The Examination of Photocopies, Microfilms and Faxes

"The question is frequency asked, "can an examination be made from a photocopy, microfilm or fax?" The answer to that question is definitely YES.

Introduction

The examination of a photocopy of the original document will certainly pose some limitations in the scientific process of analysis, but it can lead to definite conclusions. The Forensic Document Examiner may not be able to determine from a photocopy of an original indented writings, erasures, obliterations, watermarks, tonal gradations and color. Also, photocopies that are less than clear copied will not always disclose pen pressure, pen lifts, retouching, shading and sometimes the type of writing instrument used.

When originals are available and a technical study is requested, it often becomes essential to make reproductions of originals by means of photography, photocopying with a high resolution printer with a minimum of 300 dpi, microfiling and faxing.

Since each of these processes gives different results, the best results that show the most of writing details, are from well made black and white and color photographs, followed by photocopy digital imaging. Photographic prints prepared directly by proper lighting and special filters will often detect forged signature, alterations and erasures. With photocopy digital imaging, one can also reasonably detect forged signatures, alterations and erasure. (The author uses a HP photocopy digital imaging printer, using either inkjet or toner for best results).

Technically speaking, photocopies produced in the older models of the 70' and 80' produced less than exact copies from originals. Most copies are either reduced or enlarged from originals, usually from 1 to 2 percent. Quality of the copy can range from bad to excellent. It all depends on the photocopier, toner and sometimes, the paper due to humidity. Quality copies are best produced on smaller copiers than larger copiers.

The grant majority of copies are electrostatically produced. (A dry rather than wet process in producing a copy). With the modern black, white and color imaging photocopiers, the document examiner can be confident that copies of originals can be examined for abnormalities and used for court purposes as evidential documentation. Of course it is recommended that originals be examined when possible, but when not available for reasons beyond one"s control, the examiner can proceed in examining the document and reaching definitive conclusions.

For questions concerning copies Orhway Hilton, in his book "Scientific Examination of Questioned Documents," states that the suspicious photocopy is one class of problem in which it is desirable to have a good deal of background information concerning the document.

In learning about the reproduction of documents the investigator, attorney

or interested party should ask the following questions:

• 1. Where is the original?

• 2. Who has it?

• 3. Where was it stored?

• 4. For how long?

• 5. How many copies of the original exist?

• 6. Who are the persons who witnessed the photocopying the original?

• 7. What is the interest of each person who handled in one way or another the original and copies in the case?

• 8. In case the original no longer exist, who and for what reason the document(s) was destroyed, lost or just holding back?

• 9. In case the document have a logical and timely procedure when produced?

• 10. Are any disinterested persons available to the reproduction of the document(s), custody and handling of the original document(s)?

• 11. If the document was altered in a particular part of it, what other document could it have come from and who could have supplied it?

• 12. Who is benefited by the reproduction of the document(s)?

• 13. Who is harmed by the reproduction of the document(s)?

Microfilm copies

With rising costs in transporting, handling and storing documents, banks andother businesses are converting checks, withdrawal and saving forms as well as other kinds of business documents to microfilm is a medium to high orthochromatic film used to duplicate the image from originals. What concerns forensic document examiners is the quality of the microfilm copies reproduced. Since a copy of any kind will be reduced in size and the clarity of some of the elements relied upon to determine authenticity of signatures and writings will be secondary.

Suitable copies from microfilm should be direct copies form the negative of the microfilm or the best copy possible. When possible, the investigator take notes as to model and copies where produced. It is suggested that the microfilm camera lens be cleaned for

sharper copies. (In 2002, the author was contracted and for the first time examined digital inkjet copies of checks. These check copies were of excellent quality that permitted an examination, resulting that some of the signature copies had definitive signs of simulation and altered writing in the check amounts).

Copies from Fax Machines

Fax machine copy is for practical purposes a copy from an original. What distinguishes it from other reproduced copies is the line quality in the writing. (Each letter, number, symbol and line movement is in a jagged or in-set form produced by the electrical impulses sent from on fax machine by telephone transmission. Of course, fax transmissions machines have improved in the last several years improving line quality in the writing and signature mode.

Official documents sent by fax machines are considered copies and its authenticity relies solely on comparing it to the original document, but when this is not the case, the copy will come under the Best Evidence Rule, as well as other types of copies already mentioned in this article. For examination purpose, this examiner recommends that the investigator should take the following steps:

• 1. Identify the fax machine as to brand name.

• 2. Date of fax machine when purchased.

• 3. When fax machine last repaired.

• 4. Type of fax printer (thermal, carbon, laser, inkjet or light emitting diode).

• 5. Inquire if a fax log exists in order to determine who sent the fax, date, time and who sent it.

• 6. Simulate a copy of the original document in controversy (letter typed or written) and send it by the purported fax in different modes (standard, fine and extra fine), to the fax the document was originally sent to.

• 7. Repeat the above mentioned steps (1thru 5), where the fax, microfilm or photocopy case. It will be important for court purposes.

Methods of Photocopy Alteration or Manipulation

Examiners may from time to time examine questioned copies from an altered original document. It"s the investigator" job to learn all about the photocopied document(s) and the possible method or methods employed in the preparation of the document(s).

Cut-and-paste Method

The method involves cut and pasting of information including signatures on a prepared document and printed out by means of a photocopier or other printing means, producing a copy for illegal means.

Transparency Tape Lift-off Method

This method involves using transparency tape placed over a signature that was written in erasable ink and lifted from an original document and transferred to another document. To the untrained eye the tape lift-off signature can be passed off a genuine signature on a bogus document or check. Of course, in my 28 years of document examination I haven"t come across one.

Transparency Copy Method

The person simply uses a transparency to duplicate information or a signature from an original and then transfer it by means of a photocopier to another document or check making it look like an original with deleted, added or altered information.

Electronic Editing

Today we have electronic editing that one can manipulate information that is stored in a computer that photocopies and then printed out in toner, inkjet or laser. Information can be deleted or added creating a new document.

Authentication Documents

The authentication and introduction of documentary evidence is a matter of importance. The Best Evidence Rule of Puerto Rico requires that if the contents of a writing is to be proved, the document must be produced unless a copy is introduced into evidence without challenge. Some documents are self-authenticating as are ancient documents, recorded deeds, and other documents over thirty years of older. In proving the signature on a document anyone who witnessed the signing or who was present and saw the document signed or, anyone who can established that he knows the signature, may prove the document, even when it is a photocopy. When the investigator has located an important document either by speaking with the person who is responsible for the original or by serving a court order to produce the original, he should interview all witnesses concerning the document and have him, her or they available in court. If you have no such witness or witnesses, adequate proof of the handwriting of the maker should suffice.

Anyone who can establish that he or she has knowledge of the handwriting of the person who wrote or executed the document can be a witness or by using a qualified forensic document examiner that can express an opinion by comparison of the disputed handwriting of signature with any writing proved to be in the genuine handwriting or signatures offers little trouble. But the investigator will meet with situations where it will challenge his or her ingenuity. A lot of legwork and imagination may be necessary. Look for public and private documents such as cancelled checks, loan applications, letters, all types of legal documents, etc.

Documents of all types are constantly introduced into evidence. If originals of documents are introduced, the questions of hand writings or signatures become important. If you have copies the originals must be located if they exists. If the original no longer exists such as cancelled bank checks or other important documents, etc., copies should be gotten and certified to the satisfaction of the court. Good copies of the originals can be examined by the forensic document examiner and an opinion given. Under the Rules of Evidence, if notice is ignored or the person informs the investigator that he or she does not have the original, the investigator has satisfied the requirements of the Best Evidence Rule by showing the person" inability to produce the original. Copies may then be proved and introduced as court evidence.

From experience, when photocopies of documents and faxes are introduced in evidence, little problems arise unless the other side in a legal issue raises an objection. For that matter, meticulous care is required in proving those types of secondary documents.

Document Investigation

The first thing the investigator must decide is how the photocopy of fax was prepared, by whom, from where sent, date, hour and for what purpose. If a lawyer is suing a bank or credit agency for falsely reporting to an inquirer your client" bankruptcy, you would prove the dispatch sent. If sent by fax accepting an offer, and receipt of the fax is denied, you would prove receipt in a case where acceptance depends upon receipt and not upon mere sending, in order to hold the entity liable. In proving either, you will need not only your witness" testimony that he received the fax, but, records and possibly the testimony of an employee of the sender that he or she dispatched it at a specified time addressed to a specified person or firm, and the document read so and so.

The investigator or lawyer must be sure the document(s) will be admissible in court, either under a general rule or under an exception of the rule, either admissible on whole for all purposes or in part and for a limited purpose. When you have satisfied yourself as to its admissibility, you now turn your attention to method of proof.

Subpoena your Witness

As a general rule, a witness should be subpoenaed. However, treat each witness respectfully and when possible have the witnesses on call as they are called to testify. Professional people should be on call including the expert witness. It is recommended that experts not be sworned in court until he or she is ready to testify. Sometimes, attorneys may have the need to talk to the expert during trial. If the expert has already been sworned in as a witness, the expert bound by the court in not talking with the attorney who hired him. Those witnesses with whom the investigator or attorney have not talked to, especially an unwilling witness, would be foolhardy, even though you feel sure what his or her testimony will be. The attorney will be bound by his or her witness" testimony and especially when the witness is considered a hostile witness. All witnesses should be treated with a subpoena, it would be very considerate that he or she have transportation to and from the court.

Submission of Document Evidence to the Examiner

Even though there are some shortcomings in examining photocopies, investigators and attorneys are encouraged to transmit good quality reproductions to the forensic document examiner when the original document is or is not available. The examiner will receive all types of document cases for preliminary analysis and scientific examinations. It is important for the investigator to keep in mind that submission of evidential documents should adhere to the following recommendations:

• 1. Enclose all documents in protective envelopes that come in different sizes.

• 2. Avoid excessive handling of documents. Make photocopies of originals for reference purposes. In case a document is to be processed for fingerprints, do not touch the document with your bare hands. Use a clean piece of paper or handkerchief to pick up the document(s).

• 3. Do not mark documents, unless it will not conflict with other writings after it is determined that lifting prints from the document was not necessary.

• 4. Do not fold, cut, tear, stain, hole punch, clip, staple or experiment with the document.

Summary

By adhering to the above mentioned and providing good quality reproductions of the original or photocopies, the document examination will result in definitive conclusions in the majority of cases. If testimony is going to be required, the original document of it exists, should be available to the examiner for confirmation of the opinion. The document examiner will also want to photograph or photocopy the original(s) or copy(s)

for court demostration purposes.

Bibliography

• 1. Gorajczyk, John S. "Examination and Identification of Photocopies and Photocopiers." American Jurisprudence, Proof of Facts, 3d. Series, Vol. 23, 1993.

• 2. Hanna, Georgia A., "Microfilm Document Examination?", Journal Forensic Science, Vol. 33, January 1988.

• 3. Hilton, Orhway, "Scientific Examination of Questioned Documents," Elsevier, New York, revised edition, 1982.

• 4. Kelly, Seaman, "Facsimile Documents: Feasbility For Comparison Purposes." JFSCA, Vol. 37, No. 6, November 1992.

• 5. Morton, Susan E. "Look at Newer Photocopiers", Journal Forensic Sciences, Vol. 36, March 1991.

• 6. Osborn, Paul J., "Fraudulent Photocopy of a Promissory Note", Journal Forensic Science, Vol. 32, January 1987.

• 7. Owens, Casey, "A Look Into Facsimile Transmission," JFSCA, Vol. 35, No. I. 72 ALR 2d 308 on "Photostatic Copies."

• 8. Swett, George G., "Importance of Copies in Document Inquiries." Journal Forensic Science, Vol. II, October 1966.

Photocopy Court Cases

• 1. Iliana Álvarez v. De Lage Landen Financial Services, Inc. LT, civil case no. CACE08-036825, 4th District Court of Appeals for the State of Florida.

• 2. Central Medical Lab Corp. v. Banco Santander de P.R., civil case #KAC2008-0839, Court of San Juan, P.R.

• 3. Central Waste Services, Inc. V. Diogenes Mercado Zapata, civil case no. #DCD-2010-1464, Court of Bayamón, P.R.

• 4. Claro Quiñones González v. Departamento de Hacienda, administrative case no. #DT-87-03-550, JASAP. San Juan, P.R.

• 5. Ricardo Cromeyer Villalta, et als v. Corpak, Inc. et als, civil case no. KPE 2003-0392, Court of San Juan, P.R.

• 7. Delgado Construction Group, Inc. v. Puerto Rico Telephone Company, civil case no.#DAC2007-2576, Court of San Juan, P.R.

• 8. Hilda E. Dixon Sellés v. Banco Santander, civil case no. EAC 200700404, Court of San Juan, P.R.

• 9. In re: Lcdo. Julio E. Gil de Lamadrid Pérez, case no. AB-2009-0324 (Compliant), Supremo Court of P.R.

• 10. Manuel Navas Pavia v. Ex Parte, civil case no. KJV10-0144, Court of San Juan, P.R.

• 11. Oficina de Administración de Tribunales v. AA Public Finance Co., civil case no. #03-1772 (GAG) MPR 980183A, District Federal Court of San Juan, P.R.

• 12. Dimaris Passapera v. Coralys Passapera, civil case no. #H2C1200700158, Appeals Court of Humacao, P.R.

• 13. Pueblo v. William Castro Rivera, criminal case no. #685-2434, Court of Caguas, P.R.

• 14. Pueblo v. Juan Carlos Córdova Ramos, criminal case no. ISCR201000638-640, Court of Mayagüez, P.R.

• 15. Pueblo v. Héctor Malave Ortiz, criminal case no. #KPD G86-2465, Court of San Juan, P.R.

• 16. Pueblo v. Jorge Reyes Santiago (Pesca), criminal case no. #DOP 2009-00072/DVI 2009-GOD 890009, Court of Bayamón, P.R.

• 17. Gregory Saba v. Compagnie d"Assurance d"Haiti, administrative case, Port Au Prince, Haiti.

• 18. Vanessa Semier Sánchez v. Erasmo Collazo Rivera, Inc. et als, civil case no.

DCD2011-1851, Court of Bayamón. P.R.

Autor:

Evaristo Alvarez Ghigliotti*

__________________

*Conference Professor, University of Turabo. Bsc. John Jay College of Criminal Justice, New York, 1968.

Forensic Examiner of Questioned Documents with 28 years of experience and court

qualified expert in state and federal court of San Juan, P.R.

MA, Interamerican University, San Juan P.R, 1979.

LL.B, LaSalle Extension University Law School, Chicago Ill., 1968.

Author of "Forensic Document Investigation: Historical, Technical &

Legal Aspects, 4ta. Edition 2012.

Principal editor of the publication "Forensic Examiner of Puerto Rico."