[blindlaw] Supposedly suspicious behaviors (WAS: conducting investigations)

Mon Nov 5 09:58:34 UTC 2018

On the subject of behaviors like gaze, sweat, shuffling, etc not
actually having any legitimate bearing on determining suspicion:

Here's an affidavit I filed in my case against all of TSA's policies.

At page 41, heading "SPOT behaviors", I exhaustively list behaviors that
are on the TSA SPOT ("behavior detection") profiling list, and explain
how they are in fact symptoms of my disability, exercise of
Constitutional rights, or just being a human.

PDF (as filed):
<https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzmetJxi-p0VOFZXLUdpRzJ6LXc/view?page=41>

Google Docs version (as drafted):
<https://drive.google.com/open?id=1XiqxmO3gRTZpXRrBGkEmcTYktJfigneeZdWSkV4npgY>

Google Docs version of TSA's SPOT checklist (transcribed by me):
<http://s.ai/tsa_spot>

Many of the supposedly suspicious behaviors are specifically related to
my blindness, namely:

1. "Observation and behavior analysis" - 4 or more points = selectee
screening, 6 or more points = automatic referral to police
* 1 point: Arrives late for flight, if known
* 1 point: Avoids eye contact with security personnel or LEO
* 2 points: Powerful grip of a bag and/or hand inside the bag
* 2 points: Rigid posture, minimal body movements with arms close
to sides
* 3 points: Appears to be confused or disoriented
* 3 points: Appears to be in disguise

That's 12 points total, just for perceived symptoms related to my
blindness. Well over the 6 points for police referral.

2. "Signs of deception" - 2 or more = automatic referral to police
* Appearing not to understand questions
* Distracted or inability to pay attention to present situation
* Gazing down
* No or little direct eye contact
* Placing objects between self and official

(My affidavit has explanations of why each one applies to me.)

So basically, TSA's policy means that ordinary blind people are to be
referred to police for behaviors that are perfectly normal symptoms of
disability.

If you total everything I list in that affidavit as normal for me, I
have 56 points of "suspiciousness" (vs 6 for police referral) & 24
"signs of deception" (vs 2 for police referral).

It's completely absurd. One part of my lawsuit seeks to permanently
enjoin this program, and make TSA's documents about it public.

The case is Sai v Pekoske, No. 15-2356 (1st Cir.). Original proceeding
under 49 USC 46110, not an appeal.

I'm IFP and need counsel, so if any of you are interested or know
someone who may be, please get in touch.

Sincerely,
Sai
President, Fiat Fiendum, Inc.

On 11/5/18 01:37, Elizabeth Troutman via BlindLaw wrote:
> A huge thanks to everyone who responded to my post about investigations. It didn't feel right when I was told that blind people can't conduct investigations well, but it's hard to argue when you're genuinely uninformed. I am now armed with some good information to start addressing the assumptions and getting myself trained up. I feel so fortunate to have this group.
> Elizabeth
> From: BlindLaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of blindlaw-request at nfbnet.org
> Sent: Friday, November 2, 2018 8:00 AM
> To: blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> Subject: BlindLaw Digest, Vol 174, Issue 2
> 
> Send BlindLaw mailing list submissions to
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org<mailto:blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org>
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> blindlaw-request at nfbnet.org<mailto:blindlaw-request at nfbnet.org>
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> blindlaw-owner at nfbnet.org<mailto:blindlaw-owner at nfbnet.org>
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of BlindLaw digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
> 1. Re: conducting investigations (Stewart, Christopher K)
> 2. Re: conducting investigations (Sai)
> 3. Anyone using iPad as laptop replacement in the workplace?
> (Cody Davis)
> 4. Re: Anyone using iPad as laptop replacement in the workplace?
> (Josh Loevy)
> 5. Re: Anyone using iPad as laptop replacement in the workplace?
> (Aser Tolentino)
> 6. Re: Anyone using iPad as laptop replacement in the workplace?
> (Cody Davis)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2018 09:02:15 -0500
> From: "Stewart, Christopher K" <chris.stewart at uky.edu<mailto:chris.stewart at uky.edu>>
> To: Sai <sai at fiatfiendum.org<mailto:sai at fiatfiendum.org>>
> Cc: Blind Law Mailing List <blindlaw at nfbnet.org<mailto:blindlaw at nfbnet.org>>
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] conducting investigations
> Message-ID:
> <CAAyF1PBWwb2wLC8Wdy9_=AtgDwc=GGxUSKZ_2-a0Y-QSnpd9Sg at mail.gmail.com<mailto:CAAyF1PBWwb2wLC8Wdy9_=AtgDwc=GGxUSKZ_2-a0Y-QSnpd9Sg at mail.gmail.com>>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> 
> That's really interesting info. And now that you mention it, it makes
> a lot of sense. In fact, everything I pointed out about tone of voice,
> body movement, Etc. are all things which require a baseline knowledge
> of the person. They're also instances where the person's reactions
> could, as you said, be the result of something completely different. I
> know investigators who swear they can spot someone lying, but I
> imagine that may well be confirmation bias. They tend to interview
> criminals. Criminals frequently lye. They've caught many criminals
> lying. Therefore their inclinations must have been correct.
> 
> Anyhow, thanks for the info.
> 
> 
> 
> On 11/1/18, Sai <sai at fiatfiendum.org<mailto:sai at fiatfiendum.org>> wrote:
>> FWIW: the research on this (which I know fairly well because it was
>> related to my master's thesis and also to my litigation about TSA's SPOT
>> program) is pretty solidly in favor of one conclusion:
>>
>> There does not exist any reliable way to detect lies, short of using an
>> fMRI scanner. The best results shown to date are barely even
>> statistically significant (let alone practically), and even those are
>> only in highly controlled and unnatural settings.
>>
>>
>> There are somewhat reliable ways to detect *emotions*, but they rely
>> substantially on knowing that specific person's baseline. So e.g. you
>> could detect that someone is nervous, angry, smug, etc.
>>
>>
>> However, knowing that emotion doesn't tell you whether they're lying or
>> not.
>>
>> Suppose e.g. that someone in a police interrogation room responds with
>> fear when accused of raping someone. Are they afraid of being caught?
>> Afraid of a false accusation? Reminded of a traumatic personal history?
>> Afraid of perceived aggression? Randomly thinking about something else?
>> Claustrophobic? Afraid they'll get a shiv while locked up? Afraid for
>> what might happen to their family? Afraid of being caught in an actual
>> lie? Afraid the cop will do a search and find the (totally unrelated)
>> crack rock in their sock? Etc. etc.
>>
>>
>> There are simply too many possible reasons someone can experience an
>> emotion. Without knowing that specific person very, very well, you can't
>> correctly make the jump (as various agencies would like to do) from
>> "expression of fear" to "sign of guilt".
>>
>> Same is true for every symptom you listed.
>>
>> Same is true for a polygraph, which is why it's inadmissible. It's pure
>> bullshit whose effects rely entirely on whether the subject believes it,
>> and whether you care about the risk of false confessions.
>>
>> "Gut feeling" has been repeatedly proven to be not just wrong, but often
>> worse than wrong ? it heavily plays into confirmation bias, bigotry,
>> etc. Results are no better for "experienced" people like cops & judges.
>>
>>
>> If you want to catch someone in a lie, you have to rely on logic,
>> contradictory evidence, etc. Not whether or not the person fidgets.
>>
>> (Maybe your chairs are uncomfortable, or they need to go pee?)
>>
>>
>> I've attached some recent meta-analysis papers on the subject in case
>> you want to read for yourself.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> Sai
>> President, Fiat Fiendum, Inc.
>>
>> On 10/31/18 16:48, Stewart, Christopher K via BlindLaw wrote:
>>> This claim is ableist and absurd. First, many common tells of lying
>>> are readily detectable to a blind person: throat clearing; vocal
>>> tension; shallower breathing; fidgiting or feet shuffling; over
>>> verbosity; unnatural hesitations inconsistent with the rest of their
>>> answers. I could go on and on. The notion that because we can't see
>>> one or two visual cues we can't spot a falsehood is ridiculous.
>>>
>>> Moreover, in investigative work, experienced investigators will tell
>>> you they often follow their gut. Of course blind people have gut
>>> instincts as well. But at the end of the day, as lawyers, what our gut
>>> says doesn't matter, it's what the testimony and the facts reveal.
>>> That's the record we work with. I've seen seasoned lawyers go down
>>> rabbit holes in depositions that leave me scratching my head, knowing
>>> they just waisted their time and didn't get what they were after. It
>>> happens, and it has nothing to do with whether or not they can see.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Chris
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> BlindLaw mailing list
>>> BlindLaw at nfbnet.org<mailto:BlindLaw at nfbnet.org>
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org>
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> BlindLaw:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/sai@fiatfiendum.org<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/sai@fiatfiendum.org>
>>>
>>
> 
> 
> --
> Chris K. Stewart
> Attorney at Law
> KBA #97351
> Ph:
> (502)457-1757
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2018 15:21:41 +0100
> From: Sai <sai at fiatfiendum.org<mailto:sai at fiatfiendum.org>>
> To: "Stewart, Christopher K" <chris.stewart at uky.edu<mailto:chris.stewart at uky.edu>>
> Cc: Blind Law Mailing List <blindlaw at nfbnet.org<mailto:blindlaw at nfbnet.org>>
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] conducting investigations
> Message-ID:
> <CAHs-R5yUTWud6Ms1wUd62LhWx2k9yNf2Fxq7RfFXEqm6NmPC6w at mail.gmail.com<mailto:CAHs-R5yUTWud6Ms1wUd62LhWx2k9yNf2Fxq7RfFXEqm6NmPC6w at mail.gmail.com>>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> 
>> They tend to interview criminals.
> 
> *Alleged* criminals entitled to, but rarely receiving, presumption of
> Innocence.
> 
> One of the compounding problems is that the people targeted for
> investigation to begin with are a hugely skewed group. They then get pushed
> to plea, even if innocent, which in turn makes the prosecution think they
> were right, and feeds that cycle ? completely regardless of actual accuracy.
> 
> Which is why e.g. an experienced cop may well have a completely sincere and
> good faith "gut feeling" that the black guy did it and is lying, and not
> even be (consciously) racist, but still be wrong.
> 
> Allowing this kind of totally spurious yet sincerely believed
> pseudo-evidence into the process, anywhere, inevitably and systemically
> worsens biases.
> 
> Blinding (in the other sense) is actually one of the few things that
> provably improves your lie detection ability, because you don't get exposed
> to distractor information that would bias your logic.
> 
> So if you're blind and can't see their mannerisms etc., that "disability"
> is actually a *good* thing for your ability to get to the truth.
> 
> Ironic, and a bit of a pun? but it's true.
> 
> Sincerely,
> Sai
> 
> Sent from my phone; please excuse the concision and autocorrect typos.
> 
> On Nov 1, 2018 15:02, "Stewart, Christopher K" <chris.stewart at uky.edu<mailto:chris.stewart at uky.edu>>
> wrote:
> 
> That's really interesting info. And now that you mention it, it makes
> a lot of sense. In fact, everything I pointed out about tone of voice,
> body movement, Etc. are all things which require a baseline knowledge
> of the person. They're also instances where the person's reactions
> could, as you said, be the result of something completely different. I
> know investigators who swear they can spot someone lying, but I
> imagine that may well be confirmation bias. They tend to interview
> criminals. Criminals frequently lye. They've caught many criminals
> lying. Therefore their inclinations must have been correct.
> 
> Anyhow, thanks for the info.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 11/1/18, Sai <sai at fiatfiendum.org<mailto:sai at fiatfiendum.org>> wrote:
>> FWIW: the research on this (which I know fairly well because it was
>> related to my master's thesis and also to my litigation about TSA's SPOT
>> program) is pretty solidly in favor of one conclusion:
>>
>> There does not exist any reliable way to detect lies, short of using an
>> fMRI scanner. The best results shown to date are barely even
>> statistically significant (let alone practically), and even those are
>> only in highly controlled and unnatural settings.
>>
>>
>> There are somewhat reliable ways to detect *emotions*, but they rely
>> substantially on knowing that specific person's baseline. So e.g. you
>> could detect that someone is nervous, angry, smug, etc.
>>
>>
>> However, knowing that emotion doesn't tell you whether they're lying or
>> not.
>>
>> Suppose e.g. that someone in a police interrogation room responds with
>> fear when accused of raping someone. Are they afraid of being caught?
>> Afraid of a false accusation? Reminded of a traumatic personal history?
>> Afraid of perceived aggression? Randomly thinking about something else?
>> Claustrophobic? Afraid they'll get a shiv while locked up? Afraid for
>> what might happen to their family? Afraid of being caught in an actual
>> lie? Afraid the cop will do a search and find the (totally unrelated)
>> crack rock in their sock? Etc. etc.
>>
>>
>> There are simply too many possible reasons someone can experience an
>> emotion. Without knowing that specific person very, very well, you can't
>> correctly make the jump (as various agencies would like to do) from
>> "expression of fear" to "sign of guilt".
>>
>> Same is true for every symptom you listed.
>>
>> Same is true for a polygraph, which is why it's inadmissible. It's pure
>> bullshit whose effects rely entirely on whether the subject believes it,
>> and whether you care about the risk of false confessions.
>>
>> "Gut feeling" has been repeatedly proven to be not just wrong, but often
>> worse than wrong ? it heavily plays into confirmation bias, bigotry,
>> etc. Results are no better for "experienced" people like cops & judges.
>>
>>
>> If you want to catch someone in a lie, you have to rely on logic,
>> contradictory evidence, etc. Not whether or not the person fidgets.
>>
>> (Maybe your chairs are uncomfortable, or they need to go pee?)
>>
>>
>> I've attached some recent meta-analysis papers on the subject in case
>> you want to read for yourself.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> Sai
>> President, Fiat Fiendum, Inc.
>>
>> On 10/31/18 16:48, Stewart, Christopher K via BlindLaw wrote:
>>> This claim is ableist and absurd. First, many common tells of lying
>>> are readily detectable to a blind person: throat clearing; vocal
>>> tension; shallower breathing; fidgiting or feet shuffling; over
>>> verbosity; unnatural hesitations inconsistent with the rest of their
>>> answers. I could go on and on. The notion that because we can't see
>>> one or two visual cues we can't spot a falsehood is ridiculous.
>>>
>>> Moreover, in investigative work, experienced investigators will tell
>>> you they often follow their gut. Of course blind people have gut
>>> instincts as well. But at the end of the day, as lawyers, what our gut
>>> says doesn't matter, it's what the testimony and the facts reveal.
>>> That's the record we work with. I've seen seasoned lawyers go down
>>> rabbit holes in depositions that leave me scratching my head, knowing
>>> they just waisted their time and didn't get what they were after. It
>>> happens, and it has nothing to do with whether or not they can see.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Chris
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> BlindLaw mailing list
>>> BlindLaw at nfbnet.org<mailto:BlindLaw at nfbnet.org>
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org>
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> BlindLaw:
>>>
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/sai@fiatfiendum.org<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/sai@fiatfiendum.org>
>>>
>>
> 
> 
> --
> Chris K. Stewart
> Attorney at Law
> KBA #97351
> Ph:
> (502)457-1757
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2018 11:38:38 -0400
> From: Cody Davis <cjdavis9193 at gmail.com<mailto:cjdavis9193 at gmail.com>>
> To: Blind Law Mailing List <blindlaw at nfbnet.org<mailto:blindlaw at nfbnet.org>>
> Subject: [blindlaw] Anyone using iPad as laptop replacement in the
> workplace?
> Message-ID: <70BCBA47-3083-4D83-A2D5-5746D02F3A89 at gmail.com<mailto:70BCBA47-3083-4D83-A2D5-5746D02F3A89 at gmail.com>>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> 
> All,
> 
> Does anyone have any experience using an iPad Pro with Voiceover as a laptop replacement at work? I?m curious how viable of an option that would be. Did you have to use it along with a desktop, or were you able to use the iPad as your primary computer.?
> 
> In your experience, if the iPad Pro a redundancy if I am already using an iPhone?
> 
> Thanks for any input.
> 
> 
> Respectfully,
> Cody J. Davis, J.D., M.P.A.
> Email: cjdavis9193 at gmail.com<mailto:cjdavis9193 at gmail.com>
> Phone: (919) 349-9799
> Linkedin: www.linkedin.com/in/codyjdavisesq<http://www.linkedin.com/in/codyjdavisesq>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2018 10:43:09 -0500
> From: Josh Loevy <joshl at loevy.com<mailto:joshl at loevy.com>>
> To: Blind Law Mailing List <blindlaw at nfbnet.org<mailto:blindlaw at nfbnet.org>>
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Anyone using iPad as laptop replacement in the
> workplace?
> Message-ID: <55426b618e03829154bb6e678df65951 at mail.gmail.com<mailto:55426b618e03829154bb6e678df65951 at mail.gmail.com>>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> If I may add an addendum to this question...
> If you are using IOS as a laptop sub, can you speak to the word processing
> experience specifically? I have heard good things about Scrivener as a
> legal writing tool, has anyone used that?
> -------------- next part --------------
> An embedded message was scrubbed...
> From: unknown sender
> Subject: no subject
> Date: no date
> Size: 4289
> URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attachments/20181101/cec5a9b3/attachment-0001.mht<http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attachments/20181101/cec5a9b3/attachment-0001.mht>>
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2018 08:49:46 -0700
> From: Aser Tolentino <agtolentino at gmail.com<mailto:agtolentino at gmail.com>>
> To: Blind Law Mailing List <blindlaw at nfbnet.org<mailto:blindlaw at nfbnet.org>>
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Anyone using iPad as laptop replacement in the
> workplace?
> Message-ID: <11648D1C-B9F2-4D5D-9895-82690E241CD7 at gmail.com<mailto:11648D1C-B9F2-4D5D-9895-82690E241CD7 at gmail.com>>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> 
> Good morning,
> 
> I like to think of the iPad Pro like the F/A-22 Raptor. It?s really sleek and sexy and does some things incredibly well, and some things less well. I occasionally get into a mood where I do as much on iOS as possible, but even though the smart keyboard and split screen do a lot to make iOS more multitasking friendly then it used to be, I would still say that it?s nothing like sitting in front of my laptop alt-tabbing between the web, two documents, email and a book. Scrivener is really cool, in fact I?m going to start a book on it for National Novel Writing Month today on an iPad, but I think to fully take advantage of it, you?d want to run it on a Mac: the PC version doesn?t work with JAWS.
> 
> Because of the split-screen functionality, I would say there are advantages to the iPad over the phone, particularly if you have some sight, but mileage may vary there. I like taking notes on the iPhone but ultimately always return to Word for a more responsive and fleshed out proofing experience. Apps like Drafts that sync to the cloud make this workflow really smooth. Anyway, those are just my two cents. Please let me know if you have any questions you think I can help out with.
> 
> Respectfully,
> Aser Tolentino, Esq.
> 
>> On Nov 1, 2018, at 08:38, Cody Davis via BlindLaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org<mailto:blindlaw at nfbnet.org>> wrote:
>>
>> All,
>>
>> Does anyone have any experience using an iPad Pro with Voiceover as a laptop replacement at work? I?m curious how viable of an option that would be. Did you have to use it along with a desktop, or were you able to use the iPad as your primary computer.?
>>
>> In your experience, if the iPad Pro a redundancy if I am already using an iPhone?
>>
>> Thanks for any input.
>>
>>
>> Respectfully,
>> Cody J. Davis, J.D., M.P.A.
>> Email: cjdavis9193 at gmail.com<mailto:cjdavis9193 at gmail.com>
>> Phone: (919) 349-9799
>> Linkedin: www.linkedin.com/in/codyjdavisesq<http://www.linkedin.com/in/codyjdavisesq>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> BlindLaw mailing list
>> BlindLaw at nfbnet.org<mailto:BlindLaw at nfbnet.org>
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org>
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for BlindLaw:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/agtolentino@gmail.com<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/agtolentino@gmail.com>
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 6
> Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2018 11:53:46 -0400
> From: Cody Davis <cjdavis9193 at gmail.com<mailto:cjdavis9193 at gmail.com>>
> To: Blind Law Mailing List <blindlaw at nfbnet.org<mailto:blindlaw at nfbnet.org>>
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Anyone using iPad as laptop replacement in the
> workplace?
> Message-ID: <F01D0A2E-3392-4390-A78C-90992720E1B0 at gmail.com<mailto:F01D0A2E-3392-4390-A78C-90992720E1B0 at gmail.com>>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> 
> Thanks for that input.
> 
> Respectfully,
> Cody J. Davis, J.D., M.P.A.
> Email: cjdavis9193 at gmail.com<mailto:cjdavis9193 at gmail.com>
> Phone: (919) 349-9799
> Linkedin: www.linkedin.com/in/codyjdavisesq<http://www.linkedin.com/in/codyjdavisesq>
> 
>> On Nov 1, 2018, at 11:49 AM, Aser Tolentino via BlindLaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org<mailto:blindlaw at nfbnet.org>> wrote:
>>
>> Good morning,
>>
>> I like to think of the iPad Pro like the F/A-22 Raptor. It?s really sleek and sexy and does some things incredibly well, and some things less well. I occasionally get into a mood where I do as much on iOS as possible, but even though the smart keyboard and split screen do a lot to make iOS more multitasking friendly then it used to be, I would still say that it?s nothing like sitting in front of my laptop alt-tabbing between the web, two documents, email and a book. Scrivener is really cool, in fact I?m going to start a book on it for National Novel Writing Month today on an iPad, but I think to fully take advantage of it, you?d want to run it on a Mac: the PC version doesn?t work with JAWS.
>>
>> Because of the split-screen functionality, I would say there are advantages to the iPad over the phone, particularly if you have some sight, but mileage may vary there. I like taking notes on the iPhone but ultimately always return to Word for a more responsive and fleshed out proofing experience. Apps like Drafts that sync to the cloud make this workflow really smooth. Anyway, those are just my two cents. Please let me know if you have any questions you think I can help out with.
>>
>> Respectfully,
>> Aser Tolentino, Esq.
>>
>>> On Nov 1, 2018, at 08:38, Cody Davis via BlindLaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org<mailto:blindlaw at nfbnet.org>> wrote:
>>>
>>> All,
>>>
>>> Does anyone have any experience using an iPad Pro with Voiceover as a laptop replacement at work? I?m curious how viable of an option that would be. Did you have to use it along with a desktop, or were you able to use the iPad as your primary computer.?
>>>
>>> In your experience, if the iPad Pro a redundancy if I am already using an iPhone?
>>>
>>> Thanks for any input.
>>>
>>>
>>> Respectfully,
>>> Cody J. Davis, J.D., M.P.A.
>>> Email: cjdavis9193 at gmail.com<mailto:cjdavis9193 at gmail.com>
>>> Phone: (919) 349-9799
>>> Linkedin: www.linkedin.com/in/codyjdavisesq<http://www.linkedin.com/in/codyjdavisesq>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> BlindLaw mailing list
>>> BlindLaw at nfbnet.org<mailto:BlindLaw at nfbnet.org>
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org>
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for BlindLaw:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/agtolentino@gmail.com<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/agtolentino@gmail.com>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> BlindLaw mailing list
>> BlindLaw at nfbnet.org<mailto:BlindLaw at nfbnet.org>
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org>
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for BlindLaw:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/cjdavis9193@gmail.com<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/cjdavis9193@gmail.com>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Subject: Digest Footer
> 
> _______________________________________________
> BlindLaw mailing list
> BlindLaw at nfbnet.org<mailto:BlindLaw at nfbnet.org>
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org>
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> End of BlindLaw Digest, Vol 174, Issue 2
> ****************************************
> 
> Confidentiality Notice:
> 
> The information contained in this e-mail transmittal is privileged and confidential intended for the addressee only. If you are neither the intended recipient nor the employee or agent responsible for delivering this e-mail to the intended recipient, any disclosure of this information in any way or taking of any action in reliance on this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the person transmitting the information immediately.
> 
> This email has been scanned for viruses and malware by Mimecast Ltd.
> _______________________________________________
> BlindLaw mailing list
> BlindLaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for BlindLaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/sai%40fiatfiendum.org
> 