• Home
  • Our Services
  • From John Cooke
  • Library
  • About
  • Contact Us
  • OUR SERVICES
  • FROM JOHN COOKE
  • LIBRARY
  • ABOUT
  • CONTACT US
9 MIN READ

Cross Those T’s, Dot Those I’s – Handwriting: How to Cross Examine the Expert

December 31, 2012
-
Other

Copyright held by The John Cooke Fraud Report. Reprint rights are granted with attribution to The John Cooke Fraud Report with a link to this website.

 

By Anne Silver Conway, M.S., M.A.
Handwriting examination can be a valuable tool in the investigation of fraud; however, the field of document examination does not require any specific licensing, and practitioners are not policed. How then can an investigator locate a competent examiner and then trust that the results are accurate?

When selecting an individual to determine the validity or authorship of signatures or handwriting, seek the expert who uses scientific criteria and backs findings with solid foundational reasoning. Otherwise, the disputed handwriting could be erroneously credited to the wrong person and someone may be falsely sanctioned, accused or exonerated.

Many industry personnel do not fully understand the difference between graphologists and examiners. A document examiner is not a graphologist, graphoanalyst or handwriting analyst. The titles are often and easily confused to the layman, but the differences between them are like night and day. The analyst predicts personality traits; the examiner is trained in scientific methodology and forensic document examination. The analyst reads between the lines and uses intuitive thinking to arrive at certain conclusions. The examiner uses logic and scientific methods in a laboratory.

WHEN IS AN EXPERT AN EXPERT?

Handwriting examiners come with all levels of expertise.  Unfortunately, anyone can hold himself out as a handwriting expert; no formal college degree in the specialty is available on the west coast. So how can an examiner be located who will base an opinion on stringent test results and examination instead of by just “eyeballing” a document? Here are some suggestions.

One yardstick is court experience. Examiners who are frequently asked to testify about their conclusions are accepted as experts in the eyes of the court. If examiners claim they do not need to testify because their conclusions often prompt pretrial settlements, think twice before retaining their services. While many cases settle before trial, many do not, and testifying in court is a significant portion of an experienced examiner’s duties.

When interviewing examiners, ask for their level and areas of education. A background with graduate scientific methodology course work is important. While many handwriting examiners work on “gut instinct” and simple examination alone, scientific testing is often necessary, depending on the document in question.

Surprisingly, a background in law enforcement is not a necessity, especially if the experience is unrelated to handwriting examination. Remember, the job of the handwriting examiner is to ascertain authenticity, not to solve crimes.

Trade groups to which handwriting examiners belong have had difficulty watchdogging their members and setting standards of professionalism and ethics. What does it mean if an examiner is on the board of one of these societies? Not much. The president of one, for example, was wrong about the validity of the Howard Hughes will, and the man in charge of certification in another society announced on national television that Elvis Presley wrote the address block on his own autopsy report.

Be aware that it is often very difficult to say with certainty whether a person simulated a specific signature. There are only a few procedures in which a forgery can be determined. They require the use of contemporaneous signatures (a dozen or more signatures signed during the same time period by the individual) on like documents (i.e., checks when a check signature is questioned) when possible. A competent document examiner will use laboratory equipment such as a light box with transmitted light (infrared and ultraviolet light when appropriate) and a stereo-scopic microscope. Make sure the examiner has these tools available.

In a recent case, an examiner opined with the highest degree of certainty that an executive disguised his own writing to fill out receipts submitted for reimbursement. They called in a second examiner to take another look. When examining the writing under the stereoscopic microscope, it became absolutely obvious that the handwriting was not that of the executive. The pressure pattern was not the same, the slant of the letters was varied, the height of the letters was altogether different and 15 other criteria did not match. The executive had been wrongly suspended from his job but was reinstated after the second opinion was proved to be the correct one.

Opinions vary in degree of certainty. Examiners should always request to work from original documents when possible. Under stand that if the examiner does an examination from photocopies, the opinion you will receive will be “qualified.” Qualified means that the examiner has reservations. Of course, an unqualified opinion is ideal because the examiner is totally convinced of that opinion. The difference between qualified and unqualified should be explained to you upfront.

Most examiners charge between $125 and $175 an hour. The hourly rate may not be as important as how efficiently the work is conducted. A fast and thorough examiner working at $150 an hour will cost less than a slow and disorganized person who charges $125. Always ask for a time estimate before work begins.

Let the examiner know whether the assignment is part of litigation. When it is, provide the case name and number so the examiner can check it against other assignments. Competent examiners are in demand and attorneys and investigators often select from the same limited pool of examiners. You do not want to retain an examiner who is already working for the other side.

Indicate your deadline before work begins. Also, make sure the examiner will be available to testify if the case goes to trial.  A trial date may be a year or more away. You will want an examiner who does not plan on retiring or relocating before then.

THE EXAMINER’S REPORT

Every examination generates notes of observations that can, in turn, be used to create a report if requested. Reports can be verbal as well as written, but they should discuss the examiner’s findings and conclusions. Request sample written reports from past cases from prospective examiners to get an idea of what to expect from your examination.

Most written reports are divided into an introduction, findings and conclusion sections. The introduction explains the purpose of the examination and lists the documents that were examined (those with the disputed signature and comparison documents for example).

The findings section indicates how the questioned document was examined. It tells what, how and why procedures were undertaken.  Read this section carefully. Impressive sounding tests may do nothing to help resolve the questions about a document. For example, only original documents benefit from the use of a light box and infrared and ultraviolet light tests. If the question involves ink type, these tests may be helpful, but when only photocopies are available for examination, these tests are meaningless. In the case of the executive accused of submitting bogus receipts, the first examiner claimed he used an infrared light to determine genuineness; yet the type of ink in the pen had nothing to do with the issue at hand.

Several machines are available that can bring out hand indentations on pages below the page containing the questioned handwriting. For example, when a bank robber leaves behind a note written from a note pad, hand indentations on the pages of the pad may be useful. A handwriting expert can use one of these devices to compare handwriting similarities between the robbery suspect and the hand indentation left on the pad.

The conclusion will include an opinion and the degree of certainty regarding that opinion. Again, the word qualified means there are reservations. The conclusion should contain a discussion of what would have to happen in order for the examiner to reach an unqualified opinion (i.e. possibly the need for an original document).

Often, other information may counterbalance the lack of original documents. In these cases, the examiner should explain the conclusion using wording such as “Although my opinion is qualified because only a photocopy was available for examination, I examined enough contemporaneous signatures to determine that the differences between the known and disputed signatures were fundamental and significant. Therefore I have the highest degree of certainty that the signature in dispute is not authentic. This is based on information and signatures that were submitted.”

OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

Photography is an essential skill in disputed handwriting work.  Photographic records may be included in reports and are often used in court to help support an examiner’s conclusion. Examiners who do not use photos to substantiate opinions may not be adequately backing up their conclusions. Ideally, examiners should use a macro lens and copy stand to bring out the detail of a line of writing or signature.

THE REPORT

The report received from the examiner should be clearly written without confusing trade jargon. Document examiners, as a whole, can sometimes become offended if their findings are questioned.  Some take this line of questioning personally. The examiner selected should be able to put his ego aside and seek the truth and if he is unable to reach an unqualified conclusion after an examination he should not be afraid to say so. If the individual who ordered the report does not understand how the examiner reached a conclusion or conducted a test, clarification should be requested.

A second opinion may be in order if the requester is unhappy with the way an examination was undertaken or believes the conclusion was incorrect. Even when the first opinion is favorable to the case or investigation, it is of no value when the points made in the report can be knocked down in court. To ward off such a disaster, play devil’s advocate by crossexamining the expert yourself before the case goes to trial. If the findings make good sense to you, the odds are better that they will hold up in court.

The opinion of a handwriting expert is often crucial to the outcome of an investigation and case. Selecting an experienced and credible examiner with good verbal and written communication skills is the first step in ensuring that the examination will be thorough and accurate.

An individual’s handwriting can be as unique as a fingerprint.  The slant of the letters, the space between words, the angle of the cross on the T’s or the placement of the dot on the I’s …  each can be a valuable clue as to the authenticity of a signature or of an entire document.

Anne Silver Conway has been a handwriting expert since 1978 and has qualified over 300 times in federal, bankruptcy, superior, criminal and municipal courts in California and Texas.

© Copyright 1997 Alikim Media

← PREVIOUS POST
From the Coalition Against Insurance Fraud – Capitol Update
NEXT POST →
Around Every Corner – The Christians, the Church and Fraud

Related News

Other posts that you should not miss.

Fraud Prevention Integration – You Can Hear the Train A-Comin’

December 31, 2012

Copyright held by The John Cooke Fraud Report. Reprint rights are granted with attribution to The John Cooke Fraud Report with a …

Read More →
Other
10 MIN READ

Off the Wall Lawsuits

February 14, 2014

Copyright held by The John Cooke Fraud Report. Reprint rights are granted with attribution to The John Cooke Fraud Report with a …

Read More →
Other
1 MIN READ

Jury Verdicts – Awards Based on Place of Trial Claims Intelligence Report – Reprint

December 29, 2012

Copyright held by The John Cooke Fraud Report. Reprint rights are granted with attribution to The John Cooke Fraud Report with a …

Read More →
Other
2 MIN READ

  • Categories

John Cooke Investigations | Cross Those T’s, Dot Those I’s – Handwriting: How to Cross Examine the Expert