Lease this WebApp and get rid of the ads.
Michael 5260
Trendley and "stuff"
Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:12

Reilly and Trendley provide a whiff of doubt to the jury concerning photography.

Q. Is it possible to distort the handwriting by photography?

A. Oh, yes; you can do a lot of that stuff with photography..

Q. It is a fact, is it not, that these are photographic reproductions according to Mr. Osborn's testimony?

A. Yes, I heard him.

The silent notion here is that Osborn somehow distorted the handwriting evidence with photography. Reilly and Trendley did not come straight out and say it, but it was what they were carefully insinuating.

The fact is photography is very important to solving forensic document examination problems. Sometimes photography is vital.

Photographs are useful in nearly every questioned document investigation and in many cases it is impossible without them to present the facts to a court and jury in an effective, convincing manner.

Photographs often make clear what otherwise may be hidden or indistinct, and this fact alone is sufficient reason for their use.

Every questioned document should be promptly photographed in order that a correct and permanent record may be made of it and its condition.

The most important reason for making photographs of a disputed document is that by this means the writing in question can be accurately enlarged so that every quality and characteristic of it can be clearly and properly interpreted whether the facts so shown point to genuineness or to forgery.

Another purpose in photographing a document is to provide any number of accurate reproductions of it, thus affording unlimited opportunity for study, comparison and investigation by any number of examiners.

Photographs can be cut apart as may be desirable and the various parts classified for comparison, which cannot be done without some means of making accurate duplicates of the original paper.

The photographic lens and sensitized photographic film or plate will distinguish and make a permanent record of delicate differences in tint that the eye does not clearly see until illustrated in this way.

Properly made photo-micrographs give court and jury in permanent form the transitory view that can be seen only one at a time through the use of the microscope. Enlarged photographs of this kind sometimes are absolutely conclusive as evidence. They are silent but convincing witnesses of fact and not of opinion and cannot be successfully disputed.

Photographs are also useful in showing delicate discolorations due to chemical erasures or other fraudulent changes which otherwise might be overlooked, denied or misinterpreted.

Transmitted light photography is also useful in the examination of watermarks and also furnishes a method of determining the identity, or the difference, in papers by showing arrangement of the fibers and the markings of the wire gauze and dandy-roll.

If there is any question in court about photographic images of a document "the original" document is in court and it can be referred to. If there is any distortion or manipulation of a photograph the examiner is going to get nailed to the wall quickly.

The news reporter was on target when he described Trendley as a furtive, musty old codger. If the shoe fits wear it.

Trendley's "stuff" should have been bread, cornbread, or rice for a Thanksgiving turkey. At least this would have made sense to the jury.

    • Re: Trendley and "stuff"Anonymous, Tue Apr 3 09:48
      Over the years, Trendley was able to prove that handwriting identification was dubious. Trendley had the ability to "fool" Handwriting Experts with his forgeries. I think that just might be the real... more
  • Click here to receive daily updates