Standards Handwriting Examination (002.0)

Version: 3.0

Date of approval: 12 December 2016

Date of effect: 12 December 2016

De datum van inwerkingtreding ligt voor de datum van uitgifte.

Part I. General Introduction to Standards

§ 1. Background to and aim of the Standards

Reporting forensic experts play a crucial role in the administration of justice. The NRGD aims to ensure justified confidence in forensic expertise for stakeholders. This confidence must be based on the demonstrable independently safeguarded quality of forensic investigators and their reports on the basis of (inter)national forensic-specific standards.

The NRGD is managed by the Board of Court Experts (hereinafter: Board). The Board’s core task is to rule on the applications for registration or repeat registration in the register of the NRGD (register). To that end the Board first defines the field of expertise. This is important in order to inform applicants, assessors and users of the register (e.g. judge, public prosecutor and attorney) about the activities an expert in the field of expertise in question engages in and about the activities that fall outside the field of expertise. The demarcation of the field of expertise is set out in Part II of these Standards.

The Board also determines the criteria on the basis of which an assessment is made for each field of expertise as to whether an application complies with the quality requirements. The generic requirements are set out in the Register of Court Experts in Criminal Cases Decree (Besluit register deskundige in strafzaken). These requirements are elaborated further for each field of expertise. This elaboration is set out in Part III of these Standards.

Furthermore the Board determines the assessment procedure. This procedure is described in Part IVof these Standards.

The NRGD has a system of periodic repeat registration. Court experts must demonstrate every five years that they still meet the requirements in force at that time. The Standards are dynamic and are being developed further in order to enhance the quality of the experts. These Standards set out the current state of the (sub-)field of expertise.

§ 2. Types of applicants

The NRGD distinguishes two types of applicants: the initial applicant and the repeat applicant. The initial applicant is a reporter who at the time of submission of the application is not yet registered in the register for the field of expertise to which the application relates. The repeat applicant is an expert who is already registered in the register for the field of expertise to which the application relates.

These two types of applicants are subdivided as follows:

Initial applicant:

Repeat applicant:

The initial applicant is an applicant who at the time of submission of the application does not have an NRGD registration. An initial applicant could be:

In respect of initial applicants, it is necessary to make a clear distinction between the independent reporter and the reporter without work of his own. An example of a reporter without work of his own is the newly-trained expert. This expert has completed the forensic training (reporter’s training), but has not yet been able to independently write the number of reports required for the assessment because these are written under the supervision of a tutor during the training. Another example of a reporter without work of his own is the reporter whose earlier application was rejected and who has been working (partly) under supervision following this rejection.

The Board adopts the following principle. Every applicant must draw up a List of Case Information. This list must include a specific number of cases in a period specified by the Board immediately preceding the application. If the List of Case Information includes one or more cases which have been prepared under supervision, the applicant will be qualified as a ‘reporter without work of his own’. An additional requirement applies to the applicant who was rejected earlier: the case reports included in the List of Case Information must have been drawn up after the date of the Board’s decision rejecting the earlier application (Policy Framework on Application after Rejection).1It is possible to make an exception to this general rule, namely in case of an earlier rejection pursuant to Article 12(2), sub-paragraph a, of the Register of Court Experts in Criminal Cases, the so-called training requirement. Reports written before the date of the Board’s decision rejecting the earlier application may be included in the List of Case Information, provided that they were drawn up within the generally applicable period preceding the time of submission of the new application.

The distinction between the various types of repeat applicants is important in the context of the assessment procedure: the documents a repeat applicant must submit, the composition of the Advisory Committee on Assessment and the assessment method.

§ 3. Justification of Standards

These Standards have been established by the Board in accordance with the Register of Court Experts in Criminal Cases Decree (Besluit register deskundige in strafzaken) and the Experts in Criminal Cases Act (Wet deskundige in strafzaken). Representatives from the various domains were consulted; users (judges, public prosecutors and lawyers) and subject matter experts in the field (professional organisations, representative associations, experts both at home and abroad). The draft of the Standards has also been published on the NRGD website for public consultation.

§ 4. Validity of Standards

The Standards are valid from the date shown on the cover. The validity runs until the moment of publication of a new version. In principle it will be checked annually as being up-to-date. This check can lead to a new version. The aim is to publish the new version no more than once a year.

§ 5. Version management and formal revision history

All changes made to the Standards lead to a new version. Newer versions of (parts of) the Standards are designated with a higher version number.

5.1. Version management

In the case of editorial changes the old version number is increased by 0.1. Editorial changes have no substantive impact. In the case of substantive changes the version number is increased by 1.

5.2. Formal revision history

The revision history starts with version 1.0 as the first formally approved version. Substantive changes made are briefly described in the revision history (Annex C). This makes it possible to trace which Standards are valid at any given moment at all times.

Part II. Demarcation of Handwriting Examination

§ 1. Introduction

Preliminary remark:

In this context, handwriting also refers to signatures.

§ 2. Core activities

The core function of Handwriting Examination is to determine whether samples of handwriting originate from one and the same writer.

In addition, a handwriting examiner may express opinions on the motor state of the writer. These statements will refer only to the way the shape of the handwriting sample is produced by the writer’s movement. For instance, the motor state of the writer may be ‘tremor’ (for example due to Parkinsonism, substance abuse, emotion). The effects of the tremor may be visible in the handwritten trace. In such a case, it would be justifiable to mention the presence of ‘tremor’, but not its cause.

In addition to formulating conclusions regarding the origin of the handwriting, a handwriting examiner may also formulate a conclusion on the process of production (for example whether a signature is the product of a copying process). Although irregularities in the writing trace and pen pressure transitions may clearly indicate − i.e. constitute visible evidence of − for instance, interruptions in the writing process, it falls outside the scope of the handwriting examiner to make statements about the writer’s mental or physical state or personality traits.

Field of law: criminal law.

§ 3. Methodology

A handwriting examination is carried out by assessing geometric2Geometric features refer to angles, lengths, distances and areas that can be measured from the shapes of the written ink trace. An example would be the ratio of the length of the ascender (stick) of a letter to the corpus height of its belly. Geometric features are usually quantitative (See: geometry in mathematics). and structural,3Structural features refer to unique shapes or patterns that are either present or absent, such as loops, crossings, hooks, ligatures, curls etc. (See: topology in mathematics). Structural features, if present, are helpful in reporting because they can be more easily verbalized and explained to non experts than is usually the case in quantitative geometric features. visual features of the text, as well as detailed and measurable characteristics of the writing trace which are the result of the deposition process of the writing instrument, the force applied by the writing instrument (pen pressure) and the temporal order of the writing movements.4The analysis of ink-deposition features or the indentation pattern on the back of a document will usually require microscopy and/or special equipment such as an electrostatic detection apparatus (ESDA). An example of an ink-deposition feature is periodic striation in the ink trace caused by the rolling ball of a ballpoint pen, indicating aspects of writing direction and speed.The features associated with the questioned sample are then compared with the features of the known writing. In general, the degree of similarity or dissimilarity of features may be seen as a measure of evidence for the hypothesis of common origin.

§ 4. Boundaries of the field of expertise

Described below are those tasks in which a handwriting examiner does not engage and which are excluded from the field of Handwriting Examination.

A handwriting examiner will make no further inferences or answer any questions as to the writer of a sample that is being analyzed other than those mentioned above.

A handwriting examiner will only express opinions based on handwriting samples written in a script type which falls within his expertise. For most European handwriting examiners, this will be Latin script (as opposed to for example Cyrillic or Arabic script). An exception may be made for signatures. Signatures can be legible (text-based) or illegible (stylized). Signatures in a script unfamiliar to the examiner can to some extent be processed like illegible signatures. The opinions of a handwriting examiner always have to be corroborated by reference to observable features in the writing trace.

A handwriting examiner must have sufficient knowledge to be able to decide whether the services of a document examiner are required.

The following activities emphatically do not belong to the field of expertise of handwriting examiners:

§ 5. Registration

The register will record the name of the relevant expert as an expert in the field of Handwriting Examination.

Part III. Registration requirements for Handwriting Examination

The general (repeat) registration requirements are given in the next paragraphs in italics with a reference to Article 12 paragraph 2 in the Register of Court Experts in Criminal Cases Decree (Besluit register deskundige in strafzaken).

An expert will only be registered as an expert in criminal cases upon submission of the application if, in the opinion of the Board, the expert:

§ 1. Article 12(2) sub-paragraph a

(...) has sufficient knowledge and experience in the field of expertise to which the application relates.

1.1. Initial: independent reporter

1.2. Initial: reporter without work of his own

1.3. Repeat applicant: after unconditional registration

1.4. Repeat applicant: after conditional registration

§ 2. Article 12(2) sub-paragraph b

(...) has sufficient knowledge of and experience in the field of law concerned, and is sufficiently familiar with the position and the role of the expert in this field.

§ 3. Article 12(2) sub-paragraph c

(...) is able to inform the commissioning party whether, and if so, to what extent the commissioning party’s question at issue is sufficiently clear and capable of investigation in order to be able to answer it on the basis of their specific expertise.

§ 4. Article 12(2) sub-paragraph d

(...) is able, on the basis of the question at issue, to prepare and carry out an investigation plan in accordance with the applicable standards.

§ 5. Article 12(2) sub-paragraph e

(...) is able to collect, document, interpret and assess investigative materials and data in a forensic context in accordance with the applicable standards.

§ 6. Article 12(2) sub-paragraph f

(...) is able to apply the current investigative methods in a forensic context in accordance with the applicable standards.

Where necessary, a handwriting examiner uses relevant examination instruments such as a stereomicroscope or ESDA5ElectroStatic Detection Apparatus..

§ 7. Article 12(2) sub-paragraph g

(...) is able to give a verifiable and well-reasoned case report on the assignment and any other relevant aspects of their expertise in terms which are comprehensible to the commissioning party, both orally and in writing.

Apart from the required administrative data (name of commissioning party, date of commission, date of report, reference commissioning party, own reference, number and type of appendices etc.) a forensic handwriting examination report contains the following sections:

§ 8. Article 12(2) sub-paragraph h

(...) is able to complete an assignment within the stipulated or agreed period.

§ 9. Article 12(2) sub-paragraph i

(...) is able to carry out the activities as an expert independently, impartially, conscientiously, competently, and in a trustworthy manner.

An applicant should:

§ 10. Hardship clause

The Board may decide not to apply or deviate from a registration requirement if application of such requirement would produce very unreasonable results. The hardship clause may only offer a solution in certain exceptional situations. It is up to the applicant himself to submit facts and circumstances showing that a certain registration requirement is unreasonable in his specific case.

Part IV. Assessment procedure for Handwriting Examination

§ 1. General

In all fields of expertise the assessment will be based on the written information provided, including as a minimum requirement case reports and items of evidence, supplemented in principle with an oral assessment. However, such an oral assessment will not be necessary if the applicant's expertise has already been clearly demonstrated by the written information.

The assessment will in principle be carried out on the basis of the information provided by the applicant:

If it is felt necessary in the context of the assessment an additional case report and/or information, for example information about the way collegial review and/or supervision is organized within the organization, can be requested.

§ 2. Assessment procedure per type of applicant

2.1. Initial: independent reporter

2.2. Initial: reporter without work of his own

2.3. Repeat applicant: after unconditional registration

2.4. Repeat applicant: after conditional registration

Annex A. Suggested literature for the field of handwriting examination

• ○. Budowle et al. (2009). A Perspective on Errors, Bias, and Interpretation in the Forensic Sciences and Direction for Continuing Advancement. Journal of Forensic Science, July 2009, Vol. 54, No. 4, pp. 798-809.

• ○. Ellen, D. (1998). The Scientific Examination of Questioned Documents. Ellis Horwood Ltd., Chichester.

• ○. Found, B. & Rogers, D. (1998). A consideration of the theoretical basis of forensic handwriting examination: The application of “Complexity Theory” to understand the basis of handwriting identification, in: International Journal of Forensic Document Examiners, 4(2), pp.109-118.

• ○. Found, B. & Rogers, D. (Eds.) (1999). ‘Documentation of forensic handwriting comparison and identification method: A modular approach’, Journal of Forensic Document Examination, 12, pp.1-68.

• ○. Sita J, Found B, Rogers D.K. (2002). Forensic Handwriting Examiners’ Expertise for Signature Comparison. Journal of Forensic Science, Sept 2002, Vol. 47, N0 5, pp 1117-1124.

• ○. Gross, S.R. (2001). Detection of deception: The case of handwriting expertise. Virginia Law Review, 87, 1847-1855.

• ○. Gailbraith III, O et al. (1995). The Principle of the “Drunkard’s Search” As A Proxy For Scientific Analysis: The Misuse of Handwriting Test Data In A Law Journal Article. International Journal of Forensic Document Examiners, Vol. 1, No 1, pp 7-17.

• ○. Hardy, H.J.J. & Fagel, W.P.F. (1995). Methodological Aspects of Handwriting Identification, in: Journal of Forensic Document Examination (8), pp.33-69;

• ○. Huber, R.A. & Headrick, A.M. (1999). Handwriting Identification: Facts and Fundamentals. CRC Press, Boca Raton/ New York.