Line Quality in Non-original Documents Expert Opinions and Conclusions

Paolo Vaccarone; Linton Mohammed

doi:10.69525/jasqde.282

Line Quality in Non-original Documents Expert Opinions and Conclusions

Journal of the American Society of Questioned Document Examiners

Volume 25 (2022): Issue 1

By: Paolo Vaccarone and Linton Mohammed

Open Access

|Jun 2022

Abstract

Forensic Handwriting Examiners (FHEs) and Document Examiners (FDEs) are involved in legal cases where specific skills are required to analyse signatures and handwriting. The examiners are increasingly being asked to express their opinion regarding the authenticity of signatures and handwriting where non-original documents are involved. With this study, the authors tried to understand the expert perceptions and opinions regarding the quality of the line when the documents are in non-original format as well as whether the analysis of non-original documents also influences the final opinions rendered.

References

ISO 19005-3:2012 - Document management— Electronic document file format for long-term preservation - Part 3: Use of ISO 32000-1 with support for embedded files (PDF/A-3) ISO 32000-2, Document Management Portable Document Format Part 2
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
J.L Parker. PDF Technology Related Effects in Documents. ASQDE AGM 2.0 ver. 2021. The Future is Now, August 10-12, 2021;
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
J.S. Kelly, M. Angel. Forensic Document Examination in the 21st Century, CRC Press 1st Edition, (2020), 211–223;
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
P. Vaccarone, F. Dellavalle, A. Lvovskaya. Handwriting Pen Stroke Vs Magnetic Toner. Which one came first? ASQDE AGM August 10-14 2020.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
J.S. Kelly, M. Angel. Op. Cit., 252–254.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
ISO 5466:1996. Photography. Processed safety photographic films. Storage practices.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
R, Derrick Making Microfiche. A Guide to Equipment Choices for Establishing a Microfiche Production Facility. International Development Research Center. IDRC-MR199e - (1988).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
G.A. Hanna. Microfilm Documents: What Are the Boundaries in Document Examination? Journal of Forensic Sciences, Vol. 33, n. 1 (1988), 154–166.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
M. Gupta. Forensic Examination of Source Media on Facsimile Generated Documents. ASQDE AGM 2.0 ver. 2021. The Future is Now. August 10-12, 2021;
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
G.A. Dawson, B.S. Lindblom. An evaluation of line quality in photocopied signatures. Science & Justice, Vol. 38, (1998) 189–194.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
B. Found, D. Rogers. Investigating forensic document examiners’ skill relating to opinions on photocopied signatures. Science & Justice, Vol. 45, (2005) 200–206.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Seaman, J. (1991). Facsimile documents: Feasibility for comparison. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, Anaheim, CA.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
R.A. Huber, A.M. Headrick. Handwriting Identification: Facts and Fundamentals. CRC Press; 1st edition (1999), 257–283.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
S.E. Morton. A Look at Newer Photocopiers. Journal of Forensic Sciences, JFSCA, Vol. 34, No. 2 (1989), 461–467.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
SWGDOC Standard for Examination of Handwritten Items. Ver. 2013-1
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
D. Ellen, S. Day, C. Davies. Scientific Examination of Documents Methods and Techniques. 4th edition. (2018), 56–57.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
S.K. Mishra. P. Sharma. M. Singh. O.P. Jasuja. What forensic information does a photocopier reproduction convey—Is it suitable and sufficient to lead an expert to a definite conclusion? Problems of Forensic Sciences. vol. 117, (2019), 19–36.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
K. Saini, A. Singh, The Evaluation of Handwriting Features in Photocopied Signatures. The Internet Journal of Forensic Science. Vol. 4 n. 1, (2008)
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
SWGDOC Standard for Examination of Documents Produced with Liquid Ink Jet Technology. Ver. 2013-1
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
SWGDOC Standard for Examination of Documents Produced with Toner Technology. Ver. 2013-1
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
O.P. Jasuja, S.K. Mishra. M. Singh.. The effect of photocopier types on online quality features of handwriting in multi-generational photocopies. Nowa Kodyfikacja Prawa Karnego 59, (2021), 57–70
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Best Practice Manual for the Forensic Examination of Handwriting, ENFSI-BPM-FHX-01, Ed. 03, (2020). https://enfsi.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/BPM-Handwriting-%E2%80%94-Edition-3.pdf, 9.7, 36.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article

Articles in this issue

DOI: https://doi.org/10.69525/jasqde.282 | Journal eISSN: 1524-7287

Journal RSS Feed

Language: English

Page range: 9 - 20

Published on: Jun 1, 2022

Published by: American Society of Questioned Document Examiners

In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

Keywords:

© 2022 Paolo Vaccarone, Linton Mohammed, published by American Society of Questioned Document Examiners
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Volume 25 (2022): Issue 1