We're an eBay affiliate and may be compensated on purchases made through clicks. 

Guaranteed Forensic Authenticators (GFA): What Methods Do They Use? Stephen Rocchi John Gorajczyk

Stephen Rocchi opened Guaranteed Forensic Authenticators (GFA) in September 2011, with John Gorajczyk listed as their forensic document examiner.

I remember reading in one of the baseball forums that numerous autograph collectors were excited that a new Third-Party Authentication (TPA) company was going to compete with PSA/DNA and JSA.

But that excitement was short-lived when collectors started posting photos of GFA-certified autographs.

They were the same well-known sports autograph forgery styles certified by Nicholas Burczyk, Chris Morales, Ted Taylor and Drew Max (AUU) and sold by AtAuction.com.

My observation of the autographs sold by AtAuction.com (formerly Always At Auction) is that I never saw one authentic autograph being listed and sold over there.  Not one.

According to an email I received from AtAuction in October 2010 all of the AtAuction inventory originated from leftover Scoreboard inventory.

Of course, that is a lie, since, except for a few beat-up Mantle signed autographs, there was no leftover Scoreboard inventory awarded to anyone.

Below is a statement written by Ken Goldin back in 2012.

My Focus Today

This thread is going to focus on my  purchases from AtAuction.com (John House).

Previously, I made numerous purchases from AtAuction.com with COAs from Chris Morales, Ted Taylor and Drew Max.

The purchases I will focus on today all have COAs from Guaranteed Forensic Authenticators (GFA).

I purchased these directly from AtAuction.com.

The team at GFA includes Stephen Rocchi and John Gorajczyk.

 

My AtAuction.com Purchases and Guaranteed Forensic Authenticators (GFA)

Years ago I made  purchases of AtAuction pieces with GFA (Rocchi) COAs.  I recently opened them up.  The pieces consisted of forged Mickey Mantle, Whitey Ford and Ted Williams photos.  They all arrived matted and framed.  

They are all come with a COA from Stephen Rocchi/John Gorajczyk and their Guaranteed Forensic Authenticators (GFA) group.

I will state that since the inception of GFA in Sept. 2011, I have personally not observed any authentic autographs of Mickey Mantle, Ted Williams, Joe DiMaggio, Willie Mays and Sandy Koufax with COAs from Guaranteed Forensic Authenticators (GFA).

So I purchased a few so that I could examine them myself.  

I will also state, that my first observation of the autographed photos with COAs from GFA is that they looked too rigid and stiff to be penned by the human hand.

In my opinion, they look to be mechanically drawn.

So even though I knew they were forgeries, I wanted a few of them in my possession so that I could scrutinize them.

Without being examined in-person, these are obvious forgeries.  I call them no-brainer forgeries.

Let's Get Started

First we have my Mickey Mantle/Ted Williams purchase.  This is one of the most popular images used by the source of the AtAuction inventory.

Let's Examine The Paper

The below images are from my ProScope HR (50X magnification) of the Mantle/Williams image. 

My own "Forensic Paper Analysis."

 

Observe the dots.  This is clearly inkjet paper.

Why didn't Stephen Rocchi and John Gorajczyk discover that during their "Forensic" and "Scientific" examination of this piece?

Mickey Mantle passed away August 13, 1995.

When would have Mr. Mantle signed photos that were produced on inkjet paper in mass quantities?

Not only that, but it would have been cost prohibitive if it was available.

Also, all of Scoreboard's images were on photo lab (Photo File) paper.

Another one of my purchases is the below Mickey Mantle/Ted Williams piece with a COA from Stephen Rocchi and GFA.

This is a 5X7 piece.  When did Mickey Mantle and Ted Williams sign 5X7 photos back in the early 1990's in mass quantity?

A little common sense goes a long way.

Below is my "Forensic Paper Analysis" of the above image.

Again, please observe the dots.  This is clearly inkjet paper.

Why didn't Stephen Rocchi and John Gorajczyk discover that during their "Forensic" and Scientific" examination of this piece, after all they claim to be utilizing "the latest technology."

Below is my Mickey Mantle/Whitey Ford item with a COA from Stephen Rocchi and GFA.

My own  "Forensic Paper Analysis" of the paper below under my ProScope HR.

Again, it is clearly inkjet paper.

Why didn't Stephen Rocchi and John Gorajczyk discover that during their "Forensic" and "Scientific" examination of this piece?

Photo Lab Paper Under My ProScope HR

My Tom Tresh signed photo.

As you can see in the second photo there are no dots.

Below is a Joe DiMaggio I purchased from AtAuction with a COA from Guaranteed Forensic Authenticators.

It is on 4X6 paper.   

Joe DiMaggio passed away March 1999.

So when did Mr. DiMaggio sign these 4X6 photos in quantity on inkjet paper, Mr. Rocchi and Mr. Gorajczyk?

Here is that Joe DiMaggio I purchased from AtAuction from the time I unwrapped it from the box, to the moment I removed it from the frame and matting.

Huge frame and matting for a 4X6 photo?

In my opinion, they did that for two reasons; to deter anyone from removing the photo from the frame and examining the photo itself, or, from having a TPA examine them. 

All of the autograph items that I observed AtAuction selling were sold matted and framed.

On the below image observe the "ink spot" in the "io" in DiMaggio.  I attempted to remove part of the autograph with a dry erase marker, but was unable to because it is inkjet paper and inkjet paper is porous.

If that was photo lab paper, the dry erase marker would have lifted the "io" from the paper.

Here is that DiMaggio examined under my ProScope HR.

Observe the dots.  Again, the photo was produced on inkjet paper.

Again, when did Joe DiMaggio, who passed away in March 1999, sign the above 4X6 image (produced on inkjet paper) in quantity?

A Little History 

 

According to an email I received from AtAuction back in 2010, all of their autograph items were from leftover Scoreboard inventory that was awarded to their source of various Mantle, DiMaggio, Williams, Mays, etc. autographed photos.

Facts:

1. The source of AtAuction's inventory was never awarded any Scoreboard inventory.

2. Except for a few beat-up Mickey Mantle signed photos, there was no Mickey Mantle, Joe DiMaggio, Ted Williams, etc., inventory remaining after Scoreboard went bankrupt.

3. When Scoreboard was in business, their printer NEVER used images produced on inkjet paper.

4.  Mickey Mantle only signed 4-6 different images for Scoreboard.

5.  Mickey Mantle never signed any 4X6 or 5X7 photos for Scoreboard.

The GFA COA

The GFA COA, while it is an impressive read to the impulsive buyer of autographs or the casual collector, it means zero to serious autograph collectors.

Opining autographs is not NCIS.

And what does "100 Years Of Law Enforcement , Professionally Trained" have to do with opining autographs?

From The GFA Website

New Technology And Sophistication

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.

As for the above from the GFA website:

 

What "New Technology And Sophistication" are Stephen Rocchi and John Gorajczyk referring to and employing?

What Scientific proof that signatures are authentic or counterfeit are Stephen Rocchi and John Goraczyk referring to?

I would think that the first step required from a so-called Forensic Examination (whatever that means) would be to date the item that the autograph is signed on.

Mr. Rocchi and Mr. Goraczyk, according to your website, GFA performs document examination.

So how do you explain the inkjet paper?

Mickey Mantle passed away August 13th, 1995.  

Is it possible that Mickey Mantle autographed thousands of various-sized photos produced on inkjet paper?

Absolutely not.

Scoreboard did not use inkjet paper for their images.  And if it was available, it would have been cost prohibitive back then.

The GFA Website

Below is document (link) from the GFA website.

http://gfaauthenticated.com/faq/

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

Below is one of GFA's Examination Sheets.

Where is the "Forensic" and "Scientific" examination?

On the below Examination Check Sheet where is the description showing Today's Latest Technology?

You may have to click your mouse on the below image to get a closer view.

Maybe Stephen Rocchi and John Gorajczyk can explain what "Scientific Fact" had them determine that my purchases from AtAuction are authentic autographs?

Did anyone at GFA physically examine any of the pieces I purchased or any of the pieces sold by AtAuction over the past six years and the pieces that I've seen (by the thousands) listed and sold on Ebay?

Remember the HBO Sports segment on forgeries when Armen Keteyian asked (paraphrasing) Frangipani  "Didn't you ask yourself where all of this stuff was coming from?"

Now I want to ask Mr. Rocchi, Did you ever ask yourself where those thousands of Mantle, DiMaggio, Williams, Mays, Koufax, etc, autographed photos originated from?

Who At GFA Is/Was Ultimately Responsible For The End Result Authentication Process?

Maybe Stephen Rocchi and John Gorajczyk can explain to the autograph hobby when Mickey Mantle (who passed away August 13, 1995) started signing images of himself produced on inkjet paper.

I will add one more item to this blog.

Below is a Joe DiMaggio that I also purchased from AtAuction.

It comes with a COA from Chris Morales.

Below is an image of the back of the above photo.

I bought it knowing it was a forgery, but I still wanted to examine it myself.

The back of the photo reads "HP Advanced."

When I first read the markings on the back, I immediately emailed HP inquiring about "HP Advanced" paper.

I received an email (still in my possession) from HP dated October 12, 2011 and the first sentence reads "The HP Advanced Photo Paper was initially introduced in 2005."

How could Joe DiMaggio sign a photo on paper that wasn't introduced until six years after his passing?

Joe DiMaggio passed away March 8, 1999.

Views: 8241

Tags: Guaranteed Forensic Authenticators Autographs Inkjet Paper Mickey Mantle Joe DiMaggio Signed Photo

Comment by Rick Meyer on January 5, 2019 at 2:21pm

I did google it. For $1,000 war bond purchase they received a premium seat over those who purchased a $25 war bond. Doesn’t say anything about the HOF autograph of choice. 

I just don’t believe autographs back in that day we’re used as enticements like they are today. Folks were not out there buying and donating money to get signatures. Athletes didn’t charge for signing autographs back then and were much easier to get access to and get autographs from then they are today. The paid signing started when autograph selling and dealing became a big thing.

Comment by Rick Meyer on January 5, 2019 at 2:28pm

Steve is right. Babe Ruth was a generous signer. As big as he was back then he signed for kids and fans nonstop. If he were around today he would be in every too 10 easiest signor list. Back then Autographs were played with, cards that were signed put into bicycle spokes and such. Fans collected them. Not dealers back in those days. Autographs were valued in 1943 for sentimental reasons not monetary value. Far more Babe Ruth autographs for example have been ruined and destroyed by the kids who got them then there are available sigs of him today. 

Autographs being used as an enticement to purchase war bonds in 1943 would have not really been appealing cause signatures were not being bought and sold back then. I could see a meet and greet or something like that being offered but offering 1 autograph for each $1,000 war bond bought not so much. Post the google article you said shows this. I’d like to see it.

Comment by Ann Mahony on June 4, 2019 at 9:51am

Christopher, you have a confusion in terms here. You keep referring to the dot patterns that exist on the paper as "ink jet paper" but the dots are a result of the ink jet PRINTER regardless of the paper used.  Different printers produce different dot patterns. You might want to check w/ EFF - Electronic Frontier Foundation re: futher info in this area.  As for the ink jet paper itself, the following is a response from Doug Cobb at Paper Forensics - "The statement that was made regarding porosity is valid. A lot of time was spent developing inkjet paper grades, the key was to control the penetration of the ink, this was done with a combination of internal and surface sizing chemistries. The porosity or openness of the sheet was also key. They had to control the porosity so the ink didn't adsorb too quickly into the holes of the sheet, through capillary action, and needed to control the ink so it either didn't penetrate completely through the sheet or just stay on the surface and smear. The inks then were solvent based. Most of these concerns went away when HP and the others went to pigmented inks. Now days the sheets are less complicated to make because you don't have to worry as much all of those properties." Hope this helps.

In addition, it appears from all the holes in the Joe DiMaggio photo that someone was doing thin layer chromatography to test the age of the ink, a process they could have avoided had they, like you, observed the paper manufacturer.  Ann Mahony, Forensic Document Examiner, San Francisco 

I avoid authentication of sports memorabilia and various other autographs for the very reasons you point out. The market is flooded with imitations, and you need enough valid, genuine signatures for comparison to form a Baseline of Authenticity, and sufficient in number to exhibit the author's Range of Variation.

Comment by CJCollector on June 4, 2019 at 12:55pm

Ann, thank you for your contribution.

I wish I had made my point clearer.

It is "The dots are caused by the inkjet printer spraying the ink."

Comment by CJCollector on June 4, 2019 at 1:04pm

Ann, I have always been curious how "true" Forensic Examiners view the likes of the following:

Christopher Morales, Drew Max, and Stephen Rocchi.

Comment

You need to be a member of Autograph Live to add comments!

Join Autograph Live

Photos

  • Add Photos
  • View All

Videos

  • Add Videos
  • View All

© 2024   Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service