Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice

2014 Edition
| Editors: Gerben Bruinsma, David Weisburd

Handwriting as Evidence

Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5690-2_684



Handwriting is produced by finely coordinated and precisely articulated movements of the hand, finger, and arm, manipulating a tool which leaves a trace on a surface with the ultimate control being responsible – the brain. It is a very complex activity requiring intelligence that distinguishes human being from the rest of the animal species. By way of writing, the author can convey and preserve ideas or information. With the advancement of technology, the writing instrument changes considerably, but handwriting, being the most personal and immediate means of graphic communication, and the movements associated with it remain virtually the same since the creation of the strokes and the alphabets.

Ever since the invention of the “written language,” the need for the verification of authorship started to exist. Nowadays, there is a widespread demand for the examination of handwriting, not only in criminal cases and civil...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Recommended Reading and References

  1. Allen RE (ed) (1990) The concise Oxford dictionary of current English, 8th edn. Oxford University Press, OxforGoogle Scholar
  2. Cheung YL, Leung SC (1989) A comparative approach to the examination of Chinese handwriting part 4 – identification by statistical classification techniques. J Forensic Sci Soc 29:77–8Google Scholar
  3. Cole A (1980) The search for certainty and the use of probability. J Forensic Sci 25:826–83Google Scholar
  4. Eisermann HW, Hecker MR (1986) FISH-computers in handwriting examinations. In: Proceedings of the 44th annual meeting of the American Society of questioned document examiners, Savannah, GeorgiGoogle Scholar
  5. Eldridge MA, Nimmo-Smith I, Wing AM, Totty RN (1984) The variability of selected features in cursive handwriting measures. J Forensic Sci Soc 24:179–21Google Scholar
  6. Ellen DM (1979) The expression of conclusions in handwriting examination. Can Forensic Sci J 12:117–12Google Scholar
  7. Ellen D (1993) The scientific examination of documents, 1st edn. Ellis Horwood, ChichesteGoogle Scholar
  8. Evett IW (1996) Expert evidence and forensic misconceptions of the nature of exact science. Sci Justice 36:118–12Google Scholar
  9. Hardcastle RA, Thornton D, Totty RN (1986) A computer-based system for classification of handwriting on cheques. J Forensic Sci Soc 26:383–39Google Scholar
  10. Harrison WR (1966) Suspect documents. Their scientific examination, 2nd edn. Sweet & Maxwell, LondoGoogle Scholar
  11. Hilton O (1982) Scientific examination of questioned documents, revised edition. Elsevier North Holland, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Huber RA, Headrick AM (1999) Handwriting identification: facts and fundamentals. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  13. Leung SC (1994) The scientific examination of Chinese handwriting. Forensic Sci Rev 6(2):97–145Google Scholar
  14. Leung SC, Cheung YL (1989) On opinion. Forensic Sci Int 42:1–13Google Scholar
  15. Leung SC, Chung MWL, Tsui CK, Cheung WL, Cheung SYL, Mok MMC (1987) A comparative approach to the examination of Chinese handwriting part 2 – measurable parameters. J Forensic Sci Soc 27:157–173Google Scholar
  16. Leung SC, Cheung WL, Fung HT, Cheung YL (1993) A comparative approach to the examination of Chinese handwriting part 5 – qualitative parameters. J Forensic Sci Soc 33:9–19Google Scholar
  17. McAlexander TV, Beck J, Dick RM (1991) The standardization of handwriting opinion terminology. J Forensic Sci 36:311–319Google Scholar
  18. McNally JP (1979) Certainty or uncertainty in expert testimony. J Police Sci Admin 7:26–27Google Scholar
  19. Osborn AS (1978) Questioned documents, 2nd edn. Patterson Smith, MonclairGoogle Scholar
  20. Srihari SN, Cha SH, Arora H, Lee S (2002) Individuality of handwriting. J Forensic Sci 47(4):856–874Google Scholar
  21. Sugiyama T, Kurauchi H (1986) Identification of handwriting in Chinese characters using discriminant analysis. Behaviormetrika 19:55–71Google Scholar
  22. U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, United States vs. Paul. (97–9302), 999Google Scholar
  23. U.S. District Court ruling, United States v. Starzecpyzel. 880 F. Supp. 1027 (S.D.N.Y.), 1995Google Scholar
  24. U.S. Supreme Court ruling, Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 1993, 584–587Google Scholar
  25. U.S. Supreme Court ruling, General Electric Co. v. Joiner. (96–199) 78F.3d 524Google Scholar
  26. U.S. Supreme Court ruling, Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael. (97–1709) 131 F.3d 1433Google Scholar
  27. Whiting F (1986) The reasoning process: an integral component of questioned document examinations. In: Paper presented at the 44th annual meeting of the American Society of questioned document examiners, Savannah, GeorgiaGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Scientific Consultancy LimitedHong KongChina