Forensic document examiner Eric Svakin joins Will to unpack the wild Disney vs. Slesinger battle over Winnie the Pooh royalties. From alleged dumpster-dived documents to coffee-stain “fracture matches,” copier defect fingerprints, and toner chemistry, Eric shows how tiny physical clues revealed that “confidential” labels were removed—and why a judge ultimately tossed the longest-running civil case in California at the time. If you love law, forensics, or Disney lore, this one’s a ride. Like, comment, and subscribe for more behind-the-scenes investigations. 

Chapters

00:00 - Intro: Meet Will and expert Eric Svakin

00:24 - Pooh’s billions: why the stakes were huge

01:22 - Who owns Pooh? Milne, Schlesinger, Disney

02:35 - The 1991 lawsuit and royalty disputes

03:48 - A record-long California civil case

04:30 - Dumpster-dived documents surface

05:28 - Why Eric was hired: dueling “confidential” copies

06:20 - Inside LA evidence review: three days of tests

07:15 - Coffee-stain match: identical patterns prove source

08:18 - Swapped cover page: toner tells on the forgers

09:10 - Photocopier “fingerprint”: three recurring dots

10:30 - Toner chemistry 101: dyes and composition

11:35 - Fracture matching explained with paper & stains

12:40 - Courtroom visuals and expert testimony

13:30 - Judge’s ruling: case dismissed for misconduct

14:10 - When experts disagree (and why)

15:00 - Copier anatomy: glass, optics, drum

16:05 - Takeaways: tiny clues, massive consequences

Links

SunlitStudios.com

@TheBibleShowPodcast

@UnderTheHoodFL

Hashtags

#WinnieThePooh #Disney #ForensicScience #DocumentForensics #IntellectualProperty #CourtCase #EvidenceAnalysis #AAMilne #DisneyLawsuit #TonerAnalysis #CopyMachine #LegalHistory #TrueStory #ExpertWitness

Forensics expert Eric Spokini walks through a wild decades-old case: a 1963 Seattle incident involving a visiting Buddhist priest, a later rise to high priest, and a diary used as an alibi—until document science, infrared ink tests, and even a Harvard statistician dismantled it in court. We unpack fountain-pen mechanics, how front/back page intersections reveal timing, and why the judges concluded the entry was added years later. If you’re into true crime, forensic document examination, or courtroom twists, this one’s for you. Like, comment, and subscribe to support more stories like this! 

Chapters

00:00 - Intro: Meet host Will and expert Eric Spokini

00:41 - Setup: 1963 US visit and Seattle stop

01:45 - Power shift: Excommunication and Soka Gakkai dispute

02:32 - New witness: Seattle host “Hero Klo” steps forward

03:26 - 3 a.m. call: Police custody after street altercation

05:20 - Follow-up probe: Newspaper finds the arresting officers

07:32 - Lawsuit: High priest sues for slander

08:46 - Alibi unveiled: The 1963 diary says “went to bed 1 p.m.”

10:06 - Key question: Was the entry contemporaneous or added later?

11:10 - In Tokyo: Exam setup and fountain-pen basics

12:54 - Infrared testing: Comparing inks across days

14:12 - Front vs. back: How line intersections reveal sequence

17:59 - Findings: The entry added after backside writing

19:12 - Appeals: More experts and statistical review

20:40 - Chernoff’s analysis: Probability the entry was added later

23:35 - Credibility hit: “Carousel Room” notes and court takeaways

25:37 - Outro: Forensics sorts fact from fiction

Links

SunlitStudios.com

Hashtags

#ForensicDocumentExamination #HandwritingAnalysis #TrueCrime #LegalForensics #JapanHistory #BuddhismHistory #CourtroomScience #FountainPens #InfraredAnalysis #Statistics #HermanChernoff #DiaryAnalysis #SokaGakkai #SeattleHistory

An 18-year cold case from Flint, Michigan gets revived when new DNA methods bypass indigo-dye interference on a suspect’s jean jacket. Forensic expert Eric Spekin walks through why a single, tiny blood spot testing positive for both victims is a massive red flag, how siloed lab workflows can mislead prosecutors, and the cross-examination strategy that helped a jury reach “not guilty.” If you’re into true crime, forensic science, or legal strategy, this episode breaks down the science—and the storytelling—behind cold case prosecutions. Stick around to the end and don’t forget to like, comment, and subscribe! 

Chapters

00:00 - Cold open: “Both DNAs in one spot?”

00:17 - Welcome & guest intro (Eric Spekin)

00:40 - Case setup: 1991 Flint shooting; 2009 prosecution

01:06 - Dice game, $937 motive, suspect & van murders

02:05 - Evidence seized: the indigo jean jacket

03:39 - Cold case team finds a blood spot

04:34 - Why indigo dye blocks DNA; buffers fix it

06:07 - Lab result: both victims on one tiny spot

07:15 - Defense brings in an outside expert

08:37 - Only one sample from one location—why that matters

09:09 - Building the cross & challenging the narrative

11:07 - Verdict: not guilty; key lesson learned

12:03 - How court-appointed defense experts work

14:31 - Trial tactics: using prosecution witnesses

16:47 - Takeaways on scientific honesty

17:31 - Outro & CTA

Links

SunlitStudios.com

Hashtags

#ColdCase #TrueCrime #ForensicScience #DNAEvidence #BloodstainPattern #PCRInhibitors #ExpertWitness #CrossExamination #CriminalJustice #IndigentDefense #FlintMichigan #LegalStrategy #ColdCaseReview

A forensic document examiner walks through a fresh Detroit case tied to new affidavits that allegedly claim prosecutors and police took bribes to frame Derek Smith—then shows why the paperwork itself doesn’t add up. You’ll learn how examiners spot red flags like mismatched fonts, cloned jurat blocks, and near-identical signatures that suggest tracing or digital copy-paste, plus what next steps (known-signature collection, fingerprinting) could definitively confirm or debunk the claims. The episode ends with a narrow conclusion about this case: the evidence here points to “Diddy didn’t do it,” while underscoring how neutral science protects both sides.

Like what we do? Please like, comment, and subscribe to support the show!

Chapters

00:00 - Cold open: Can science clear a case?

00:23 - Welcome & show setup

00:32 - Why Diddy is back in headlines

00:41 - Detroit affidavits: what they allege

01:12 - Claims of bribes and collusion

01:51 - The underlying CSC case (Derek Smith)

02:56 - Step one: obtain and inspect affidavits

03:55 - Handwriting analysis 101

05:12 - Red flags: fonts, jurats, white-outs

06:19 - Two signatures that look “too perfect”

07:38 - Tracing: how forgers actually do it

09:42 - Photocopy & Photoshop forgeries

11:11 - Will AI change handwriting forensics?

12:21 - Beyond handwriting: more anomalies

13:17 - Next steps: collect known signatures

14:31 - Why the science matters for real lives

17:28 - Where the case stands now

17:51 - Narrow conclusion: “Diddy didn’t do it”

18:01 - Outro & what’s next

Links

SunlitStudios.com

Hashtags

#Forensics #TrueCrime #DocumentExamination #HandwritingAnalysis #ForgeryDetection #Affidavits #Notary #WrongfulConviction #DetroitCase #LegalScience #AIandForensics #CrimeLab #Diddy #CourtroomScience #EvidenceMatters

A Silicon Valley patent fight spirals from suspicious “stolen” lab notebooks into a masterclass in forensic document analysis—and a jailhouse murder-for-hire twist. We follow Amr Mosin’s 1988–89 notebooks, the selective car theft, and the day planner entries written with ink that didn’t even exist yet. You’ll see how experts used ink chemistry (date tags), drying tests, and VSC imaging to expose altered pages, plus the late reveal of original-notebook copies and the Aptex v. QuickTurn link. Stick around for the wild endgame involving an FBI informant. Like, comment, and subscribe for more real-world forensics!       

Chapters

00:00 - Cold open: lawsuits, wiretaps, and a hit plot

00:15 - Welcome + case tease: notebook fraud to murder-for-hire

00:32 - “Craziest patent case” overview and timeline

00:57 - Northern California, Amr Mosin, and the leased patent

01:45 - Notebooks “stolen” the night before exam

02:46 - Patent basics: scope and first to invent

03:33 - 1988 notebook dates altered (9→8)

04:29 - 1989 pages don’t match attorney submissions

04:55 - Two murder-for-hire targets emerge

06:17 - Day planner ink “not yet invented” problem

08:10 - Anonymous “FL” fragments arrive—more red flags

11:21 - Aptex v. QuickTurn + discovery of original-notebook copies

12:11 - Arrest on bond; alleged hit on opposing expert

19:16 - FormulaBs, no date tag, and VSC ink reveals

21:56 - Ink-drying test for age estimation

25:50 - TLC demo in court; judge concludes forgery

Links

SunlitStudios.com

Hashtags

#ForensicDocumentExamination #PatentFraud #InkAnalysis #VSC #ThinLayerChromatography #MurderForHire #FBIInformant #SiliconValley #AptexVsQuickTurn #ChainOfCustody #LabNotebooks #ForensicScience #CourtroomDemo #EvidenceTampering