What risk? Forging someone's name in your yearbook? What's the penalty on that?
They is the "Journalists" that took a picture of a autograph that had two different color inks and published a black and white picture of it.
Roy Moore, OJ Simpson, And why I don't believe you.
- Thread starter fool
- Start date
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Was the news conference in which Nelson was holding the yearbook also in black and white?
Your contention that all "they" needed was to plant a seed is the same kind of seed Moore planted when he questioned the authenticity. That's all the loyal Moore supporters needed to shore up any wavering doubt. They can say "fake signature!" and vote with a clean conscience.
Here's the opinion of a former FBI agent who now works as a forensic document examiner:
Also: Did Moore deny writing that inscription? All I've seen him say is "tampering has occurred." Do you have anything that says he didn't write the inscription to this person he denied ever knowing?
Was everyone at the news conference or did most people get the info from the media?
Did Daily Beast publish this a pic where it all looks one color:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/roy-moore-signed-latest-accusers-high-school-yearbook
When it really looks like this:
View attachment 26047
He didn't need to plant a seed, it's obviously fake.
Framing the guilty man.
Cause they framed a guilty man.
Pay wall.
They say it's forged.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
How is it a black and white photo if her hand isn't black and white?
Because you're an expert? Right.... you're some guy on the internet who says it's fake.
Maybe you could read what an expert has to say. Here's what was at my link:
Sean Hannity is a case study in why Roy Moore won’t drop out of the Alabama Senate race. During his Fox News show on Tuesday, he gave Moore a 24-hour ultimatum: Provide a good explanation for the multiple allegations of sexual misconduct against you, or I can’t support you.
Within that window, Moore replied by way of an open letter to Hannity that he published online.
“I am suffering the same treatment other Republicans have had to endure,” it began. He denied the accusations of two accusers, Leigh Corfman (who says she was 14 when Moore tried to touch her) and Beverly Nelson (who says she was 16 when Moore assaulted her behind the restaurant where she worked). Moore didn’t offer any response to the claims made by several other women that he had pursued them romantically while they were still in high school.
Close-up photograph of the inscription. (Los Angeles Times)
He did, though, repeat a claim made on Wednesday by an attorney representing him about an inscription in a yearbook that Nelson showed the media when she came forward with her allegations. The inscription, shown above, includes the letters “D.A.,” which his attorney says weren’t written by Moore (who at the time of the alleged incident was an assistant district attorney).
Moore wrote:
Within that window, Moore replied by way of an open letter to Hannity that he published online.
“I am suffering the same treatment other Republicans have had to endure,” it began. He denied the accusations of two accusers, Leigh Corfman (who says she was 14 when Moore tried to touch her) and Beverly Nelson (who says she was 16 when Moore assaulted her behind the restaurant where she worked). Moore didn’t offer any response to the claims made by several other women that he had pursued them romantically while they were still in high school.
He did, though, repeat a claim made on Wednesday by an attorney representing him about an inscription in a yearbook that Nelson showed the media when she came forward with her allegations. The inscription, shown above, includes the letters “D.A.,” which his attorney says weren’t written by Moore (who at the time of the alleged incident was an assistant district attorney).
Moore wrote:
“Those initials as well as the date under the signature block and the printed name of the restaurant are written in a style inconsistent with the rest of the yearbook inscription. The ‘7’s’ in ‘Christmas 1977’ are in a noticeably different script than the ‘7’s’ in the date ’12-22-77.’ I believe tampering has occurred.”
For Hannity, this note was enough to keep him from speaking out forcefully against Moore. When he first issued his ultimatum to the candidate, Hannity specifically mentioned the yearbook inscription. During his show on Wednesday, he read Moore’s letter on the air, declaring that he would leave Moore’s fate up to the people of Alabama. Moore had sowed a little doubt on one part of one allegation — and that was enough space for Hannity to stand down on his criticism.
This is precisely why Moore’s lawyer held a news conference: to similarly raise a question about one facet of one allegation and, thereby, give Moore’s supporters reason to question all of the allegations against him.
But is doubt about the yearbook inscription warranted? To answer that question, The Post spoke with Mark Songer, a former FBI agent who now works as a forensic document examiner in the private sector in Denver.
Songer wasn’t able to offer any assessment of the validity of the inscription, which is precisely the point: There is not enough information at hand for an outside observer to make such an evaluation.
“No two writings are ever exactly alike,” Songer said. “Handwriting is a complex motor skill of sensory neurological and physiological impulses. After practice and repetition, writers interject their own individual characteristics into their writings which become a pattern of habitual formations that are repeated from one writing to the next.”
In other words, your signature is never exactly the same each time you write it — but each time you write it there are common characteristics that your signatures share. To evaluate whether a questioned signature is your signature, a document examiner would need a lot of other examples of your signature (Songer said he would need five to 10) to have enough evidence to determine whether the questioned signature was valid. For other handwriting, like the rest of the inscription, he would need much more: other examples of your known writing (that is, things proven to have been written by you) that would allow him to evaluate individual words and sentences.
What’s more, Songer said, those known writings would need to be contemporaneous to 1977, the year that the inscription was purportedly written. “Everybody’s writing eventually changes over time,” he said, meaning that a bunch of handwriting from 2017 wouldn’t necessarily provide the necessary information to evaluate writing from 40 years earlier.
This is, Songer said, is why it’s hard to dismiss the inscription as invalid simply on the basis of the two sets of “77’s.”
“If you’re comparing just the number ‘7’ the question becomes: Out of the, what, 7 billion people in the world can that be replicated? And the answer is: Yes,” Songer said, making the point that it’s hard to identify a writer simply by how a seven is written. “You can only make a ‘7’ so many ways — or a ‘1’ or a ‘2’. If there were some kind of unique feature that was added to that number and it’s repeated, and it’s unique, possibly.”
“Just comparing numbers on its own merits?” he continued. “It’s very dangerous for someone to say, ‘Yeah, just based on that, that they’re different, therefore different writer.’ I would never go to that level.”
Moore’s attorneys have asked to review the yearbook itself. There’s good reason for this, Songer said.
“As a handwriting expert, we always want to look at the original vs. a photocopy because with the originals we can microscopically examine it,” he said. “Look at the line quality and determine what kind of instrument was used: Was it a ballpoint pen? Was it a gel pen? In 1977, did they have this writing instrument available at the time?” The ink itself could be tested to see if it was an ink that was available in 1977.
That said, Songer didn’t know that Moore’s team necessarily needed the yearbook.
“The quality of this copy?” Songer said, “I think they could come to a qualified opinion.”
Asked whether there was evidence of multiple writers, Songer indicated that he didn’t have enough examples of Moore’s writing to say with certainty.
“Looking at the yearbook entry,” he said, “it looks pretty spontaneously prepared” — that is, it doesn’t look like the writer stopped and restarted, as though someone were tentative in writing perhaps because they were trying to imitate another writer. “It looks very fluid. I don’t see any indications of unnatural writing.”
“The writing seems consistent with one writer,” he added, though he pointed out that “Old Hickory House” and the second date appear to be different stylistically — though he’d need to see examples of Moore’s hand-printed writing to be able to determine whether it’s authentic. (Moore’s lawyers didn’t provide any examples of non-script writing that might show an inconsistency.)
Songer, the former FBI agent, was applying a different standard of proof to the question than did Hannity. Songer wanted to know whether he could demonstrate without question that the handwriting might or might not be Moore’s. Hannity, and many other Moore defenders, are content with the existence of doubt.
Without more handwriting available for comparison, Songer couldn’t rule out that the inscription had been manipulated, though he also didn’t see strong evidence that it had been. With that doubt lingering, Moore’s political goals have already been met — as they were with Hannity.
This is precisely why Moore’s lawyer held a news conference: to similarly raise a question about one facet of one allegation and, thereby, give Moore’s supporters reason to question all of the allegations against him.
But is doubt about the yearbook inscription warranted? To answer that question, The Post spoke with Mark Songer, a former FBI agent who now works as a forensic document examiner in the private sector in Denver.
Songer wasn’t able to offer any assessment of the validity of the inscription, which is precisely the point: There is not enough information at hand for an outside observer to make such an evaluation.
“No two writings are ever exactly alike,” Songer said. “Handwriting is a complex motor skill of sensory neurological and physiological impulses. After practice and repetition, writers interject their own individual characteristics into their writings which become a pattern of habitual formations that are repeated from one writing to the next.”
In other words, your signature is never exactly the same each time you write it — but each time you write it there are common characteristics that your signatures share. To evaluate whether a questioned signature is your signature, a document examiner would need a lot of other examples of your signature (Songer said he would need five to 10) to have enough evidence to determine whether the questioned signature was valid. For other handwriting, like the rest of the inscription, he would need much more: other examples of your known writing (that is, things proven to have been written by you) that would allow him to evaluate individual words and sentences.
What’s more, Songer said, those known writings would need to be contemporaneous to 1977, the year that the inscription was purportedly written. “Everybody’s writing eventually changes over time,” he said, meaning that a bunch of handwriting from 2017 wouldn’t necessarily provide the necessary information to evaluate writing from 40 years earlier.
This is, Songer said, is why it’s hard to dismiss the inscription as invalid simply on the basis of the two sets of “77’s.”
“If you’re comparing just the number ‘7’ the question becomes: Out of the, what, 7 billion people in the world can that be replicated? And the answer is: Yes,” Songer said, making the point that it’s hard to identify a writer simply by how a seven is written. “You can only make a ‘7’ so many ways — or a ‘1’ or a ‘2’. If there were some kind of unique feature that was added to that number and it’s repeated, and it’s unique, possibly.”
“Just comparing numbers on its own merits?” he continued. “It’s very dangerous for someone to say, ‘Yeah, just based on that, that they’re different, therefore different writer.’ I would never go to that level.”
Moore’s attorneys have asked to review the yearbook itself. There’s good reason for this, Songer said.
“As a handwriting expert, we always want to look at the original vs. a photocopy because with the originals we can microscopically examine it,” he said. “Look at the line quality and determine what kind of instrument was used: Was it a ballpoint pen? Was it a gel pen? In 1977, did they have this writing instrument available at the time?” The ink itself could be tested to see if it was an ink that was available in 1977.
That said, Songer didn’t know that Moore’s team necessarily needed the yearbook.
“The quality of this copy?” Songer said, “I think they could come to a qualified opinion.”
Asked whether there was evidence of multiple writers, Songer indicated that he didn’t have enough examples of Moore’s writing to say with certainty.
“Looking at the yearbook entry,” he said, “it looks pretty spontaneously prepared” — that is, it doesn’t look like the writer stopped and restarted, as though someone were tentative in writing perhaps because they were trying to imitate another writer. “It looks very fluid. I don’t see any indications of unnatural writing.”
“The writing seems consistent with one writer,” he added, though he pointed out that “Old Hickory House” and the second date appear to be different stylistically — though he’d need to see examples of Moore’s hand-printed writing to be able to determine whether it’s authentic. (Moore’s lawyers didn’t provide any examples of non-script writing that might show an inconsistency.)
Songer, the former FBI agent, was applying a different standard of proof to the question than did Hannity. Songer wanted to know whether he could demonstrate without question that the handwriting might or might not be Moore’s. Hannity, and many other Moore defenders, are content with the existence of doubt.
Without more handwriting available for comparison, Songer couldn’t rule out that the inscription had been manipulated, though he also didn’t see strong evidence that it had been. With that doubt lingering, Moore’s political goals have already been met — as they were with Hannity.
You keep saying that. It doesn't mean anything.
There's that "they" again. And that's not what I asked you. I'll try again:
Also: Did Moore deny writing that inscription? All I've seen him say is "tampering has occurred." Do you have anything that says he didn't write the inscription to this person he denied ever knowing?
Saying "tampering has occurred" isn't a denial that he signed the yearbook. And if he's not denying he wrote it, then how can he say he didn't know who she was?
!. The Republican Governor of Alabama believes the 9 women, but would still vote for Moore - so much for the ends don't justify the means!
2. It would appear that if Moore is elected, the Senate Ethics Committee plans to terminate his stay and ask the Governor to appoint another representative - that could be Jeff Sessions!
3. If a child molester also serves as a lawyer with the local District Attorney, to whom is one supposed to turn for justice?
Last edited:
How come you can't see it's two different color inks?
Let's get down to brass tacks here Anna, I'm Asking YOU in front of the whole internet if you think this autograph was all written by the same person at the same time;
View attachment 26050
Your answer will follow you forever.
Your experts is a moron.
Let's break it down.
Forget the ink, that could be easily explained on examination. The book could have been left open to that page near a window with another book covering the darker part and that would make a distinct line. If the two inks chromatograph the same then we're done with that.
Who puts the date in twice?
Nobody does that.
Who uses two different 7s for the two different dates?
Nobody nobody does that.
It's the point of the thread.
They say it's forged.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
How come you can't see her hand is flesh-toned and she has on red fingernail polish?
I'll give you a reasonable answer: I don't know.
Oh, the drama...
Wow.
Sorry, you're not an expert. I'll go with the guy who is.
And the minute you say "nobody does that" is the minute you overstated your case.
Does this mean you couldn't find anywhere where he outright denies writing it?
Because until you do, I'm thinking he's being evasive.
Instead of "trashing" his accuser, Franken has accepted his guilt and apologized!
She has accepted his apology and stated publically that she never wanted him to be expelled from the Senate!
Franken has also promised to cooperated with the Senate Ethics Committee!
How come I can't see there's blue and black ink there?
Do you find it fishy?
At all?
It's what we do around here.
Your "expert" never addresses the sevens. He dances around them.
Anna's expert that she believes said:
Where exactly in the word salad did he explain why anybody would date it twice with two different styles of 7?
I went on to Nobody nobody if you recall.
Didn't look.
Evasive? A Lawyer that used to date high schoolers when he was 30?
He's gonna be evasive?
Who'd have ever thought?
I think one person did write that up to the Roy, and that looks like his Roy. It looks like everything until the Roy is contemporaneous. Everything after that don't fit.
So if he did sign it but just Roy and the Woman or the media supped it up because it wouldn't sell with out his last name.
Has the book been fingerprinted?
Instead of "trashing" his accuser, Franken has accepted his guilt and apologized!
She has accepted his apology and stated publically that she never wanted him to be expelled from the Senate!
Franken has also promised to cooperated with the Senate Ethics Committee!
Is Franken going to come clean on Hollywood?
Even if the Moore camp could prove conclusively the yearbook to be a fake, what about the testimony of the other 8 women?
Their compelling narratives were enough to convince Senate Leader McConnell, most congressional Republicans and even the GOP Governor of Alabama!
musterion
Well-known member
This bit should be its own thread but it'll tell you everything you need to know on why the GOP is the way it is.
https://pjmedia.com/trending/sen-flake-caught-hot-mic-says-gop-toast-embrace-moore-trump/
https://pjmedia.com/trending/sen-flake-caught-hot-mic-says-gop-toast-embrace-moore-trump/
What did he do in Hollywood?
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Good grief...
"If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?" (Alice in Wonderland)
I don't think someone thought a forgery would ever fly. I'd be surprised. I'd accept being wrong about that if we ever find out. But I'd be surprised.
I'm more interested in whether or not he's denied that he wrote in her yearbook after denying he even knew her, so my interest and your interest aren't intersecting.
Why put "expert" in quotes, and why do you think you can do a better job of forensics than someone who's trained in it and made a career in it? I don't pretend I can build a bridge, are you pretending you're an expert in document forensics?
So you understand that would mean that Moore lied about knowing her.
It's still too crazy to think that someone would forge what came after and expect no one would question it.
Didn't look.
ClimateSanity
New member
He isn't trashing his accusers because the accuser is telling the truth. Moore's accuser is making up a total fabrication. There is nothing to apologize for. In fact , his accuser belongs behind bars.
Instead of "trashing" his accuser, Franken has accepted his guilt and apologized!
She has accepted his apology and stated publically that she never wanted him to be expelled from the Senate!
Franken has also promised to cooperated with the Senate Ethics Committee!
ClimateSanity
New member
Mark Levin said the ethics committee is where charges go to die and be forgotten.
Of course not and the same people whining here, would still support Bill Clinton, they are total hypocrites.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Have you counted how many Republicans are calling for Trump to resign?