Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
signatures adjust over time. which is why i'm curious to see more moore examples from the era.
Ok, well starting with examining the ink would be the quickest way to determine if it is a scam. New ink = scam. I see why you don't want the ink to be examined.
And as I pointed out, the note in the yearbook switches from cursive to print, and I don't buy Moore would have done that, and dated it twice. It looks to me it was a forgery by a low IQ person.
Seems much more probable the yearbook accuser saw DA on her divorce paperwork and assumed Moore signed off with a DA. Note that the accuser didn't mention Moore presided over her divorce.
It doesn't seem likely a man in his 30s is going to include his occupation if he signed a yearbook, and date it twice, and include location of the restaurant. Doesn't seem likely that he writes part of the note in cursive, then ends with print.
The girl wasn't married when the yearbook was signed. She was still in high school. You have mixed up the accounts of 2 different victims.
It's highly likely initials, dates and names of businesses are printed, rather than written in cursive. it's very common to mix them. Most who write in cursive always mix some printed capital letters into their handwriting; pure Spencarian cursive is rare now, and hasn't been taught in the public schools since before WWII.
New American Cursive was adopted as the new teaching standard before the war, and was the style Moore (and I, along with millions of others our age) were taught. It's a simplified form than has many more printed elements in it.
Any bully likes to remind his victim if he can. It's part of bullying. Moore also loves to boast. Either is a valid rationale as to why he included all those details. They were pleasant in his mind, and he never realized the girl thought differently.
The girl wasn't married when the yearbook was signed. She was still in high school. You have mixed up the accounts of 2 different victims.
It's highly likely initials, dates and names of businesses are printed, rather than written in cursive. it's very common to mix them. Most who write in cursive always mix some printed capital letters into their handwriting; pure Spencarian cursive is rare now, and hasn't been taught in the public schools since before WWII.
New American Cursive was adopted as the new teaching standard before the war, and was the style Moore (and I, along with millions of others our age) were taught. It's a simplified form than has many more printed elements in it.
Any bully likes to remind his victim if he can. It's part of bullying. Moore also loves to boast. Either is a valid rationale as to why he included all those details. They were pleasant in his mind, and he never realized the girl thought differently.
You haven't provided any evidence that 'it is very common to mix' them or any evidence that Moore did so.
I never said the woman was married in 1977. My point is it is probable that she thought Moore signed off with DA because of her divorce papework that had DA on it after his name.
again, you are crediting me for something i didn't say!
You've said several times it can't be given over to a neutral custodian. A neutral custodian would be a somebody that both sides agree is neutral.
You keep taling about a senate investigation that you must know can't happen if he's not in the senate yet.
Obviously if the yearbook is examined, and the ink is new, majority of voters are not going to believe any of the accusations and will see it as a smear. That is why reporters on both CNN and MSBC were annoyed with Gloria.
Ok so you think it is a legit Roy signature even though the R and y do not look similar to the R and y on the divorce paperwork.
it is funny that you have had multiple posts on this topic but you claim not to have seen Roy's signature anywhere. The divorce paperwork signature is all over the internet.
The strokes in both capital Rs are identical. The only difference is one letter is more condensed than the other, and that's very common. The important thing is how the letter is formed, not how narrow or wide it is. A person who learns script young always forms a letter the same way, and it becomes a lifelong habit. The capital letter M, with the second loop larger than the first, is also habitual.
A writer can change this, but it must be done consciously and practiced continually afterwards. Moore's handwriting shows he has always had a consistent hand that changed very little over time. He always tends to swoop the last letters of his name upwards at the same slight angle, the spaces between letters remain identical, the last stroke always tapers with a small lift of the hand, and there are many other identical similarities.
At some time later, probably after being appointed a judge, Moore began to include the middle initial into his signature. It may have been a requirement. As a DA, he didn't have to include it. Some people habitually sign their names informally, while others do it formally habitually. Most people mix it, depending on the occasion.
The inclusion of the letter S in the later signature became a continuous stroke as part of forming the lower case g.
The only way to fairly compare the letter g would be comparing two Moore signatures that didn't include the first letter of his middle name. Without the middle letter, the g stops the word. There are always differences between a stop and a continuance in most people's longhand.
A neutral analysis using many samples would probably provide answers to all Moore's questions, but so would a polygraph test on both people. Which is more reliable as a method of discerning truth from lie?
A polygraph. If Moore really wants the truth to come out, that's the method he should be pushing for.
Gloria has already said her client won't do a polygraph.
I don't see any reason Moore should have to. It is the accuser's job to prove their case.
I don't think the signatures look similar. And I don't buy he would have signed with DA in a yearbook given he wsan't a DA, and dated it twice.
It will be easy to test to see if the ink is new. I suspect the print part of it with DA is at the very least.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
