Posted on 03/27/2014 10:50:26 AM PDT by Seizethecarp
“Hayes is certainly a qualifed document examiner, but how is he with digital documents?”
Why assume that Hayes’ report is outside his legally defensible (Daubert-qualified) expertise? Hayes may have done NO digital analysis. His report is sealed.
It's not an assumption. In his affidavit tendered in the recently decided Alabama case, Zullo excerpted this statement from Hayes:
“...based on my observations and findings, it is clear that Certificate of Live Birth I examined is not a scan of an original paper birth certificate, but a digitally manufactured documented created by utilizing material from various sources.”
So Hayes isn't purporting to limit his conclusions to the signatures not appearing to facsimiles of original autbentic signatures, but rather he goes WAY outside his expertise and claims the entire document is not at all a digital scan of a hardcopy document. So Zoltan is correct: Hayes would never withstand a Daubert challenge to his testifying about compression algorithms and the other technical details relevant to that type of conclusion.
Hayes may have done NO digital analysis.
As can be seen, that is not true. But were it true, given the .pdf is completely a digital document, it would make Hayes look even sillier.
His report is sealed.
And forever will remain so, apparently. Were this a bona fide criminal investigation, the "evidence" should be turned over or at least discussed with the prosecuter, not "sealed." I've seen nothing to suggest the Hayes report has been seen by any relevant person.
This is but one of many reasons to know that the Zullo-Gallups show is a carnival barkers' game of grifting, not a real investigation.
Why assume anything about the Hayes report as we not seen any of it other than Zullo’s statements about it.
When you say sealed what exactly do you mean? IIRC, it was never submitted to the Alabama Supreme Court in any form other than as a mention it Zullo’s affidavit.
Zullo’ hiding it is IMO not the same as it being sealed by a court.
“So Hayes isn’t purporting to limit his conclusions to the signatures not appearing to facsimiles of original autbentic signatures, but rather he goes WAY outside his expertise and claims the entire document is not at all a digital scan of a hardcopy document. So Zoltan is correct: Hayes would never withstand a Daubert challenge to his testifying about compression algorithms and the other technical details relevant to that type of conclusion.”
I disagree that Hayes has to go outside of his expertise to declare the WH BC to be a digital forgery. Hayes can reach this conclusion without ever opening the pdf file or claiming pdf expertise. Hayes can do this by examining the characteristics of the image that the pdf file is claimed to replicate. Was the document image typed consistently by a single typewriter?
If that image contains numerous demonstrable characteristics of having been cut and pasted together from multiple inconsistent typewriter character images in a manner almost certain to have been aided by computer graphics software, then Hayes could render a Daubert survivable opinion, I would think.
Oh Geez! Not again!
You are still an idiot.
His expertise is handwriting analysis. If he sticks to that issue then there is less of a problem. (Here I'll leave aside the question whether handwriting analysis can be done using a photocopied and scanned document, rather than the original hardcopy version).
But Hayes is not qualified to speak to the question whether an electronic document is a true scan of a hardcopy original or whether it's electronic from origin.
Hayes can reach this conclusion without ever opening the pdf file or claiming pdf expertise. Hayes can do this by examining the characteristics of the image that the pdf file is claimed to replicate.
Was the document image typed consistently by a single typewriter?
There's no rule or practice that says a form must be typed on a single typewriter. This post gives an example of another birth certificate from that time period that shows clear signs of having been started on one typewriter, with later elements completed on another.
If that image contains numerous demonstrable characteristics of having been cut and pasted together from multiple inconsistent typewriter character images in a manner almost certain to have been aided by computer graphics software, then Hayes could render a Daubert survivable opinion, I would think.
This is one beg-the-question assertion. Some assert (a) the "layers" and other supposed anomalies are signs of a cut-and-paste job. Others assert (b) that those characteristics are simply functions of algorithmic processes in the scanning software. Hayes cannot give an opinion that "this document is a function of (a), and not (b)," since Hayes is not qualified to opine on the electronic characteristics which give rise to either conclusion. He's not an electronic document guy; he's a hardcopy handwriting guy.
So have you seen Lord Monckton’s observation that the document is fake?
Apparently the characters don’t line up in rows and columns as they should if they were typed on an actual typewriter.
When you lay a grid over the entire document, you see horizontal and vertical shifts of a half space or so... something which is impossible for a typewriter to do.
What’s the Ha Ha That’s Very Logical explanation for such a thing?
http://static.infowars.com/2012/06/i/general/peers-briefing-2.pdf
He's Kenyan, He isn't nice, and his problems are with his eligibility.
But yeah, it's a scam, and apparently a successful one so far.
Will any of them have some of the typewritten characters shifted over half a space both vertically and horizontally?
“But Hayes is not qualified to speak to the question whether an electronic document is a true scan of a hardcopy original or whether it’s electronic from origin.”
Hayes claims to be a court qualified (can survive Daubert challenge) in both handwriting AND document examination and could easily have rendered a qualified expert opinion that the image of the WH BC (not the pdf file) was tampered with.
From Hayes’ “about” page:
http://reedwrite.com/?page_id=2
“Reed Hayes is a court qualified handwriting and document examiner whose business is located in Honolulu, Hawaii. He has nearly 40 years of handwriting related experience, and has worked as an international consultant and speaker.
“Reed is a graduate of the International Graphoanalysis Society and the Andrew Bradley Training Course in Forensic Document Examination (beginning and advanced). He holds certification from the National Association of Document Examiners and a certificate of training from the American Institute of Applied Science. Reed utilizes his handwriting skills in forensic document examination, personnel selection, jury screening and litigation support. He is the author and co-author of several handwriting related publications. Case involvement includes investigation of the purported Jack the Ripper Diary.
“Qualifications (for further details see Curriculum Vitae)
“Certified Document Examiner
Court Qualified Expert Witness
Board Certified Behavioral Profiler, ABFE
Certified Master Graphoanalyst
Paralegal Experience”
It would expose Hayes to liability for false advertising and be professionally suicidal for Hayes to hold himself out to lawyers (of all people) as a court qualified expert witness in BOTH handwriting and document examination.
No digital document examination credential is claimed by Hayes nor would one be needed by Hayes to declare the image produced by the pdf file to be forged, IMO.
One of the key challenges to any expert is whether their methods are recognized by other experts in the field. Any expert who has written a widely accepted course in his fields of both handwriting and document examination, as Hayes has, will be nearly bullet-proof in court as an expert, IMO.
See: Hayes’ current course on BOTH handwriting AND document examination:
http://reedwrite.com/?page_id=14
“Training Course in Questioned Handwriting & Document Examination
“The Training Course in Questioned Handwriting and Document Examination teaches the fundamentals of forensic handwriting and document work. It is designed to equip participants with the knowledge necessary to launch a career in questioned document examination.
“The training consists of 26 lessons which guide students from the basics of handwriting examination all the way through writing reports and appearing in court to render testimony. Each lesson is followed by an exam and numerous practical exercises are provided to demonstrate application of the principles involved. Actual case material is utilized and, in many instances, original documentation is provided for the student’s examination. Students are required to work several actual cases and pass an extensive final exam in order to qualify for the Certificate of Training.”
Right. Handwriting expert.
It would expose Hayes to liability for false advertising and be professionally suicidal for Hayes to hold himself out to lawyers (of all people) as a court qualified expert witness in BOTH handwriting and document examination.
But hardcopy documents and electronic documents entail two entirely different skill sets. You can't move from one area to the other on the notion that one is a "document" expert. It's like saying an electrical engineer can give opinion on a building collapse because he has expertise as an "engineer." No, an engineer who is expert in construction is still needed.
No digital document examination credential is claimed by Hayes nor would one be needed by Hayes to declare the image produced by the pdf file to be forged, IMO.
The latter clause is nonsense. Of course one needs certification as an expert in electronic processes and systems to be qualified to give opinion on a digital document. And I think Zullo knows this. It's one reason why he has kept Hayes's report under wraps. It has grifting value to him to point to it, but he knows the moment it's actually released and attempt made to use it in a legal proceeding it's going to get flushed immediately.
That it's not impossible at all for a typewriter to do that. The typewriter I had in the 60s--a cheap manual from Montgomery Ward--had a button on the end of the platen that would enable it to roll freely rather than in discrete chunks. This process also loosened the machine's grip on the paper, so the paper could easily shift if you weren't careful. But it was handy for quickly moving to a new line (like on a form) compared to repeated carriage returns.
I also don't find it plausible that a forger would have pasted in letters, scanned from who knows where, one or two at a time. It would have been a lot easier and less time-consuming to simply type all the words he needed on a separate piece of paper, scan them all in, and paste them in as complete words.
So for me, Lord Monckton's assertion fails on two points: it's based on a false assumption, and it posits an implausible scenario.
It’s no doubt that it is a forgery, and to you Obama supporters, it’s all academic because Arpaio/Zullo have to the proof that it is a foregery. Argue all you want OBots to no avail, but as soon as they hold the presser it’s over.
A lot of the above comments are in the realm of “how many aspiring lying paralegals dance on the head of a pin?” but maybe more like “dance on the point of a pin”.
They’re flapping pointlessly and they know it.
To mix metaphors...
Yeah, it’s what we expect from the OBama supporters and voters as we see up the thread. It’s all for their liberal/Marxist causes. Lying and hiding in perceived gray areas or any other way to get it done.
Does it also move the text around a half character, both vertically and horizontally when it scans it? Nothing else, just the text. You know, in a manner which it is impossible to do with a typewriter, but quite easy to do with a computer?
Just wondering. Can’t think of any application in which text needs to be moved over a half space, but perhaps it’s a feature on these new machines.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.