Confusion with Bates police memo

[Zsearcher Profile]

Here's a list of some experts in their respective fields for you to consider:

Bernie Madoff
Jimmy The Greek
Dr. Kevorkian
Joaquin Phoenix
Woody Hayes

I could go on, but as you can see, each one of these people was or is an expert in their own field, but made a mockery of their profession in one way or the other. Would I put Nanette Barto in the same class as a guy who stole billions of dollars from little old ladies. No. She still has a chance to get with the program. Let's hope she does. Zs

[MrBungle Profile]

I think we also forget that we're all more or less aware of the sham that is the Kaufmann/Barto Project, so we already know that Barto couldn't ID Gary Coleman as Arnold Jackson. But Gav is right...to an outsider, both Barto and Morrill have the "certification", so they'd likely be viewed upon as equals. Let's also not forget that Sherwood flip-flopped opinions on his own analysis. It's certainly an imperfect "science".

[smithy Profile]

A couple of things in this thread I find myself at odds with, as discussed in another thread. Just to highlight them here, too:

Basically the writer gives a very high degree of pertinent detail, that (if it were not true) would immediately DQ the letter as legitimate (i.e. method of disabling the vehicle, method of killing her, fact that part of the knife was still in her body etc.).

Nope, not a "high" degree of pertinent detail, and not all of those details referred to in this quote.
Yes, the method of disabling the vehicle was generally as described - but since it's difficult to find the specific method described now in the public domain (it varies in various articles, and distributor, coil and the leads of both devices are mentioned, as far as I've been able to find) - this may not be conclusive proof that the writer was Cheri’s murderer.
All of the many rather sensationalised accounts of Cheri's death have included the method of killing her.
As the autopsy reveals fact that part of the knife was still in her body isn't a fact at all.

[Michael Butterfield Profile]

The Confession didn't claim that the knife broke and that part of the blade remained in the body of the victim. All the writer said was, "I plunged the knife into her and it broke."

[smithy Profile]

The Confession didn't claim that the knife broke and that part of the blade remained in the body of the victim. All the writer said was, "I plunged the knife into her and it broke."

Absolutely correct Mike, and not a "pertinent detail" as it can't be proven. Forgive me, I should have made that clearer.