The missing link

[Daktari]

Found on shirleymckie.com

Wertheim Masterclass Day 1
http://www.thefingerprintinquiryscotlan ... 2.221.html

Masterclass Day 2
http://www.thefingerprintinquiryscotlan ... 1.221.html

Missing from shirleymckie.com

Masterclass Day 3

So here it is

http://www.thefingerprintinquiryscotlan ... 1.221.html

As Pat says; "Read the transcripts" (especially the Afternoon!)
Have a nice weekend.

[Pat A. Wertheim]

Thanks, Dak!!!

You've come through for us once again. You're a good man, Dak (er, you are a man, aren't you?) Sorry I missed our little appointment at "The Counting House." But I know an excellent place called "Big Nose Kate's" down in Tombstone, just a couple of blocks from the OK Corral. I'm checking my legal rights and if I'm not mistaken, when two citizens of different countries are involved in a civil action, the person filing the action has the option of filing it in his own country. I've made about 15 trips to Scotland in the last decade. Maybe a few of my British friends will get the opportunity to visit me here. Stay tuned.

But I wander. I sincerely appreciate you posting those links on this site.

Cheers,
Pat

[PCC]

Pat-I must be a little hung over...don't quite understand why Dak posted the links? Could it by he/she has seen the light and is now a fan of yours? I don't see how anyone could read the transcrips and not be impressed by your responses. I've shared copies with co-workers for training purposes. In my department we focus a lot on procedures and developing skills in crime scene processing and latent work, but not nearly enough on court room testimony. While the setting is somewhat foreign, the subject matter isn't. Being able to articulate responses with regard to fingerprint comparisons so that lay people can easily understand is an extremely valuable skill. One that you certainly possess. Seems to me, even if you don't return and give any more testimony to this inquiry, this cake is done. Adding more is only icing.

Hope this post doesn't necessitate buying larger hats. Keep up the great work! By the way, I've been to big nose Kates...her nose ain't that bad.

[Pat A. Wertheim]

Hi PCC

To understand the transcripts, it helps to understand the imaging system they had in the court room. Every lawyer's desk had a couple of monitors (nine desks for lawyers**) plus the lead counsel's desk, plus the Judge, plus the witness. When they put an image up on the screen, the lead counsel could draw on it and I could draw on it with tools very much like those on the Adobe Photoshop toolbar. So in my testimony when you read about me drawing lines or arrows or circles or tracing ridges, I'm using the tools right on the screen. That was great because lead counsel (Mr. Moynihan) could indicate by drawing on the screen, and I could answer by drawing on the screen. There were three large flatscreen monitors for the various folks in the gallery. Neat stuff -- lots of fun!

(**added a day after original post: Excuse me, it may not have been nine desks. It was a lot more than the two desks I normally see in court. Perhaps Wullie or Attonement could count the number of tables for the interested parties, including all of the tables arranged in the roughly amphitheater fashion facing the Chairman's station. I can see this blunder in numbering may raise yet another charge of attempt to mislead or conspiracy if it is not immediately rectified. Oh, and please count the total number of monitors available to lawyers and representatives on the main floor. An inaccuracy there might also be grounds to impeach me yet again or allege more deception on my part.)

[PCC]

To be honest, I had to read the transcripts pretty slow to follow along, but then again, being in a protected class due to age, that is pretty understandable. While the counsel stressed that they tried to develope the best solution for all to mark and display their mark-ups, seems like they could have simplified it some more, but maybe it was more clear in person. Never mind as I was quite able to follow along and could totally appreciate the difficulties you faced. I have never encountered as indepth questioning about a comparision as this. I really liked the tracing the ridges for demonstration purposes. I will be sure to pass that along too. Normally when testifying you expect the defense to try their best to discredit you. They are just doing their job, like you are doing yours. This however, wasn't about doing their job so much as it was an obvious, vindictive, and a vain attempt to intimidate and silence you. But as I said, the cake's been baked...you pretty much made it easy for any lay person to see that there is no way this could have been an identification. AND if a lay person can see that, certainly someone with 20 + years of experience in latent comparisons should be able to see it too. WTFudge happened!!!! Are they completely incompetent or did they have an axe to grind? Blurring images ain't gonna help em now.

[Atonement]

Unfortunately I won't be able to attend the Inquiry this week (or for a while) as "proper" work beckons. I would say that I consider that last week was, for me, "training" and I should be able to claim the time as part of my required CPD hours ("continuing professional development") for this year. I now know so much more about the science and art of fingerprint identification. Thank you Pat for your excellent presentation and for sharing your skills and knowledge.

To Big Wullie and his good lady (sorry I don't know your first name): it was good to speak with you both, albeit briefly. Keep up the good work, Wullie, in providing valuable feedback from the Inquiry for those of us who cannot be there. Hopefully I will see you both sometime later in October when I hope to be back to hear more evidence.

To the other gentleman in the audience I spoke with (again, sorry I did not get your name but you appear to have an encyclopaedic knowledge of the issues), it was good to talk with you and hopefully we will meet again.

[josher89]

Atonement wrote:

I now know so much more about the science and art of fingerprint identification.

(emphasis my own).

I just wanted to be sure and remind you that fingerprint identification is all science: there is no art involved in friction ridge comparisons. Unless, of course, you meant the ridge tracings, descriptions such as 'blobs', and such. Otherwise, I second your comments about Mr. Wertheim. I'm so glad to be able to finally meeting him at our state IAI conference in 2010 as I missed him in 2008 (his first public engagement discussing the forged Pollock fingerprint!) I'm looking at the fingerprints posted by Forensic Scientist now to 'see what I can see'.

[Big Wullie]

I wasn't going to be caught up on this posting started by Daktari but on further reading I see the post has backfired on him Big Time with amazing comments about Pat's "GREAT WORK".

Al told Pat I think there are about 11 desks (Counting the witness box) where there are monitors full of people and a couple of vacant ones where Swann & Co would have sat, then there is the IT desks next to the judge all told about 15 desks or so with monitors to view presentations.

You bad boy not doing your sums right, you will get a slap on the wrist, haha.

There are at least 6 small, plus 4 large screens for the public.

However for sake of clarity I will count them all on Tuesday and let you know for definite.

Atonement

Likewise it was nice speaking to you, and look forward to speaking again later in October.

I am sure you will be reading the transcripts though.

Here is a thought:

If SCRO can attend seminars which allows them to become experts in those fields then anyone sitting through this Inquiry can claim to be experts in the following fields of fingerprinting, Single Taps, Double Taps,Triple Taps, twists and 180 degree turns, Bifurcations,Ridge Endings,Lakes,Incipient's,Pores, Islands etc oh and Fakes & Forgeries, and how to cover up your mistakes with Blurred Images.

The presentations from McKenzie are appalling and a disgrace to Scotland he should hang his face in shame.

[Big Wullie]

I thought it worthwhile to post the credentials of the other person who saw fit to sit with Mr Geddes and laugh in the face of Pat Wertheim while he was giving evidence.

NAME AND PERSONAL INFORMATION
1. My name is David Samuel Kennedy Thurley. I am now a retired police
constable. I presently look after personal business affairs and work, part
time, at Glasgow University and the Police College. I teach body recovery
techniques and the recovery of plant and botany samples.

Wonder if he puts on another face at Glasgow University and the police College or does he teach them how to Laugh in Court when others are giving evidence.

I wonder also if they both would have him under their roofs, had they seen him sitting with Geddes laughing at Pat Wertheim in the witness box.

Retired Police Constable

Does this mean throughout his career he gained no promotion ?

And he has the audacity to laugh at Pat's evidence.

[SueMedname]

Although it's captioned the "THE MISSING LINK" that doesn't mean it's your thread Wullie.

Whilst you are casting aspertions on the careers of others, before your no doubt wrongful conviction for (what was it again, bank robbing, holding folk up?) I take it you were a hard working public servant or industrious individual paying your way? Go on enlighten us. What dizzy heights did you attain before your wrongful conviction robbed you of your career?

The position of Police Constable isn't a bad position to attain in life. In contrast I've heard of people reaching far more senior ranks yet ending up sleeping in cars. Tragic.

I always hear of the 'no angel' syndrome when those with a bit of previous get collared for something more serious then cry injustice, so what were you Wullie? No angel? A saint? Or a bloke doing an honest days work for an honest days wage? A bam? You can tell us, we won't judge, we won't make smart comments about your career or your career prospects.

[Taggart]

Sue,

Am a little confused with your posting.

I didn’t see you make any reference to any contact with Strathclyde Police or the Crown Office over the evidence of Pat Wertheim, which on another thread you stated:

Pat boasted (under oath) that he had knowingly presented incomplete evidence at a previous trial (a perjury trial no less, also under oath)

You seem to attack Wullie for his observations and claimed he was casting aspersions on the careers of others.

Let me get this right. It is okay for you and the SCRO experts to cast very serious allegations of criminality under the privilege of a Public Inquiry and under anonymity on this website? And that’s acceptable?

So have you made the contact?

Has Mr. Holmes made the written allegation and submitted the supporting evidence as instructed by Sir Anthony Campbell?

Let me suggest the answer to both is no.

If as you claim you are so worried about Justice why are you doing nothing about it?

Perhaps Mr. Holmes will be forced soon into retracting his spurious allegations and making an unreserved public apology?

Now wouldn’t that be interesting……

Maybe this thread should change its name to 'The Missing Allegation'!

[Big Wullie]

Maybe this thread should change its name to 'The Missing Allegation'!

Hear Hear Taggart.

(what was it again, bank robbing, holding folk up?)

Daktari's Mouthpiece you must try harder to get your facts right before casting asperstions.

You seem to be making a habit of jumping to conclusions about Jails and Signing on and Charges etc etc But then again you did the same with Y7 & QI2 which brings us all to this forum.

Nice to note : Nothing has changed.

I have told you once before my Credibility is not on trial here but yours is, keep up your great work of destroying it.


Moderator, Please take note.

I really take offence to unsubstantiated Allegations from Posters on this forum.

I trust the Moderator will romove your reference to "Bam" and the spurious allegations of Robbing Banks that I have never ever been accused of, let alone convicted of.

[Daktari]

Moderator, Please take note.

I really take offence to unsubstantiated Allegations(sic) from Posters(sic) on this forum.

But not the unsubstantiated Allegations(sic) about criminality, conspiracy and competence apparently!

Next you'll be telling us you don't believe in making personal attacks on people!

I hate to be pedantic but; watch your use of upper case or you'll have Gillian on your case!

But at least you've got an excuse.

[Big Wullie]

Mr Geddes

See you haven't grown them Balls yet, and still using the old Daktari.

I like the use of Hindu now.

Is your mothpiece suggesting above that because someone has been convicted of a less serious crime then it is OK for the police to frame them for a more serious crime ?

No wonder you are in the situation you are in today

But not the unsubstantiated Allegations(sic) about criminality, conspiracy and competence apparently!

Sorry Geddes but there is plenty of proof of Conspiracy, Incompetence and Criminality on the part of SCRO like the following:

Honest Mistake Admission from First Minister.
Mcleod Report.
MacKay Report.
Pat Wertheim.
Arie Zeelenberg.
Ashbaugh.
15 Jurors.
£750.000.
4 Sacked workers, or was that 6.
Malcolm Graham. Right Thumb he said.

And many many more


One thing is for sure though my allegations are substantiated and correct, I do not accuse you of rape now do I.

No I get my facts right, You all wrongly Identified Y7 and QI2 and apart from your own colleagues the rest of the world agrees on this issue.

Did Swann not at one time actually claim it was a right thumb too ?

You still cannot correct the jails you attributed to me either, Too much for you, you that knows everything now you are getting the charges wrong too, You really haven't a clue have you but then again that's not new.

I will try again SueMedname:

The position of Police Constable isn't a bad position to attain in life.

Does this mean throughout his career he gained no promotion ?

Where did I claim this wasn't a Good Position ?

I was merely asking a competent question.

This is you jumping to conclusions again.

See you at the Inquiry later Mr Geddes.

[Daktari]

Sorry Geddes but there is plenty of proof of Conspiracy, Incompetence and Criminality on the part of SCRO like the following:

I hate to pedantic, but;
There is absolutely no proof, just a load of wild allegations mainly from the twisted, vindictive mind of Iain McKie.

You will have noticed how the SCRO people are treating these allegations.
By facing their accusers in public, under oath, at the Inquiry Iain McKie tried to stop.