Posted on 09/16/2004 12:31:23 PM PDT by Bushruffneck
Kerry Spot says Baltimore Sun is now claiming Pierce says he did not authenticate anything.
CBS also identified the four experts it had consulted to authenticate the Killian papers. In recent days, Linda James and Emily Will, two analysts who said they were asked by CBS to review the documents before the broadcast, have stepped forward to say they raised questions about the memos before the broadcast, but the network brushed their doubts aside. In a statement, CBS said that the two had misstated their involvement, adding that the two women "played a peripheral role in the authentication process" and had deferred to the judgment of San Francisco-based document examiner Marcel Matley, who has defended the authenticity of some aspects of the memos. A fourth examiner, James J. Pierce, also continues to support the documents, the network said. But in interviews with The Sun, both women said they had not deferred to Matley.
"That is untrue," James said yesterday by telephone. "I did not authenticate them. This keeps on getting more and more involved."
Some aspects? Like what? They're on paper, and paper was used in 1972?
I think you are confusing Pierce with James. Read the article again.
Waiting for Strong to back away as well.
Wrong James. James Pierce stands by his authentication, LINDA JAMES does not. Read it carefully.
I think you misread the post. Mrs. James, not Pierce, says she did not authenticate the documents. Pierce, whoever he is, is still a member of the flat earth society.
They're actually referring to Linda James. The important part, however is that CBS points out that the experts deferred to Matley, who "examined" all four documents. Matley says he did examine all four, and only authenticated one. And why in the world would two document experts yield to a handwriting expert??
What I heard was that Matley did not AUTHENTICATE anything - he verified that all the signatures on the forged docs were from the same person, NOT that that person was Killian.
for what its worth this is Pierce's report from CBS website..no one can find this guy on the internet either..what are his qualifications?
http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/pierce1.pdf
Please change or delete this post. I think it is misleading and has faulty info.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/elections/bal-te.cbs16subsep16,1,4934986.story?coll=bal-nationworld-headlines
More from the article...("James" is a woman per this report)
...CBS also identified the four experts it had consulted to authenticate the Killian papers. In recent days, Linda James and Emily Will, two analysts who said they were asked by CBS to review the documents before the broadcast, have stepped forward to say they raised questions about the memos before the broadcast, but the network brushed their doubts aside. In a statement, CBS said that the two had misstated their involvement, adding that the two women "played a peripheral role in the authentication process" and had deferred to the judgment of San Francisco-based document examiner Marcel Matley, who has defended the authenticity of some aspects of the memos. A fourth examiner, James J. Pierce, also continues to support the documents, the network said.
But in interviews with The Sun, both women said they had not deferred to Matley.
"That is untrue," James said yesterday by telephone. "I did not authenticate them. This keeps on getting more and more involved."
Instead, James, a document examiner from Texas, said that she had been asked by CBS to look at several apparent Killian documents five days before the broadcast and that she made clear her reservations about them.
Will, a North Carolina-based documents consultant, said she was sent two copies of memos to review by the network three days before the broadcast. One, a document dated August 1972 that was used on the air, contained only initials, not a signature.
Huh? The article says:
both women said they had not deferred to Matley.
He needs only one qualification. He agrees with Dan Rather.
All other qualifications are secondary.
I know. I'm asking why CBS would release a statement saying that two document experts yielded their findings to a handwriting expert. It's rhetorical, as we all know why.
Sounds like a case of "pin the blame on the donkey".
I hate to say it, but this is poorly written and confusing.
As I understand it, he opined that the signatures on all 4 memos matched -- matched each other, not that they were necessarily the real signatures of the guy who supposedly wrote the memos, and not that the memos themselves were genuine.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.