Forensic linguistics, weapon of the JIDI knight

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

Do you plan to read McMenamin in its entirety, and discuss its ramifications?


  • Total voters
    7
How passionate are you about securing justice for JB?


Very. However, I have two children, a dog, a cat and a rabbit, a full-time job, a husband currently working away from home in Europe, elderly parents whom I love and like to see occasionally, three sisters and their families whom I love and like to see occasionally, friends around the globe with whom I relish contact as well as commitments to write for various legal, sporting and food journals/magazines and a season ticket to my footy club's league games (minimum of 22 home games per season). So, as hard as I am happy to work on this case, there are odd aspects that I find more labour than fun since they are totally outwith my area of knowledge and comprehension doesn't come easily - tomes on forensic linguistics being among them.

So there. Hmph. Bloody students.... LOL (enjoyed that little rant).
 
Voynich, Beckner specifically mentioned advances in linguistics as being something they would look at and, given the calibre of the experts you mention, you'd have to assume that these guys - and others - were being consulted.

Surely if these experts can infer negatives, they can infer positives and come to more concrete predictions about who wrote the note.


Ultimately, given that most people will never write anything like a ransom note, it is incredibly difficult to infer from their other writings how they would write a ransom note. Add the backdrop of intelligent people disguising their language and possibly combining their efforts and you will see why this stuff will never be the slam dunk in this case. In cases where forensic linguistics are used, there is always a slew of additional investigation - eg. with suicide notes, the victim's known state of mind etc etc etc.

Similarly, there is no way on God's green earth of getting round the fact that the RN was written on Ramsey paper, with a Ramsey pen, in the Ramsey house and with knowledge of the Ramsey family. If RDI are being accused of ignoring things which point away from the Ramseys, then IDI almost wilfully ignores elementary stuff about the note - such as the actual physical evidence of the paper which was smooth and undamaged despite having been laid on steps and read by Patsy and John and having no fingerprints on it; such as references to Ramsey family trivia like John's bonus and the Paugh nicknames for John. In the final analysis, this stuff simply has to be weighed against anyone's opinion on authorship of the note.

Finally, I'd give you the example of world class psychiatrists being taken in by criminals who want to make insanity pleas. It happens. Being highly- skilled in your area is not necessarily protection against being conned by someone clever and trying to disguise his/her true self. I'll say it again, there are several players in this case - not just the Ramseys, I might add - who could pit their wits against anyone.

ETA: I have a lot of time for this stuff as an investigative tool. A professor predicted the location of the Yorkshire Ripper hoxer down to about two streets in Sunderland and was proven right (although DNA actually caught the guy). This is great stuff. Similarly, my dad was once in New York and went into a little bookshop. The owner said, after three minutes' chat with dad, 'Let's see, you're from North West Durham in England, aren't you?' This is just spooky.
 
You seem to be fixated on one single problem here and I don't think I have to remind you how complex this case is.You can choose to take the single piece of the puzzle you like so much and analyse it till you drop dead,won't solve this case.

And I can tell you the same thing....why don't you try reading some of the stuff that contradicts your opinions?Trust me,I've read what IDI experts (PAID experts) had to say.You on the other hand seem to IGNORE everything that doesn't sound like IDI and ridicule all experts who have a RDI point.

It takes two to tango.


Quote:
"As Professor Kam stated: 'It struck me very quickly that lay persons tend to see similarities and jump to a conclusion . . . whereas document examiners always started the analysis–when I asked why did you make the decision–by trying to show me sic what's different'"

1. Ignoring Differences. "Ignoring differences between characteristics is a frequent cause of error in handwriting identification. (SMF P 233; PSMF P 233.) (Carnes 2003:52-53).
2. Dismissing Differences as Disguised. "Similarly, dismissing differences as merely the product of intentional disguise is another common mistake made in the analysis. (SMF P 235; PSMF P 235.) (Carnes 2003:52-53).
3. Analysis Should be Blinded. "In addition, an examiner should not know the identity of the comparators and should consult more than one comparator to increase the reliability of his or her analysis. (SMF PP 256-57 & 268-72; PSMF PP 256-57 & 268-72.)" (Carnes 2003:52-53).


Quality of RN Not Ideal. "Both parties agree that the Ransom Note is not an ideal specimen for handwriting analysis, primarily due to the type of writing instrument, a broad fiber-tip pen, used to draft the note. This type of pen distorts and masks fine details to an extent not achievable by other types of pen, as for example a ball point pen. (SMF P 243; PSMF P 243.) In addition, the stroke direction used to construct certain letters and subtle handprinting features, such as hesitations and pen lifts, are difficult to ascertain because of the pen used in the Ransom Note.

Error Rates: Professionals vs. Non-Professionals. "A study by Dr. Moshe Kam indicates that professional document examiners had only a 6.5% error rate compared to an error rate of 38.3% for nonprofessionals.

# No BPD-Hired Experts Identified Patsy as RN Author. "During the investigation, the Boulder Police Department and Boulder County District Attorney's Office consulted at least six handwriting experts. (SMF P 191; PSMF P 191.) All of these experts consulted the original Ransom Note and original handwriting exemplars from Mrs. Ramsey. (SMF P 205; PSMF P 205.) Four of these experts were hired by the police and two were hired by defendants. (SMF P 191; PSMF P 191.) None of the six consulted experts identified Mrs. Ramsey as the author of the Ransom Note. (SMF P 195; PSMF P 195.) [Emphasis added.]



[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hGvQtumNAY"]YouTube - You Can't Handle The Truth[/ame]

I want answers.
No BPD handwriting expert identified PR nor JR as RN author, and forensic linguists rule them out.

Since the R's did NOT author the RN, who did?
 
The two look nothing alike, sorry. As HOTYH pointed out, several letters have a box like drawing, which is not how PR writes.

Oh, what I wouldn't GIVE to be able to scan those pages from Sex, Lies and Handwriting! "Nothing alike," you say?

You forget but writing w/a marker, any number of individuals can write in a manner vaguley resembling the question sample.

I doubt it.

John Mark Karr produces letters that more closely match the RN, take a look The Zodiac Killer's writings also resembles RN.

They don't look like it to me.

1. Ignoring Differences. "Ignoring differences between characteristics is a frequent cause of error in handwriting identification. (SMF P 233; PSMF P 233.) (Carnes 2003:52-53).
2. Dismissing Differences as Disguised. "Similarly, dismissing differences as merely the product of intentional disguise is another common mistake made in the analysis. (SMF P 235; PSMF P 235.) (Carnes 2003:52-53).
3. Analysis Should be Blinded. "In addition, an examiner should not know the identity of the comparators and should consult more than one comparator to increase the reliability of his or her analysis. (SMF PP 256-57 & 268-72; PSMF PP 256-57 & 268-72.)" (Carnes 2003:52-53).

Even if all that it true, (and since it comes from Carnes, I have my doubts), does it apply to this case?

Quality of RN Not Ideal. "Both parties agree that the Ransom Note is not an ideal specimen for handwriting analysis, primarily due to the type of writing instrument, a broad fiber-tip pen, used to draft the note. This type of pen distorts and masks fine details to an extent not achievable by other types of pen, as for example a ball point pen. (SMF P 243; PSMF P 243.) In addition, the stroke direction used to construct certain letters and subtle handprinting features, such as hesitations and pen lifts, are difficult to ascertain because of the pen used in the Ransom Note.

Error Rates: Professionals vs. Non-Professionals. "A study by Dr. Moshe Kam indicates that professional document examiners had only a 6.5% error rate compared to an error rate of 38.3% for nonprofessionals. Dr. Kam concluded by stating that professional document examiners possess writer identification skills absent in the general population. Another study by Professor Kam indicated that professionals concluded that forgeries were genuine 0.49% of the time whereas lay persons did so 6.47% of the time. Professionals mistakenly concluded that genuine signatories were forgeries 7.05% of the time; lay persons did so 26.1% of the time. Another study by Jodi Sita, Brian Found and others found that forensic document examiners made errors in 3.4% of their opinions, while 19.1% of the control group gave erroneous opinions.

And just what does all of this mean? Are you trying to say that we, as laypeople, are not fit to make a judgement here on our own? because if you are, I imagine most of us would agree. That's why we don't.

# No BPD-Hired Experts Identified Patsy as RN Author. "During the investigation, the Boulder Police Department and Boulder County District Attorney's Office consulted at least six handwriting experts. (SMF P 191; PSMF P 191.) All of these experts consulted the original Ransom Note and original handwriting exemplars from Mrs. Ramsey. (SMF P 205; PSMF P 205.) Four of these experts were hired by the police and two were hired by defendants. (SMF P 191; PSMF P 191.) None of the six consulted experts identified Mrs. Ramsey as the author of the Ransom Note. (SMF P 195; PSMF P 195.) [Emphasis added.]

Again, there are several problems with that.

1) Carnes was only using preliminary handwriting analysis reports she got from LS, who had access to them early on. Some of the later findings are a bit more interesting. More on that shortly.

2) None of them ruled her out, either. Not even the two that were HIRED to do so. Don't think the cops didn't notice that. (Actually, I take that back. Far as I know, they were hired to rule JR out alone.)

3) Worse, none of them knew at the time that PR was ambidextrous. That information was not known until a while afterwards.

No BPD identified PR nor JR as RN author,

Oh, no?

As Chet Ubowski, the examiner from the Colorado Bureau of Investigation and the man who did the most extensive analysis said, they would need "the full range of her handwriting." In Perfect Murder, Perfect Town, Ubowski told his boss, Peter Mang, that he believed Patsy Ramsey wrote it. In 2002, Ubowski was reported by FOX News to say that the bleeding ink from the felt-tip pen and the disguised letters were all that kept him from saying she wrote it. As Steve Thomas said, "out of 74 people whose writing was examined, Patsy was the only person who set off alarm bells."

Moreover, I've talked to several handwriting experts (don't ask who; I promised them I'd keep their names out of it). And they all told me the same thing: most times, it's not a question of saying that "this person is definitely the writer." It's a question of "we've eliminated everybody else."

Let's take another tack here:

--Tom Miller said she wrote it, and their private investigators tried to get him sent to prison so he couldn't testify to that effect. I notice IDIs aren't too willing to take that issue on. I guess they understand the implications.

--Did you listen to the radio broadcast I gave you? They tried to scare that analyst into silence. You have to wonder why they felt the need to do all of this, don't you?

--Gideon Epstein said she wrote it. And as far as I can tell, he's considered the guy when it comes to document examinations.

I could do this all day.

I want answers.

Glad to be of service!

Since the R's did NOT author the RN

You were only off by one word. And in all seriousness, I don't like it one bit myself.
 
Quote:
"As Professor Kam stated: 'It struck me very quickly that lay persons tend to see similarities and jump to a conclusion . . . whereas document examiners always started the analysis–when I asked why did you make the decision–by trying to show me sic what's different'"

1. Ignoring Differences. "Ignoring differences between characteristics is a frequent cause of error in handwriting identification. (SMF P 233; PSMF P 233.) (Carnes 2003:52-53).
2. Dismissing Differences as Disguised. "Similarly, dismissing differences as merely the product of intentional disguise is another common mistake made in the analysis. (SMF P 235; PSMF P 235.) (Carnes 2003:52-53).
3. Analysis Should be Blinded. "In addition, an examiner should not know the identity of the comparators and should consult more than one comparator to increase the reliability of his or her analysis. (SMF PP 256-57 & 268-72; PSMF PP 256-57 & 268-72.)" (Carnes 2003:52-53).


Quality of RN Not Ideal. "Both parties agree that the Ransom Note is not an ideal specimen for handwriting analysis, primarily due to the type of writing instrument, a broad fiber-tip pen, used to draft the note. This type of pen distorts and masks fine details to an extent not achievable by other types of pen, as for example a ball point pen. (SMF P 243; PSMF P 243.) In addition, the stroke direction used to construct certain letters and subtle handprinting features, such as hesitations and pen lifts, are difficult to ascertain because of the pen used in the Ransom Note.

Error Rates: Professionals vs. Non-Professionals. "A study by Dr. Moshe Kam indicates that professional document examiners had only a 6.5% error rate compared to an error rate of 38.3% for nonprofessionals.

# No BPD-Hired Experts Identified Patsy as RN Author. "During the investigation, the Boulder Police Department and Boulder County District Attorney's Office consulted at least six handwriting experts. (SMF P 191; PSMF P 191.) All of these experts consulted the original Ransom Note and original handwriting exemplars from Mrs. Ramsey. (SMF P 205; PSMF P 205.) Four of these experts were hired by the police and two were hired by defendants. (SMF P 191; PSMF P 191.) None of the six consulted experts identified Mrs. Ramsey as the author of the Ransom Note. (SMF P 195; PSMF P 195.) [Emphasis added.]



YouTube - You Can't Handle The Truth

I want answers.
No BPD handwriting expert identified PR nor JR as RN author, and forensic linguists rule them out.

Since the R's did NOT author the RN, who did?


“I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it.”
Voltaire
 
voynich, when C Wong referred to 243? 'significant' similarities, was that not a statistical comparison with consideration of the differences?

:clap:

(Nice to know that someone appreciates my efforts.)
 
Voynich, Beckner specifically mentioned advances in linguistics as being something they would look at and, given the calibre of the experts you mention, you'd have to assume that these guys - and others - were being consulted.

Surely if these experts can infer negatives, they can infer positives and come to more concrete predictions about who wrote the note.

Well done.

Similarly, there is no way on God's green earth of getting round the fact that the RN was written on Ramsey paper, with a Ramsey pen, in the Ramsey house and with knowledge of the Ramsey family. If RDI are being accused of ignoring things which point away from the Ramseys, then IDI almost wilfully ignores elementary stuff about the note - such as the actual physical evidence of the paper which was smooth and undamaged despite having been laid on steps and read by Patsy and John and having no fingerprints on it; such as references to Ramsey family trivia like John's bonus and the Paugh nicknames for John. In the final analysis, this stuff simply has to be weighed against anyone's opinion on authorship of the note.

Just to add all the interviews containing "ransomspeak." Can't forget that.
 
Very. However, I have two children, a dog, a cat and a rabbit, a full-time job, a husband currently working away from home in Europe, elderly parents whom I love and like to see occasionally, three sisters and their families whom I love and like to see occasionally, friends around the globe with whom I relish contact as well as commitments to write for various legal, sporting and food journals/magazines and a season ticket to my footy club's league games (minimum of 22 home games per season). So, as hard as I am happy to work on this case, there are odd aspects that I find more labour than fun since they are totally outwith my area of knowledge and comprehension doesn't come easily - tomes on forensic linguistics being among them.

So there. Hmph. Bloody students.... LOL (enjoyed that little rant).

Hi Sophie.

That's cool, I know how difficult it can be to squeeze in WS acedemic persuits between real life. I had to read McM, in small portions; late nights, when all were asleep.

McM was a slow but ok read, the first portion of his book is geared towards the layman.

I was hoping we'd all cordially meet at the 'McM tuturial' over coffee and pastries, but I get the feelin', they'll be nothing but dried out spotted dick, by the time we arrive at that discussion.
 
Well done.



Just to add all the interviews containing "ransomspeak." Can't forget that.


True!

Plus the fact that they didn't apparently even give the threats in the letter five minutes' consideration (by their own timeline) or mention the threats in the 911 call, rather imploring LE to please hurry...

I can see someone deciding to get in touch with LE in the circs but you'd think it would warrant a short debate in view of the extreme threats and the fact that the threat is obviously serious given that your daughter is in fact missing.
 
True!

Plus the fact that they didn't apparently even give the threats in the letter five minutes' consideration (by their own timeline) or mention the threats in the 911 call, rather imploring LE to please hurry...

I can see someone deciding to get in touch with LE in the circs but you'd think it would warrant a short debate in view of the extreme threats and the fact that the threat is obviously serious given that your daughter is in fact missing.

It adds up.
 
Just to add all the interviews containing "ransomspeak." Can't forget that. - SD

yes ... I've always wondered about the ransom speak.

Why would anyone taunt a killer with triplespeak?
assuming the 'killer' was watching LKL, but why taunt the killer? when your family would be susceptible?

And also I wonder why LHP includes the term 'Listen', in her one chapter efforts of a book?

is it, "Listen", part of PR's iodiolect?
 
VOYNICH'S post:
Today, 06:56 PM
voynich
Registered User Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: college campus
Posts: 828

The Ramseys didn't write the RN note. We all know what that means. Justice for JB is Justice in IDI (JIDI)
IMHO sitting around discussing JR's sex games with JB or PR's PMS rage attack or DNA secondary transfer are all just mental masturbation while the real killer remains at large.
Forensic Linguistics: Recognizing Individual Written and Spoken Word Usages and Characteristics
Angela Lack, Law and Science Fellow
Introduction
Forensic linguists provides two functions: determining what text means and who wrote it.1 Experts in this field assist with investigations and have worked with attorneys in this capacity for over 20 years.2 The 1993 Daubert decision, which holds that trial judges must conduct a two-pronged test of admissibility by evaluating proffered expert witnesses to determine whether their testimony is both “relevant” and “reliable”, increased the need for testimony from forensic linguistic experts and made it imperative to prove scientific reliability of forensic linguistic findings.3 These experts are now being called to the witness stand to analyze spoken words and handwritten or computer-generated documents.
Forensic Linguistics
Forensic linguists focus on “the theoretical position that every native speaker has their own distinct and individual version of the language they speak and write, their own idiolect, and the assumption that this idiolect will manifest itself through distinctive and idiosyncratic choices in texts.”4 To determine individualized meanings or authenticity, linguists study syntax, or the way in which words are combined to make phrases.5 These syntactical structures are measured by complexity, categorized by the terms of the complexity, and then run through statistical procedures.6 Linguists also study patterns of speech sounds, how words are combined, how sentences are formed, the meaning or conveyed meaning of words, and the changing nature and variability of language.7 In addition to these tools, linguists sometimes rely on common sense and awareness to determine if someone else is imitating the writing of another.8
Forensic linguistic experts are skilled in numerous areas to help solve crimes or to help prove the guilt or innocence of the accused. These areas include (1) voice identification, such as determining whether the voice on a threatening tape was the defendant; (2) author identification, which compares the document in question to that of a known writing sample; (3) discourse analysis, which analyzes the structure of written or spoken words, to determine what topics are discussed and if the defendant agreed to partake in criminal endeavors; (4) linguistic proficiency, to determine if a suspect understood the Miranda warning or police caution; and (5) dialectology, focusing on the dialect of the defendant and comparing it to the dialect of the speaker on the incriminating tape recording.10 Dialectology differs from voice identification because voice identification analyzes the acoustic qualities of the voice.
To comply with Daubert, statistical information has become more complex, producing mathematical proof of the accuracy of the expert’s identification of the document’s author.11 However, some courts have limited the testimony of forensic linguistic experts to the comparison of the ‘markers’ between the compared writings; sometimes courts exclude the testimony of the expert with regard to extrinsic factors and their opinion of the authorship of the ‘questioned’ writing.12 When allowed to testify, most forensic linguistic experts testify for the defense because there is less burden of proof.13 In most cases, the expert can say with confidence that the person on the tape is not the voice of a certain person or that it is not likely that a certain person was the author of a particular written piece.14 Therefore, it is easier to eliminate a person than to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the person is the speaker or author.15
The Written Word
While each person has a unique style of handwriting, forensic linguistics focuses on the way in which a person uses a word or phrase rather than the unique characteristics of their handwriting. Determining whether a writing is an imitation can be as simple as knowing that a elementary school dropout will not use sophisticated words in a confession or as complicated as determining that a certain word or phrases is specific to a dialect.16 One issue with author identification of documents is the length of the document. In most cases, the document (such as a ransom note or threatening letter) is too short to make reliable identifications.17 Forensic linguistic experts typically compare the writings of a known person to those of an unknown author. For example, Brian David Hummert was convicted of killing his wife after he claimed that a stalker sent notes to his wife.18 In addition to the notes from the stalker, the police received letters from a “serial killer” claiming to have killed Hummert’s wife.19 Professor Robert Leonard from Hofstra University compared the letters to Hummert’s writing and discovered that the stalker, serial killer, and Hummert had a pattern of never using contracting positive verbs, such as using “I am” instead of “I’m”.20
In one case, the murder suspect sent text messages from the victim’s cellular telephone to her friends and her father days after the murder to make them believe she was still alive.21 The police gave Professor Malcolm Coulthard the three July text messages sent to the victim’s friends and father, 100 samples of the July text messages, and 11 samples of text messages sent by the victim.22 Text messaging is rather short and most people make up their own style of sending text messages; therefore, making them more distinctive than other writings.23 While the texts sent by the victim and the July texts looked similar, upon closer review, Coulthard noticed differences.24 For example, both the victim and the 3 July texts used “2” instead of “to”; however, the victim did not leave a space between the “2” and the next word, while the 3 texts sent in July had a space before the next word.25 Other differences were more apparent, such as the victim’s use of “Im” and “Im not” rather than “I am” and “aint.”26 Other words used by the victim, such as “my”, “cu”, and “fone”, appeared as “me”, “cya”, and “phone” in the July texts, leading Coulthard to determine it was highly unlikely the victim sent the text messages.27
Another example of written analysis is focusing on misspelled words. In order to help determine the guilt of the murder suspect, Coulthard analyzed text messages, two suicide notes, and writing samples the suspect gave to the detectives.28 Similarities between the 3 July texts and the writing samples of the suspect were indicated through the misspelling of the word “off”, spelled “of” and the word “might”, spelled “mite”.29 An expert can determine when a highly educated person attempts to portray that he was poorly educated by misspelling simple words, such as cops (spelled “kops” in the letter), but correctly spelled complex words.30
Forensic linguistic experts use other methods of comparison such as transposition of verbs, which helped identify the Unabomber, or the similar and unusual spacing between words, which helped lead to the conviction of a surgeon who murdered his wife and then tried to blame someone else by writing an anonymous letter.31 Another mistake or error that linguists look for in documents is ‘competence errors’, which are differences from standard rules that the writer uses consistently.32 The linguist focuses on the grammatical or orthographic rule-breaking in short documents and only examines characteristic vocabulary in longer documents because more textual context is needed to determine vocabulary preferences.33
Forensic linguistic experts also provide testimony in non-criminal cases. A forensic linguist can testify in trademark disputes to help determine if the similarity or difference between two trademarks would be significant enough to confuse people.34 The forensic linguist focuses on how the words sound, the smallest component of the language.35 In addition to how a word sounds, a forensic linguist would also look at the meaning of the word to determine similarity.36
The Spoken Word
Analysis of the spoken word generally relates to tape recorded conversations or messages, such as undercover police recordings, voicemail messages, or answering machine messages.37 Each speaker builds his/her own active vocabulary, which differs from others, in terms of actual words or in preference of word choices.38 Forensic linguistic experts, such as Dr. Robert Shuy, specialize in ‘discourse analysis,’ which determines what a person is thinking based upon subjects raised in the conversation.39 Once the topics of the conversation are determined, the expert then looks at which person initiated the conversation in regard to the topic, who responded, and how the person responded and then subjects the information to linguistic analysis.40 For example, analysis of covert recordings may show the suspect's use of "I" rather than "we" indicating noncomplicity in a conspiracy, or the suspect’s use of the word "yeah" or "uh-huh", may not show that the suspect necessarily agrees, but may simply provide a feedback marker indicating he has understood the utterance.41 However, conflicting court decisions exist as to whether discourse analysts can testify as experts; however, even when they are not allowed to testify, attorneys may use them to help prepare the case.42 While this method will not give an exact indication of what the speaker’s intentions truly are, it does provide useful hints to what is on their mind and what is not on their mind.43
Another method of analyzing speech includes breaking down the speech into its smallest unit and counting syllables to make clear a disputed transcript.44 For example, by counting syllables in the sentence “I’ll take the bribe, wouldn’t you?” or I wouldn’t take a bribe, would you?”45, the linguist could determine what the suspect in a bribery case said on a recording.46
Computer analysis
Advances in technology and science now allow experts to compare documents and voice recordings quicker and more easily. Computer use, such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Communication Threat Assessment Database (CTAD), makes it possible to break communication into 23 different categories.47 These developments promise continued expansion of forensic linguistics.
Conclusions
Forensic linguistic experts use the written and spoken word to determine many characteristics and patterns in anonymous writings and covert recordings. These traits, utterances, unique abbreviations, and grammatical style or formatting are used to help link to a known individual, thereby leading to greater certainty in evidentiary analysis.
__________________
Gerald R McMenamin - Forensic Linguistics Advances In Forensic Stylistics can be downloaded by clicking here
http://www.filestube.com/8ab5481c3a4...9/details.html
Justice is in IDI or JIDI (pronounced Jedi)
Remember, the FORENSICS will be with you, always.
 
voynich,

I found your posting most thought provoking, in relation to the possible determination that the rn was written by an ESL .

Whether or not you read McM's chapter on the JBR note, one can see the basic catagories of format and syntax, misspellings; the various components of the rn can be catagorized. And if the rn was created by process of catagorization, then McM forensic stylistics, and analysis would only serve to outline that truth?

The issue here, with McM is that it does not exactly counterbalance or dispute the observations made in other linguistics based approaches.

The true start would be to disect the rn in to observable patterns, and grammatical segments; the obervational base, rooted in pure applied linguistic that even McM uses to set his criteria.

Considering just these fundamnetal patterns; What would PR have had to consider?

dialect
linguistic proficiency

misspellings
grammatical or orthographic rule-breaking in short documents
pattern of never using contracting positive verbs, such as using
“I am” instead of “I’m”.
20
Another mistake or error that linguists look for in documents is
‘competence errors’, which
are differences from standard rules that the writer uses consistently
transposition of verbs

An expert can determine when a highly educated person attempts
to portray that he was poorly educated by misspelling simple words,
such as cops (spelled “kops” in the letter), but correctly spelled
complex words.30


Re" The Spoken Word
Another method of
analyzing speech includes breaking down the speech
into its smallest unit
and counting syllables to make clear a disputed transcript.
 
Hi voynich.

McM does outline the patterns of bilingualism in his review of cases:
I compiled a few.

as a comparative,
Selected examples of style-markers in bilingual
(Spanish and English) writings. McM chap 12



**Not observed in JBR rn:
#17. -GTH for -GHT in words ending in -GHT
#35. Subject pronoun for possessive: HE for HIS
NEGATIONS CORRECT #36. NO for NOT
spelling sound-alike letters and homonyms.
incorrect double-letter spellings




** style-markers in bilingual, observed in JBR rn:

28 Two words run together as one
29 One word separated into parts

[31 Substitution of “IS” for “IF”]
JBR rn, substitute "that" for "which"
improper accord: 'a' for 'an'
inclusion of 'orthographic accents'
inclusion of ! for punctuation of a command
incorrect capitalization

Also Visible in JBR rn:
"word endings, verb forms,
and more complex syntactic structures absent in
his use of the language make his speech at times
ungrammatical and unintelligible."-McM


As far as 'class features',
quite a few words from the SAT spelling List?
so is the writer 'undereducated'?
No. IMO.
 
The Ramseys didn't write the RN note. We all know what that means.

I would say that it means you have drawn the wrong conclusion.

Gideon Epstein - Forensic Document Examiner:

“Based on the presently available documents, there are strong indications that Patsy Ramsey is the author of the ransom note.”

David S. Liebman - Certified Document Examiner:

“There are far too many similarities and consistencies revealed in the handwriting of Patsy Ramsey and
the ransom note for it to be coincidence. In light of the number of comparisons and similarities between Patsy Ramsey and the ransom note writer (51), the chances of a third party also sharing the same characteristics is astronomical. In my professional opinion Patsy Ramsey is the ransom note writer.”

Tom Miller - Attorney, Court Qualified Expert Witness in Questioned Documents:

“Based upon available exemplars compared to the purported "ransom" note in the JonBenét Ramsey murder, the handwriting is probably that of Patsy Ramsey.”

Chet Ubowski - Colorado Bureau of Investigation Handwriting Expert:

Chet Ubowski wrote, "This handwriting showed indications that the writer was Patsy Ramsey.'' He is said to have found 24 of 26 letters in the ransom note which matched exemplars from Patsy Ramsey.

Cina L. Wong - Certified Document Examiner:

“I have made careful examination and comparison of the ‘ransom’ note and the exemplars of Patsy Ramsey. I have reached the conclusion that the handwritings and ‘ransom’ note were very probably written by the same person…it is my professional opinion that Patsy Ramsey very likely wrote the ‘ransom’ note.”

Larry F. Ziegler - Forensic Document Examiner:

“It was determined and is still determined by myself that Patsy Ramsey is the writer of the ransom note.”


[ame="http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?t=6404"]Analysis of the Linguistics and Handwriting in the Ramsey Ransom Note - Forums For Justice[/ame]
(Page 3)
 
if we're going to cut and paste wiki

Chester A. Ubowski

* Ubowski Findings

1. "Indications" Patsy May Have Written RN. Some of Ubowski's preliminary findings were revealed in the affidavit used as justification for the Charlevoix search warrant. According to affiant Jane Harmer, Ubowski provided Detective Linda Arndt the following information: "The analysis of the handwriting samples obtained from Patsy Ramsey showed "indications" which suggest that Patsy Ramsey may have written the reported ransom note."
2. Evidence Falls Short. Later in the affidavit, Harmer further states "He determined that there is evidence which indicates the ransom note may have been written by Patricia Ramsey but "the evidence falls short of that necessary to support a definite conclusion."
3. Full Range of Handwriting Sought. Affiant Harmer also stated: "It would be helpful to obtain additional historical samples of Patsy Ramsey’s writings so that a more conclusive determination could be made on the analysis of her handwriting compared to the handwriting contained in the reported ransom note. CBI Agent Ubowski informed Detective Arndt that samples of Patsy’s handwriting which had been completed prior to December 26, 1996 might not include or contain any elements of distortion, attempts to disguise handwriting, or nervousness. Agent Ubowski further stated that these handwriting samples would help to “display a full range of the variation of the writer.” CBI Agent Ubowski had been present when a third handwriting sample had been obtained from Patsy Ramsey on February 28, 1997. The handwriting was completed in a standard block style. A REDACTION APPEARING TO BE A SINGLE SENTENCE APPEARS HERE. Agent Ubowski stated that the handwriting samples obtained from Patsy do not suggest the full range of her handwriting.” Harmer noted that "Detective Arndt said that approximately 16 pages of handwriting have been provided by Patsy Ramsey to the Boulder Police Department to date."
4. Carnes Opinion. "Chet Ubowski of the Colorado Bureau of Investigation concluded that the evidence fell short of that needed to support a conclusion that Mrs. Ramsey wrote the note. (SMF P 197; PSMF P 197.)" (Carnes 2003:26, note 14).
5. 24 of 26 Letters Matched? According to Internet poster Cherokee, Ubowski "is said to have found 24 of 26 letters in the ransom note which matched exemplars from Patsy Ramsey" (Thomas 2000: page number not provided).
6. Patsy Sole Possible Author of 100 Examined? Likewise, according to Internet poster The Punisher, Carol McKinley stated in the Fox News story that Ramseys sued Fox over: "Many forensic document examiners have given their opinions as to who wrote the note. But the only one to testify before a grand jury in the case was Chet Ubowski, forensic document examiner for the Colorado Bureau of Investigation. Out of 100 people he analyzed for the Boulder Police Department, he found ONLY ONE person whom he thought may have authored the document, Patsy Ramsey. Investigative sources tell Fox News that the disguised letters and bleeding ink from the felt tipped pen used to write the note kept him from 100 percent ID of Mrs. Ramsey." It is not clear who the source for this report was, but it would appear to contradict the sworn testimony of Alex Hunter. In his deposition for the Wolf v. Ramsey libel case, Alex Hunter acknowledged that these experts had concluded chances of Patsy writing the note were "very low" and also asserted there were other individuals who were under suspicion whose handwriting was analyzed that were not eliminated as the author of the note.
7. Schiller's Account. But Schiller claimed "The police never bothered to ask Ubowski if he had put his entire analysis of the ransom note into his report. Either way, Ubowski was prepared to say, 'Patsy wrote the note.' The CBI saw this as another missed opportunity" (Schiller 1999a:536-537; quotation and source provided by Internet poster The Punisher). Schiller further notes: "experts from the CBI presented their evaluations into evidence, including Chet Ubowski. He also told Pete Mang, his boss at the CBI, that his gut told him it was her handwriting" (Schiller 1999a:740; quotation and source provided by Internet poster The Punisher).



* Qualifications. Ubowski is a member of the American Board of Forensic Document Examiners, the only professional certifying organization in the profession. He served as the CBI laboratory agent in charge of the JBR investigation.


Leonard Speckin

* Speckin Findings.

1. Unable to Eliminate. "Leonard Speckin, a private forensic document examiner, concluded that differences between the writing of Mrs. Ramsey's handwriting and the author of the Ransom Note prevented him from identifying Mrs. Ramsey as the author of the Ransom Note, but he was unable to eliminate her. (SMF P 198; PSMF P 198.)" (Carnes 2003:26, note 14). Speckin's report stated: "When I compare the handwriting habits of Patsy Ramsey with those in the questioned ransom note, there exists agreement to the extent that some of her individual letter formations and letter combinations do appear in the ransom note." (Epstein Deposition (p. 138:9-14) "When this agreement is weighed against the number, type and consistency of the differences present, I am unable to identify Patsy Ramsey as the author of the questioned ransom note with any degree of certainty. I am, however, unable to eliminate her as the author." (Epstein Deposition (p. 138:25 through p. 139:1-6).
2. Infinitesimal Chance of Intruder Match to Patsy. However, Speckin reportedly was ready to testify that "there was only an infinitesimal chance that some random intruder would have handwriting characteristics so remarkably similar to those of a parent sleeping upstairs." (Thomas 2000:page number not provided; quote and source provided by Internet poster The Punisher).



* Speckin Qualifications.

1. "Leonard Speckin is a forensic document analyst, retired from the Michigan State Police. He has given expert witness testimony in this area over 500 times, for many courts, state committee hearings, and federal grand juries. He is certified by the American Board of Forensic Document Examiners" (pdf).
2. Gideon Epstein Assessment. In his deposition in the Wolf v. Ramsey case, Epstein, a handwriting expert testifying against the Ramseys said: "Speckin I don't consider a document examiner. Speckin has a document laboratory. He's basically a chemist, he does ink and paper work. He's a young fellow with very little experience. If he has done handwriting, it's been very little handwriting" (p. 158:2-7). It would appear that Epstein mistakenly was alluding to Leonard Speckin's son, Erich Speckin, who did a "two-year residency with Leonard A. Speckin his father in the examination of questioned documents" and indeed only has a degree in chemistry (See Chapter 29 here). Erich Speckin runs a forensic laboratory in Okemos, MI Wall Street Journal.


Edwin F. Alford, Jr.

* Alford Findings

1. Evidence Fell Short. "Edwin Alford, a private forensic document examiner, states the evidence fell short of that needed to support a conclusion that Mrs. Ramsey wrote the note. (SMF P 197; PSMF P 197.)" (Carnes 2003:26, note 14).
2. Evidence Failed to Provide Basis. According to Internet poster Jameson (see Nov. 02 2002,6:18 pm), Alford asserted: "Examination of the questioned handwriting and comparison with the handwriting specimens submitted has failed to provide a basis for identifying Patricia Ramsey as the writer of the letter."



* Alford Qualifications. Alford is a diplomate of the American Board of Forensic Document Examiners (ZoomInfo.com).




Consultants Hired by Ramseys (2 experts)
Lloyd Cunningham

* Cunningham Findings.

1. No Significant Similar Characteristics. "Lloyd Cunningham, a private forensic document examiner hired by defendants, concluded that there were no significant similar individual characteristics shared by the handwriting of Mrs. Ramsey and the author of the Ransom Note, but there were many significant differences between the handwritings. (SMF P 201; PSMF P 201.)" (Carnes 2003:26, note 14).
2. Cannot Identify or Eliminate Patsy as Author. In his Wolf v. Ramsey deposition, Gideon Epstein agreed with Ramsey attorney James Rawls' characterization of Cunningham's findings: "he cannot identify, nor eliminate Patsy Ramsey as the author of the ransom note..." and "he has spent 20 hours examining the samples and documents and found that there were no significant individual characteristics, but much significant difference between Patsy's writing and the note" (p. 148:9-11 and 13-17).



* Cunningham Qualifications. Cunningham was a police officer in the San Francisco Police Department from 1963-1991; he became the department's first forensic document examiner after receiving training with the U.S. Secret Service. He is a member of the Southwestern Association of Document Examiners and served as its president from 2001-2003. He is best known for being the world's leading expert on the handwriting in the Zodiac killer case.


Howard C. Rile, Jr.

* Rile Findings. "Howard Rile concluded that Mrs. Ramsey was between "probably not" and "elimination," on a scale of whether she wrote the Ransom Note. (SMF P 202; PSMF P 202.)" (Carnes 2003:26, note 14). This also is confirmed in Epstein Deposition, p. 150:6-9).
* Qualifications. Rile is a member of the American Board of Forensic Document Examiners, the only professional certifying organization in the profession.


Authors/Internet Analysts (2 individuals)
Sheila Lowe and Associates.

* Lowe Findings. Based on differences between Patsy's personality profile (inferred from handwriting) and those of the perp,this on-line analysis concludes Patsy is not the writer.


Beverly East

* East Findings. Her on-line personality profile of Patsy Ramsey draws no direct conclusions about whether she was the note's author, but appears inconsistent with her having written the RN.
* Qualifications. According to her Web site, Ms. East trained intensively for 4 years and was qualified in the world's foremost institute of graphology, based in Chicago, Illinois. She established Strokes & Slants in Washington, D.C. in 1989 and in London, England in 1991.
 
“I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it.”
Voltaire

Indeed.

Linguists from Duke University, Brown University, University of Chicago, Univ of California

Thanks God, for answering my prayers!

I regret I didn't post THIS initially (as opposed to Yoda v.s Sidious)

LISTEN CAREFULLY!

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4z6Krsjwc84"]YouTube - Forensic Linguistics: Linguist as detective & expert witness[/ame]




the speaker above is professor Malcolm Coulthard

http://www1.aston.ac.uk/lss/staff/coulthardm/

"I studied English Language and Literature as an undergraduate in Sheffield and then trained to be an English teacher in the London Institute of Education. There I became interested in the work of Basil Bernstein on the relationship between class, language ability and educational achievement. In order to pursue this interest I trained as a linguist at University College London under Michael Halliday and then went on to the University of Birmingham to undertake doctoral research with John Sinclair."

Qualifications

* BA in English Language and Literature (Sheffield)
* MA in Linguistics (University College, London)
* PhD in English Linguistics (University of Birmingham)


He reviews McM's analysis of the RN

#
by Malcolm Coulthard, Alison Johnson - 2008 - Language Arts & Disciplines - 237 pages
McMenamin (2002: 181–205) exemplifies a resemblance analysis with a very detailed, ... Both her parents became murder suspects and McMenamin was asked to ...

http://books.google.com/books?id=RQ...esult&ct=result&resnum=1#v=onepage&q=&f=false

Review of both Olsson's analysis of JB letter

http://americanspeech.dukejournals.org/cgi/reprint/81/3/314.pdf


"The primary difference between forensic linguistics and non-linguist methods is the scientific approach. In forensic linguistics, the scientific method requires hypothesis testing and a litigation-independent testing of the method for its accuracy. Further, these tests are performed with robust controls regarding data quantity, data sources and analytical objectivity."

DON"T TRY TO GROW A BRAIN RDI SPIN TEAM!


USE THAT GOOD SOUTHERN SENSE OF YOURS!


http://investigation.discovery.com/videos/solved-forensic-linguistic.html

IT"S UP TO YOU NOW RDI SPIN TEAM!

VICTORY

F.L.W.J.K
 
IT"S UP TO YOU NOW RDI SPIN TEAM!

Well, I don’t know how many court trials you have either watched in person or on television, but all that would happen with the ransom note in court would be the typical battle of the experts.
After several windbags finished pontificating, and smelling salts were administered to several jurors to awaken them from their deep sleep, the trial would proceed with no clear winner.
Who then would decide the source of the RN? It would happen in the jury room where common folks would apply common sense (hopefully) and chances are they would come to the conclusion that the RN was clearly not a real ransom note and, given all the other circumstances of the case, was authored by PR.

"Linguistically, the ransom note is a fake and has nothing to do with ransom or kidnapping. As confirmed by the FBI and Colorado law enforcement, it was part of a staged crime scene found in the Ramsey home. By definition, a “staged” crime scene is one in which someone tries to manipulate the evidence in order to thwart or redirect an investigation.
According to Vernon J. Geberth, Former New York Police Department Commander, the most common type of staging occurs when the perpetrator changes elements of the scene to make the death appear to be a suicide or accident in order to cover up a murder. The second most common type of staging is when the perpetrator attempts to redirect the investigation by making the crime appear to be a sex-related homicide.
This kind of staging was the one employed by the person who arranged JonBenet’s body and who wrote the fake ransom note. Unfortunately for them, they created a first in the annals of crime. Murdering pedophiles do not leave ransom notes, fake or otherwise, and they certainly don’t take their time composing a three page letter in their victim’s home using pen and paper left on the kitchen counter.
Whoever staged the Ramsey crime scene went too far in their attempt at redirecting the truth, just as they went too far in writing their idea of a ransom note. Their desperation to explain JonBenet’s dead body led them to devise a far-fetched kidnapping plot with elements of sexual abuse and “immediate execution.” The very piece of paper they used to escape from justice is now the one piece of evidence that ties them to JonBenet’s death."
[ame="http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?t=6404"]Analysis of the Linguistics and Handwriting in the Ramsey Ransom Note - Forums For Justice[/ame]
 
I would say that it means you have drawn the wrong conclusion.

Gideon Epstein - Forensic Document Examiner:

“Based on the presently available documents, there are strong indications that Patsy Ramsey is the author of the ransom note.”

David S. Liebman - Certified Document Examiner:

“There are far too many similarities and consistencies revealed in the handwriting of Patsy Ramsey and
the ransom note for it to be coincidence. In light of the number of comparisons and similarities between Patsy Ramsey and the ransom note writer (51), the chances of a third party also sharing the same characteristics is astronomical. In my professional opinion Patsy Ramsey is the ransom note writer.”

Tom Miller - Attorney, Court Qualified Expert Witness in Questioned Documents:

“Based upon available exemplars compared to the purported "ransom" note in the JonBenét Ramsey murder, the handwriting is probably that of Patsy Ramsey.”

Chet Ubowski - Colorado Bureau of Investigation Handwriting Expert:

Chet Ubowski wrote, "This handwriting showed indications that the writer was Patsy Ramsey.'' He is said to have found 24 of 26 letters in the ransom note which matched exemplars from Patsy Ramsey.

Cina L. Wong - Certified Document Examiner:

“I have made careful examination and comparison of the ‘ransom’ note and the exemplars of Patsy Ramsey. I have reached the conclusion that the handwritings and ‘ransom’ note were very probably written by the same person…it is my professional opinion that Patsy Ramsey very likely wrote the ‘ransom’ note.”

Larry F. Ziegler - Forensic Document Examiner:

“It was determined and is still determined by myself that Patsy Ramsey is the writer of the ransom note.”


Analysis of the Linguistics and Handwriting in the Ramsey Ransom Note - Forums For Justice
(Page 3)

You've got a friend there, voynich. Don't be too quick to dismiss him.

BTW, I realize that asking this is probably an exercise in futility, but you didn't happen to catch that radio broadcast I posted, did you?
Tadpole asked a good question:

voynich, when C Wong referred to 243? 'significant' similarities, was that not a statistical comparison with consideration of the differences?
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
182
Guests online
1,749
Total visitors
1,931

Forum statistics

Threads
606,828
Messages
18,211,736
Members
233,970
Latest member
rndy
Back
Top