I’ll still wait for someone to present the typewriter line spacing theory to Triers of Fact (including a Grand Jury composed of representative American citizens) and have the theory subjected to cross-examination.
Since the theory appears to be based on examination of digital reproductions of photocopied documents, I remain skeptical but I’m open to changing my mind.
I’m surprised that the line-spacing position hasn’t yet made it beyond Internet blogs.
Way to stick your neck out. Still hiding under the Judge's robes I see. Can you not formulate an opinion of your own without getting "Mother may I?" permission from the high priests of legaldom?
I perceive that Judges aren't interested in examining this, and they don't give a tinker's D*MN whether there is compelling evidence or not. This topic has ceased to have any real world relevance long ago, and now serves as a mere intellectual curiosity for those people who do not have better things upon which to waste their time.
The only question of note is whether some people on this forum can exhibit intellectual honesty or not. So far the results are not looking very promising.
Since the theory appears to be based on examination of digital reproductions of photocopied documents, I remain skeptical but I’m open to changing my mind.
Your statement requires some sort of theory to explain how a copying process might render all the aspects of the printed form in perfect accuracy, but some how manage to misalign the typewritten print in various places on the document.
And here you thought the column spacing theory was complicated! The theory required for your explanation makes of the column spacing theory a poor step-child.
So do tell. By what possible mechanism could the typewritten characters be disturbed from their correct positions without marring the document in an easily recognizable manner? This I gotta hear!