Autograph Live
Judge Throws Out Christopher Morales Expert Testimony—From Small Claims Court
Christopher Morales and the sellers who use him claim that as a "forensic document examiner," his "scientific methods" and exhaustive procedures have earned him "court-approval." They say this makes him far superior to any other kind of autograph authenticator.
Forensic document handwriting analysis generally requires at least 10-15 known handwriting samples, preferably from the time period of the writing being analyzed. The "scientific" part is primarily ink and paper analysis to try to establish when the item was could have been signed, if it was altered and other factors. There will be a detailed final report showing the item being examined, the handwriting samples used, and documenting the process of examination and analysis. The examiner keeps all notes, tests and other work product in case he is called to testify in the future.
Most forensic document examiners charge about $200-$500 an hour, and most evaluations take at least four hours. Some take 10, 20 hours or more.
When You Buy an Autograph Authenticated by Christopher Morales,
Are You Getting the Forensic Examination Promised?
Or Simply a Rubber Stamp?
These notes from a March 2011 small claims court trial may give you an idea.
Judge Lovert Bassett purchased about $7,500 in classic horror signed photos from Bryan Slaven of Autograph Central. Judge Bassett had them examined by PSA/DNA, who felt they were forgeries. Slaven refused to refund Judge Bassett's money. In Illinois, you can be awarded legal fees and court costs in small claims cases where fraud is established, so the judge hired an attorney and went full-bore after Slaven. [Lovert Bassett vs. Bryan Slaven, Case No. 10 SC 3866]
There was a hearing on March 11, 2011 in Waukegan, Ill. Morales was Slaven's expert witness, brought in to testify that his forensic document examination determined that the autographs on the photos were genuine. A potential witness attending the hearing sent us his notes from the trial, which were lightly edited to make them easier to follow:
Defendant, Brian Slaven did not appear at the hearing.
Forensic Document Examiner, Christopher L. Morales appeared at the hearing on behalf of the Defendant.
Christopher L. Morales said he ended his employment with the Dept. of Justice roughly 12 to 13 years ago and began self-employment at that time, saying he also continued to do contract work for the government. Morales said he still does contract work for the government. In the note taker's opinion, Morales was clearly implying that he is being hired by the government.
The presiding judge was Michael Fusz.
Gary Manges was Judge Bassett's counsel.
Robert Ritacca was Bryan Slaven's counsel.
Judge Fusz asked Morales what kind of contract work he did for the government.
Morales answered that he does developmental programs, saying the work is done through USAID.
Judge Fusz asked Morales what government agency hired him.
Morales answered that he's contracted for developmental programs contracted by the Dept. of Justice.
Judge Fusz: When work is done through USAID doesn't the government hire contractors who then sub-contract personnel? In fact, Mr. Morales, would it be correct to say that you weren't hired by the government to do contract work, but in fact you were hired by a contractor who was hired by the government?
Morales: That is correct.
Judge Fusz asked Morales when he'd last done work for the government.
Morales answered that he'd recently just completed doing work for the government.
Judge Fusz asked Morales where that work was done.
Morales answered that he did that work in Guatelmala for the Police Academy.
Attorney Mages asked Morales if he'd been employed by George Washington University (GWU).
Morales: Yes.
Mages asked Morales when he worked at GWU.
Morales answered that it was in the mid-90's, approximately '95 to '99.
Mages: What work did you do for GWU?
Morales answered he'd been a faculty advisor, an adjunct professor, that he gave tours, and briefed new students.
Mages asked if Morales instructed Forensic Document Examination classes at GWU?
Morales said he did teach the class when the instructor asked Morales to fill-in for him. Morales also said he had assisted the instructor in teaching the class.
Mages asked Morales if he was paid by GWU for teaching.
Morales answered he was not paid by GWU for teaching.
Mages asked Morales how long he's done forensic authentication work for Autograph Central and its owner Bryan Slaven.
Morales answered that he's done work for Slaven for 5 to 6 years.
Mages asked Morales what he charges Slaven for each of Morales's forensic examinations of memorabilia.
Morales answered $75. Morales said he charges different rates to different dealers who hire him based on how long he's done work for the dealer and how much work the dealer gives him. Morales also said he also charges different rates for different industries.
Mages: How many examinations do you do for Mr. Slaven per year?
Morales: Approximately 15-20 pieces per year.
Mages stated at a rate of $75 for 20 pieces is approximately $1,500 annually.
Morales: That's correct. Morales further answered that rate pertains to the memorabilia industry.
Mages asked how much it cost him to attend the hearings.
Morales: Approximately $2,000, even more when you consider the hotel, but he wasn't staying at a hotel. Morales said that Slaven is paying his expenses related to these hearings.
Mages asked how long it takes Morales to complete his forensic examinations.
Morales: It depends on how many writings there are.
Mages asked how long it takes to examine each signature.
Morales: Approximately 2 to 3 hours.
Mages asked how many dealers Morales does forensic authentication work in memorabilia for.
Morales answered approximately 6 to 8 dealers, saying he does more work for other dealers than Bryan Slaven.
Mages asked if Morales kept notes of his time for each examination.
Morales answered that he keeps a scan of the signatures he authenticates along with a copy of his report. Morales does not keep other notes. He either passes the piece or not.
Mages asked what detail Morales provides in his report as to how Morales arrived at his findings and conclusions.
Morales answered that pass or fail is pretty much accepted in the memorabilia industry, compared to other industries, which require a "full-blown" report. Morales considers his reports acceptable forensic reports.
Morales said he's issued more than 17,000 certificates of authenticity pertaining to memorabilia, saying each of his COAs display a sequentially numbered hologram sticker identifying the item.
Mages read the "Objective Statement" listed on Morales's COAs: "To determine whether or not the signature on the paper is genuine." He then compared it to "Morales's Results of Forensic Comparison" statement listed on his COA: "Based on the principles of forensic handwriting comparison, the questioned signature on the paper appears to be genuine."
Mages stated that "is" and "appears to be" are two completely different findings, and asked Morales if he understood this difference.
Morales reluctantly acknowledged that there is a difference.
Morales said he's appeared in 8 to 10 court hearings as a "court-qualified" forensic document examiner expert.
Morales said he gets his "known writings" exemplars from the Library of Congress, Baseball HOF, private collectors, the Smithsonian Museum; and from a handwriting guide-book.
Judge Fusz: Did the Smithsonian Museum let you take the "known writings" out of the museum?
Morales: No.
Judge Fusz: Did you do your examination right there in the Smithsonian?
Morales: No.
Judge Fusz: Then how were you able to use the Smithsonian's "known writings" for your examination?
Morales answered that he'd taken a picture of the Smithsonian's "known writing."
Judge Fusz: So in your examination you didn't compare the signatures against the actual "known writing," you compared it against a picture. Is that your testimony?
Morales: Yes.
Judge Fusz asked Morales if the "known writings" he'd gotten from private collectors were supported by certificates of authenticity.
Morales: No.
Judge Fusz: How did you know these "known writings" were in fact authentic "known writings?"
Morales: Because they're from a private collection.
Judge Fusz: That doesn't mean that they're authentic "known writings" just because they're from a private collection, does it Mr. Morales?
Morales: No.
Judge Fusz identified Defendant's Exhibits 13 and 15 as Morales's "known writings" exemplars, which Morales had testified were his work product used to authenticate Lovert Bassett's items.
Judge Fusz asked Morales where he'd gotten these "known writings" from?
Morales said that they were contracts, checks, and he'd gotten some of them from a handwriting guide book.
Judge Fusz: What's the name of the handwriting guide book?
Morales: It's the "Autograph Collector's Handbook."
Judge Fusz asked Morales when the book was published.
Morales said it was published by Krause Publishing about 10 years ago.
Judge Fusz asked Morales who authored this book.
Morales didn't know the name of the author.
Judge Fusz asked Morales what the author's qualifications were regarding handwriting.
Morales didn't know the author's qualifications.
Judge Fusz: Then we really don't know that these known writings you used as your work product to authenticate Mr. Bassett's items are in fact authentic known writings, do we?
Morales: No.
Judge Fusz asked Morales how he determined the signed contracts and checks were in fact "known writings."
Morales: Because they're accepted writings that were done through the course of doing business.
Judge Fusz: How do you know that the signatures weren't signed by his [Bela Lugosi's] wife, or his manager, or by someone else?
Morales: Because they're accepted writings done through the course of doing business.
Judge Fusz asked Morales if he had documentation or certificates of authenticity proving these "known writings" as such.
Morales said he did not.
Judge Fusz: Then we don't know that these "known writings" you used as your work product to authenticate Mr. Bassett's items are in fact known writings do we?
Morales answered no.
Judge Fusz refused to accept Defendant's Exhibit 13 and Exhibit 15 and ordered that all testimony by Morales related to these exhibits be stricken from the record. [Meaning that the "known writings" Christopher Morales used and his related expert testimony were thrown out.]
Mages asked Morales whether the signatures could have been traced.
Morales said their was no guide for tracing. Morales said he tried tracing the signatures with a cartridge pen, but it couldn't be done effectively because of the double-nib.
Judge Fusz stated that he has knowledge of cartridge pens and many other types of pens from being involved in the hobby.
Mages asked if Morales did ink analysis on these signature.
Morales: I looked at the ink.
Mages asked again if Morales did an ink analysis of the signatures.
Morales said he did, but had no record of the ink analysis.
• Mages then questioned Lovert Bassett.
• Closing Statements from Gary Mages, then from Robert Ritacca.
• Judge Fusz will provide his decision in a hearing scheduled on Friday, 8 April 2011, at 1:30 p.m. in the same courtroom.
scott
There sure are a lot of interesting things going on in the autograph industry. I am glad to see Mr. Morales has another court appearance to add to his resume. I am very sad that Mr. Slaven did not have time to make it to his court date.
It seems like Mr. Bassett is making some serious claims about the quality of Mr. Slaven's merchandise. I wonder why Mr. Slaven did not think it was important enough to attend? Maybe he has some kind of court/prison phobia.
Mar 22, 2011
CJCollector
Mar 22, 2011
CJCollector
Very impressive responses, Mr. Morales. Let me see. When the judge asked "If you did a ink analysis" you replied "I looked at the ink." What the heck does that mean!!!??? When the judge asked you, Mr Morales "Whether the signatures could have been traced" you replied "There was no guide for tracing." Wow!!!
But Mr. Morales did purchase a copy of the book "Autograph Collector's Handbook." And he took photographs of signatures at the Smithsonian Museum" for his exemplar database.
Mr. Morales, did you authenticate the below sigs from photos you took at the Smithsonian?
Mar 22, 2011
john reznikoff
Mar 22, 2011
Steve Cyrkin, Admin
Mar 22, 2011
Steve Cyrkin, Admin
Good question, George. The plaintiff's expert witness was Robin Williams, a board certified FDE from Wisconsin. I believe he determined that most or all of the signed photos had signatures already on them that were traced in pen, and in some cases, the pen's ink didn't cover all the tracings. I haven't seen them yet, but I expect to after the judge makes his ruling.
I don't know if the person took notes of Williams' testimony, but I'm sure it will all be availalable at some point.
Mar 22, 2011
Bill Panagopulos
17,000 items?!?!?! God help us...
And people wonder why collectors aren't buying this stuff anymore?
Between incompetent (or crooked) third party authenticators, collusion, lawsuits, bogus pricing, "attack" websites, smear campaigns, etc. etc., you're better off buying swampland in the Everglades.
And believe me, this statement costs me money. I spoke with one of the most respected dealers in the industry today and he's just shaking his head...
Steve - what you wrote his heresay, not testimony, so be careful, although it certainly rings true. Morales will lose his case and come out the fool, but it will cost all of us in the long run. Maybe he can get Don Frangipani as a character witness.
But as they said in The Godfather: "We need a war like this every now and then to get out the bad blood..."
Right, Don Bacardi? PS Ate at Dominick's two nights ago...it was heaven!
Mar 22, 2011
Bill Panagopulos
BTW Steve:
Ever hear back from the equally contemptable Nate?
Please put my blog back up - the public MUST be informed of this little worm's dastardly business practices.
NATE! NATE! NATE! Marry me!
Mar 22, 2011
Steve Cyrkin, Admin
Bill,
The hobby isn't about dealers. It's about collectors.
Mar 22, 2011
Steve Cyrkin, Admin
Here's a 50th GRAMMYS guitar from Gallery of Dreams in California, where Morales was listed as an executive and authenticator until late 2009. It was supposedly signed by 34 artists in attendance. I'd like Morales to tell us how Celine Dion signed it when she was in South Africa at the time.
But what's really interesting is that, at 2-3 hours a signature, it should have taken Morales 1.7 to 2.6 weeks to authenticate the guitar—and I believe they sold at least 25 of them. That's 10-15 months to do all the guitars...in California.
BTW, the GRAMMYS said they did not create the logo or license it. Anyone with one of these guitars has contraband.
Click to enlarge:
Mar 22, 2011
roger epperson
Mar 23, 2011
Brandon Mysinger
This is the very thing I have been saying for years. If experts are not careful where they get their examples from, they may find themselves in the same delima.
That's why I obtain all of my examples in-person and have for 24 years. I know they are authentic and from which era they are from. At that point, it's apples to apples. It's up to me to use my experience and knowledge to base my opinions off of authentic material that can be backed-up by proof.
I know there are "experts" out there that either buy their examples or they simply have photographs of the signatures from other collections. It seems that Morales admitted it openly ( which kind of shocked me ...kind of ).
I felt that the Judge was handing Morales the same warning that is handed to buyers "If you didn't see it signed yourself, you can't be sure that it is real".
The above does open a loop-hole for his defense though that I will NOT get into because I don't want it used. Still The court looks down on neglegence.
I know it is far easier to obtain in-person NASCAR examples than any other genre. However, in this case, the court doesn't care. The end result is the same. Hopefully, the court ( some court ) will force Morales to actually display his exemplar collection and verify how he reaches his opinions.
I hope everyone here is aware of how deep of a hole Morales is in now thanks to the intellegent questions asked by the court.
The best case scenario for him is to show that he was duped by his own exemplar collection then exploited by dealers / collectors looking to use his wrongly slanted opinions to procure a COA. In the end though the result is the same. he is "the forger's best friend". Still, he has the burdon of responsibility to ensure that his examples are authentic.
If someone wanted to start an authentication company the "Morales way", they could obtain as many photographs of signatures or books about autographs as they want. In reality, they would have a MASSIVE exemplar collection. Right?
The same goes for Another favorite dealer of ours here who has states on his own COAs and in his own words that he is the biggest "BUYER" of autographed material. Not that he obtained an exemplar collection by getting the signatures in-person. So, the Judge's question would ring true here too. "How do you know it's authentic?". What if someone else signed all of the items that were purchased then were used as "authentic examples for authentication purposes?". See where I'm going?
Mar 23, 2011
CJCollector
Below is another masterpiece (offered by Coach's Corner) "authenticated" by "Forensic Examiner" Chris Morales.
Mar 23, 2011
roger epperson
Mar 23, 2011
Chad B
Mar 23, 2011
Chad B
I just looked at autographcentral.net. Wow! Being an uneducated buyer (I am no authenticator) in many ways, I have a hard time telling what is real and what is not. All I know is that their prices are incredibly low. I would love the following item if it was real. But if it was real, they would put it with a legit company and get triple the money. This is enough to give me a headache.
Signed by Jim Morrison, Ray Manzarek, Robby Krieger and John Densmore
Request Item
Mar 23, 2011
Bill Panagopulos
Steve -
The "Nate" link is still down.
You claim: "The hobby isn't about dealers. It's about collectors". Silliest thing I've ever heard you say. It's ALL about the dealer's, except for those collectors who hang out in airport lounges and hotel lobbies.
Mar 23, 2011
roger epperson
Mar 23, 2011
CJCollector
Mar 23, 2011
Steve Cyrkin, Admin
Chris, that's right. So if Chris Morales authenticates an average of 100 items a month for Coach's Corner, that's 1200 items a year. An as you say, he has 130 items up this month alone, so the actual number is higher.
Now according to these trial notes, Morales said he spends 2-3 hours on a signature. That's 2400-3600 hours a year if there's only ONE signature per auction lot.
With 50 40-hour work weeks in a year and two weeks vacation, that's 2,000 hours a year. So it would take Morales at least 14.4 to 21.6 months to authenticate a year's worth of Coach's Corner auction lots alone.
And that's assuming signature per item. Many have two. Some have a dozen or more.
And that doesn't include Morales's time working for government agencies, or doing work for other dealers.
Christopher Morales or his authorized representatives are welcome to come here and explain.
Mar 23, 2011
CJCollector
Mar 23, 2011
CJCollector
Mr. Morales, if you're reading this forum I hope you will answer some of our questions. You owe it to the hobby to explain how exactly you "authenticate" autographs.
You owe it to the hobby to explain because judging by the number of autographs (17,000?) you have "authenticated" for various companies, sellers, etc., your actions have had a dramatic effect within the hobby or we wouldn't be where we are today.
We all would like to know if you really used photographs you took at the Smithsonian as exemplars in your work? We would like to know when you 'authenticated" historical cuts for Coach's Corner if you performed actual ink analysis as a "forensic examiner?" And you have 'authenticated" hundreds of historical cuts for Coach's Corner. As a "forensic examiner," Mr. Morales, have you ever questioned how Coach's Corner acquired literally hundreds of historical cuts?
You once 'authenticated" a Mike "King" Kelly signed softball for Coach's Corner. I am really curious what exemplar you used to "cert" it and how you acquired that particular exemplar?
That's all for now, Mr. Morales.
Mar 23, 2011
Brandon Mysinger
What he has yet to realize is that his testimony may be used against him in ANY other court case. In a case where his actions and history as an "authenticator" are questioned, he will find that he backed himself into a very deep corner.
To be honest, He probably was not expecting the court to ask such smart and specific questions. It appears that they had their doubts early on.
They already made him admit that his resume isn't exactly as he claims.
Now that I think of it, he may want to have second thoughts before stepping into a court room again now that he has tied the noose around his neck.
Mar 23, 2011
Meredith Miller
As an FBI trained and certified document examiner, I am not surprised by Mr. Morale's admission of the poor methodology and his lack of training. As an expert in this field for over 12 years, I have witnessed individuals who claim they are experts without any real training, education, and use unreliable standards to conduct handwriting examinations. I would urge any collector to review the credentials of any "authenticator" seriously before purchasing memorabilia. A trained document examiner will have at a minimum: a bachelors degree, a 2 year training program completed with a federal, state or local laboratory, and be a member of professional organizations such as the American Acadamy of Forensic Science, (AAFS) Questioned Document Section, the American Board of Forensic Document Examiners (ABFDE), or the American Society of Questioned Document Examiners (ASQDE). There are many organziations that sound similar but are not the same.
Mar 24, 2011
Steve Cyrkin, Admin
Meredith,
Thanks for joining us. I just googled you. Is this your Web site: www.dekalbmiller.com?
I'm sure many of us would love to ask you questions about forensic document examiners and the examination process. I hope you'll be kind enough to oblige.
If you don't mind me asking, how did you find us? Did someone ask you to come here? Are you involved in a current or potential case involving Christopher Morales?
Thanks--and welcome here. Hope you come back often.
Mar 24, 2011
DB
well we can be assured that there will always be a home for Morales with Coach's Corner and other similar low end places for unsuspecting people.
When Coach's Corner was asked specifically if they would continue to allow Morales amongst others to provide his COA on items after being banned from Ebay there response was and I quote, " did you read the article I referenced (A/Alert what else) in which Jimmy Spence authenticated items. People took his holograms off, sent to Chris Morales who hologrammed and certified them. Then they re-sent to Jimmy and he flunked them?? Including Tristar,UD items,etc.. I'm sure you did not."
Thus rather than answer the question it's easier to throw out a red herring. So it's reasonable to believe that Morales will continue on as he always has but as Ali would say; "rope a dope".
No Mr. Bill we'd call it in another life that some "should seriously consider heading for the mattresses" which in some cases would be a step up for some, ya know the ones hiding under rocks.
might be worth buying the official transcript if one was kept.
Mar 25, 2011