No winner yet in 'Doonesbury' Bush search

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
om...
In article . net,
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"Michael Wise" wrote in message
...

Do objective judges accept one guy's claim of having seen something as
something even approaching conclusive evidence?

To the best of my knowledge, yes. Why wouldn't they?

Because eyewitness testimony is not very reliable at all.

When I've sat jury duty the instructions were to take all testimony
at face value if there was an interpretation of events that allowed it.

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
om...
different points of view about Kerry's Vietnam record (ranging from hero
to nearly a war criminal).

Yea, I wonder how many other opinions Kerry will have of his war record.
;-)

In Mr. Bush's case, has anybody else from his former AL unit stepped
forward to confirm the "sighting"?

A few so far, and there have been minor discrepancies in their stories,
which has been a major point of contention on his service record.

There is also his girlfriend, who seemed to remember him very well
indeed.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (requires authentication)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

In article ,
"John Keeney" wrote:

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
om...
In article . net,
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"Michael Wise" wrote in message
...

Do objective judges accept one guy's claim of having seen something as
something even approaching conclusive evidence?

To the best of my knowledge, yes. Why wouldn't they?

Because eyewitness testimony is not very reliable at all.

When I've sat jury duty the instructions were to take all testimony
at face value if there was an interpretation of events that allowed it.

That's nice, but the footnote to that is that most eyewitness testimony
is extremely easy to disallow.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

"Michael Wise" wrote in message
...

Nobody said anything about specifc dates.


You mentioned dates in your previous message.



I think year and approximate
month (or even season) would suffice. That coupled with the instances in
which the person claims to have seen Mr. Bush.


That's been done.



Tell me, why has nobody else in the unit come forward. I sure as well
won't ever forget those I served with both on active duty and active
reserves. Surely, more than one person can step forward.


Probably because as he was a non-flying pilot in a flying unit his assigned
duties did not require him to interact very much with other members of the
unit, who were directly involved in flying operations.



Nobody is accusing the person claiming to have seen Mr. Bush multiple
times of partnership. However, partisanship should be considered...when
it's only one person coming forward (months after the fact).


Months after what fact?

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
om...

Well, from the point of view of the "Doonesbury" folks, it's because
someone could have paid off the witness, or the witness could just plain
be wrong about 30 year old memories.


Exactly. There will be no credible witness because anyone that puts Bush on
the base is not credible.

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
om...

But that's for short-term situations. Can you remember everyone you
went to school with in high school? Can you even remember all of your
*teachers*?

Now, put yourself in the place of some old guy who was the rankingh
officer at some NG base 30 years back, and consider how hard it would be
to remember with any certainty if some young guy went through your unit
for a few days over a couple of months.


But they weren't seeking one specific person to remember everyone in the
unit, they were seeking anyone from the unit to remember one specific
person.



Political, monetary, or notoriety. For example.


Political gain? How so? Monetary gain? The witness doesn't receive the
reward, it's donated in his name to the USO. Notoriety? Why would anyone
wish to be known in an unfavorable light?

In article ,
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

But they weren't seeking one specific person to remember everyone in the
unit, they were seeking anyone from the unit to remember one specific
person.

Can you remember all of the people *you* knew, 30 years back, even
casual acquaintances, in enough detail to specify dates?

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
om...

Can you remember all of the people *you* knew, 30 years back, even
casual acquaintances, in enough detail to specify dates?


Nope, but that's a different situation. No specific person was being asked
to confirm Bush's attendance at Dannelly on any specific date.

In article t,
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
om...

Can you remember all of the people *you* knew, 30 years back, even
casual acquaintances, in enough detail to specify dates?

Nope, but that's a different situation. No specific person was being asked
to confirm Bush's attendance at Dannelly on any specific date.

So you're saying that, even though you can't do it, you expect one of
the dozen or so people who actually worked with Bush in that time period
to do better...

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.