Abstract
Advances in the development of computer-assisted handwriting analysis have led to the consideration of a computational system by courts in the United States. Computer-assisted handwriting analysis has been introduced in the context of Frye or Daubert hearings conducted to determine the admissibility of handwriting testimony by questioned document examiners, as expert witnesses, in civil and criminal proceedings. This paper provides a comparison of scientific and judicial methods, and examines concerns over reliability of handwriting analysis expressed in judicial decisions. Recently, the National Research Council assessed that “the scientific basis for handwriting comparisons needs to be strengthened”. Recent studies involving computer-assisted handwriting analysis are reviewed in light of the concerns expressed by the judiciary and National Research Council. A future potential role for computer-assisted handwriting analysis in the courts is identified.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
National Research Council: Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward, pp. 4–11. National Academies Press, Washington DC (2009)
Wigmore, Evidence §1367 (Chadbourn rev.) (1974)
Frye v. United States, 54 App. D.C. 46, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir (1923)
Martin, M.M., Capra, D.J., Faust, A., Rossi, F.: New York Evidence Handbook, Novel Scientific Evidence, Sec. 7.2.3., 2nd edn., p. 586. Aspen Publishers, New York City (2003)
509 U.S. 579 (1993)
526 U.S. 137 (1999)
National Research Council: Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward, pp. 5–29. National Academies Press, Washington DC (2009)
Farrell, R.: Richardson on Evidence (Cum supp. 1997-2008) Sec. 7-318., 11th edn., p. 485. Brooklyn Law School, Brooklyn (1995)
People vs. Silvestri, 44 N.Y. 2d 260, 266 (1978)
Nimely vs. City of New York, 414 F. 3d 381, 396 (2nd Cir. 2005)
United States vs Williams, 506 F. 3d 151, 162 (2nd Cir. 2007)
U.S. v. Starczepyzel, 880 F. Supp. 1027, 1037. (S.D.N.Y. 1995)
U.S. v. Saelee, 162 F. Supp. 2d, 1097, 1102. (D. Alaska 2001)
U.S. v. Crisp, 324 F. 3d. 261, 280. (4th Cir. 2003)
Starczepyzel, 880 F. Supp. at 1037
U.S. v. Hines, 55 F. Supp. 2d. 62, 68 (D. Mass 1999)
National Research Council: Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward, pp. 5–30. National Academies Press, Washington DC (2009)
Kuckuck, W., Rieger, B., Steinke, K.: Automatic Writer Recognition. In: Proc. 1979. Carnahan Conf. on Crime Countermeasures. University of Kentucky, Lexington (1979)
Found, B., Rogers, D., Schmittat, R.: Matrix Analysis: A Technique to Investigate the Spatial Properties of Handwritten Images. J. Forens Doc. Exam (Fall 1998)
Plamondon, R., Srihari, S.N.: On-line and off-line handwriting recognition: A comprehensive survey. IEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 22(1), 63–84 (2000)
Srihari, S.N., Leedham, C.G.: A survey of Computer Methods in Forensic Document Examination. In: Proceedings of the 11th Conference of the International Graphonomics Society, November 2-5, 2003. IGS, Scottsdale (2003)
Srihari, S.N., Cha, S.H., Arora, H., Lee, S.: Individuality of Handwriting. J. Forens Sci. 44(4), 856–872 (2002)
Huber, R.A., Headrick, A.M.: Handwriting Identification: Facts and Fundamentals. CRC Press, Boca Raton (1999)
Fed. R. Evid. 104 (a)
Janopoulos v Harvey L. Walner & Assoc., 866 F. Supp. 1086 (N. D. Ill 1994)
U.S. v. Prime, 431 F. 3d 1147, 1153 (9th Cir. 2005)
U.S. v. Yagman 2007 WL 4409618 (C.D.Cal. 2007)
U.S. v. Gricco, 2002 WL 746037, *3-*4
Srihari, S.N., Zhang, C., Tomai, S.J., Lee, Z., Shi, Y.C., Shin, A.: A system for handwriting matching and recognition. In: Symposium on Document Image Understanding Technology (SDIUT 2003), Greenbelt, MD (2003)
Version 1.3, March 3, 2008. 2003-2008 The Research Foundation of State University of New York. All Rights Reserved 2003-2008 CEDAR Tech, Inc. All Rights Reserved, Portions of the product were created using LEADTOOLS 1991-2002 LEAD Technologies, Inc. (2003-2008)
Srihari, S., Srinivasan, H., Desai, K.: Questioned Document Examination Using CEDAR-FOX (2007)
Kabra, S., Srinivasan, H., Huang, C., Srihari, S.: On Computing Strength of Evidence for Writer Verification. In: ICDAR (2007)
Srihari, S.N., Huang, C., Srinivasan, H.: On the Discriminability of the Handwriting of Twins. J. Forens. Sci. 53(2), 430–446 (2008)
U.S. v. Starczecpyzel, 880 F. Supp 1027, 1039 (1995)
Sax, M.J., Vanderhaar, H.: On the General Acceptance of Handwriting Identification Principles. J. Forens Sci. 50(1), 119–124 (2005); Kelly, J.S., Carney, B.B., Sax, M.J., Vanderhaar, H.: On the General Acceptance of Handwriting Principles. J. Forens Sci. 50(1), 119–124 (2005); J. Forens. Sci. 50(5) (September 2005); Purdy, D.C., Sax, M.J., Vanderhaar, H.: On the General Acceptance of Handwriting Identification Principles. J. Forens Sci. 50(1), 119–126 (2005); Author’s response; J. Forens Sci. 5(5) (2005)
People v. Wesley, 83 N.Y. 2d 417, 438 (citing Giannelli, The Admissibility of Novel Scientific Evidence: Frye v. United States, a Half-Century Later 80) Columbia Law Review (1197, 1209 – 1210)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Manning, K.A., Srihari, S.N. (2009). Computer-Assisted Handwriting Analysis: Interaction with Legal Issues in U.S. Courts. In: Geradts, Z.J.M.H., Franke, K.Y., Veenman, C.J. (eds) Computational Forensics. IWCF 2009. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 5718. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03521-0_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03521-0_13
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-03520-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-03521-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)