From: Jonathon Blake <grafolog@netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 13:51:24 +0800
To: jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>
Subject: Re: 5th protect password?
In-Reply-To: <m0uAiWV-00091CC@pacifier.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9604210212.A12876-0100000@netcom2>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


	Jim:

On Sat, 20 Apr 1996, jim bell wrote:

> >   DOE v. United States, 487 U.S. 201; 108 S. Ct. 2341 (1988)

> >   A defendant can be compelled to produce material evidence that
> >   is incriminating.  Fingerprints, blood samples, voice
> >   exemplars, handwriting specimens, or other items of physical
> >   evidence may be extracted from a defendant against his will.
> 
> As you might expect, I see a problem (and a pattern!) with even these 
	
	The pattern is that you are again ignoring legal realities.
	<< Which is a thing to be expected.  >> 

> examples.  Notice that with the possible exception of "handwriting 
> specimens", the examples above all represent pieces of evidence whose 

	Handwriting as a tool used by most people, dates back to
	Eighteenth Century.  Before that, it was a trade practiced
	by scribes, and priests. In Europe, outside of the Clergy,
	illiteracy was the standard, till the begining of the Industrial
	Revolution.   <<   Remember that John Dee had an incredibly large
	library of 200 volumes.  >> 

> or so, etc.  I think even graphology (handwriting analysis) for legal 
> purposes is likewise comparatively recent, although there is no obvious 
> technological reason which this should have been so.  The last category, 

	Courts have yet to rule that an individual can be forced
	to provide a sample of their handwriting, if the purpose
	of obtaining such a script is for a graphological profile.
	More to the point, courts -- or at least US Courts -- don't
	accept graphological profiles, as proof of anything.  

	I suspect you confusing graphology with questioned document
	examination. Courts have ruled that a person may be forced
	to provide a sample of writing, for use in questioned document
	examination, without violating the fifth amendment.  << You ought
	to read the case law, to see why providing such a sample is
	not a fifth amendment violation ---- it might help you be a 
	better armchair lawyer, who spends to much time watching
	Perry Mason reruns.  >> 

> Anyone who denies this should be required to make a list of the kinds of 

	Questined Document Examination, which you alluded to, was
	first accepted by courts in the United States, at the turn 
	of the century.  And it was only after World War One, that 
	it was accepted in all courts in the US.  

        xan

        jonathon
        grafolog@netcom.com

        Owner:     Graphology-L@Bolis-com 
	

**********************************************************************
*								     *
*	Opinions expressed don't necessarily reflect my own views.   *
*								     *
*	There is no way that they can be construed to represent      *
*	any organization's views.				     *
*								     *
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
*	ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/gr/graphology/home.html	     *
*								     *
*			     OR					     *
*								     *
*       http://members.tripod.com/~graphology/index.html             *
*								     *
***********************************************************************