Has the good doctor replied to the inquiry yet?

Isn't it rather ironic that the very people who seem to take so much glee in prying into other's lives and questioning their integrity scuttle away when the light is shone into their dark corners?

I'm attempting to follow up on the resume issue as well.

Skeptic

Vato,

Perhaps I wasn't clear in my post, either. I didn't mean to appear irritated with you! I'm not. What I meant was that, if you're willing, it might be helpful if you'd also contact Mr. Gelb's office seeking verification of his credentials.

Observer,

Perhaps you don't think exposing a fraud is "productive work." Reasonable people might disagree, however.

That the Dissertation Abstracts database includes no dissertation by anyone with a name resembling "Edward Gelb" is prima facie evidence that Ed Gelb never filed a doctoral dissertation with any accredited university.

Ed Gelb could remove any doubt about his credentials by simply responding to the simple questions I e-mailed him. As Beech Trees noted, if he has testified as an expert witness (and I believe he has), then his CV should be a matter of public record.

Beech Trees,

According to Los Angeles Times reporters Phil Willon and William Lobdell ("Recipient of Sex Abuse Settlement Wants Priest's Slander Suit Tossed," 7 Nov. 2002),"Dr." Gelb filed a court declaration in a civil suit filed by Monsignor Lawrence J. Baird in San Francisco Superior Court against Lori Copabianca Haigh, who had hired Gelb's services.

Baird's suit was filed in April 2002 and dismissed on 27 Nov. 2002.

Quote:


I don't know if that would be productive Mr. Mallah, although the offer is quite generous. The case in which Mr. Gelb was hired (CGC-02-413508, LAWRENCE J BAIRD VS. LORI CAPOBIANCO HAIGH et al) does not appear to have any record with regard to Mr. Gelb's participation in a supplemental declaration contained within the court reporter's minutes. That's odd, because [url=http://www.sftc.org/scripts/magic83/Mgrqispi.dll?APPNAME=IJS83&PRGNAME=caseinfoscreens&ARGUMENTS=-ACGC02413508,-AR,-A,-AN,-AGenerated\%3A%20Jan-30-2003%20%


A,-AA,-ADate%20-%20User%20-%20Screen%20-%20Location]the record notes[/url]:

RESPONSE TO MONSIGNOR BAIRD'S EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS; INDEX OF SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATIONS AND SUPPLEMENTAL DECLS. OF LORI HAIGH, DR. EDWARD I. GELB, AND KATHERINE K. FREBERG, AND DECL. OF MARK GOLDOWITZ IN SUPPORT OF DEFT. LORI HAIGH'S SPECIAL MOTION TO STRIKE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT AS A MERITLESS SLAPP; PROOF OF SERVICE OF REPLY PAPERS FILED BY DEFENDANT HAIGH, LORI CAPOBIANCO--NOV-22-2002

Pouring over the entire file might come up with the declaration, but I doubt that Mr. Gelb's CV or resume would be there.

And for the faceless critic who smarted off about being productive, none of this would be necessary if Ed Gelb would simply answer the LEGITIMATE queries about his credentials.

How about it, Batman? Are you going to go after Mr. Gelb's credentials as vigorously as you demand them from the polygraph's detractors here? Or do credentials only matter to you when you don't like-- but cannot disprove-- what the other person is saying?

Dave, PhD in forensic psycho-physiologial-prelimbic detection of deception, LaSalle University (our school's mascot is a Bayou Billy Bob swiggin beer while driving an airboat)

Hi Mark,

The Clerk with whom I spoke did not see the same entries I was seeing on my computer screen (and which I cited). The day in question (Nov. 22) had listed some supplemental declarations, but Mr. Gelb was not listed there on her screen. (Odd!) Probably an administrative oversight, and no doubt if someone *did* go down there and pull the entire file, Mr. Gelb's info would be there. The clerk was uncertain whether or not a person's cv or resume would be filed as a part of the total record, and I certainly didn't know.

Sorry for my lack of clarity,

Dave