Richard Dusak & Edwin F. Alford, Jr and the power of the Daubert Side of the Forensics

Wed May 09, 2018

this post will follow this criteria
Brent Turvey outlines the code of ethics

Brent Turvey wrote:
Maintain an attitude of professionalism and integrity.
Conduct all research in a generally accepted scientific manner.
Assign appropriate credit for the ideas of others that are used.
Treat all information (not in the public domain) from a client or agency in a confidential manner, unless specific permission to disseminate information is obtained.
Maintain an attitude of independence and impartiality in order to ensure an unbiased analysis and interpretation of the evidence.
Strive to avoid preconceived ideas or biases regarding potential suspects or offenders from influencing a final profile or crime analysis when appropriate.
Render opinions and conclusions strictly in accordance with the evidence in the case.
Not exaggerate, embellish, or otherwise misrepresent qualifications when testifying, or at any other time, in any form.
Testify in an honest, straightforward manner and refuse to extend their opinion beyond their field of competence, phrasing testimony in a manner intended to avoid misinterpretation of their opinion.
Not use a profile or crime analysis (the inference of Offender or Crime Scene Characteristics) for the purposes of suggesting the guilt or innocence of a particular individual for a particular crime.
Make efforts to inform the court of the nature and implications of pertinent evidence if reasonably assured that this information will not be disclosed in court.
Maintain the quality and standards of the professional community by reporting unethical conduct to the appropriate authorities or professional organizations. (Turvey 1999: 722)

of these

Maintain an attitude of professionalism and integrity.

Conduct all research in a generally accepted scientific manner.

Maintain an attitude of independence and impartiality in order to ensure an unbiased analysis and interpretation of the evidence.

Render opinions and conclusions strictly in accordance with the evidence in the case.

Did John Ramsey write the ransom note? All 6 ABFDE all eliminated John Ramsey.

Did Patsy Ramsey write the ransom note?


Richard Dusak & Edwin F. Alford, Jr.

Richard Dusak

Richard Dusak wrote:
  Dusak Findings. "Richard Dusick (sic) of the U.S. Secret Service concluded that there was "no evidence to indicate that Patsy Ramsey executed any of the questioned material appearing on the Ransom Note." (SMF P 200; PSMF P 200.)" (Carnes 2003:26, note 14).

Edwin F. Alford, Jr.

Edwin F. Alford, Jr.

"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.

where on the 9 point ASTM scale, with 8 being highly improbable and 9 being elimination should their findings be rated?

Does this expert witness testimony provide any support for RDI forumsforjustice.org claim

Patsy wrote the ransom note. Patsy was the  only one who could not be eliminated, therefore Patsy wrote it.
It's Patsy's handwriting?

Now, the second set of questions,

first study and read




i will show you  the power of the Daubert Side of the Forensics

Conduct all research in a generally accepted scientific manner.

Maintain an attitude of independence and impartiality in order to ensure an unbiased analysis and interpretation of the evidence.

Render opinions and conclusions strictly in accordance with the evidence in the case.

are  Richard Dusak & Edwin F. Alford, Jr.  expert witnesses under the Daubert standard?

why or why not?

are other FDE's, from Gideon Epstein, to Cina Wong, Tom Miller, to Dr. Andrew Hodges and James Fitzgerald, et al, expert witnesses under the Daubert standard?

why or why not?

is forumsforjustice posters like kodlkase and delmar england expert witnesses?

What is science? How does science work?

How would you use science to answer these questions?


here is an example of scientific testing



now, here's the question no RDI on any forum has ever considered, esp forumsforjustice.org

imagine you could read a copy of  Richard Dusak & Edwin F. Alford, Jr.  forensics report

based on these textbooks




what content and information do you think they contain? What kind of technological language do they contain?

what kind of observations do you surmise it may contain? how did they arrive at their conclusion?

now imagine Richard Dusak & Edwin F. Alford, Jr. were called to testify their findings

what do you think they will be called to testify for?
what do you think their testimony will entail?

what sort of facts and findings do you think they will present?

how will a judge, jury, forensic scientist, expert witnesses, appeals court using this criteria

Conduct all research in a generally accepted scientific manner.

Maintain an attitude of independence and impartiality in order to ensure an unbiased analysis and interpretation of the evidence.

Render opinions and conclusions strictly in accordance with the evidence in the case.

draw on the question, did Patsy Ramsey write the ransom note,

when  Richard Dusak & Edwin F. Alford, Jr. testisfy


Richard Dusak

Richard Dusak wrote:
  Dusak Findings. "Richard Dusick (sic) of the U.S. Secret Service concluded that there was "no evidence to indicate that Patsy Ramsey executed any of the questioned material appearing on the Ransom Note." (SMF P 200; PSMF P 200.)" (Carnes 2003:26, note 14).

Edwin F. Alford, Jr.

Edwin F. Alford, Jr.

"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.

how does this testimony affect all other evidence found in the Jonbenet Ramsey crime scene, from DNA, to fibers, hair, to tape ligature, to shoe prints?

Does finding additional DNA on additional articles of clothing increase the credibility of the conclusions of forensic handwriting experts Richard Dusak & Edwin F. Alford, Jr. or decrease it?

I'm writing this on Wed May 09, 2018

How is it no RDI, on any forums, from websleuth to forumsforjustice.org to reddit topix,

ever identified the key scientific issues and concepts relevant to the Murder of JonBenet Ramsey?

applying the daubert standard, or what I as a Science Lord call  the power of the Daubert Side of the Forensics,

it is clear the only conclusion that best explains the evidence, with the assistance of scientific expert witnesses, is that Jonbenet was murdered by an intruder.

as I told superdave,

there is no conflict

I felt a great disturbance in the Forensics, as if millions of RDI posters suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible has happened to RDI

in summary,

Richard Dusak & Edwin F. Alford, Jr. testimony and conclusion,


Richard Dusak

Richard Dusak wrote:
Dusak Findings. "Richard Dusick (sic) of the U.S. Secret Service concluded that there was "no evidence to indicate that Patsy Ramsey executed any of the questioned material appearing on the Ransom Note." (SMF P 200; PSMF P 200.)" (Carnes 2003:26, note 14).

Edwin F. Alford, Jr.

Edwin F. Alford, Jr.

"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.

should be understood in terms of the science as described in these textbooks




the textbooks are themselves the result of scientific research, scientific papers published in scientific journals, using scientific methodology and statistics



only their findings, and 4 others are allowed under Daubert standard

a forensic scientist, DA, appeals court, are required to follow that testimony in combination with these ethics

Conduct all research in a generally accepted scientific manner.

Maintain an attitude of independence and impartiality in order to ensure an unbiased analysis and interpretation of the evidence.

Render opinions and conclusions strictly in accordance with the evidence in the case.

the other evidence found, from shoe print to UNSOURCED fibers, hair, ligature tape, missing piece of broken paintbrush, medical injuries, and yes DNA should be understood in terms of, and reinforces the conclusion of the forensic document examiners.

the one thing every so called expert who proclaims Patsy wrote it, as well as every nontrained poster like forumsforjustice cherokee and koldkase, is they do not meet the daubert standard and therefore their testimony is inadmissible

Richard Dusak & Edwin F. Alford, Jr. testimony and conclusion, in combination with all 6 eliminating John Ramsey, is exactly the testimony you would predict would be the case if an intruder, say Mr. Cruel, came in and wrote the ransom note. finding additional DNA fiber hair shoeprint reinforces the credibility of this testimony.

they trend in one direction - they trend towards intruder

you've been redpilled