Is every handwriting sample ‘identifiable’?

No, it is not always possible to identify (or eliminate) the writer of every sample of handwriting.

Handwriting and signatures can be a powerful and significant indicator of identity.  Handwriting is, in fact, one of the best forms of personal identification. However, that does not mean that every sample of writing can be identified or associated to a specific person or suspect.  The strength of association (or non-association) depends entirely upon the quality of samples used for the comparison.

A meaningful and effective comparison and evaluation requires a sufficient amount of comparable material (both questioned and specimen in nature) with writing that has been executed in a normal and natural manner while displaying adequate complexity and skill. If any of those conditions are not fully met, then the evaluation and final conclusion is likely to be limited.

For example, some people write their signature or handwriting in a very simplistic style or manner with very little complexity in graphical formation. Alternatively (or at the same time), they may write with poor fluency and execution. Writing done in that manner is relatively easy to simulate or copy. Furthermore, low complexity, or unskilled, writing may also possess limited ‘individuality’ meaning there will be a higher chance of coincidental similarities with the writing of some other person.

These factors, among others, must be taken into account when doing a comparison.  The bottom line is that good samples make for a  good comparison providing the best chance of success when assessing potential authorship.

Do you only examine signatures and handwriting?

No. The examination of signatures and handwriting, to evaluate issues pertaining to authorship, is an important part of the work of a Forensic Document Examiner (FDE), but it is only part of that work. Most examiners can and will also address questions pertaining to how a document was produced, or things that may have happened to a document in the course of its existence.1

The former entail examinations relating to methods of production such as typewriting, computer-generated documents, rubber stamps, inks, pens, paper, photocopies, staplers, faxes, graphic arts, and commercial printing presses. The latter involve examinations relating to alterations, obliterations, erasures, indented impressions, among other things. 

Please note that this list is not exhaustive. In general, examinations are done to assess questions pertaining to the authenticity, source, content, or age of a document.

Can I send you something for a “quick look” before I decide about using your services?

In general, the answer to this is ‘no’.  However, there are some specific exceptions that might apply in your case.  I’ll get to those possibilities shortly, but first it is important to clarify the main issue at hand.

First, like other professionals I do not work for free and I expect to be paid fairly for my time and efforts. To protect everyone’s interests I require a  formal (signed) work agreement between the parties; specifically the client and myself. An estimate of costs will be provided before the agreement is finalized, and before actual work begins.  Finally, I require a deposit payment to be made before I commence work.

Further to this, I will be officially retained on a matter only after the agreement is signed and received at my office, and after the deposit payment has been made.

Second, there is no way to form an opinion until the work is actually done. At best, it is possible to assess potential limitations to determine what material will be required for an effective examination.

Please understand that no qualified document examiner will ever give an opinion after simply ‘eye-balling’ something; that isn’t how it works. I provide top-quality service and my reputation rests on providing the best possible analysis and opinion.

Third, most people come to me with their own opinion on a matter. That’s understandable, but my professional opinion must be, and will be, based on a detailed review of the evidence. To that end, I will conduct a complete examination and comparison before I reach a final conclusion and give you my opinion. The outcome may or may not meet your expectations or conform to your belief, particularly if you are looking for something particular or specific.

It is critical to understand the duty of an expert is to provide impartial and unbiased information to the trier of fact so that they can determine what the evidence means. I guarantee the quality of my work but that guarantee does not extend to providing any particular outcome or opinion. That is not how it works.

For all these reasons, please do not expect me to provide my opinion without first doing a proper and complete examination.


Now, there are times when a “pre-submission review” of a case submission might be acceptable. Specifically, this might be done to conduct a proper assessment of the material in situations where the matter is complicated, confusing, or it is unclear whether the material you have will be adequate.

As a rule, I provide a work estimate based on a general description of the items and the questions you need answered. Unfortunately, that means there is always some uncertainty in the quote. Hence, from time to time a preview of the material (i.e., pre-submission review) will allow a more precise estimate of the time required or the costs involved so that the estimate is more accurate.

At the same time, please note this is not a “quick look” intended to provide any sort of opinion. No actual examination will happen until my services have been formally retained, and the retainer fee has been received and acknowledged. In other words, any pre-submission is limited to a determination of the type of work to be done, the time required, and a final estimation of costs. A “pre-submission” review is not an examination and will not result in a final, or even preliminary, opinion.

How can I be sure my examiner is really qualified and competent?

Competency is a huge issue for any forensic service. Ensuring your examiner is actually qualified and competent is not a trivial thing.  And, it’s absolutely critical that you do this!

First and foremost, ask questions.  Challenge every aspect of that’s person’s credentials:  their training, their certification, the equipment they use, the methods they apply to casework, etc.

Their training should conform to the Scientific Working Group for Forensic Document Examination (SWGDOC) Standard for Minimum Training Requirements for Forensic Document Examiners.  That is, the examiner’s training:

  • should be “the equivalent of a minimum of 24 months full-time training under the supervision of a principal trainer”.  That means at least two years’ worth (i.e., over 4,000 hrs) of face-to-face instruction with direct oversight by the trainer.
  • should have been given by a principal trainer who:
    • was fully qualified as a forensic document examiner;
    • had successfully completed this type of training program (i.e., equivalent of a minimum of 24 months full-time supervised training);
    • had been trained in the topics of instruction in the SWGDOC standard (see Section 7); and
    • had a minimum of at least five years full-time, post-training experience as a forensic document examiner.
  • should be primarily in-person training; not solely or primarily based on distance learning and/or periodic meetings with the principal trainer.  Short courses and internet-based training options are acceptable only as supplemental training.  Regular, preferably daily, in-person oversight is necessary so that the trainer can fully assess a trainee’s methods and thought processes and ensure the accuracy of their conclusions.

Additionally, the examiner should have an earned baccalaureate degree or equivalent from an accredited college or university.

If your examiner does not recognize and accept the standard for minimum training in forensic document examiners published by SWGDOC, you should be very wary about the nature and quality of their training.

Professional certification is a great credential BUT you must look for someone who has been certified by an independent certifying body that is not affiliated with any specific training entity.  I discuss this topic at length in another blog post, however a good resource in this regard is the Forensic Specialties Accreditation Board (FSAB) in the USA.  The FSAB program “…is intended to establish a mechanism whereby the forensic community can assess, recognize and monitor organizations or professional boards that certify individual forensic scientists or other forensic specialists (conformity assessment bodies, CABs).”  In other words, the FSAB accredits the bodies that certify examiners.   

To that end, I personally recommend examiners who have been certified by the ABFDE.  The ABFDE was the first independent professional certifying body for FDE work having been founded in 1977.  It is the only accredited certifying body with Diplomates employed as document examiners in federal, state/provincial, and large municipal crime laboratories in the USA, Canada, and elsewhere.  Many of their Diplomates also offer private, independent FDE services.  Related blog post:  Certification – ABFDE.

The examiner should have a fully-equipped and well-maintained laboratory suited to the services they provide.  The basic equipment for a forensic document examination laboratory consists of:

  • Stereoscopic binocular microscope
    • Specialized lighting for the scope
  • Spectral analysis equipment
  • Electrostatic detection device

One last note: graphology is a field of study that purports to assess personality from handwriting. Graphology is NOT equivalent to forensic document examination and is not accepted in courts within Canada or the USA. I strongly recommend avoiding any examiner with graphology training and background unless they also have the required FDE training as outlined above. Many ‘purported’ examiners come from this domain and lack appropriate FDE training. Please note that many graphologists downplay their training to minimize challenges relating to this issue. 

What is Graphology? Are you a graphologist?

A common definition for graphology is simply ‘the examination of handwriting to assess personality or character traits of the writer’.

The SWGDOC site states that examiners must be “actively engaged in the practice of forensic document examination” with the following explanation relative to graphology:

Forensic document examination is not synonymous with graphology. Graphology or graphoanalysis attempts to predict character traits from handwriting examination. Some graphologists call themselves handwriting analysts or document examiners and are therefore confused with FDEs. In U.S. v. Bourgeois, 950 F. 2d 980 (5‘h Cir. 1992), the court rejected the testimony of a proffered handwriting examiner, in part, because the individual’s training was completed through a correspondence school and its strong emphasis on graphoanalysis. It also pointed out that the witness was not certified by the ABFDE.ASTM also differentiates forensic document examination from graphology. Standard E444-98 states, “[f]orensic document examination does not involve the employment of calligraphic or engrossing skills, nor does it involve a study of handwriting in an attempt to create a personality profile or otherwise analyze or judge the writer’s personality or character.”

Under that definition, I am definitely not a graphologist. A forensic document examiner examines handwriting to address issues of potential authorship, not personality. Of course, forensic document examination covers a lot more things than just authorship of writing.

NOTE:  various terms are used and considered to be synonymous to graphology, including graphometry, graphometrics, graphanalysis, or graphoanalyis.

Is ‘bias’ a concern in Forensic Science?

The short answer to this question is ‘yes’, bias is a concern. However, that is far too simplistic a response.

The bottom line is that every examiner must be aware of the potential for bias in their work, the various ways in which it may manifest, and what can and should be done to minimize such concerns. At an absolute minimum, examiners must be able to explain any steps they have taken to achieve that goal so that the trier can be assess the effectiveness of any such steps. The steps taken will undoubtedly differ for a private examiner working alone, versus a larger laboratory with considerably more resources and mechanisms they might employ.

In general, ‘bias’ is a potential concern for any and every human endeavour that involves or requires evaluation and reasoning. Since every forensic evaluation is a human-based activity involving mainly subjective assessment (even in those situations where there might be an empirical basis to support that assessment), it follows that the potential for bias will be present. It also follows that every examiner needs to be aware of this prospect when doing their work.

On the positive side of things, examiners that follow published guidelines and best practice documents will be utilizing procedures that are designed to help minimize this type of concern. For example, examiners applying the logical approach to evidence evaluation must expressly consider (and disclose) relevant framework information, as well as all relevant propositions considered in the course of their evaluation. Doing so reduces the potential for bias in the evaluation process.

How long does an examination take?

The time required for a case depends on the number of items involved, as well as what needs to be done (ie., the number of requests made and the number of comparisons or examinations to be done). However, assuming the case isn’t too large and the quality of samples is reasonable, turnaround times are usually within 5-10 business days from receipt of evidence to return of evidence with a verbal report of findings. Written report will generally take a few more days. Complex matters, such as medical record reviews or examinations involving multiple potential writers, will require additional time, sometimes considerably more. If your samples have limitations it may be necessary to obtain more or better items in which case the time frame will extend. An estimate for the expected completion date will be provided once a case has been submitted and reviewed.