The Examination of Photocopies, Microfilms and Faxes

Enviado por Evaristo Alvarez Ghigliotti

"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."