Yes. That is what my analysis indicates.
That no handwriting expert agrees with you?
No, I would NOT agree with that. As far as I know, no "handwriting expert" has ever publicly addressed the question of whether or not a child could have written the letters. Plus, a first grade school teacher could be considered to be a "handwriting expert" for how first graders write, and it was a first grade school teacher who first described the handwriting as using the techniques that first graders are taught.
Plus, it doesn't make any difference if someone disagrees with me. That doesn't automatically make me wrong, even though you may think so.
What probability do you attribute to your characterization that a child “almost certainly” wrote the anthrax letters?
It varies with how closely I'm working on that particular subject. I'd say it's between 90 and 95 percent certainty that a child wrote the letters. And the fact that you believe otherwise doesn't change that.
Then I’ll compare it to the probability Ken’s assessment of the probability that Jdey is the mailer and see who is more certain. (He is very confident).
Clearly you do not understand that comparing degrees of confidence to come to some kind of a conclusion about who is right is stupid beyond belief. At one time, nearly everyone in the world was 100% confident that the earth was flat. That didn't make it flat. And it didn't make them right.
To clarify Ken’s theory, he theorizes that Jdey mailed the anthrax letters after making the martyrdom video.
And I should care .... why?
To clarify your theory, did he write the letters before or after recess?
Sarcasm just shows you don't have a real argument. The same with the way you endlessly distort what I've said.
The FACTS show that the first letter was written some time before the envelopes for the first mailing were addressed. The FACTS show that the letter writer was taught how to properly draw the letter R between the writing of the first letter and the addressing of the envelopes.
But you can dream up some alternative explanation, and I it's unlikely that I can prove beyond any doubt that you are wrong. So, you are free to believe whatever you want to believe. I only say it is "most likely" that a child wrote the letters. That automatically says I cannot prove it beyond any doubt.
Ed says
“I’d say it’s between 90 and 95 percent certainty that a child wrote the letters.
“and he says the evidence is that the writer learned how to write “R” sometime between writing the first letter and addressing the envelopes.”
Let me posit a different theory. In his February 2002 “profile” that the one accomplice was a drunk because he read a botched Brian Ross news account suggesting that the FBI suspected someone fellow who was mowing his lawn on 9/18 and got in an argument with his neighbor after drinking. See his profile using google archives (he changed it when I told him it was outrageous to fit his “profile” around the person he suspected).
He separately learned of a scientist in the field who went to the same university (but actually doesn’t know the mower). Ed saw a google item showing a listing for the PTA. (He first thought the scientist lived in NJ and then realized he was in NYC). So Ed developed his First Grader theory and became wedded to it. He passes it off as having been discerned from the “FACTS” when it is no more fact-based than his suggestion of the drinking.
I recently canvassed 30 First Graders at a birthday party. I put up Ed’s theory and supporting evidence on a powerpoint presentation. They are all pretty sure Ed did it. Ed, in contrast, has never even addressed Ken Dillon’s Jdey Theory.