Ceglia v. Zuckerberg et al

Filing 459

AMENDED DOCUMENT by Paul D. Ceglia. Amendment to 456 Order on Motion to Strike,. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1-15, # 2 Exhibit 16-20, # 3 Exhibit 21-37, # 4 Exhibit 38 Part 1, # 5 Exhibit 38 Part 2, # 6 Exhibit 38 Part 3, # 7 Exhibit 39-50, # 8 Certificate of Service)(Boland, Dean)

Download PDF
EXHIBIT 21 EXHIBIT 21 EXHIBIT 21 REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED EXHIBIT 22 EXHIBIT 22 EXHIBIT 22 EXHIBIT 23 EXHIBIT 23 EXHIBIT 23 EXHIBIT 24 EXHIBIT 24 EXHIBIT 24 Questioned “Mark Zuckerberg” initials from page 1 Note the writing differences by comparing the corresponding numbers and arrows 4 2 5 1 6 7 3 9 8 ______________________________________________________________________ Known specimens by Paul Ceglia writing the “MZ” initials 2 4 2 5 4 5 1 6 6 8 9 4 2 3 5 9 8 4 2 1 6 7 3 9 8 5 1 1 5 7 7 3 4 2 2 6 4 5 1 6 6 7 7 7 3 8 9 2 4 3 5 2 1 1 9 8 4 5 3 6 4 2 1 3 8 9 7 3 9 8 5 6 6 7 9 8 7 3 8 BLANCO & Associates Inc. 9 EXHIBIT 24 EXHIBIT 25 EXHIBIT 25 EXHIBIT 25 EXHIBIT 26 EXHIBIT 26 EXHIBIT 26 Questioned “Mark Zuckerberg” signature on Facebook Contract Note the writing differences by comparing the corresponding numbers and arrows 2 6 4 8 11 12 1 14 3 5 7 13 10 9 ______________________________________________________________________ Known specimen signatures by Paul Ceglia writing “Mark Zuckerberg” 4 2 6 8 11 12 1 14 3 5 4 7 6 10 9 2 13 11 12 8 1 14 3 5 2 4 7 9 10 11 8 6 13 12 1 14 3 5 7 9 10 13 BLANCO & Associates Inc. EXHIBIT 26.1 Known specimen signatures by Paul Ceglia writing “Mark Zuckerberg” 4 2 6 8 11 12 1 3 14 5 7 10 9 2 4 6 13 11 8 1 12 3 7 5 10 13 9 4 11 8 2 14 6 12 1 3 14 7 5 4 2 6 10 9 8 13 11 12 1 14 3 5 2 7 4 9 10 6 8 13 11 12 1 14 3 5 7 9 10 13 BLANCO & Associates Inc. EXHIBIT 26.2 EXHIBIT 27 EXHIBIT 27 EXHIBIT 27 Latent handwriting impression test using the “ESDA” Crop from original Page 1 of Facebook Contract scan (rendered in black and white for comparison to “ESDA lift”); this is the image of the actual hand printing on Page 1 Enhanced callout of “esigner” from “Designer” Printout of scan of “ESDA lift” from Page 2 BLANCO & Associates Inc. EXHIBIT 27 EXHIBIT 28 EXHIBIT 28 EXHIBIT 28 Designation: E2291 – 03 Standard Guide for Indentation Examinations1 This standard is issued under the fixed designation E2291; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. A superscript epsilon (´) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval. 1. Scope 1.1 This guide provides procedures that should be used by forensic document examiners (Guide E444) for examinations and comparisons involving visualization and recording of indentations. 1.2 These procedures include evaluation of the sufficiency of the material available for examination. 1.3 The particular methods employed in a given case will depend upon the nature of the material available for examination. 1.4 This guide may not cover all aspects of unusual or uncommon examinations. 1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory requirements prior to use. 3.2.3 film, n—thin transparent plastic material that covers the item during an examination using an EDD. 3.2.4 indentations, n—latent or visible impressions in paper or other media. 3.2.5 indirect contact, n—two sheets of paper, one on top of the other, with one or more intervening sheets. 3.2.6 lift, n—the product of an EDD examination; a selfadhesive plastic sheet adhering to a film that preserves the results of an EDD examination. 3.2.7 primary indentations, n—impressions caused by the act of writing or other dynamic actions. 3.2.8 secondary impression(s), n—fiber disturbances caused by contact with the embossed side of indentations and not caused by the act of writing. 3.2.9 side lighting, n—illumination from a light source that is at a low angle of incidence, or even parallel, to the surface of the item. Syn. oblique lighting. 2. Referenced Documents 2.1 ASTM Standards:2 E444 Guide for Scope of Work of Forensic Document Examiners E1732 Terminology Relating to Forensic Science E2195 Terminology Relating to the Examination of Questioned Documents 4. Significance and Use 4.1 When sheets of paper are in direct or indirect contact with one another, impressions on the top sheet can produce indentations on the sheet(s) below. 4.2 This guide establishes procedures for visualizing those indentations. 4.2.1 These procedures are essentially non-destructive; however, pencil writing and single-strike ribbon typing can be partially lifted from the document by EDD. Although this effect can be minimal, adequate documentation of such items should precede EDD. 4.3 Paper fiber disturbances caused by erasures or present in torn paper edges may be visualized using this guide. 4.4 Electrostatic detection device (EDD) examinations may be useful in developing other types of impressions on paper items (for example, typewritten material, shoeprints and latent prints). 4.5 The procedures outlined here are grounded in the generally accepted body of knowledge and experience in the field of forensic document examination. By following these procedures, a forensic document examiner can reliably reach an opinion concerning indentations. 3. Terminology 3.1 Definitions—For definitions of terms in this guide, refer to Terminologies E1732 and E2195. 3.2 Definitions of Terms Specific to This Standard: 3.2.1 direct contact, n—two sheets of paper, one on top of the other, with no intervening sheets. 3.2.2 electrostatic detection device (EDD), n—an instrument used to visualize paper fiber disturbances (for example, indentations, erasures, typewritten material/lift off). 1 This guide is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E30 on Forensic Sciences and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee E30.02 on Questioned Documents. Current edition approved April 10, 2003. Published June 2003. DOI: 10.1520/ E2291-03. 2 For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or contact ASTM Customer Service at service@astm.org. For Annual Book of ASTM Standards volume information, refer to the standard’s Document Summary page on the ASTM website. Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States. 1 E2291 – 03 5. Interferences 5.1 Certain items submitted for examination may have inherent limitations that can interfere with the procedures in this guide. Limitations should be noted and recorded. 5.2 The size, shape, density or condition of an item may make it unsuitable for the EDD portion of the procedure (for example, some book covers, large file folders and items that have been wet or damaged after indentations were made). 5.3 A complete examination involves the use of both the optical and EDD portions of the procedure. All indentations may not be revealed if the optical and EDD portions of the procedure are not conducted. 5.4 The results of prior storage, handling, testing, or processing may interfere with these procedures. Chemical processing for latent prints generally interferes with indentation examination results. Indentation examinations should be conducted prior to any chemical processing. Items should be handled appropriately to avoid compromising subsequent examinations (for example, with clean cloth gloves). 5.5 Items should be handled as little as possible prior to EDD examination to prevent contamination (for example, the introduction of latent prints and additional indentations). Improper handling (for example, rubbing the item surface with cloth gloves) may also impede EDD examination results. 5.6 EDD examination may yield secondary impressions as well as primary impressions. Caution should be taken when attempting to determine whether impressions are primary or secondary. 5.7 In some locations (that is, areas with low humidity), conducting an EDD examination without prior humidification of the document may impede examination results. 5.8 Periodically check the condition of the glass beads utilized in EDD examinations. They can deteriorate with use, affecting the quality of the developed EDD image. 5.9 Repeated processing with EDD can result in degraded images. 7.3 View the item being examined using side lighting that is directed at the item from various angles and directions. In some instances, the use of side lighting in a room with subdued light may provide better visualization of indentations. 7.3.1 Document any indentations observed. 7.3.2 If indentations are not observed, document the lack of visible indentations. 7.4 Determine whether the item is suitable for EDD examination. 7.4.1 If the item is not suitable, discontinue examination and report accordingly. 7.5 Each suitable item should be examined using an EDD. 7.5.1 The EDD shall be operated utilizing the instructions provided in the operating manual, laboratory procedures, and current technical research. 7.5.2 A control indentation shall be successfully developed and recorded on the day of examination. This control can be conducted prior to, or concurrently with, the EDD examination of the item(s). If the control indentation is not successfully visualized, the problem shall be corrected before any further indentation examinations are conducted with that instrument. 7.6 Results of the EDD examination may be preserved by making a lift. 7.7 If no indentations are developed, the results will be documented or preserved, or both, according to laboratory policy. NOTE 1—In situations where the developed results are faint or there is background interference, or both, results may be difficult to see. In such instances, the results should be lifted and evaluated using an appropriate background. 7.8 Lifts shall be maintained according to laboratory policy. 7.9 Evaluate and document results of the EDD examination. 7.10 If indentations or other images are visualized, conduct other examinations as appropriate. 8. Report 8.1 Conclusion(s), or opinion(s), or other finding(s) resulting from the procedures in this guide may be reached once sufficient examinations have been conducted. 8.2 The bases and reasons for the conclusion(s), opinion(s), or finding(s) should appear in the examiner’s documentation and may also appear in the report. 8.3 Once examinations and evaluations have been completed, reports may include the following types of conclusion(s), opinion(s), or finding(s): 8.3.1 Whether indentations were observed. 8.3.2 Whether decipherable indentations were observed. 8.3.3 The text of deciphered indentations. 8.3.4 Information as to the source of indentations. 6. Equipment and Requirements 6.1 Light source(s) of sufficient intensity and appropriate form to be used for side lighting. 6.2 Electrostatic detection device (EDD). 6.3 Imaging or other equipment for recording observations as required. 6.4 Sufficient time and facilities to complete all applicable procedures. 7. Procedure 7.1 All procedures shall be performed when applicable and noted when appropriate. These procedures should be performed in the order given. 7.2 Examinations performed, relevant observations, and results shall be documented. 9. Keywords 9.1 electrostatic detection device (EDD); embossing; forensic science; indentations; questioned documents 2 E2291 – 03 ASTM International takes no position respecting the validity of any patent rights asserted in connection with any item mentioned in this standard. Users of this standard are expressly advised that determination of the validity of any such patent rights, and the risk of infringement of such rights, are entirely their own responsibility. This standard is subject to revision at any time by the responsible technical committee and must be reviewed every five years and if not revised, either reapproved or withdrawn. Your comments are invited either for revision of this standard or for additional standards and should be addressed to ASTM International Headquarters. Your comments will receive careful consideration at a meeting of the responsible technical committee, which you may attend. If you feel that your comments have not received a fair hearing you should make your views known to the ASTM Committee on Standards, at the address shown below. This standard is copyrighted by ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States. Individual reprints (single or multiple copies) of this standard may be obtained by contacting ASTM at the above address or at 610-832-9585 (phone), 610-832-9555 (fax), or service@astm.org (e-mail); or through the ASTM website (www.astm.org). Permission rights to photocopy the standard may also be secured from the ASTM website (www.astm.org/ COPYRIGHT/). 3 EXHIBIT 29 EXHIBIT 29 EXHIBIT 29 EXHIBIT 30 EXHIBIT 30 EXHIBIT 30 EXHIBIT 31 EXHIBIT 31 EXHIBIT 31 Page 1 of Facebook Contract (rendered in red) showing area of staple holes & location of the hand printed interlineation BLANCO & Associates Inc. EXHIBIT 31.1 Page 2 of Facebook Contract (black and white) showing area of staple holes & location of where the latent hand printed interlineation was found BLANCO & Associates Inc. EXHIBIT 31.2 Full page 2 of Facebook Contract (in black) with the left half of page 1 rendered in red and overlaid over page 2. With the staple holes of both pages lined up, note that the latent hand printed interlineation from page 2 also lines up with the visible hand printed interlineation from page 1. BLANCO & Associates Inc. EXHIBIT 31.3 EXHIBIT 32 EXHIBIT 32 EXHIBIT 32 Left Margin Positioning of Interlineations Facebook Contract vs. Street Fax document Facebook Contract document Interlineation indented 15 characters 1 1 2 3 2 1 2 3 4 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Street Fax Document Interlineation indented 4 characters BLANCO & Associates Inc. EXHIBIT 32 EXHIBIT 33 EXHIBIT 33 EXHIBIT 33 Latent handwriting comparison to printed text Crop from original Page 1 of Facebook Contract scan. Note how “PC” is positioned higher than the main line of hand printed text as indicated by the dashed red line that rises. Printout of scan of “ESDA lift’ from page 2 of Facebook Contract scan. Note how “PC” is positioned higher than the main line of hand printed text, the same as the visible text from Page 1. Crop from the best available scan of the STREET FAX image. However, one can observe that the “PC” initials are positioned much lower than the interlineation from page 1 of the Facebook Contract- more evidence that it was the hand printing from page 1 of the Facebook Contract that created the latent image on page 2, not the STREET FAX interlineation. BLANCO & Associates Inc. EXHIBIT 33 EXHIBIT 34 EXHIBIT 34 EXHIBIT 34 TEST REPORT December 13, 2011 Page 1 of 2 IPS FI 02956-11 Report to: Larry Stewart Stewart Forensic Consultants 793 A East Foothill Blvd. San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 Sample identification: 2 Vials Date received: November 1, 2011 Test requested: Fiber Identification Purchase Order: Credit Card Report of Fiber Analysis Enclosed are the results of the analysis performed on the sample we received with your Test Services Request Form. If you have any questions concerning this work, please do not hesitate to contact us. Authorized By: ______________ Gregory J. Fox Lab Manager Signed _______________________________ Walter J. Rantanen Technical Leader, Fiber Science (920) 749-3040 Ext. 127 WJR/jml 3211 E. Capitol Drive ~ Appleton, WI 54911 (920) 749-3040 ~ Fax: (920) 749-3046 ~ www.ipstesting.com Report to Stewart Forensic Consultants IPS FI 02956-11 Fiber Identification December 13, 2011 Page 2 of 2 The paper samples did not have any detectable mechanical (high lignin) pulp fibers which would be effected by photodegredation from UV light. There is a strong UV fluorescence in both samples, which indicates optical brightening agents. In the small punch outs, significant fluorescence differences were not detected. It could not be determined if these samples were effected by contact with UV light, but long exposure to UV light has been known to lower the whiteness of paper. A noticeable particulate material was observed on one side of the punch outs. This particulate may also affect the UV fluorescence of paper. The main inorganic substance in these particulates was found to be iron. The EDS spectra are enclosed. The nature of this material implies contact on one surface of the papers. Spot tests show the same consistent reactions for starch and pH levels between the two samples. The fiber content of the two vials is consistent with coming from the same mill and production run. Table 1. Fiber Identification of Vial 7 Hardwood Bleached Kraft – Principally Redgum and Oak with some Blackgum, YellowPoplar, Cherry, Southern Magnolia Softwood Bleached Kraft – Hard Pine (Except Red & Pine) Table 2. Fiber Identification of Vial 9 Hardwood Bleached Kraft – Principally Oak and Redgum with some Yellow-Poplar, Blackgum, Cherry Softwood Bleached Kraft – Hard Pine (Except Red & Pine) Method: TAPPI Test Method T 401 om-03 “Fiber Analysis of Paper and Paperboard.” Analyzed by WJR Quality review by JML, KTM Date(s) of testing November 8, 2011 Notes: These results relate only to the item(s) tested. This test report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without written consent of IPS. See the TAPPI test method(s) cited for estimates of measurement uncertainty. EXHIBIT 35 EXHIBIT 35 EXHIBIT 35 Test using VSC4: New office paper exposed to UV light These areas were exposed to light resulting in damage to the document These areas were covered by wide strips of black heavy stock paper and were not exposed to light BLANCO & Associates Inc. EXHIBIT 35.1 Test using VSC4: New office paper exposed to UV light These areas were exposed to light resulting in damage to the document These areas were covered by wide strips of black heavy stock paper and were not exposed to light- note their lighter appearance BLANCO & Associates Inc. EXHIBIT 35.2 EXHIBIT 36 EXHIBIT 36 EXHIBIT 36 EXHIBIT 37 EXHIBIT 37 EXHIBIT 37 Facebook Contract / “WORK FOR HIRE” CONTRACT Page 1- crimp/divot/gouge marks 1 2 BLANCO & Associates Inc. EXHIBIT 37

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?