Comment by Kelly Wilkins on June 20, 2011 at 5:08pm

Roger.
I stand by what I said and I concur with what you say.  If I cannot find enough exemplars to either validate or invalidate any claim, then I won't take the case, or I will render my official opinion as inconclusive.  But, depending on how deep the person wants me to dig, I'll dig.  It depends on how deep their pocket book is.  I will go as far as needed.  But most people don't/won't want to pay for that.

Christopher.

Once again, I cannot vouch for the professionalism (or lack of, as it sounds) of the previous claimants.  Whether or not they use industry standard tools, training they received from a respected school/apprenticeship, have their own lab with the equipment to properly evaluate a document, or not.  I have.  I do this day in, day out, for the last year as FDE, and 2 years as an apprentice before, AND Handwriting Analyst and Expert Witness since 97, I can assure you that lumping me in with the past people is just bad form.  

Steve,

I have worked Crime Scene's as a labrat, and I can assure you that FDE are never on the scene.  We always have the evidence brought to our labs for analysis.  :)

 

Seriously people, I understand that I have an uphill battle, but this is no way to treat someone new.  Like I said, I am a collector myself first and foremost. I just have a unique perspective.   

 

Comment by CJCollector on June 20, 2011 at 5:20pm

Mr. Wilkins,  I don't think anyone here has lumped you in with those "other" guys.  We are simply conveying our experiences with so-called "Document Examiners" and "Forensic" people.   We would never lump you in with "those" guys.

But this I can convey, Mr. Wilkins, the sports memorabilia autograph hobby is a different animal.  And I believe experts like Roger Epperson and John Renzikoff will concur with me that there are certain autographs that we can label as a forgery in seconds.  I am sure there are certain horror-related autographs that you can ascertain as a forgery in the same amount of time.

We all hope here, Mr. Wilkins, that you can put the acronym "FDE" in a better light than others that have been present in the hobby for a long time.

Comment by Kelly Wilkins on June 20, 2011 at 5:28pm

Well, that's good.  Just the general tone is so far, fairly negative. 
As far as the sports end of it goes, I agree that unless the player autographs something right there in front of you, 9 out of 10, it is a forgery.  This is a trivial fact in our world as it is yours.  
And 1 rule of thumb as an analyst of any kind, unless you witness the autograph yourself, count ALL signatures as forgery until you prove beyond a shadow of a doubt, that it isn't.  That way, you're not looking for something that isn't there.

Comment by CJCollector on June 20, 2011 at 5:28pm

Mr. Wilkins, if I may ask.   Is your area of expertise going to be confined to horror-related autographs or will you be venturing into historical signatures, sports autographs, music-related autographs, etc?

Comment by CJCollector on June 20, 2011 at 5:36pm

Mr. Wilkins,  Ebay has a "Banned COA" list.  It isn't a long list and the majority of names on the list are from "Operation Bullpen."  But two of the names on that list are "Forensic Document Services" and "Christopher L. Morales, Forensic Investigator." 

Being on Ebay's "Banned COA" list means that anything with a COA from Christopher L. Morales is removed if the auction gets reported.  It is not easy to get on Ebay's banned list.

Comment by Steve Cyrkin, Admin on June 20, 2011 at 6:07pm

Kelly,

My apologies. My comment was just a quip, not meant to offend you. But it is accurate regarding our experience with the forensic document examiners who specialize in issuing COAs and LOAs used to sell autographs. Less than one-percent of the autographs they authenticate as genuine are truly genuine. I'm not exaggerating. I would not be surprised if the actual number is less than 1/500.

Now you may understand better why you're hearing what you are here.

Comment by Kelly Wilkins on June 20, 2011 at 9:41pm

Thanks Steve.  
Just so you know, I am no one's "yes man". I am hired to find a fact.  Whether or not a signature, document, etc, has been altered/forged, or not.  

Again, I have never trusted a COA.  Heh, I barely trust Microsoft's. :-p

Anyway, rest assured, I am not like anything you've experienced.  I don't deal COA/LOA, nor do I want too. I just don't want to see people get screwed.  Period.

 

Christopher,

My area of expertise is going to be anything handwritten.  Be it from Horror, historical, or music, I will do it all.  Or, if I don't get hired, I will do none and just be one of the many contributors here.  :) 

Comment by john reznikoff on June 21, 2011 at 6:02am

I have only browsed this blog and thought I would comment briefly. I think it is wrong to paint all forensic experts with the same brush that we have applied to various so called experts that have been on the EBay banned list .

Kelly has come here uninitiated to what has been going on in our trade recently. Let's start by giving him the benefit of the doubt. 

As I have tried to explain, Forensic Document Examination or Questioned Document Examination as I call it, is very different from Autograph Authentication.

I have a practice in Questioned Document Examination and have had training by forensic experts :
http://www.universityarchives.com/About-UA/About-John/Expert-Witnes... 

While I have not been certified by any board, I have been accepted and qualified as an expert in each and every one of my many appearances to testify, both State and Federal. The Daubert Standard applies to the admissabilty on non-scientific experts and is best illustrated in the Supreme Court case Kumho Tire Co. Vs. Carmimichael :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kumho_Tire_Co._v._Carmichael

What this case essentially says is that specialized knowledge in an area is not distinctly different from scientific knowledge. Thus for example only  take a signed Beatles Album. A Beatles Expert like Frank Ciazzo  is more qualified than any board certified expert who has scientific knowledge but not specialized in Beatles signatures. 

Questioned Document experts generally charge between $250 and $400 an hour ( myself included)  and as much as 50% more for testimony . Each signature requires a study that is usually at least 4 hours and usually compares the questioned signature to known exemplars . A report or position is presented that hopefully would be defensible in court.  I utilize machinery and equipment that is not available to the public and that is very costly . I believe my lab is very advanced but do not often use it for Autograph Authentication.

I currently have 9 cases that I am working on. They range from illegally obtained immigration status to forgery and embezzlement that quite possibly eventually led to murder. 

But make no mistake folks,never would I consider what I do as a questioned Document Examiner akin to my duties as an Autograph Authenticator. In the latter, the decisions are often made in minutes based on years of experience handling the very same autographs and in no way reflect the standards I use when preparing for court in a questioned document examination. I do feel that these opinions are almost always as accurate as what I might bring to court but for a very different reason.  I know and am very familiar with the signatures I authenticate, and the various forgery styles that are often associated with the same.

The bottom line here is that a forensic or questioned document examination of a signature  to a court admissible standard , should cost a very minimum of $1000 per example.

Anything else in my book is just an autograph authentication opinion and should not ethically be represented as a Forensic Document examination ( as may be being suggested here by Kelly and is most certainly suggested by other FDE's who are infesting our business)

Additionally , this opinion, to have veracity, should be based on years of study of the particular personage and a healthy file of known exemplars. Something like this usually costs a fraction of the $1000 that I suggested above.

Comment by Kelly Wilkins on June 21, 2011 at 6:24am

Nicely said, John :)

 

And congratulations on your success.

Comment by CJCollector on June 21, 2011 at 7:35am

Well written, John.

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• Next ›
• Page