[ml/nj]

In this case, Mara Zebest is not a forensic digital image analyst. The act of scanning a document into a PDF introduces digital alterations into it, so she is certainly correct that the image has digital alterations. That's a point any novice computer user could verify. But those alterations don't mean either the image or the underlying document are forgeries.

Let me guess: You're a lawyer?

How do I know this? I know it because you are full of sh*t. You see this is my business too. There are anomalies in the scan that would never be introduced by a simple scan. The smoke blowers say this is because of things the Adobe Software automatically introduced because of how it set up on the machine that was used. Zebest is precisely an expert in Adobe Software. Your argument is akin to suggesting that she (probably) doesn't know much about theoretical physics and since all of this involves the interactions of sub atomic particles, she has nothing to bring to the table.

ML/NJ

[Las Vegas Ron]

Let me guess: You're a lawyer?
How do I know this? I know it because you are full of sh*t.

LOL!!

A lawyer would argue that the sky is not blue because there are many shades.

[Las Vegas Ron]

I meant to also include....depending on who their client, or what their agenda is.

[tired_old_conservative]

“Let me guess: You're a lawyer?”

I told you that. No guesswork was required.

“I know it because you are full of sh*t.”

I attempted a civil explanation of a legal result that by your own admission you do not understand. You response clarifies that you have no actual desire to understand.