15-07-2014, 06:37 PM
(This post was last modified: 15-07-2014, 06:52 PM by Drew Phipps.)
Joan better name names. Not only is her examiner anonymous, but the alleged contacts in the licensing organization aren't named either. Joan doesn't even name the certifying agency to which she refers: It's probably the International Association for Identification (IAI), but who knows. The "note" in the file may or may not be an official document of whatever agency it is, but it doesn't sound very official.
For that matter, the IAI has 2 levels of membership, one is for "active" members that are employed, and the other is for "participating" members that are not employed. As I recall, when Darby made the print ID's he was no longer employed as a print examiner. The way I understand it, membership in the organization is a completely voluntary activity and in no way connected to competence, nor is it a prerequisite for the job. Of course it must be said that testifying experts in a criminal case darn well better have an active membership or they would risk getting discredited by the opposing side. Stripping an active member of membership for competency reasons would be better documented than with just a "note" in a file, or your organization would risk libel lawsuits.
I have read Joan Mellen's work before and I am surprised that she relies on anonymous unverifiable assertions to make a gratuitous reputation smear job. She better name some names. If she appears uninterested or unwilling, perhaps it is time to request docs from the IAI.
Edit: I have read from other sources that he was certified by IAI. Time to make them cough up their file.
For that matter, the IAI has 2 levels of membership, one is for "active" members that are employed, and the other is for "participating" members that are not employed. As I recall, when Darby made the print ID's he was no longer employed as a print examiner. The way I understand it, membership in the organization is a completely voluntary activity and in no way connected to competence, nor is it a prerequisite for the job. Of course it must be said that testifying experts in a criminal case darn well better have an active membership or they would risk getting discredited by the opposing side. Stripping an active member of membership for competency reasons would be better documented than with just a "note" in a file, or your organization would risk libel lawsuits.
I have read Joan Mellen's work before and I am surprised that she relies on anonymous unverifiable assertions to make a gratuitous reputation smear job. She better name some names. If she appears uninterested or unwilling, perhaps it is time to request docs from the IAI.
Edit: I have read from other sources that he was certified by IAI. Time to make them cough up their file.
"All that is necessary for tyranny to succeed is for good men to do nothing." (unknown)
James Tracy: "There is sometimes an undue amount of paranoia among some conspiracy researchers that can contribute to flawed observations and analysis."
Gary Cornwell (Dept. Chief Counsel HSCA): "A fact merely marks the point at which we have agreed to let investigation cease."
Alan Ford: "Just because you believe it, that doesn't make it so."
James Tracy: "There is sometimes an undue amount of paranoia among some conspiracy researchers that can contribute to flawed observations and analysis."
Gary Cornwell (Dept. Chief Counsel HSCA): "A fact merely marks the point at which we have agreed to let investigation cease."
Alan Ford: "Just because you believe it, that doesn't make it so."