NCJ Number
186062
Journal
International Journal of Forensic Document Examiners Volume: 5 Dated: December/January 1999 Pages: 20-21
Date Published
1999
Length
2 pages
Annotation
This article explains how document examiners might explain qualified handwriting opinions to a jury.
Abstract
To adequately explain qualified findings, the testifying document examiner must understand where his/her expert opinion falls in relation to other degrees of confidence and be able to explain the entire range of opinions, or confidence scale, in simple terms understandable to the layperson. The confidence scale must not be viewed in terms of points on a scale. Even identifications and eliminations must be viewed as segments, not as points, since the evidence may continue to build even after judgments have been made. "Strong probability" and "Strong probability did not" are the smallest segments of the scale, yet they overlap "Identification" and "Probable" or "Elimination" and "Probably did not." Even "No conclusion" overlaps "Indications" and "Indications did not." The overlapping portions of the scale may be called the "zones of legitimate disagreement," since a conservative examiner may take the weaker of the opinions, and others may take the stronger. This article provides an example of one way qualified opinions may be explained to a jury or other laypersons by use of a confidence scale. 2 references