Analysis of the Linguistics and Handwriting in the Ramsey Ransom Note part 1

Go down

Analysis of the Linguistics and Handwriting in the Ramsey Ransom Note part 1

Post by redpill on Sun Nov 02, 2014 9:57 pm

this is a direct response to " Analysis of the Linguistics and Handwriting in the Ramsey Ransom Note" by by Cherokee, September 21, 2005, 5:42 pm Wed Sep 21 17:42:26 to be found here

first a disclaimer
Fair use is a limitation and exception to the exclusive right granted by copyright law to the author of a creative work. In United States copyright law, fair use is a doctrine that permits limited use of copyrighted material without acquiring permission from the rights holders.
For educational purposes only.

For discussion I will refer to the author in the feminine she.

the first and obvious question is what is qualifications of Cherokee? Has Cherokee ever studied either handwriting or linguistics? The answer, to anyone familiar with the science, is of course, no. She has never. So for someone who has never studied either science, and does not grasp the most rudimentary understanding of the relevant forensics, her analysis has no scientific validity whatsoever.

Cherokee wrote:


The three different components of this analysis are:

1. linguistic
2. graphological
3. exemplar comparison

Much of this same work has been presented by various linguists, graphologists and document examiners. I do not pretend to break new ground or make startling revelations. I am only posting my own analysis and research. Most of it was done before I ever came to the forums.

Since Cherokee has never studied linguistics, let alone forensic linguistics, she cannot do claim her analysis is "linguistics". She claims that she is doing her own analysis and research, rather than relying on established scientific research in peer-reviewed journals.

Cherokee wrote:
I have found people and web sites devoted to linguistic statement analysis, handwriting analysis, and exemplar comparison of the ransom note, but none that combine all three areas of analysis into a composite picture. Of course, opinions on the Ramsey case, and particularly on the ransom note, are a dime a dozen. All I can offer is what I have done with the knowledge I have.

since Cherokee has never studied either handwriting or linguistics, she does not have "knowledge".

Cherokee wrote:

Because this kind of analysis is a subjective science, there can be disagreement as to the correct interpretation and conclusion. Therefore, confirmation of a conclusion from multiple, and varied, approaches is the best way to insure an accurate interpretation of data. That is why I think it is important that more than ONE area of analysis be used to determine the authorship of the Ramsey “ransom note.” By itself, linguistics is not enough, graphology is not enough, and exemplar comparison is not enough ... but taken together, they offer a more complete picture of the truth.

Linguistics deals with objective data. forensic handwriting draws conclusions based on objective science. She errs when she says "linguistics is not enough, graphology is not enough, and exemplar comparison is not enough". actually in real court cases linguistics is enough to convict and in others handwriting is enough to convict.

she errs when she says "exemplar comparison is not enough". all disputed authorships involves "exemplar comparison". exemplar comparison is not a separate method independent of handwriting and linguistics.

the simplest way to do research is to visit wikipedia.
lastly, graphology, had she done her research, is a discredited pseudo-science.
wiki wrote:
Graphology is the analysis of the physical characteristics and patterns of handwriting purporting to be able to identify the writer, indicating psychological state at the time of writing, or evaluating personality characteristics.[1] It is generally considered pseudoscience.[2][3][4] The term is sometimes incorrectly used to refer to forensic document examination.

Graphology has been controversial for more than a century. Although supporters point to the anecdotal evidence of positive testimonials as a reason to use it for personality evaluation, most empirical studies fail to show the validity claimed by its supporters.[5][6]

Cherokee did not even do the most rudimentary research which is to visit wikipedia. I'll spell it out right here, Cherokee did not perform a competent forensic document examination, and did not do the most elementary research. Just in the intro, she fails to demonstrate the most rudimentary understanding of science and of forensic document examination, and she gets her facts wrong. There is zero scientific validity in her findings. Her conclusion that Patsy wrote the ransom note has zero scientific credibility.

if forumsforjustice was committed to "justice", they would remove her "analysis" as plain wrong and misleading.

If you only knew the POWER of the Daubert side

Posts : 2462
Join date : 2012-12-08

Back to top Go down

Back to top

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum