Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 49 to 60 of 93
  1. #49
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Candyland
    Posts
    5,132

    Default

    Richard Dusak was cited as one of 4 high ranking secret service officials who were complicit in perjury during the Martha Stewart trial. If he had been of the opinion that Patsy wrote the note, would that have been sufficient to discredit him in the eyes of the RST?
    This is my opinion and it may not be copied in whole or in part without my written permission

  2. #50
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Candyland
    Posts
    5,132

    Default

    The Wiki quotes Judge Carnes judgement (this is about Cina Wong):-

    Not a Member of ABFDE. "She, however, is not a member of the ABFDE, the sole recognized organization for accreditation of qualified forensic document examiners.
    That is very misleading! On the ABFDE website it states that:-

    Where can I find a qualified forensic document examiner?

    Attorneys should search for FDEs who are active members in the recognized national and/or regional forensic science organizations. The following is a list of such organizations:

    American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS) (Questioned Document Section)
    American Society of Questioned Document Examiners (ASQDE)
    American Board of Forensic Document Examiners (ABFDE)
    Midwestern Association of Forensic Sciences (MAFS)
    Southwestern Association of Forensic Document Examiners (SWAFDE)
    Mid-Atlantic Association of Forensic Scientists (MAAFS)
    Southeastern Association of Forensic Document Examiners (SAFDE)
    Northeastern Association of Forensic Scientists (NEAFS)
    Canadian Society of Forensic Science (CSFS)
    Nowhere does it say that this list is comprehensive! I think the source of Judge Carnes statement was Gideon Epstein.

    It goes on...

    [quote]Although she is the former vice president of the National Association of Document Examiners ("NADE"), (PSDMF P 2), (Defs.' Mot. In Limine 68 at 6.) Wong, herself, admits that NADE does not require specialized training or experience for its certification. (Wong Dep. at 87-89.)

    From the NADE website:-

    Certification:

    Members of NADE may participate in a certification program. In order to become certified, the candidate must:

    1) Submit an application which includes specifics related to various aspects of the candidate's work as a document examiner.
    2) Pass a written examination given at the annual conference.
    3) Submit case files from a number of cases in which the candidate has testified as an expert witness in document examination.
    4) Pass an oral examination in the form of a mock trial based on a case that the applicant was assigned earlier in the certification process.
    When the candidate has successfully completed these steps, the certification committee will award the title of CDE. Approximately one-third of NADE's members are Certified Document Examiners, and can be recognized as such by the use of the letters "CDE" after their names.

    NADE members who have been certified for ten years and who have contributed to the profession through journal publications and/or conference presentations, may apply for Diplomate status.
    also:-

    NADE certifies document examiners who meet specific requirements including an application process, written testing and oral testing.

    Upon successful completion of the certification process a member is entitled to use the designation of Certified Document Examiner, or CDE. To maintain this designation, a certificate holder must be recertified every five years.

    The Wiki also fails to mention that Sheila Lowe's qualifications which are online here:- http://www.sheilalowe.com/
    This is my opinion and it may not be copied in whole or in part without my written permission

  3. #51
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Candyland
    Posts
    5,132

    Default

    This is what was said when the ransom note was first published:-

    Experts who reviewed the note agreed it is too long to be a true ran som note. They also noted the difference in the writing at the beginning, which shows a distinct tremor, to the end, where it's much smoother and self-assured.

    Sheila Lowe, a court-certified handwriting analyst and graphologist from Valencia, Calif., concluded that the first few paragraphs show "acute anxiety, then it relaxes a little bit." Lowe believes the writer was using alcohol or other drugs and perhaps has a psychological disorder.

    "I think the note is contrived," Lowe said. "But the writing is too natural to be a disguise. ... When people try to disguise writing they change the slant or the size. And if you want to disguise your writing, why write at all?" Lowe believes the author's personality has a criminal element, based on the spacing around the words on the page. "Every time I've seen this kind of spacial arrangement, it's been an indicator of criminal activity," Lowe said.

    Retired FBI agent Gregg McCrary said the author is well-educated.

    "It looks like there was an attempt to intentionally dumb down the note - in other words, to make the writer look less articulate than he really is," McCrary said. "But the vocabulary and syntax reflect an individual who is articulate and well-spoken and not as stupid as he or she might like us to believe he is."

    Clint Van Zandt, a retired FBI agent and former supervisor in the agency's Behavioral Sciences Unit, examined the note and said, "Whoever did this is living a lie." Van Zandt said he found no evidence that the author is a foreigner, as the writer asserts. "There's nothing in the document to suggest it was written by anyone other than a person for whom English is their first language." The writing and phrasing also shows a "softness," Van Zandt said, that "is normally more consistent with a female or genteel male" author.

    He said the writer is educated, at least 40 years old, and someone who has exerted authority over others.

    "I don't think the writer is a professional criminal, nor do I think the note was actually written to extort money. But I think it was written to point authorities in the direction of a kidnapper-extortionist."

    Robert Ressler, another retired FBI agent, also called the note "bogus."

    "It provides information about the alleged kidnapper, which immediately tells you it's a phony note," Ressler said. "And it was obviously written after the child's death, written for no other reason than to conceal reality." The entire note is inconsistent with what he knows from years of investigating kidnappings, he said.

    "When there's a note at the Ramsey residence, there shouldn't have been a dead child. When there's a dead child at the residence, you shouldn't find a note," he said. "It's totally stupid."

    http://extras.denverpost.com/news/jon134.htm
    This is my opinion and it may not be copied in whole or in part without my written permission

  4. #52
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Candyland
    Posts
    5,132

    Default

    It has come to my attention that Miss Marple has linked to this post because he thinks it showed my "true colours" and that the only reason I posted a (slightly) truncated version of it at Crimelibrary was because I am overly fond of my little green boxes (reputation level).

    Firstly, I think that is a low blow because I actually had my reputation level hidden until a change to the software a few days ago meant no-one could hide their reputations anymore. I chose to hide mine because I thought the reputation levels might be a target for bullies and that they could potentially distract from the discussion. In making his snide remark about my reputation level, Miss Marple proved my point.

    Now to the post. My original post here was identical to the post I made at Crimelibrary but included the comment at the end that I thought someone was frantically updating /spinning on the wiki page (as it turns out, I was right!)

    Since Miss Marple has chosen to attack me for this comment, I will elaborate. In his post complaining about my comments above, Marple referred to the wiki in order to argue his point. His point was (naturally) that my opinion was unreasonable/unmerited. However, if one goes to the History page of the wiki and does a comparison between the current version of the wiki and one from several days ago, one can see that this page of the wiki has been significantly changed over the past few days:-

    http://jonbenetramsey.pbwiki.com/sdi...05-18-20-56-39

    Deleted text is shown in red, added-in text is shown in green.

    Bottom line is that this is akin to someone visiting a restaurant and making negative observations about the hygiene of the place. The restaurant owner then quickly spruces the place up and then invites people to come and see how clean his restaurant is whilst accusing the critic of lying! OK, it was the first analogy I came up with but I'm sure you get the point. Marple defended his wiki with a REVISED version of the page I criticised... and I think that's dishonest - especially since his posts were laced with snide little personal attacks on me. He's lucky I didn't report him to the mods at Crimelibrary. Perhaps next time I will.
    Last edited by Jayelles; May 31, 2007, 6:37 am at Thu May 31 6:37:51 UTC 2007.
    This is my opinion and it may not be copied in whole or in part without my written permission

  5. #53
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,381

    Default

    Defs.' Mot. In Limine 68 at 6.) Wong, herself, admits that NADE does not require specialized training or experience for its certification. (Wong Dep. at 87-89.)
    Did I read this correctly, Jay? Good grief!

    Thank you again for your valuable research. Glad you noticed your personal information would have been included. Crafty, aren't they? However, they are just protecting their material.
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  6. #54
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,381

    Default

    Retired FBI agent Gregg McCrary said the author is well-educated.

    "It looks like there was an attempt to intentionally dumb down the note - in other words, to make the writer look less articulate than he really is," McCrary said. "But the vocabulary and syntax reflect an individual who is articulate and well-spoken and not as stupid as he or she might like us to believe he is."
    This one stands out for me, Jay. I agree with Gregg McCrary. I've read what he had to say before, and thought he was right way back. I can just see Patsy Ramsey writing this ransom note in the same way she tackled her speech for the talent competition, and won. Her friend Linda McLean helped her. As for the writing part, she was smart enough to print it, cutting out any repetitive slanting. Patsy Ramsey knew this 3 page ransom note would throw everyone into a tizzy. No doubt about it, she had the experience and was well rehearsed.
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  7. #55
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Candyland
    Posts
    5,132

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Elle_1
    Did I read this correctly, Jay? Good grief!

    Thank you again for your valuable research. Glad you noticed your personal information would have been included. Crafty, aren't they? However, they are just protecting their material.
    Apparently specialised training is optional. However, members cannot put the certification letters after their name without taking exams.

    Professional bodies are a bit of an oddity IMO. Many of them are little more than a money-making scam. Take Plastic Surgeons for example. There are numerous professional bodies for plastic and cosmetic surgeons but there are also plenty of really good surgeons who aren't members of them because their reputations speak for themselves.

    There are aslo different qualifications for the same professions For example, in Scotland we have PGCE (Post Graduate Certificate of Education) as well as Dip Ed (Diploma of Education). Both are perfectly acceptable teaching qualifications which are recognised throughout the UK. Our professional body is the GTCS (General Teaching Council for Scotland) but although you need to be a member of the GTC to work in the State system, you need only be "eligible for registration" in the private system - i.e. they recognise that some teachers aren't members but that they would meet the requirements if they had to join. I'm sure the same applies in other professions.
    This is my opinion and it may not be copied in whole or in part without my written permission

  8. #56
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,381

    Default

    Thank you for this valuable update. As per usual, Jay, you are right on top of it all, and a wealth of information relating to the JonBenét case.

    Soon, school will be over for you, and time for you to go sailing.
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  9. #57
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Candyland
    Posts
    5,132

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Elle_1
    Thank you for this valuable update. As per usual, Jay, you are right on top of it all, and a wealth of information relating to the JonBenét case.

    Soon, school will be over for you, and time for you to go sailing.
    You betcha! I stocked the boat up on Sunday and weather permitting, we're going racing on Saturday :-)
    This is my opinion and it may not be copied in whole or in part without my written permission

  10. #58

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Elle_1
    You're welcome. Here is the url for the character codes for Times New Roman

    http://rmhh.co.uk/ascii.html

    If you forget, just type what you're looking for in a google search Ames, and you'll also find the answers there.
    Thanks Elle...I will give that a try.

  11. #59

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayelles
    This is what was said when the ransom note was first published:-




    http://extras.denverpost.com/news/jon134.htm
    "When there's a note at the Ramsey residence, there shouldn't have been a dead child. When there's a dead child at the residence, you shouldn't find a note," he said. "It's totally stupid."

    Yes, TOTALLY!!!

  12. #60
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,381

    Default

    Exactly, Ames. Totally stupid.
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.



Similar Threads

  1. Cherokee's Thread/Analysis
    By Tricia in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 241
    Last Post: January 27, 2006, 8:55 am, Fri Jan 27 8:55:17 UTC 2006
  2. Comments to the FOX Analysis
    By 1000 Sparks in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: January 7, 2005, 5:06 pm, Fri Jan 7 17:06:17 UTC 2005
  3. Catherine Crier - Scott's Handwriting Analysis
    By "J_R" in forum Laci Denise Rocha Peterson
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: July 23, 2004, 4:14 pm, Fri Jul 23 16:14:54 UTC 2004
  4. Statement Analysis: Detecting Deception
    By JustinCase in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: May 23, 2004, 12:16 pm, Sun May 23 12:16:19 UTC 2004
  5. JBR's underwear sent for DNA analysis
    By Tez in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 64
    Last Post: January 22, 2004, 9:40 pm, Thu Jan 22 21:40:21 UTC 2004

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •