Expert concludes Roy Moore wrote disputed entry in accuser's yearbook, lawyer says

a reply to: Grambler

At the 11:30 mark in the video, she’s basically just reading the inscription out of the yearbook as it appeared.

While she was explaining that Roy Moore wrote the inscription, I never heard her say he wrote every word and I never heard her questioned on that specifically where she would have had the opportunity to clarify.

While I agree that it could be interpreted that way by someone who’s taking every word literally, I’m not getting it that way and I don’t think there was any attempt to lie or mislead anyone. She was just reading the inscription.

That’s why she did NOT admit to lying about anything. It’s Brietbart who is lying, as usual.

originally posted by: snowspirit
So he wrote part of it and she wrote part of it.
He wrote part of it, which at the very least, shows he knew her.

He should just fess up, and admit that, back in those days, sometimes an older guy (adult in thirties) would date a high school student.
Denying it isn't that believable when he said himself, that he didn't date anyone without their mom's permission.

I think all of us that are old enough, probably knew at least one girl in high school that was dating the much older guy.

Times were different back then, still not right, but it happened more than people want to admit.

Where is your proof he wrote part of it?

Did an independent expert say that?

Or is a woman who we know has changed her story claiming that?

Remember, when Moore called for an independent expert to look, Allred said they wouldnt trist someone that Moores team picked.

Yet now they refuse to allow a third party to look at it, have been caught lying about Moore writing about old hickory, and yet they want us to believe their expert without questioning it?

Nope, not buying it.

Leave an indpendent expert view it, and then I will believe it.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Grambler

What are you talking about. You think Roy Moore is innocent because she said her noted were his.

You think the special council case is bust because 1/3 of Mueller team donated to democrats and his right hand man was "Clinton lawyer"

Your literally spouting network propaganda.

I have no idea if Moore is innocent. I have said all along that if this yearbook proves it, by all means let an independent investigator look at it and remove all doubt.

I questioned why that hasnt happened, and I am now showing this woman lied.

I also never said the whole investigation into trump is bust, I said despite biases I see no reason why the indictments I have seen shouldnt hold up because there appears to be physical evidence of the claims.

I have said that I want people in the investigating acting with bias to be removed, but want the investigation to continue.

You are the other hand are practically begging people to please not point out factual stories on these events.

You go so far as to flat out make up accusations that I said something that I never came close to saying.

You say I sound like network propaganda?

Is that you Rachel Maddow?

Lol.

No my point is you have no information to make your judgements. The same crappy media you complain about is your only source.
You can't magically control human bias. Not even in science.

When you get that you can make tests that can best use the fact there is bias and control it or mitigate it....

Like a judge and jury or grand jury etc...

Which is why I have said wait and see for about 12 months.

The media is not a source anymore. Any of them.

originally posted by: Flatfish
a reply to: Grambler

At the 11:30 mark in the video, she’s basically just reading the inscription out of the yearbook as it appeared.

While she was explaining that Roy Moore wrote the inscription, I never heard her say he wrote every word and I never heard her questioned on that specifically where she would have had the opportunity to clarify.

While I agree that it could be interpreted that way by someone who’s taking every word literally, I’m not getting it that way and I don’t think there was any attempt to lie or mislead anyone. She was just reading the inscription.

That’s why she did NOT admit to lying about anything. It’s Brietbart who is lying, as usual.

So as the article in the OP outlines, they knew for over a month that people were questioning the writing on Old hicklory.

So for a month she said nothing?

Why not just come out and say "Oh he didnt write that part"

Why not just let an indpendent expert look at it?

Who needs an freggin expert.

It's a big arse red flag that someone that was 'sexually assaulted' would keep a reminder of it.

And let alone get their autograph.

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Grambler

What are you talking about. You think Roy Moore is innocent because she said her noted were his.

You think the special council case is bust because 1/3 of Mueller team donated to democrats and his right hand man was "Clinton lawyer"

Your literally spouting network propaganda.

I have no idea if Moore is innocent. I have said all along that if this yearbook proves it, by all means let an independent investigator look at it and remove all doubt.

I questioned why that hasnt happened, and I am now showing this woman lied.

I also never said the whole investigation into trump is bust, I said despite biases I see no reason why the indictments I have seen shouldnt hold up because there appears to be physical evidence of the claims.

I have said that I want people in the investigating acting with bias to be removed, but want the investigation to continue.

You are the other hand are practically begging people to please not point out factual stories on these events.

You go so far as to flat out make up accusations that I said something that I never came close to saying.

You say I sound like network propaganda?

Is that you Rachel Maddow?

Lol.

No my point is you have no information to make your judgements. The same crappy media you complain about is your only source.
You can't magically control human bias. Not even in science.

We you get that you can make tests that can best use technology fact there is bias and control it.

Like a judge and jury or grand jury etc...

Which is why I have said wait and see for about 12 months.

The media is not a source anymore. Any of them.

So I cant take this womans own words from two differnt conferences? That relying on the media?


So what are you waiting and seeing aboyut then?

For the media to tell you what reulted in these investigations?

Well if listening to this womans own words is relying on the media, then that is exactly what you will be doing when you wait and see what they said.

So you too are using the media as your source.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: pavil

So the part he didn't write according to the handwriting pro was Roy Moore hickory house?

No.... She said he wrote it all initally at the Press Conference the YT video Documents......

NOW, she has Changed that story.

All Allard had to do was submit the Yearbook to a verifiable uninterested party for handwriting analysis. Instead she chose the person and didn't allow anyone else to verify it. Instead of producing her own expert, who I'm guessing someone paid for the analysis (Wonder who?) she could have worked with Moore's side and they could have selected a totally unbiased expert. You know how lawyers are, you can find an "Expert" to say whatever your side wants.

It's not passing the smell test, there was NO Senate Hearing for this.

a reply to: Grambler

So she wrote Roy Moore and the location how does that truly change anything?

It is grasping at straws.

Obvious misdirection. Yet you say nothing about the shady headlines from brietbart and co...

Hum real unbiased your search is.

Did the breitbart Heflin purposely exaggerate and misdirected or do you think it's on the level?

originally posted by: pavil

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: pavil

So the part he didn't write according to the handwriting pro was Roy Moore hickory house?

No.... She said he wrote it all initally at the Press Conference the YT video Documents......

NOW, she has Changed that story.

All Allard had to do was submit the Yearbook to a verifiable uninterested party for handwriting analysis. Instead she chose the person and didn't allow anyone else to verify it. Instead of producing her own expert, who I'm guessing someone paid for the analysis (Wonder who?) she could have worked with Moore's side and they could have selected a totally unbiased expert. You know how lawyers are, you can find an "Expert" to say whatever your side wants.

It's not passing the smell test, there was NO Senate Hearing for this.

Bit your aware the only part in quesrion is Roy Moore and the location correct not the statement?

a reply to: Quantumgamer1776

She did not admit signing the signature..for whatever that's worth.

a reply to: pavil


no, she doesn't.

this desperation is embarrassing..

a reply to: Grambler

You can interpret what she said and how she said it any way you want. I'm still of the belief that Roy Moore fondled teenage girls while he was in his 30's and, unless you can prove otherwise, then that's what happened.

I mean, just look at the age difference between him and his wife and then look at when they met. Hint: He was in his 30's and she was a teenager.

originally posted by: knoxie
a reply to: pavil


no, she doesn't.

this desperation is embarrassing..

Really????

Then who is that speaking in the You Tube video?

Let me hear your transcript of the 11:30 Mark of that video.

Pffft

a reply to: Grambler

Now she is going through a very emotional time, she could have mistakenly added the Ole' Hickory part. If we are given Moore the benefit of the doubt, then she deserves it too.

Maybe someone got a nice check to say she "actually" did it. The lies and corruption seem to be common place.

a reply to: pavil

Why would there be a Senate hearing on this? He's not in the senate.

originally posted by: pavil

originally posted by: knoxie
a reply to: pavil


no, she doesn't.

this desperation is embarrassing..

Really????

Then who is that speaking in the You Tube video?

Let me hear your transcript of the 11:30 Mark of that video.

Pffft

No, Roy Moore accuser didn't admit she forged his signature in her yearbook

A conspiracy-minded website attempted to cast doubt on evidence presented by one of eight women who accused Roy Moore of sexual assault in a misleading headline days ahead of the Alabama Senate race.

Beverly Young Nelson accused Roy Moore of groping her when she was 16 years old and he, in his 30s, was the deputy district attorney of Etowah County. As evidence, Nelson presented a note she said Moore wrote in her high school yearbook before the incident took place. Nelson has been represented by celebrity lawyer Gloria Allred.

The inscription reads, "To a sweeter, more beautiful girl I could not say Merry Christmas. Christmas 1977. Love, Roy Moore, D.A." Below the signature reads 12-22-77, Olde Hickory House.

Moore’s defenders have pointed out the date and place seem to have been written in different ink and handwriting than the note.

In a Dec. 8 Good Morning America interview with Nelson about Moore’s response to the allegations (he denies them) and her experience since taking her story public, Nelson addressed the inconsistency. Nelson said she added the date and place of the inscription.

"He signed your yearbook?" ABC News reporter Tom Llamas asked Nelson.

"He did sign it," Nelson said.

"And you made some notes underneath?" Llamas asked.

"Yes," Nelson said. "Nelson said she did make notes to the inscription, but the message was all Roy Moore," the video voiceover says.

To summarize, Nelson says she added the time and location to the inscription. But she says the note and signature was from Moore.

That’s not what the headlines of the Gateway Pundit, Breitbart or Silence is Consent. All three say Nelson said she either tampered with Moore’s signature or forged the inscription.

There’s no evidence of that.

The Gateway Pundit’s headline reads "WE CALLED IT! Gloria Allred Accuser **ADMITS** She Tampered With Roy Moore’s Yearbook ‘Signature’ (VIDEO)."
But Nelson does not claim she tampered with Moore’s actual signature. She said she added a time and location below the signature. Nelson still attributes the note and signature to Moore.
We rate the statement Pants on Fire.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Grambler

So she wrote Roy Moore and the location how does that truly change anything?

It is grasping at straws.

Obvious misdirection. Yet you say nothing about the shady headlines from brietbart and co...

Hum real unbiased your search is.

Did the breitbart Heflin purposely exaggerate and misdirected or do you think it's on the level?

Did I post breitbart?

Nope, I discussed abc and the actual interview.

Why should I have to talk about Breitbart? I dont rely on the media like you I guess, I listened to her own words.

And on the other said, I said Breitbarts was wrong in their title.

I think Breitbart sucks.

Now why havent you mentioned all of the media outlets you think suck here?

Oh thats right, because its irrelevant to what we are discussing.

a reply to: links234

. I'm still of the belief that Roy Moore fondled teenage girls while he was in his 30's and, unless you can prove otherwise, then that's what happened. 

That's not how this works. That's not how any of this works...

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Flatfish
a reply to: Grambler

At the 11:30 mark in the video, she’s basically just reading the inscription out of the yearbook as it appeared.

While she was explaining that Roy Moore wrote the inscription, I never heard her say he wrote every word and I never heard her questioned on that specifically where she would have had the opportunity to clarify.

While I agree that it could be interpreted that way by someone who’s taking every word literally, I’m not getting it that way and I don’t think there was any attempt to lie or mislead anyone. She was just reading the inscription.

That’s why she did NOT admit to lying about anything. It’s Brietbart who is lying, as usual.

So as the article in the OP outlines, they knew for over a month that people were questioning the writing on Old hicklory.

So for a month she said nothing?

Why not just come out and say "Oh he didnt write that part"

Why not just let an indpendent expert look at it?

If I were her I wouldn’t give a rat’s ass what Roy Moore and his campaign were questioning and I sure as hell wouldn’t feel obligated to explain myself or to provide answers to their inquiries in any way.

I wouldn’t feel like I owed him or his campaign jack s#*t.

Roy Moore and his campaign were just attempting to deflect the conversation away from the sexual misconduct and direct it towards an attack on her, the victim.

Why would she extend him a single courtesy?