Mall Manager Says Roy Moore Wasn’t Banned from the Mall

3

Remember the mall worker who so convincingly said Roy Moore was banned for harassing young girls decades ago? Well the mall manager from 1981-1996 came out and said Moore was never banned so far as he knows. The time frame isn’t exact, but it would seem that something like that would be common knowledge for some time.

The media reported the mall worker’s interview as if it were fact over all the major networks, but it was hearsay.

Barnes Boyle, who was manager of the Gadsden Mall from 1981 to 1996, told WBRC News in Alabama to his knowledge Moore was not banned.

“To my knowledge, he was not banned from the mall,” Boyle told the news station.

“We did have written reports and things. But to my knowledge, he was not banned from the mall,” Boyle told WBRC in Birmingham, Ala.

Most of the accusations were in the 1970s but Moore was prominent and if he was banned in the ’70s, he would likely have still known.

The fact is the mall worker who said Moore was banned was repeating gossip – hearsay. This is a mall manager who said he wasn’t. His hearsay negates the other hearsay.

The sound oddly disappeared so we are reposting.

Then there is the possibly phony yearbook inscription. Gloria Allred won’t let a handwriting analyst look at it and there is reason to suspect it’s not legitimate.

Accuser Beverly Nelson, who said Moore sexually assaulted her, produced a yearbook with an inscription allegedly written by Moore. He says he doesn’t remember writing anything like that.

Moore also says the initials on the inscription, ‘D.A.’, were how his assistant signed his name in the ’90s when Nelson’s divorce case came before then-judge Moore. He never used the ‘D.A’ initials at that time because he was the assistant district attorney, he says.

He also said the ‘m’s in the signature and the message don’t match and the two dates are written by a different hand. The ‘Olde Hickory’, he said matches nothing.

The next two photos are a comparison that was put up by WBRC:

This is the entire yearbook notation:

3 COMMENTS

  1. 1. Examine a color picture of the yearbook inscription: everything up to the word “Moore” is written in black ink; everything from “Moore” on is written in blue ink.

    2. The signature on the divorce document is a signature stamped by Judge Moore’s assistant. It is followed by a slash and the assistant’s initials, D. A. At the time of the divorce document, he was not a District Attorney, but a judge. Note that the “D.A.” in the yearbook inscription is written in blue ink, hence not part of the original inscription. This was obviously copied from a signature stamp at a time that Moore was a Judge, not an Assistant District Attorney, by someone who doesn’t understand the process. This implies a significant amount of time passed between the black ink inscription and the blue ink addendum.

    3. 1977 vs. 77: The year entries in the two dates are not consistent in the 7’s. The first two are consistent with each other, similarly with the last two; but they differ from the other pair. Besides who dates an inscription twice?

    4. Judge Moore’s official signature is “Roy S. Moore”. Note that on the divorce document, the “y” ending Roy has what appears to be an elaborate flourish. Look more closely and you will see that the flourish is a capital “S”. Judges want their official signature to be consistent, so his handwritten signature will match the signature stamp. The inscription lacks the flourished “S”.

    5. It makes no sense to have an unofficial 1977 signature certified by an assistant that did not work for Roy Moore in 1977. Bogus.

    6. A principle of law is, “False in one, false in all.” The entire inscription should be disregarded.

Comments are closed.