A coincedence

[Ben]

That's immaterial if the process being witnessed was beyond the area of expertise of the witnesses themselves, though, Ben.

Not wholly immaterial, Gareth. Martin Fido's commentary on Sue Iremomger's professionalism and findings could only have been buttressed by a close familiarity with her methods and the conclusions she arrived at as a consequence. Such comments should put paid, for example, to some of the more outlandish and unacceptable conclusions as to the nature of the material Iremonger had available to work with, unless anyone wants to argue that Fido himself would have confused a modern piece of a photocopied printer-regurgitated paper with an original document from 1898.

All the best,
Ben

[Sam Flynn]

Not wholly immaterial, Gareth. Martin Fido's commentary on Sue Iremomger's professionalism and findings could only have been buttressed by a close familiarity with her methods and the conclusions she arrived at as a consequence.

Martin might be closely familiar with what she did, Ben, but his not being a "world-renowned expert" in forensic document examination makes his endorsement of the merits of what he saw somewhat - ahem! - academic.

I have been mightily impressed by Prof Walter Lewin's lectures in physics on the internet, but - whilst I am scientifically literate - my knowledge of physics extends only to "A" Level standard. Even so, I'm quite happy to give Prof Lewin's online lectures my ringing endorsement... but please don't assume that my opinion on everything that he did entitles me to endorse everything that he said.

[Ben]

Hi Gareth,

Martin's positive endorsement of Iremonger's character and abilities were interesting to say the least, but I'm much more interested in his observations insofar as they relate to what she actually did, not how well she did it. That's the crucial distinction for me.

All the best,
Ben