If the yearbook claim wasn't dead before

[jc456]

Correct, and even though one part of the writing might match the age, the rest might not, or none do, or all do. Submission to a forensic expert clears it all up.

Why do I get the feeling they don't want it cleared up?

I'm not sure they can determine the age of the ink, but they can determine the composition. If it doesn't match, then it's a forgery.

Then Allred may claim that he switched pens when writing the note in the yearbook. Perhaps one pen was running out of ink.

As you can see here, Carbon 14 dating smply isn't accurate enough to make the determination:

Illustrative Mathematics

As such, the reported half life of 5730±40 years means that 40 years is the standard deviation for the process and so we expect that roughly 68 percent of the time half of the Carbon 14 in a given sample will decay within the time span of 5730±40 years. If greater likelihood is sought, we could look at the interval 5730±80 years, encompassing two standard deviations, and the likelihood that the half-life of a given sample of Carbon 14 will fall in this range is a little over 95 percent.
​

There may be other dating methods that are more accurate, but I'm not aware of them.

Perhaps, but is the chemistry of the ink the same for the entire note? Is the chemistry of today's ink the same as it was 40 years ago?

No, it is vastly different. I don't think the ink used in old Bic pens is in production anymore. They mostly use gel based inks now. They flow much easier and it's water soluable so it will wash out of your cloths.

doesn't matter, they can tell how long the ink was actually on the page.

 

[BULLDOG]

No CREDIBLE handwriting expert will guarantee that any handwriting sample is or isn't any individual's writing. They can only talk about whether any writing sample could possibly be from a particular person. They can't guarantee that it DIDN'T come from a particular person.
Is Your Handwriting Expert's Testimony Admissible?: Frost Brown Todd Attorneys

They don't have to prove anything, they can tell how old the ink is.

Correct, and even though one part of the writing might match the age, the rest might not, or none do, or all do. Submission to a forensic expert clears it all up.

Why do I get the feeling they don't want it cleared up?

I'm not sure they can determine the age of the ink, but they can determine the composition. If it doesn't match, then it's a forgery.

Then Allred may claim that he switched pens when writing the note in the yearbook. Perhaps one pen was running out of ink.

it's the age of the ink on the page.

You've watched too many Perry Mason reruns.

 

[bripat9643]

I'm not sure they can determine the age of the ink, but they can determine the composition. If it doesn't match, then it's a forgery.

Then Allred may claim that he switched pens when writing the note in the yearbook. Perhaps one pen was running out of ink.

As you can see here, Carbon 14 dating smply isn't accurate enough to make the determination:

Illustrative Mathematics

As such, the reported half life of 5730±40 years means that 40 years is the standard deviation for the process and so we expect that roughly 68 percent of the time half of the Carbon 14 in a given sample will decay within the time span of 5730±40 years. If greater likelihood is sought, we could look at the interval 5730±80 years, encompassing two standard deviations, and the likelihood that the half-life of a given sample of Carbon 14 will fall in this range is a little over 95 percent.
​

There may be other dating methods that are more accurate, but I'm not aware of them.

Perhaps, but is the chemistry of the ink the same for the entire note? Is the chemistry of today's ink the same as it was 40 years ago?

No, it is vastly different. I don't think the ink used in old Bic pens is in production anymore. They mostly use gel based inks now. They flow much easier and it's water soluable so it will wash out of your cloths.

doesn't matter, they can tell how long the ink was actually on the page.

Do you have a link to that?

 

[JoeMoma]

Correct, and even though one part of the writing might match the age, the rest might not, or none do, or all do. Submission to a forensic expert clears it all up.

Why do I get the feeling they don't want it cleared up?

I'm not sure they can determine the age of the ink, but they can determine the composition. If it doesn't match, then it's a forgery.

Then Allred may claim that he switched pens when writing the note in the yearbook. Perhaps one pen was running out of ink.

As you can see here, Carbon 14 dating smply isn't accurate enough to make the determination:

Illustrative Mathematics

As such, the reported half life of 5730±40 years means that 40 years is the standard deviation for the process and so we expect that roughly 68 percent of the time half of the Carbon 14 in a given sample will decay within the time span of 5730±40 years. If greater likelihood is sought, we could look at the interval 5730±80 years, encompassing two standard deviations, and the likelihood that the half-life of a given sample of Carbon 14 will fall in this range is a little over 95 percent.
​

There may be other dating methods that are more accurate, but I'm not aware of them.

Perhaps, but is the chemistry of the ink the same for the entire note? Is the chemistry of today's ink the same as it was 40 years ago?

has nothing to do with that. it's how long the ink was on the page. saturation levels.

I am obviously not a expert on the ink. However, I do expect that there are a verity of attributes that can be examined to verify the authenticity of the note in the year book.

 

[Pop23]

They don't have to prove anything, they can tell how old the ink is.

Correct, and even though one part of the writing might match the age, the rest might not, or none do, or all do. Submission to a forensic expert clears it all up.

Why do I get the feeling they don't want it cleared up?

I'm not sure they can determine the age of the ink, but they can determine the composition. If it doesn't match, then it's a forgery.

Then Allred may claim that he switched pens when writing the note in the yearbook. Perhaps one pen was running out of ink.

it's the age of the ink on the page.

You've watched too many Perry Mason reruns.

Or perhaps that is you. A bit of introspection would do you some good?

 

[ClosedCaption]

How many threads bringing up this same stupid crap are there going to be. Of course Aldred does not know 100% for sure Moore signed it, she was not there 40 years ago. But she does trust her client which is why she presented the yearbook. Out of all the attempts to discredit the yearbook, this is by far the most lame and stupid.

The Moore defenders are getting desperate.

You shouldve seen the thread where they said Moore was innocent because the girls mother didnt remember what room the phone was in at the time. LOL!

 

[bripat9643]

I'm not sure they can determine the age of the ink, but they can determine the composition. If it doesn't match, then it's a forgery.

Then Allred may claim that he switched pens when writing the note in the yearbook. Perhaps one pen was running out of ink.

As you can see here, Carbon 14 dating smply isn't accurate enough to make the determination:

Illustrative Mathematics

As such, the reported half life of 5730±40 years means that 40 years is the standard deviation for the process and so we expect that roughly 68 percent of the time half of the Carbon 14 in a given sample will decay within the time span of 5730±40 years. If greater likelihood is sought, we could look at the interval 5730±80 years, encompassing two standard deviations, and the likelihood that the half-life of a given sample of Carbon 14 will fall in this range is a little over 95 percent.
​

There may be other dating methods that are more accurate, but I'm not aware of them.

Perhaps, but is the chemistry of the ink the same for the entire note? Is the chemistry of today's ink the same as it was 40 years ago?

has nothing to do with that. it's how long the ink was on the page. saturation levels.

I am obviously not a expert on the ink. However, I do expect that there are a verity of attributes that can be examined to verify the authenticity of the note in the year book.

Certainly. They can do a microscopic examination. Perhaps one pen leaves a different patter of indentations than another. The texture of the ink may be different. However, I'm not aware of any means for determining the absolute age. Perhaps they can tell one is older than another, but that's all. They can probably determine when each ink type was produced, but that might be a wide range of years for each.

 

[bripat9643]

How many threads bringing up this same stupid crap are there going to be. Of course Aldred does not know 100% for sure Moore signed it, she was not there 40 years ago. But she does trust her client which is why she presented the yearbook. Out of all the attempts to discredit the yearbook, this is by far the most lame and stupid.

The Moore defenders are getting desperate.

You shouldve seen the thread where they said Moore was innocent because the girls mother didnt remember what room the phone was in at the time. LOL!

That isn't what the argument was, dumbass.

 

[S.J.]

If it's fake, the ink is probably a lot less than 5 years old. This is why Allred won't release it.
Forensic science of dating inks fine tuned

 

[blackhawk]

[QUOTE="Golfing Of course Aldred does not know 100% for sure Moore signed it, she was not there 40 years ago.

Exactly no one was there 40 years ago not Moore”s critics or his defenders neither side has provided proof of guilt or innocence the signature could do that. So in the prusit of the truth it seems having the signature checked would be a good thing if it’s his signature it would be evidence to show the allegations against him could be true if it’s not it could evidence to prove that they might be false. It would help us get to the truth assuming people really want to know the truth one way or the other.

 

[Montrovant]

My original statement still stands true today. Why did none of these women come forward during his forty years of service? If you argue because it is now national news, then A. it must never bothered the actual women who came forward since they didn't come forward in that forty years of service or B, it never happened. so if it is so egregious then coming forward should have been done earlier in his life. All waiting forty years does is create speculation. and no, i do not find any of these women credible. I'm still waiting on the famous 12 from Trump. were are they?

That's ridiculous. If you honestly believe that all the people who have hidden abuse they suffered or misconduct committed against them weren't bothered by it, you are a fool. People neither always act rationally, nor logically. Victims may feel shame, may think people will not believe them, may feel threatened by their attacker or abuser, etc. I have no idea if any of the accusations against Moore are true, and the time gap between the supposed events and the accusations means they are difficult, if not impossible, to prove. However, your binary choice clearly does not cover all the options.

so why do they come forward only when a person makes national news? dude, don't make me laugh. Again, these women did not come forward on their own, so don't tell me this was bothering them their life. The primary made national news, and none of them came out then. makey uppy shit is all we have here. created by a narrative of a reported.

bring enough forward the majority will lean to the women. not this time. it smells waaaaaay tooooooo much.

I already gave a few examples of reasons people don't come forward about misconduct or abuse. Perhaps these women felt emboldened by the post-Weinstein, #Metoo movement. Perhaps they are all lying. Perhaps after the first woman came forward, it spurred others to come forward as well. I don't know. Your argument that the women must not have cared because they didn't come forward earlier, however, is still ridiculous. Do you assume that anyone who hides a crime being committed against them does so only because they aren't bothered by it?

 

[JoeMoma]

Then Allred may claim that he switched pens when writing the note in the yearbook. Perhaps one pen was running out of ink.

As you can see here, Carbon 14 dating smply isn't accurate enough to make the determination:

Illustrative Mathematics

As such, the reported half life of 5730±40 years means that 40 years is the standard deviation for the process and so we expect that roughly 68 percent of the time half of the Carbon 14 in a given sample will decay within the time span of 5730±40 years. If greater likelihood is sought, we could look at the interval 5730±80 years, encompassing two standard deviations, and the likelihood that the half-life of a given sample of Carbon 14 will fall in this range is a little over 95 percent.
​

There may be other dating methods that are more accurate, but I'm not aware of them.

Perhaps, but is the chemistry of the ink the same for the entire note? Is the chemistry of today's ink the same as it was 40 years ago?

has nothing to do with that. it's how long the ink was on the page. saturation levels.

I am obviously not a expert on the ink. However, I do expect that there are a verity of attributes that can be examined to verify the authenticity of the note in the year book.

Certainly. They can do a microscopic examination. Perhaps one pen leaves a different patter of indentations than another. The texture of the ink may be different. However, I'm not aware of any means for determining the absolute age. Perhaps they can tell one is older than another, but that's all. They can probably determine when each ink type was produced, but that might be a wide range of years for each.

I agree, it would probably be difficult to determine the exact age of the ink. But it may not be difficult to determine if the ink could be nearly 40 years old or not.

 

[ClosedCaption]

How many threads bringing up this same stupid crap are there going to be. Of course Aldred does not know 100% for sure Moore signed it, she was not there 40 years ago. But she does trust her client which is why she presented the yearbook. Out of all the attempts to discredit the yearbook, this is by far the most lame and stupid.

The Moore defenders are getting desperate.

You shouldve seen the thread where they said Moore was innocent because the girls mother didnt remember what room the phone was in at the time. LOL!

That isn't what the argument was, dumbass.

Yeah, we know...

 

[jc456]

Then Allred may claim that he switched pens when writing the note in the yearbook. Perhaps one pen was running out of ink.

As you can see here, Carbon 14 dating smply isn't accurate enough to make the determination:

Illustrative Mathematics

As such, the reported half life of 5730±40 years means that 40 years is the standard deviation for the process and so we expect that roughly 68 percent of the time half of the Carbon 14 in a given sample will decay within the time span of 5730±40 years. If greater likelihood is sought, we could look at the interval 5730±80 years, encompassing two standard deviations, and the likelihood that the half-life of a given sample of Carbon 14 will fall in this range is a little over 95 percent.
​

There may be other dating methods that are more accurate, but I'm not aware of them.

Perhaps, but is the chemistry of the ink the same for the entire note? Is the chemistry of today's ink the same as it was 40 years ago?

No, it is vastly different. I don't think the ink used in old Bic pens is in production anymore. They mostly use gel based inks now. They flow much easier and it's water soluable so it will wash out of your cloths.

doesn't matter, they can tell how long the ink was actually on the page.

Do you have a link to that?

Forensic science of dating inks fine tuned

 

[Wry Catcher]

WATCH: Allred Admits She Does Not Know If Moore Signed Accuser's Yearbook

It's certainly dead now. Allred admits she doesn't know if Moore actually signed the yearbook.

No attorney would admit this if there was any chance it was true.

Certainly explains why she won't let it be analyzed

Sounds like she is trying to make an out for a defamation suit.

Certainly you would think the accuser would want the signature verified?

If she is sure it is real, no reason not to let an expert check it out.

There is enough evidence to put the matter before a civil grand jury. Moore v. all of his accusers, all under oath and in jeopardy of committing a felony.

What's a "civil grand jury?" The statute of limitations expired long ago, so there is no legal basis for taking it to a grand jury.

Moore was an elected official when he is alleged to have engaged in sexually inappropriate behavior, thus:

Civil Grand Jury: Every year, in each of California's 58 counties, a group of ordinary citizens takes an oath to serve as grand jurors. Its function is to investigate the operations of the various officers, departments and agencies of local government.

I don't know anything about Alabama Law, they do seem to be a couple of centuries behind the rest of us.

 

[jc456]

[QUOTE="Golfing Of course Aldred does not know 100% for sure Moore signed it, she was not there 40 years ago.

Exactly no one was there 40 years ago not Moore”s critics or his defenders neither side has provided proof of guilt or innocence the signature could do that. So in the prusit of the truth it seems having the signature checked would be a good thing if it’s his signature it would be evidence to show the allegations against him could be true if it’s not it could evidence to prove that they might be false. It would help us get to the truth assuming people really want to know the truth one way or the other.

the left wants this senate seat. gloves are off. anything goes. anything that interferes in that is not important to them. funny how certain people really don't want truths.

 

[jc456]

WATCH: Allred Admits She Does Not Know If Moore Signed Accuser's Yearbook

It's certainly dead now. Allred admits she doesn't know if Moore actually signed the yearbook.

No attorney would admit this if there was any chance it was true.

Certainly explains why she won't let it be analyzed

Sounds like she is trying to make an out for a defamation suit.

Certainly you would think the accuser would want the signature verified?

If she is sure it is real, no reason not to let an expert check it out.

There is enough evidence to put the matter before a civil grand jury. Moore v. all of his accusers, all under oath and in jeopardy of committing a felony.

What's a "civil grand jury?" The statute of limitations expired long ago, so there is no legal basis for taking it to a grand jury.

Moore was an elected official when he is alleged to have engaged in sexually inappropriate behavior, thus:

Civil Grand Jury. Print. Every year, in each of California's 58 counties, a group of ordinary citizens takes an oath to serve as grand jurors. Its function is to investigate the operations of the various officers, departments and agencies of local government.

bring it to court, I'd love to see these false claims out in the open. file the claim then.

 

[Pop23]

WATCH: Allred Admits She Does Not Know If Moore Signed Accuser's Yearbook

It's certainly dead now. Allred admits she doesn't know if Moore actually signed the yearbook.

No attorney would admit this if there was any chance it was true.

Certainly explains why she won't let it be analyzed

Sounds like she is trying to make an out for a defamation suit.

Certainly you would think the accuser would want the signature verified?

If she is sure it is real, no reason not to let an expert check it out.

There is enough evidence to put the matter before a civil grand jury. Moore v. all of his accusers, all under oath and in jeopardy of committing a felony.

What's a "civil grand jury?" The statute of limitations expired long ago, so there is no legal basis for taking it to a grand jury.

Moore was an elected official when he is alleged to have engaged in sexually inappropriate behavior, thus:

Civil Grand Jury. Print. Every year, in each of California's 58 counties, a group of ordinary citizens takes an oath to serve as grand jurors. Its function is to investigate the operations of the various officers, departments and agencies of local government.

Why waste taxpayer money over something that happened over 40 years ago, there were no eyewitnesses to testify and the only piece of evidence is being with held?

Much easier and less costly to simply produce the yearbook.

 

[S.J.]

As you can see here, Carbon 14 dating smply isn't accurate enough to make the determination:

Illustrative Mathematics

As such, the reported half life of 5730±40 years means that 40 years is the standard deviation for the process and so we expect that roughly 68 percent of the time half of the Carbon 14 in a given sample will decay within the time span of 5730±40 years. If greater likelihood is sought, we could look at the interval 5730±80 years, encompassing two standard deviations, and the likelihood that the half-life of a given sample of Carbon 14 will fall in this range is a little over 95 percent.
​

There may be other dating methods that are more accurate, but I'm not aware of them.

Perhaps, but is the chemistry of the ink the same for the entire note? Is the chemistry of today's ink the same as it was 40 years ago?

has nothing to do with that. it's how long the ink was on the page. saturation levels.

I am obviously not a expert on the ink. However, I do expect that there are a verity of attributes that can be examined to verify the authenticity of the note in the year book.

Certainly. They can do a microscopic examination. Perhaps one pen leaves a different patter of indentations than another. The texture of the ink may be different. However, I'm not aware of any means for determining the absolute age. Perhaps they can tell one is older than another, but that's all. They can probably determine when each ink type was produced, but that might be a wide range of years for each.

I agree, it would probably be difficult to determine the exact age of the ink. But it may not be difficult to determine if the ink could be nearly 40 years old or not.

They can tell if all the words were written at the same time by the same pen. OR if the ink is only a few weeks old.

 

[OKTexas]

WATCH: Allred Admits She Does Not Know If Moore Signed Accuser's Yearbook

It's certainly dead now. Allred admits she doesn't know if Moore actually signed the yearbook.

No attorney would admit this if there was any chance it was true.

Certainly explains why she won't let it be analyzed

Sounds like she is trying to make an out for a defamation suit.

You fucking moron
Why did you make me click a link that does NOTHING to prove your claim?


“But did she see him sign it?” Tur asked.

“You know, I don’t — I haven’t asked her if she saw him, but we did describe what happened that evening in question,” Allred responded. “What she alleges was that she put it on the counter; that I think she asked to sign — or that he did sign it. That’s all.”

Allred never asked if she saw Creepy Roy actually signing it

Allred said she never bothered to ask
Your claim.....she put the yearbook on the counter and someone swooped in and signed Roy's name while nobody was looking

Attorneys don't ask questions when they have doubts about their clients stories. That way they can't be charged with suborning perjury if their client lies. Alred seems to have it a bit backwards, it's on her to provide credible evidence to support a demand for a hearing, not as a condition for getting one. Her projection in the second clip was apparent. She's doing the same thing she's accusing Moore of.


.