Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old November 2nd 12, 06:39 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,misc.legal,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.lawyers,soc.culture.usa
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default Goodall Case Not Going Well

On Oct 26, 4:11*pm, "Bill Graham" wrote:
Your smrat wrote:
On Oct 26, 9:19 am, samsloan wrote:


hose


While they might look similar the handwriting expert we have
retained, who also does this work for the FBI, has blown up the
signatures and looked at them with a microscope


Just curious: why would he have to blow them up and look at them with
a microscope? Was he bad at enlarging or did his microscope suck?


hose


Also, as you can plainly see, the entire supposed signature on the
trust was halting and shaky, not like the fluid signature of a man
who was used to signing his name many times.


The fluid signature of a man "hospitalized and at the point of death"
"you mean? I'm not a doctor or anything, but aren't people "on their
death beds" more likely to move haltingly and shake a bit? I know that
if I was face to face with the grim reaper I'd be trembling and
possibly soiling myself.


hose


I am 77, and in good health, and yet my signature is halting and shakey. I
have never had a smooth signature. It just isn't my nature to write
smoothly.... A lot of the young people today never learn to write script.
They print anything that they can't do on a computer. I wonder how their
"signatures" look?


You fail to understand.

We now have something we did not have before.

All we had before was a FAX sent to Bank of America dated 2008, which
is 14 years after the purported Goodall trust was signed on August 24,
1994.

We had a lot of known signatures of Col. Goodall, but none around the
time of his deathbed signature.

So, we had nothing to compare it too.

However, recently we discovered a known real signature of Col. Goodall
and his wife from the exact time and date and place. Here is that
signatu http://www.anusha.com/signature-on-durable-power.jpg

Now compare this with the signature on gthe purported trust: Here it
is: http://www.anusha.com/signature-supp...dall-trust.jpg

Even though these signatures may look similar, a closer examination
shows vast differences.

Of special interest is the fact that Col. Kenneth F. Goodall always
signed the FG of his signature with one sweeping stroke of the pen.
Here is the real signatu http://www.anusha.com/FG-signature-o...f-attorney.jpg

Now here is the same FG on the purported trust
http://www.anusha.com/FG-signature-o...rted-trust.jpg

As you will see the signature on the purported trust is done with
three strokes of the pen and signed with a different type of pen even
though they were supposedly signed at the same time.

We have retained a handwriting expert and this is the first thing he
noticed.

However, he cannot pronounce it a forgery (even though it obviously is
a forgery) because Bank of America refuses to produce the original
trust document.

But do not worry. I intend to have them all put in jail.

Sam Sloan
  #2   Report Post  
Old November 2nd 12, 07:55 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,misc.legal,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.lawyers,soc.culture.usa
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Mar 2011
Posts: 32
Default Goodall Case Not Going Well


"samsloan" wrote in message
...
On Oct 26, 4:11 pm, "Bill Graham" wrote:
Your smrat wrote:
On Oct 26, 9:19 am, samsloan wrote:


hose


While they might look similar the handwriting expert we have
retained, who also does this work for the FBI, has blown up the
signatures and looked at them with a microscope


Just curious: why would he have to blow them up and look at them with
a microscope? Was he bad at enlarging or did his microscope suck?


hose


Also, as you can plainly see, the entire supposed signature on the
trust was halting and shaky, not like the fluid signature of a man
who was used to signing his name many times.


The fluid signature of a man "hospitalized and at the point of death"
"you mean? I'm not a doctor or anything, but aren't people "on their
death beds" more likely to move haltingly and shake a bit? I know that
if I was face to face with the grim reaper I'd be trembling and
possibly soiling myself.


hose


I am 77, and in good health, and yet my signature is halting and shakey. I
have never had a smooth signature. It just isn't my nature to write
smoothly.... A lot of the young people today never learn to write script.
They print anything that they can't do on a computer. I wonder how their
"signatures" look?


You fail to understand.

We now have something we did not have before.

All we had before was a FAX sent to Bank of America dated 2008, which
is 14 years after the purported Goodall trust was signed on August 24,
1994.

We had a lot of known signatures of Col. Goodall, but none around the
time of his deathbed signature.

So, we had nothing to compare it too.

However, recently we discovered a known real signature of Col. Goodall
and his wife from the exact time and date and place. Here is that
signatu http://www.anusha.com/signature-on-durable-power.jpg

Now compare this with the signature on gthe purported trust: Here it
is: http://www.anusha.com/signature-supp...dall-trust.jpg

Even though these signatures may look similar, a closer examination
shows vast differences.

Of special interest is the fact that Col. Kenneth F. Goodall always
signed the FG of his signature with one sweeping stroke of the pen.
Here is the real signatu
http://www.anusha.com/FG-signature-o...f-attorney.jpg

Now here is the same FG on the purported trust
http://www.anusha.com/FG-signature-o...rted-trust.jpg

As you will see the signature on the purported trust is done with
three strokes of the pen and signed with a different type of pen even
though they were supposedly signed at the same time.

We have retained a handwriting expert and this is the first thing he
noticed.

However, he cannot pronounce it a forgery (even though it obviously is
a forgery) because Bank of America refuses to produce the original
trust document.

But do not worry. I intend to have them all put in jail.

Sam Sloan

Not taking any sides in the above discussion, I would like to say that a
signature is a very poor way to identify any person, just as are bite marks
on the skin of a deceased person. Far too much credence is given to those
who claim to be able to tell forgeries from the real thing in both these
cases. I wonder how many innocent people are rotting away in prison because
of these, "pseudoscience's".

  #3   Report Post  
Old November 3rd 12, 02:12 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Nov 2011
Posts: 20
Default Goodall Case Not Going Well

Sam, face it. Mike wanted to help disabled people, and Judge Busch already denied your claim to evaluate a signature. He also told you the trust has no requirement to present to you anything, not being a party... ever

Face it dad, I can see why you were broke so many years, you got a job here as a trustee for many years with no pay and you never became an attorney so just let it go. What financial gain do you have either way.
  #4   Report Post  
Old November 4th 12, 02:18 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default Goodall Case Not Going Well

On Nov 2, 6:12*pm, Peter Sloan wrote:
Sam, face it. Mike wanted to help disabled people, and Judge Busch already denied your claim to evaluate a signature. He also told you the trust has no requirement to present to you anything, not being a party... ever

Face it dad, I can see why you were broke so many years, you got a job here as a trustee for many years with no pay and you never became an attorney so just let it go. What financial gain do you have either way.


Mike Goodall did not want to help disabled people and he especially
hated Guide Dogs for the Blind for what they have done to him and his
family. If he is looking down from heaven now, he fully approving of
what we are doing to save his estate from these people.

Mike Goodall always referred to Guide Dogs for the Blind as "The Blind
Dogs". You cannot imagine how deeply he hated these people. I am
trying to protect his old friends from not doing far worse things to
them.

  #5   Report Post  
Old November 9th 12, 05:31 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Mar 2010
Posts: 143
Default Goodall Case Not Going Well

I don't know if Sloan is right or wrong here, but damned if he's not
sympathetic even if he's 100 percent right.

Why does he post all this stuff here?
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Goodall Case: Answer by Sam Sloan to Unlawful Detainer Proceeding samsloan rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 3 September 1st 12 07:57 AM
Goodall Case: Answer by Sam Sloan to Unlawful Detainer Proceeding samsloan rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 0 August 18th 12 03:48 AM
Bank of America is Trying to Steal Entire Goodall Estate samsloan rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 1 August 4th 11 10:00 AM
Goodall Estate: Further Objection to Motion by Bank of America samsloan rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 0 July 29th 11 09:20 AM
Bogner Response B. Lafferty[_6_] rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 December 27th 08 04:52 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:13 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017