Part 35 (1/2)
”Yes.”
”You are aware that the courts accept and allow testimony from any number of so-called experts in many different fields such as doctors, psychologists, engineers and natural scientist, just to name a few?
”Yes.”
”This does not necessarily mean that all of these are one hundred percent correct in their testimony.
It just means that the court accepts and allows it.
Is that correct?”
”Yes.”
”Sources of error can exist in handwriting a.n.a.lysis, can they not?
There are a lot of judgment calls just like there is in most professions, isn't that correct?”
”Yes.”
”So we really have no evidence that handwriting a.n.a.lysis is infallible.
In fact, there are doc.u.ment examiners that are honest enough not to claim that.”
”Well, they must be graphologists. We are on a different basis and it cannot be carried over to what we are doing.”
Trenchant then named a well known doc.u.ment examiner and asked if Avery knew of him.
”Of course.”
”Is he a graphologist?”
”No.”
”We talked to him about this situation and asked him questions.
Unfortunately, it was much too expensive to bring him here to testify, however, he did agree to make an affidavit. I will read from it now.
Quote. 'It is my opinion that the identification of handwriting is not as positive as fingerprint identification. While a doc.u.ment examiner may feel that his or her opinion is 100 percent positive, the facts are that the opinion is based on qualifications, training, experience and judgment, any of which may be limiting or otherwise subject to question. In addition, the known standards used in the comparison for the Belmont case may be tainted or under dispute.'”
”I don't agree.” The doc.u.ment examiner said, visibly upset.
Henry called a recess.
When the session opened again, Diana asked, ”If you had your druthers, would you agree with other doc.u.ment examiners that original standards are preferable to copies?”
”Yes.”
”You have said that you could not reach a conclusion from the first lot of so-called standards sent to you. If you had not been sent all that additional material going back 20 to 30 years, what would have been your conclusion?”
”I would have no conclusion.”
”I am interested in your report of this note. The other unknown material you were sent was written on evaluation forms.
I am speaking now of the note.” Trenchant held up her copy.