Bijlage A Standards Handwriting Examination (002.0): suggested literature for the field of handwriting examination

Standards Handwriting Examination (002.0)

De datum van inwerkingtreding ligt voor de datum van uitgifte.

• ○ Budowle et al. (2009). A Perspective on Errors, Bias, and Interpretation in the Forensic Sciences and Direction for Continuing Advancement. Journal of Forensic Science, July 2009, Vol. 54, No. 4, pp. 798-809.
• ○ Ellen, D. (1998). The Scientific Examination of Questioned Documents. Ellis Horwood Ltd., Chichester.
• ○ Found, B. & Rogers, D. (1998). A consideration of the theoretical basis of forensic handwriting examination: The application of “Complexity Theory” to understand the basis of handwriting identification, in: International Journal of Forensic Document Examiners, 4(2), pp.109-118.
• ○ Found, B. & Rogers, D. (Eds.) (1999). ‘Documentation of forensic handwriting comparison and identification method: A modular approach’, Journal of Forensic Document Examination, 12, pp.1-68.
• ○ Sita J, Found B, Rogers D.K. (2002). Forensic Handwriting Examiners’ Expertise for Signature Comparison. Journal of Forensic Science, Sept 2002, Vol. 47, N0 5, pp 1117-1124.
• ○ Gross, S.R. (2001). Detection of deception: The case of handwriting expertise. Virginia Law Review, 87, 1847-1855.
• ○ Gailbraith III, O et al. (1995). The Principle of the “Drunkard’s Search” As A Proxy For Scientific Analysis: The Misuse of Handwriting Test Data In A Law Journal Article. International Journal of Forensic Document Examiners, Vol. 1, No 1, pp 7-17.
• ○ Hardy, H.J.J. & Fagel, W.P.F. (1995). Methodological Aspects of Handwriting Identification, in: Journal of Forensic Document Examination (8), pp.33-69;
• ○ Huber, R.A. & Headrick, A.M. (1999). Handwriting Identification: Facts and Fundamentals. CRC Press, Boca Raton/ New York.
• ○ Kam M. et al. (2001). Signature Authentication by Forensic Document Examiners. Journal of Forensic Science. 46 (4) pp 884-888.
• ○ Kam M. & Lin E (2003). Writer Identification Using Hand-Printed and Non-Hand-Printed Questioned Documents. Journal of Forensic Science 48 (6) pp 1391-5.
• ○ Michel, L. (1982). Gerichtliche Schriftvergleichung. W. de Gruyter, Berlin.
• ○ Mnookin, J.L. (2001). Scripting expertise: The history of handwriting identification evidence and the judicial construction of reliability. Virginia Law Review, 87, 1723-1845.
• ○ Morris, R. (2000). Forensic Handwriting Identification, Fundamental Concepts and Principles. Academic Press, London/ San Diego.
• ○ Risinger, D.M. (2002). Handwriting identification. In: D.L. Faigman, D.H. Kaye, M.J. Saks & J. Sanders (eds). Modern scientific evidence: The law and science of expert testimony. St. Paul, MI: West.
• ○ Risinger, D.M. & Saks, M.J. (1996). Science and nonscience in the courts: Daubert (Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 113 S. Ct. 2786 (1993)) meets handwriting identification expertise. Iowa Law Review, 82, 21-74.
• ○ Saks, M.J. & Vanderhaar, H. (2005). On the “general acceptance” of handwriting identification principles. Journal of Forensic Science, 50, 119-126.
• ○ Schomaker, L.R.B. (2008). ‘Writer identification and verification’, in: N. Ratha & V. Govindaraju (Eds.), Advances in Biometrics: Sensors, Systems and Algorithms, Springer-Verlag, pp. 247-264.
• ○ Seaman Kelly, J. & Lindblom, B.S. (2006). Scientific Examination of Questioned Documents. CRC Press, Boca Raton;
• ○ Taroni et al (2010). Data analysis in Forensic Science: A Bayesian Decision Perspective. Wiley and Sons, Ltd., Chichester.
• ○ Srihari, S.N., Cha, S-H., Arora, H. & Lee, S. (2002). Individuality of handwriting. Journal of Forensic Science (47), pp.856-872.