"FITNESS FOR SAMPLES FOR COMPARISON STUDY OF SIGNATURES" handwriting experts
Dr. Paul A. REGALADO RODRIGUEZ
Colonel PNP (r) - Lawyer - Forensic Expert
Doctor in Forensic Science and Criminal
http://sites .google.com / site / parodriguezr
parodriguezr@hotmail.comEsta mail address is being protected from spam bots. You need JavaScript enabled to view
A. INTRODUCTION
The interaction of men is a great social environment binding, the presence of so-called "written documents, which allow you to consolidate or establish different situations. It is for those who serve in a part as a means to identify, on the other to establish public and private acts, as can be to translate facts or data, among other purposes.
is in this sense that the more complex written documents criminology, are those that will hold as a "validating" the act to represent the so-called "signature" or required or involved. For example, we have the signature of the responsible officer, in a resolution, judicial, administrative or other measures, "the person holding an identity card, passport, Immigration, National ID, etc .- of the celebrants of a legal act, such as a lease contract for services, sale, rent, etc .- and so, this way we engage in a universe of written documents, most of which have essential part "one or more signatures."
Much of social conflict are committed to the truth of what that document is written and when the call to recognize his signature, states that it "is not, then there is a very delicate problem implications that are often even higher. What else can we do about it then that?. Luckily we have a "discipline" to some and "science" to others, whatever the case, makes use of knowledge and analysis techniques, to inform about the controversial signing, if it is included in some of the three qualities which we state as follows: Whether the signature denied, is a firm "adulterated or Disguise" (ie, that figure comes from the fist of the person to whom it is being assigned, but which has no close relationship similar to the firm that has developed to be used in all their actions, and that in its graphic identity is public or private), or it could be a signature "False" (when it comes graph fist person other than the owner, for whom it is intended to award the origin) could also be the case of a firm described as "authentic" (which actually comes from the fist chart holder and relates evident with its graphic identity) [1], in short, this body of knowledge to which we refer in our country receives the name of Grafotecnia "(" ... Therefore, with their principles, rules and general laws, and took Graphology unquestionably an aspect of science. The identification methods were improved and managed to collect himself and fit body for evidentiary most indispensable experiences on all peoples and all laws. Modern applications were informing the system, the foundation was set progressively served to best way to differentiate each and every one of the writings or manuscripts, and prepared and a new way science, described by the name of Grafotecnia, which is the same Graphology, as developed by its own work and purely practical purposes [2] .... ")
In any case as an illustration, we know that this branch of human knowledge still has been the subject of a particular dispute and it is now confined to the fact that we still have no consensus As for the term that defines it properly, so it is that in societies generally be known as Grafotecnia, graphic, Grafocrítica, graphology, Expertise Calligraphic, Document Examination, documentología, ETC. it really has no great significance, since it knows the "object of study", with at least one point ("Since all the terms defined are defined by other words, it is clear that human knowledge must always content to accept some terms as intelligible without definition, to have a starting point for their definitions. "BERTRAND RUSSELL [3]). But yes, the fact is kept on hand a body of doctrine, and the existence of methods, procedures and techniques in this domain, allowing to reach a categorical conclusion that resolves the problem a matter of controversy; and we leave as initially or worse.
precisely this problem, quite common in our environment, and so is insurance for other companies, is that we will arrange for the development of this article, interest lay in him for some time and experimental results from a theoretical and applicative research, in which I acted as participant observer, hoping it will be interesting and useful to the reader, if not a starting point for your own research.
B. BACKGROUND
01. As the theoretical framework about
What knowledge gives us the necessary guidelines for the solution of this problem arises from the refusal to recognize the authorship of a signature. As well we have expressed, it is for their subject knowledge in handwriting that is part of the domain of Grafotecnia, which among other things, allows us to inform us about the circumstances that shaped each person to achieve this output letter entitled "Signature."
To conduct a criminal investigation of such Handwriting Analysis, is due in principle to define the problem under study ": We refer to whether a firm is" adulterated or Disguise "if" False "or finally establish if it corresponds to a signature" True. " Problem in any case could be identified as follows: Does the signature on signed on behalf of the person "X" comes from his own hand chart?. We know that scientific research, the problems are stated as a question.
As a result, the Handwriting Expert shall be formulated by the corresponding "working hypothesis" that may well be worded as follows: "The signing dubious signed on behalf of 'X' comes from the same graph fist of the person with the name of it has signed comparison firms (hypothesis affirmative).
And henceforth we can only reason by the General Method of Scientific Research, adapted to Handwriting Examination. Research must necessarily be in consideration of the great "Theoretical Framework" available, analyzing the variables, their indicators, besides availing the most appropriate tools that allow us to obtain sufficient data must be interpreted and systematized in this way, "Verifying compliance or not the hypothesis, "which in fact will solve the problem emerged.
To reach a "firm conclusions" (confirmation or rejection of the hypothesis), it is essential that the so-called "Sample Survey", which are but the one hand "Shows Dubit" (which can be given by one or more firms) and, on the other the "comparison sample" (which can sometimes correspond to one or more signatures, provided for that purpose and as the case), meet technical requirements of "adequacy", ie we have to verify that the state found, will allow these samples to be "profitable" to practice proper consideration, otherwise the Handwriting Expert, would not be position to give any categorical statement, referring as a result the formulation of a "Conclusion Abstensiva" (when do not have the necessary elements for a proper study) [4], since the condition of the samples or rather to be suitable, has been affected.
02.
factual events
Not surprisingly, such that during police investigations involving the Public Ministry, and subsequently judicialized (via PC), as well as in civil or Labour may, among others (who may be the Administrative), we find "Handwriting Analysis Reports Surveys or contradictory" produced by "experts" who have had similar means Handwriting training, especially regarding the use of force doctrine, the same concerns substantial issues concerning the processing of the "Samples" under study.
These cases today are often very common, at least in our environment, in which more than one person after learning the result, ask the following question: But is A Why should this dispute?, and this becomes more complicated when the experts or experts are called to report the methods and techniques used by each them to reach such contradictory conclusions, "showing off" before the competent authority, reporting on "differences" or "similarities" identified by them, among both groups of samples, which enables them to conceive that they are " false "or" Authentic "and that after the famous" Debate ", any changes in its opinion to maintain its position, circumstances in which the relevant operator must wait for a third opinion, that to add insult to injury, may be just "third opinion", other than the aforementioned.
To corroborate the above, I quote another example, a case that came to my knowledge, in which having two "Firms hesitant" signed on behalf of a person "XX" does not exist (a fact that was made clear reliably), eleven (11) experts who spoke so much so "official" as "On behalf", issued dissenting opinions.
The case is as follows. These are the documents "A" and "B", in which I repeat, with the signature signed on behalf of the person "XX" nonexistent. It is presumed that these two firms, perhaps they could come from some of the people, "PP", "QQ" or "RR." Perito first he named as 01, issued his statement saying that the signatures of the documents "A" and "B" were made by the person "PP." Experts subsequently 02 and 03, were pronounced as the firm put in the "B" comes from the person "PP", omitting to rule on the signature affixed on the document "A". At a later date, the experts 04 and 05, rather conclude that the signatures of the documents "A" and "B" were made by the person "QQ." Following the staff, the experts 06 and 07, confirm what was said by the experts 04 and 05. Then the experts involved 08 and 09, and are pronounced in the sense that the signature on the document "A", not from the person "QQ", failing to make any pronouncement on the firm put in the "B" . Finally, there is the contribution of the experts 10 and 11, which categorically conclude that the signatures on the documents "A" and "B" signed in the name of the person "XX", from graphic fist of the person "RR." What do you think?. When the case came to our hands, the officer just wanted to know what happened?. What complicated the matter is that eight (08) of the experts, came from the same formation (same entity, we are knowledgeable in their teaching), and the other three (03) Surveyors, two ( 02) belonged to the same labor organization that the other eight (08) Surveyors, and the third, along with two (02) above, came from another Grafotecnia training, means more current. But in any case, all the experts involved, had full knowledge of what the study techniques recommended for these cases in terms of Handwriting.
A second case is one in which the experts in charge of the delivery expert, with five (05) firms hesitant contained the same number of bank checks from different accounts, were studied taking as a "single signature for comparison ", contained in a Deed, four years old at the dates of the checks in question (the person who is judged to the firm, had died a few days of turning the checks, not counting with other firms study). In this Mr. Surveyors were two, opining that the signatures of bank checks were "false."
Finally, another expert, ruled on a (01) "Signature doubtful" a date "x", with the pattern also confront (01) single "Sign of comparison" but eight (08) years after the previous data.
How to explain what happened?.
The explanation for both cases was very simple. The experts did not consider any, to determine the "fitness comparison samples. "
addition to these cases, there is also another great range of Handwriting expert rulings, extremely controversial, in which samples of comparison "are good" but the interpretation of signs, has been completely wrong.
then see what the doctrine provides as to the determination of "appropriateness" for comparison samples must be examined Handwriting.
C. FITNESS COMPARISON OF SAMPLES (FIRMS) for an analysis Handwriting
01.
doctrinal contributions
In principle, it is necessary to know whether the parameters under which they must be considered a handwritten samples, among these firms-are proposed under a long or a recent date.
avoid spreading greatly, we quote what we say some writers the particular issue, and, more training, we will chronologically, with our emphasis on the most significant:
a. VAL FELIX THE EARTH (1956):
"An immediate consequence of the above is clear: the study of a signature can only be accurately checked with other firms. The signature to be studied is called doubtful, the matching serving are indubitable. To make this comparison, the expert should obtain as many signatures Undoubtedly, contemporary of the doubtful, and if possible made in the same paper (quality dimensions), pen, ink and space, whether in public or private documents, either expressly obtained in a body of writing. [5]
to fit our theme, then we have the treatise considered "technical requirements" of the "comparison sample", the following: Adequacy, contemporary, and Equicircunstancialidad, the explanation of them terms we will see at the end of this point.
B.
Jean Gayet (1965)
"Parts of comparison.
a) Writings "spontaneous"
should be the most numerous possible undoubted origin and period approximately equal to the text file ... [6]
In this case, the author fills in "technical requirements" for "Compare samples" Spontaneity, sufficiency, reliability, and contemporary.
c. ANDREW Meyniel ROYAN (1992)
"First of all, remember that in any comparison there are two types of documents, or put more accurately, two types of graphics, doubtful and unquestionable ...
According to technical criteria, from the point of view grafocrítico, undoubted documents must meet, if possible, to its validity as a comparative sample, the following characteristics:
III.2.1. Be original ...
The reproductions do not allow ...
III.2.2. Be spontaneous ...
It is therefore important to be improvised preferably written or dictated, or copied, even memorized.
III.2.3. Be made under normal conditions ...
III.2.4. They are contemporary
The evolution of people over time, is something that happens on the physical, ideological and psychological, with the spelling accurate reflection of those changes, modifying the same time, by that between two graphs, chronologically distant, can be very important differences, the result of such a development of personality and significant disease appeared eventually to make identification almost unfeasible. This is even more evident in the signature personality synthesis of each individual.
III.2.5. Be extensive ...
III.2.6. Be numerous
is also clear that a larger number of samples Undoubtedly, the largest number of matching possibilities ... [7]
In this case are considered significant: Originality, Spontaneity, contemporary, and Sufficiency.
d. ANTONIO FRANCISCO BARBERÁ; and BAQUERO MENDEZ FRANCISCO (1998)
"Determining the suitability of the parts subject to opinion
In this regard we specify other writings:
- They have a large enough
- are original
- They are peers to each other
- graphics features have sufficient identifier value
- are spontaneous ... [8] "
These authors consider the following "Requirements": originality, contemporary, and Spontaneity.
e. LUIS G. POSADA VELASQUEZ (2004)
"3. Review Material
Before entering grafonómicos analysis and abstracting is necessary to ensure they have suitable material for this purpose. We must begin by distinguishing, in this order of ideas, two kinds of documents and graphics: the doubtful or questioned, and indubitable.
The first condition to be met by the comparison material is undoubted authenticity ... The certainty in the authenticity of the sample, therefore, is of vital importance ...
The abundance of material allows the expert to appreciate in detail the various features of the genuine graphics, forms and features discarding purely adventitious and accidental ...
The adequacy or similarity is to rebuild as far as possible, the circumstances under which presumably was prepared document or graphics issues ...
Contemporaneity is one of the important requirements of sampling ... The undeniable changes in writing over time thus require a study material pertaining to the alleged dates of the next question ...
graphics
Spontaneity is another requirement, obvious by others, without which it can hardly be successful in identifying ...
manuscripts and documents subject matter expert must be provided in the original and only exception to photocopy or photograph ... [9]
In this case, The treatise provides the following: Sufficiency, Homology, contemporaneity, spontaneity, and originality.
f. JOSEPH'S PICCHIO (h) MR CELSO PICCHIO and, ANA G. MAURA THE PICCHIO (2006)
"3.
comparison chart pattern
In graphology, the most important chapter of the Document Examination, "the patterns are almost mandatory and daily use.
The expert must know how to choose. Of good selection and acceptance of standards depends, in most cases, Handwriting exam success, ensuring a correct conclusion.
Hence the importance of knowledge and, especially, the requirements that must be obeyed.
In general, employers must confront graphics meet four requirements:
a) Authenticity
b) Adequacy
c) contemporaneity, and
d) Amount ... [10] "
It expressed by the authors identify the following: Reliability, Equicircunstancialidad, contemporary, and Sufficiency.
g. PERU NATIONAL POLICE (2006)
"3. Technical requirements to be met
Handwriting samples
a.
original
offending samples and comparison should not be photocopies, photographs, fax, print scans, etc.
b.
spontaneous
outlined in public documents, private and individual identity, to avoid graphic disguise.
c.
contemporary
that have been made at the same time or shortly dubious document before and after the data from it.
d.
counterparts
must compare elements of similar shape and structure, with signatures and handwritten signatures with manuscripts in different varieties, respectively.
E.
enough
involves the quality and the greatest possible number of samples by which to determine the presence and persistence of individualizing graphic features.
f.
reliable
That there is certainty that comes from the owner, to be honest, in force and not having any fraudulent alteration.
g.
Equicircunstanciales
That they are drawn in similar documents, the same graphical space and with the same instrument clerk. [11]
To complete the identification of "Technical Requirements "For it to police institution, we have: originality, spontaneity, contemporary, Homology, sufficiency, reliability, and Equicircunstancialidad. In this regard, we prefer to use the term "authenticity" to replace the term "reliability."
As you appreciate then, doctrine is rich in considering the "Samples" and, particularly "In comparison" or "indubitable" and so on., Must meet specific conditions to be the subject of a study of identification and comparison of features.
Then, Mr. Handwriting Experts, Documentoscopistas, calligraphy, etc. have in this doctrine, the basis and grounds to that when carrying out their expert study, which adhere to that expected, so arrive at conclusions valid.
02. What happened in practice?
Taking into account suggested in this case, like others who have been subjected to particular study, what is happening is that the vast majority of Mr. Surveyors, have omitted the that the doctrine we have provided regarding the "appropriateness of the comparison samples, applying each of them so completely arbitrary the process of" Approval Rating "for samples subject of study.
is then that the samples are compared in terms of quality consistent with the above, which would lead to the experts to come to misinterpretation, and therefore no conclusions tailored to the truth, prejudice any party in the process, but damage caused by Handwriting Experts involved.
In short, they worked with "BEST SAMPLES." This is nothing but a sign of lack of professional quality and do not intend to give another interpretation to this way of proceeding, which might rather borders on criminal, fact that I refuse to accept.
D. CONCLUSIONS
01. Within the range of studies that are the domain of Grafotecnia, is one related to the review of "Signatures" controversial, which can be credited as a result the quality of being "adulterated or Disguised", "False" or "Real."
02. To ensure ownership of any of these qualities, the comparative study is required of the characteristics identified in both the "Show Dubit (Challenged, controversial, etc.) as the" comparison sample "(In comparison, undoubtedly, true, etc..), which after being confronted, leading to a result is expressed as "Conclusions" of expert statement.
03. It is of particular significance that the "comparison sample", should have the status of "BEST" to carry out the forensic examination, otherwise "WOULD NOT BE SUITABLE.
04. The technical condition of "Adequacy" is gained by the "comparison sample", if they meet the "technical requirements" that the doctrine has planned for them, such as: Be original, be spontaneous, to be contemporary, be homologous be sufficient, be authentic, and be equicircunstanciales, as well as incorporated the Manual of Criminology of the National Police of Peru.
05. It is common, that Messrs. Handwriting Experts, do not work with "best samples, bypassing heavily doctrinal requirements, leaving her free will such approval rating.
06. It is imperative that whoever has to qualify the evidentiary value of these statements by experts, not sidestep this issue, because otherwise it would tolerate the arrogance and inefficiency of these experts.
The issue I have presented here is not intended to stigmatize or harm the image of those being called to implement the best of their knowledge and belief, and they do, but serve warning for those who have the power to supervise them and requiring them to comply with its doctrine arises under pain of being away from the role assigned to them for the sake of a more transparent and fairer.
--- -------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------
[1] REGALADO RODRIGUEZ, Pablo Alfonso, "The Handwriting Expert Evidence in Civil Process, Typography THE DAWN, Arequipa, Peru, 1996, p. 16 (see: a. Tests to identify the source graph.)
[2] POSADA ANGEL, Alberto, "Graphology and Graphopathology" Auditorium, Medellin, Colombia, 1977, pp. 28-29.
[3] COPI, Irving M., "Introduction to Logic", Eudeba, Fourth Edition, Buenos Aires-Argentina, 2000, p. 123.
[4] RODRIGUEZ REGALADO, Paul A., "The Handwriting Expert Evidence in Civil Procedure," Editorial THE DAWN, Arequipa, Peru, 1996, pp. 18-19.
[5] LAND VAL, Félix Del, "Grafocrítica" Editorial Tecnos, Madrid, Spain, 1956, p.122.
[6] Gayet, Jean, "Handbook of Forensic Science" Zeus Editorial, Madrid, Spain, 1965, p.395.
[7] Meyniel ROYAN, Andrew, "Grafocrítica Treaty", Editorial Trivium, Madrid, Spain, 1992, pp. 66-69.
[8] ANTONIO BARBERÁ, Francisco, and Baquero Méndez, Francisco, "Analysis of manuscripts, signatures and alterations documentaries, Tirant lo Blanch, Valencia, Spain, 1998, p. 179.
[9] Velásquez Posada, Luis G., "forgery and forensic laboratory," Ediciones La Rocca, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 2004, pp. 772-781.
[10] Picchio, José Del, Picchio, Celso MR and, Picchio, Ana Maura G. Del, "Treaty-The Forensic Document forgery", Ediciones La Rocca, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 2006, pp. 104-113.
[11] PERU NATIONAL POLICE, "Handbook of Criminology, JMD Graphics Services, Lima, Peru, 2006, pp. 493-494.
handwriting experts
