can tell the age of the ink. The party of science trying to discredit science once again.
Posted on 11/17/17 at 2:07 pm to CommoDawg
The existence of forgery is exponentially more useful to Moore than the presence of an authentic yearbook signature is to the accuser.
It proves that she is a liar.
It proves that she is a liar.
Posted on 11/17/17 at 2:09 pm to Vacherie Saint
@ them trying to plot a strategy how to move away from this.
Posted on 11/17/17 at 2:09 pm to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
I don't see how the yearbook is evidence of anything beyond that he (may have) signed someone's yearbook.
That's really all it is.
Posted on 11/17/17 at 2:11 pm to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
It was 40 years ago. I've got friends on Facebook that I went to high school with for 4 years that I have no memory of, and it was way less than 40 years ago.
But did you squeeze their firm, nubile, under age titties?
Posted on 11/17/17 at 2:15 pm to CommoDawg
What about the fact that the ink is a couple weeks old?
Posted on 11/17/17 at 2:15 pm to shinerfan
quote:
The ink can be dated very accurately.
You don't even have to date it.
It's gonna be different in composition too!
Posted on 11/17/17 at 2:15 pm to tigersbh
quote:
The analysis can tell the age of the ink.
This is the key here. Handwriting comparison is much less "scientific" than determining ink age.
Posted on 11/17/17 at 2:15 pm to CommoDawg
quote:
It certainly disproves Moore's claim that he never met the woman
It's a strange universe you live in when you can simultaneously take the position that handwriting analysis cannot validate a signature and that existence of a signature on a piece of paper is proof of something.
This post was edited on 11/17/17 at 2:17 pm
Posted on 11/17/17 at 2:17 pm to TBoy
quote:No.
But did you squeeze their firm, nubile, under age titties?
But if she accused me of doing it, I can guarantee you I wouldn't be able to intelligently discuss what I was doing on that given day at a given location if I even recalled being in the same room with her at all.
So yeah. I'd probably remember grabbing her tits. But if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to remember jack shite in terms of exculpatory information.
Posted on 11/17/17 at 2:17 pm to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
Even if he did sign it, it only proves that they were acquainted.
Also proves that Moore lied about his assertion 'I've never even heard of that restaurant.'
Posted on 11/17/17 at 2:19 pm to SusanKTaylor
Except it is fake.
Posted on 11/17/17 at 2:20 pm to idlewatcher
Its like a murder suspect saying "the existence of my fingerprints on the murder weapon doesn't make me guilty!"
The crawfishing going on today is boner inducing. Did you see Allred say that she doesn't even know if the accuser witnessed Roy Moore signing her own yearbook? Delicious.
The crawfishing going on today is boner inducing. Did you see Allred say that she doesn't even know if the accuser witnessed Roy Moore signing her own yearbook? Delicious.
Posted on 11/17/17 at 2:20 pm to SusanKTaylor
How so?
Posted on 11/17/17 at 2:22 pm to CommoDawg
Posted on 11/17/17 at 2:23 pm to SusanKTaylor
quote:
Also proves that Moore lied about his assertion 'I've never even heard of that restaurant.'
You'd be dead wrong. Handwriting experts have already concluded that the second date and location at the bottom of the inscription are in a completely different handwriting. If you look, it can clearly be seen even by the untrained eye.
Its fake. Its time to accept that uniparty is lying to all of us.
This post was edited on 11/17/17 at 2:26 pm
Posted on 11/17/17 at 2:24 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
Except it is fake.
Shh... they are pretending that that part isn't true.
Posted on 11/17/17 at 2:27 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
What I don't get is that you Dems expect Moore to prove a negative.
Why not?
They tried that with Clarence Thomas.
Page 2 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News