And I reiterate, believed hoaxes based on nothing more than handwriting, the year the communication was mailed, and the tone of the letter. New findings over the last 53 years, including the solving of the 340 cipher, has created new avenues to authenticate once believed hoaxes in the Zodiac case. Irrespective of these facts, individuals such as Tom Voigt continue to perpetuate this myth by constantly referring to his authenticated list of communications based on little more than handwriting and opinions formed many decades ago. The idea a defendant could be incarcerated for life based solely on the handwriting analysis of one document or letter is obviously preposterous, so claiming with utmost confidence that a Zodiac communication is genuine or otherwise, based solely on handwriting analysis is equally ludicrous. These communications are either genuine or not - and this can only be ascertained through examination beyond handwriting analysis. Conversely, the majority of people thinking the Fairfield letter or 148 character cipher & letter are genuine, equally doesn't make it true. Just because the majority of people think the Fairfield letter or 148 character cipher & letter are obvious Zodiac hoaxes doesn't make it true. In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is a fallacious argument which is based on claiming a truth or affirming something is good because the majority thinks so. Therefore, the creation of a list of authenticated Zodiac communications, routinely trotted out by individuals such as Tom Voigt, can only be arrived at through percentages rather than complete agreement. In other cases, such as the JonBenet Ramsey murder, you can find many certified document examiners that will claim the 3-page ransom note found in the Ramsey household was written by Patsy Ramsey, while there are many others who will counter this argument. For those interested in handwriting analysis need to read the principles of the Daubert Standard and the admissibility of expert testimony in a US court of law regarding such nonscientific methods as handwriting analysis, which is relevant to the Zodiac case. "John Shimoda" were just three document examiners (of many) who had differing opinions as to the authenticity of Zodiac communications and the handwriting contained within them. Sherwood Morrill, Robert Prouty and Satoru C.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |