Best Practice Manual

As part of the continued progression of ENFSI towards improving quality within Forensic Science, each Working Group has been requested to develop a Best Practice Manual (miniature discipline specific quality manual). Using a template developed by the ENFSI Quality and Competence Committee, the ENFHEX Steering Committee has written a draft Best Practice Manual for Handwriting Examinations.

This document is still in a draft format, and requires assistance from all ENFHEX Members to complete. Registered members of ENFHEX can download the Best Practice Manual from the Procedure documents page on the Handwriting site.

Methods and Procedures

One of the objectives of the EU funded ENFHEX project (1998-2002) was to survey and evaluate methods and procedures to help harmonise working practice. The primary goal of this survey was to get an overview of the methods and procedures used by forensic institutes in Europe, taking into account similarities and dissimilarities. Though basically the survey was not carried out to establish a European standard, it was expected that the results might provide useful information on good and bad practice.

Jonathan Morris and Stephen Maxwell sent a questionnaire to sixty organisations (for the most part ENFSI members) inviting them to reply with details of any published methods and procedures. Twenty-two ENFSI organisations replied, of which twelve indicated that they have some form of documented Methods & Procedures. The size and complexity of these methods and procedures turned out to differ widely. The BKA (Germany) and the NFI (The Netherlands) sent in full methods. Some organisations have accredited methods, among which are SKL Sweden, NBI-CL Finland, FSS England, FSANI Northern Ireland, SP-FSL Scotland and NFI Netherlands.

With regard to the methods and procedures that were not written in English, it was decided not to translate all of them, but first to review and summarise the ones written in English, and then to check the non-English contributions against the English-language versions afterwards (to point out the differences). An exception was made however for the two French-language sets of methods and procedures received (from the IRCGN in France and the IPSC in Switzerland), which were reviewed as these consist of annotated flow diagrams, detailing the process by which the examinations are undertaken.

The following common features were found:

• well-documented methods;
• system for recording the disputed writings in case notes;
• case notes are well-constructed and arranged in a logical order to facilitate checking;
• checking procedure by a second examiner.

Also variations in approach were found, such as:

• sketching the disputed writings and using ticks and crosses to denote similarities and differences;
• photocopying the disputed writings and annotating the photocopies.

Next, an overview was made of a possible structure for a "standard" method. This overview was an attempt to document the bare minimum that should be considered when undertaking handwriting examinations and comparisons. From this overview, three documents were drafted, viz. (1) Key knowledge requirements for both handwriting and signature examinations, (2) Examination of handwriting and (3) Examination of signatures. These documents were presented to the project committee members to be reviewed.

All comments received on the procedure documents were incorporated by Jonathan Morris. The amended versions of the procedures 'Key knowledge requirements for both handwriting and signature examinations' and 'Examination of handwriting' were also translated into German. (The third one, 'Examination of signatures', is largely identical to the 'Examination of handwriting' procedure.) The English versions were sent to all ENFSI institutes. The German versions were sent to the institutes in the German speaking countries as well, and to other institutes on request. These documents were discussed at the Business Meeting of 19 October 2001 in Rosny-sous-Bois, France. Comments could be sent in until January 2002, also by institutes not represented at the Business Meeting.

The comments received were minimal. As far as needed and possible, they were incorporated into the documents. The ‘final’ versions of the documents were translated in German, French and Spanish. They might be considered as a framework, at least within the ENFSI institutes.

Registered members of ENFHEX can download the documents from the Procedure documents page on the Handwriting website.