We are an eBay affiliate and may be compensated for clicks on links that result in purchases.

Guaranteed Forensic Authenticators COA (GFA): What Methods Do They Use? Billy Martin Mantle Signed Photo

Immediately below you will find a link to my Part 1 of "Guaranteed Forensic Authenticators (GFA): What Methods Do They Use? Please read that before you continue with this blog.

https://live.autographmagazine.com/profiles/blogs/guaranteed-forens...

There will be a final Part 3 following this blog post.

Below you find another GFA-certed purchase of mine. We have observed the below image of Mickey Mantle, Joe DiMaggio, Whitey Ford and Billy Martin sold hundreds of times on EBay with certs from GFA (Stephen Rocchi and John Gorajczyk) and numerous "Florida" COA's.

Mickey Mantle passed away in 1995 and Joe DiMaggio passed away in 1999.

Billy Martin was killed in a car crash in 1989.

Let's examine the below image.

My own "Forensic" examination of the paper under my ProScope.

As you can definitively see, the image was produced on inkjet paper.

The dry erase marker test immediately below. As you can clearly see, because inkjet paper is porous, the dry erase marker cannot remove the signature from the surface of the image.

If it was near to impossible for Mickey Mantle to have signed an image of himself produced on inkjet paper, then how the heck could have Billy Martin, who died in 1989, sign the above image that was produced on inkjet paper!!!

Question to Stephen Rocchi and John Gorajczyk:

Again, what "Forensic" and "Scientific" methods are you two employing to determine that the above four autographs are "genuine?"

From the GFA website:

"Without having the proper training experience, education and exemplars, a third-party authentication is just an opinion, not a scientific fact of determination."

From the GFA website:

As of Sept. 2011, the sports memorabilia authentication companies have used collectors and dealers as their authenticators. These authenticators, highly respected in the industry have for their collecting and selling expertise have had little or no formal training in forensics and document examination.

Stephen's background in law enforcement along with his years of experience in authentication, working with well-trained forensic and document examiners, combined with today's latest technology, can produce scientific proof that signatures are authentic or counterfeit.

All of the above, and "Forensics," and "Today's Latest Technology" were unable to determine that the above Mantle, DiMaggio, Ford and Martin image was produced on inkjet paper!!!

And with Rocchi's "Years of experience in authentication" why was he unable to determine that the above image was produced on inkjet paper!!! The feel of an image produced on inkjet paper and photo lab/file paper is significantly different, which begs the question "Did anyone at GFA physically examine any of the photos I have posted during the past six years" that were certed by GFA?

Below is an image that sellers of GFA-certed "autographs" were using in their auctions to enforce Rocchi's so-called authentication skills while he was at PSA.

They never posted the full COA. Here it is below. Notice the "In The Presence" on the COA.

Below are completed auctions showing the image of Mantle, DiMaggio, Ford and Martin.

I've observed that image being sold on EBay (with GFA COAs and Florida COAs) in the hundreds and I would bet my life that all of them were images produced on inkjet paper.

If this isn't incompetence, then what is it?

I will also add that since GFA started in Sept. 2011, I have yet to see an authentic Mickey Mantle, Joe DiMaggio, Ted Williams, Willie Mays, Sandy Koufax, etc autograph with a COA from GFA that is actually authentic. Not one.

Tags: Guaranteed Forensic Authenticators John Gorajczyk Forged Signed Mickey Mantle Billy Martin Photo

0 members like this

Comment by goodcat on January 17, 2018 at 11:36am: LMFAO !!!!

Comment by mncnc on February 1, 2018 at 12:33am: "No one will ever change my mind that Forensics has nothing to do with opining autographs."

I am completely inexperienced and new here to boot, I am trying to figure out what I have, I inherited a large autograph collection, and this community has been of great help, I will probably tax them and they may get tired of me. I've had some fun gong through different posts, and I've learned a lot.

This is really interesting, but your statement above, I think I need to argue against it. You just did it, you used forensics to exclude an autograph from being real. Your analysis of the paper.

I think authenticating a signature is always going to be an art, forgive me please if I'm wrong, but excluding them, as you did with the ink jet paper, is forensics.

It would be fairly easy to build a database from known good samples about inks, for example, what their chemical composition is, with a large sample size you could probably find the make and model of a pen.

The problem with that is that it would be really expensive, first you build the database and then you check against it. Even to check against it, if it were me I would use a scanning electron microscope, and time on those is expensive. But you would get a fingerprint of the ink, every time.

I own a company that deals with atomic force microscopes, I've actually used one to look at a couple of my autographs, to see if the signature was part of the paper or on it. I have it so the time on the microscope is free to me, but again people who charge for it get a lot.

My opinion would be that forensics could have a lot to do with authenticating, or maybe excluding signatures but to do it right would be cost prohibitive. Unless you are looking at laser printer paper under an optical microscope, which I think was a great example of....... forensics.

Thank you for the interesting article.

Comment by mncnc on February 1, 2018 at 12:35am: you could probably find the make and model of a pen.

Should say you could probably find the make and model of a pen from the ink.

Comment by CJCollector on February 1, 2018 at 5:03am: The point I have been making for the last seven years writing about the Florida forgeries and Forensics is that Forensics has nothing to do with opining autographs.

The Florida forgeries, which I have been writing about for over seven years, are OBVIOUS forgeries and the majority of them have been mechanically-produced.

I have owned some of these pieces for years and I have known what they are right from the beginning.

All you have to do is handle the paper to conclude that it is inkjet paper.

I simply used my ProScope to reinforce my findings about the paper.

It's really all just common sense.

As for the "autographs," they can be opined in one second as forgeries.

Comment by Jason Charnick on February 6, 2018 at 2:45am: More great work Chris! I’m starting to get a real itchin to go to their office with a video camera and do some sort of exposé (it’s ok, i’m a filmmaker!). these guys need to start answering these questions publicly!

Comment by Fuddjcal on February 12, 2018 at 8:59am: Now that would be fun to watch Jason.

Comment by Steve on February 26, 2018 at 10:05pm: Jason, you should do exactly that. When I had a special done at my house regarding forgeries in the industry, Florida stations picked it up and put it on the news. More attention needs to be brought to that area.