IT’S A FAKE! Analyst Says Judge Roy Moore Signature Inside Allred's Accuser’s Yearbook Was FORGED

You need a court? To establish that what you say is the truth?

How many courts you think we have?
Can you pay attention? The poster I responded to was talking about how in court, Allred could be compelled to turning over evidence otherwise a judge could throw said evidence out.

There is no court case here. There is no judge or plaintiff. There are merely allegations and Allred is not compelled to turn over any evidence on behalf of her client.

She will when Moore sues her. The point is her evidence isn't up to a standard that will stand up in court. It doesn't matter if the issue actualy goes to court.
IF he sues.

If he doesn’t, the matter is no different than it is now — the yearbook is not being turned over for further examination and folks decide for themselves if they believe he signed it or not.

That's right, the matter is no different. A forged signature is a forged signature, whether he sues or not. Apparently you're too stupid to understand that not going to court doesn't mean that forgeries suddenly become authentic.

Well, at least BritPat isn't screaming at the top of his lungs that the yearbook signature is a fake, but rather now, he appears open to having it examined.

That's progress, I guess.

I never scream, moron. And I never said I was 100% certain that it's fake. Only turds like you do things like that.

You have been stating repeatedly that the signature in the yearbook is a fake. It's just recently that you have admitted that it may be real, but it has to be authenticated by an analyst.
I have never admitted that it may be real. The expert will demonstrate that it's a fake.
 
I said no such thing, ya freak of nature conservative.

giphy.gif

That's exactly what you said.
LOL

Try quoting me saying that.

Why do you keep bringing it up if it has no bearing on the authenticity of the signature?
Imbecile....

That’s not a quote.

Thanks for demonstrating once again how right I am when I point out how wide the canyon is between you and lucidity.

Where did I claim I was quoting you, douchbag?
You know you’re fucking nuts, right? :cuckoo:

When you said, ”that's exactly what you said.”
 
That's exactly what you said.
LOL

Try quoting me saying that.

Why do you keep bringing it up if it has no bearing on the authenticity of the signature?
Imbecile....

That’s not a quote.

Thanks for demonstrating once again how right I am when I point out how wide the canyon is between you and lucidity.

Where did I claim I was quoting you, douchbag?
You know you’re fucking nuts, right? :cuckoo:

When you said, ”that's exactly what you said.”
You're doing the old "harp on something trivial" two step again.
 
One thing that I do know is that during court, in order to submit any evidence that both parties has the right to examine the evidence, to authenticated. If the other party doesn't let them to examine the evidence, that the judge will hand it over to the other party to examine it while court is in process. But if they are unable to give the evidence to the other party, that the judge will have to throw that evidence out. But I never heard of any lawyer that will not hand over evidences to be examine by the other party. .The first thing when evidence is brought into court, that the judge asked the other party, "Do they approve of this as evidence". Allred knows how it goes. Unless she is suffering from Alzheimer and her license needs to be revoke .



There are no court proceedings taking place here. There is no judge involved. So in which court do you believe Allred should turn over evidence for examination?


You need a court? To establish that what you say is the truth?

How many courts you think we have?

Can you pay attention? The poster I responded to was talking about how in court, Allred could be compelled to turning over evidence otherwise a judge could throw said evidence out.

There is no court case here. There is no judge or plaintiff. There are merely allegations and Allred is not compelled to turn over any evidence on behalf of her client.


And she weakens her case by refusing to turn it over.
 
LOL

Try quoting me saying that.

Why do you keep bringing it up if it has no bearing on the authenticity of the signature?
Imbecile....

That’s not a quote.

Thanks for demonstrating once again how right I am when I point out how wide the canyon is between you and lucidity.

Where did I claim I was quoting you, douchbag?
You know you’re fucking nuts, right? :cuckoo:

When you said, ”that's exactly what you said.”
You're doing the old "harp on something trivial" two step again.
You’re an idiot. You said that’s exactly what I said; now you’re forced to admit it’s not as you can’t actually quote me saying what you moronically claimed I said.

1c1p6e.jpg
 
One thing that I do know is that during court, in order to submit any evidence that both parties has the right to examine the evidence, to authenticated. If the other party doesn't let them to examine the evidence, that the judge will hand it over to the other party to examine it while court is in process. But if they are unable to give the evidence to the other party, that the judge will have to throw that evidence out. But I never heard of any lawyer that will not hand over evidences to be examine by the other party. .The first thing when evidence is brought into court, that the judge asked the other party, "Do they approve of this as evidence". Allred knows how it goes. Unless she is suffering from Alzheimer and her license needs to be revoke .



There are no court proceedings taking place here. There is no judge involved. So in which court do you believe Allred should turn over evidence for examination?


You need a court? To establish that what you say is the truth?

How many courts you think we have?

Can you pay attention? The poster I responded to was talking about how in court, Allred could be compelled to turning over evidence otherwise a judge could throw said evidence out.

There is no court case here. There is no judge or plaintiff. There are merely allegations and Allred is not compelled to turn over any evidence on behalf of her client.


And she weakens her case by refusing to turn it over.

Maybe, maybe not. People who believe her, believe her regardless of the yearbook. People who don’t believe her, don’t believe her despite the yearbook.
 
One thing that I do know is that during court, in order to submit any evidence that both parties has the right to examine the evidence, to authenticated. If the other party doesn't let them to examine the evidence, that the judge will hand it over to the other party to examine it while court is in process. But if they are unable to give the evidence to the other party, that the judge will have to throw that evidence out. But I never heard of any lawyer that will not hand over evidences to be examine by the other party. .The first thing when evidence is brought into court, that the judge asked the other party, "Do they approve of this as evidence". Allred knows how it goes. Unless she is suffering from Alzheimer and her license needs to be revoke .



There are no court proceedings taking place here. There is no judge involved. So in which court do you believe Allred should turn over evidence for examination?

I know that. And it will never be one either. They are using this opportunity to spread gossip about Senator Moore.Hoping that it will deter some of his supporters from voting for him. Allred will never let the case hit the courtroom. She knows that the accuser will get sued for slander. And so they are just letting this story linger on until after the election. But if he wins, then they will put him under pressure, having him attend the ethic hearings. So that they will pressure him into quitting. But Senator Moore is not a quitter. He fights to the end..
 
Why do you keep bringing it up if it has no bearing on the authenticity of the signature?
Imbecile....

That’s not a quote.

Thanks for demonstrating once again how right I am when I point out how wide the canyon is between you and lucidity.

Where did I claim I was quoting you, douchbag?
You know you’re fucking nuts, right? :cuckoo:

When you said, ”that's exactly what you said.”
You're doing the old "harp on something trivial" two step again.
You’re an idiot. You said that’s exactly what I said; now you’re forced to admit it’s not as you can’t actually quote me saying what you moronically claimed I said.

1c1p6e.jpg

I'm not interested in doing the "harp on something trivial two step" with you, snowflake.
 
One thing that I do know is that during court, in order to submit any evidence that both parties has the right to examine the evidence, to authenticated. If the other party doesn't let them to examine the evidence, that the judge will hand it over to the other party to examine it while court is in process. But if they are unable to give the evidence to the other party, that the judge will have to throw that evidence out. But I never heard of any lawyer that will not hand over evidences to be examine by the other party. .The first thing when evidence is brought into court, that the judge asked the other party, "Do they approve of this as evidence". Allred knows how it goes. Unless she is suffering from Alzheimer and her license needs to be revoke .



There are no court proceedings taking place here. There is no judge involved. So in which court do you believe Allred should turn over evidence for examination?


You need a court? To establish that what you say is the truth?

How many courts you think we have?

Can you pay attention? The poster I responded to was talking about how in court, Allred could be compelled to turning over evidence otherwise a judge could throw said evidence out.

There is no court case here. There is no judge or plaintiff. There are merely allegations and Allred is not compelled to turn over any evidence on behalf of her client.


And she weakens her case by refusing to turn it over.

Maybe, maybe not. People who believe her, believe her regardless of the yearbook. People who don’t believe her, don’t believe her despite the yearbook.

Not entirely true. There are many that are not entirely sure considering the timing of the entire parade.

I, for one, would like to see an actual analysis of the book but then again I don't matter as I am not a resident of Alabama.
 

Forum List

Back
Top