by Edgar J. Steele
August 23, 2011
World-class expert forensic audiologist Dennis Walsh most thoroughly would have trashed the government’s case against me. Had the judge allowed it, Mr. Walsh would have testified that the recordings not only definitely were fabricated, but that much, if not all, of “my” voice on them actually belonged to someone else.
Sound Forge vs. Edi-Tracker
The prosecutor’s FBI expert relied upon the fact that Walsh used a computer-based wave-form analysis program called “Edi-Tracker” in convincing the judge that Walsh’s methodology was so suspect that Walsh could not be allowed near the jury. After all, Walsh singlehandedly would have destroyed the government’s case, wouldn’t he?
The FBI “expert” used “Sound-Forge,” another wave-form analysis program, in demonstrating why the government’s analysis turned up zero problems with the recordings, donchaknow. Predictably, he declared that Sound-Forge is a much more accepted standard in the (audio recording analysis) “industry” than is Edi-Tracker.
Here’s the problem with the government “expert’s” conclusion: he rested his differences with Walsh upon the two different computer wave-form analysis programs they used: Sound-Forge gave “clearer, sounder and more reliable results,” he declared, which is why he did not agree with Walsh’s conclusion. Got that?
Sound Forge vs. Sound Forge
Now ask yourself how much sense the government “expert’s” opinion makes, in light of the fact that our Dr. Papcun, the leading forensic audiologist in the world, also uses Sound-Forge, the very same program the government used in discrediting Walsh. Even so, Judge Winmill ruled that Walsh was not “qualified” to testify as an expert, despite his 20 years’ experience in the field. However, Dr. Papcun used Sound-Forge, too, to find most of the same anomalies as did Walsh, thus allowing him to agree with Walsh’s findings, though not wishing to go quite so far as to articulate the same conclusions as did Walsh.
The government never did explain why Sound-Forge in Dr. Papcun’s hands allowed him to agree with Walsh, while the same program in the hands of the FBI “expert” yielded up exactly the opposite conclusion. Odd, eh? Of course, the judge kept Dr. Papcun off the witness stand, too, because his analysis was “irrelevant” to my case and, thus, might “confuse the jury.” Poor, dumb jurors. Good thing they had the judge to save them from reaching their own confused (and, thus, “wrong”) conclusions, isn’t it? Else, I would have been acquitted; that just would not have done, of course.
Guilty Until Proven Guilty
Yes, boys and girls, this is exactly how it is done – the duplicity and the juror manipulation, that is. This is how the innocent end up in jail, despite the government’s claim that we are innocent until proven guilty. No.
Get this, once and for all: We are guilty the moment we are charged by our government. Truth has nothing to do with it. Guilty until we prove ourselves to be innocent, if we are allowed to do so, that is. I wasn’t allowed to present to the jury the truth of my innocence, just as so many others before me. Just as you might not be allowed, sometime in the future.
When will we have had too much, folks? When will we rise up en masse and tell our government, “No more!?” When will we demand a return to observance of the Constitutional principles upon which America was founded.
They have come for so many of us. Now they finally have come for me. When do we stop it? If nobody stood up for me, what makes you think that anybody will stand up for you if and when the time comes? For that matter, how much longer will they allow me to talk with you like this from a jail cell?