1、Designation: E 2286 08Standard Guide forExamination of Dry Seal Impressions1This standard is issued under the fixed designation E 2286; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year oforiginal adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parenthe
2、ses indicates the year of last reapproval. Asuperscript epsilon () indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.1. Scope1.1 This guide provides procedures that should be used byforensic document examiners (Guide E 444) for examinationsand comparisons involving dry seal devices
3、 and their impres-sions.1.2 These procedures are applicable whether the examina-tion(s) and comparison(s) is of questioned and known items orof exclusively questioned items.1.3 These procedures include evaluation of the sufficiencyof the material available for examination.1.4 The particular methods
4、employed in a given case willdepend upon the nature and sufficiency of the material avail-able for examination.1.5 This guide may not cover all aspects of particularlyunusual or uncommon examinations.1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of thesafety concerns, if any, associated with its
5、 use. It is theresponsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro-priate safety and health practices and determine the applica-bility of regulatory requirements prior to use.2. Referenced Documents2.1 ASTM Standards:2E 444 Guide for Scope of Work of Forensic DocumentExaminersE 1658 Termi
6、nology for Expressing Conclusions of Foren-sic Document ExaminersE 1732 Terminology Relating to Forensic ScienceE 2195 Terminology Relating to the Examination of Ques-tioned Documents3. Terminology3.1 DefinitionsFor definitions of terms in this guide, referto Terminology E 1658, Terminology E 1732,
7、and TerminologyE 2195.3.2 Definitions of Terms Specific to This Standard:3.2.1 dry seal, na non-inked mechanical device whichembosses a design on paper.3.2.2 embossment variation, nnon-uniformity of the dryseal impression on the paper stock. It can be caused by themanner of application or by defects
8、 in the dry seal.3.2.3 impression, nan image formed by pressure.4. Significance and Use4.1 The procedures outlined here are grounded in thegenerally accepted body of knowledge and experience in thefield of forensic document examination. By following theseprocedures, a forensic document examiner can
9、reliably reachan opinion concerning whether two or more dry seal impres-sions have a common origin, or if a dry seal impression wascreated by a specific dry seal device.5. Interferences5.1 Items submitted for examination may have inherentlimitations that can interfere with the procedures in this gui
10、de.Limitations should be noted and recorded.5.2 Limitations can be due to submission of non-originaldocuments, limited quantity or comparability, or condition ofthe items submitted for examination (for example, distortedimpressions, partially imprinted impressions, or variations insurface texture).
11、Such features are taken into account in thisguide.5.3 The results of prior storage, handling, testing, or chemi-cal processing (for example, for latent prints) may interferewith the ability of the examiner to see certain characteristics.The effects can include, but are not limited to, flattening of
12、theembossment or impression, partial destruction of the paper, andstains. Whenever possible, document examinations should beconducted prior to any chemical processing. Items should behandled appropriately to avoid compromising subsequent ex-aminations.5.4 Consideration should be given to the possibi
13、lity that adry seal device can be manufactured which duplicates theimpressions of another dry seal.6. Equipment and Requirements6.1 Appropriate light source(s) of sufficient intensity toallow fine detail to be distinguished.1This guide is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E30 on ForensicScien
14、ces and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee E30.02 on QuestionedDocuments.Current edition approved May 15, 2008. Published June 2008. Originallyapproved in 2003. Last previous edition approved in 2007 as E 228607.2For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, orcontac
15、t ASTM Customer Service at serviceastm.org. For Annual Book of ASTMStandards volume information, refer to the standards Document Summary page onthe ASTM website.1Copyright ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States.NOTE 1Natural light, inc
16、andescent or fluorescent sources, or fiberoptic lighting systems are generally utilized. Transmitted illumination,side lighting, and vertical incident lighting have been found useful.6.2 Magnification sufficient to allow fine detail to be distin-guished.6.3 Other apparatus as appropriate.6.4 Imaging
17、 or other equipment for recording observationsas required.6.5 Sufficient time and facilities to complete all applicableprocedures.7. Procedure7.1 Perform all procedures when applicable and note eachwhen appropriate. These procedures do not have to be per-formed in the order given.7.2 Document the ex
18、aminations performed, the relevantobservations, and the results.7.3 At various points in these procedures, a determinationthat a particular feature is not present or that an item is lackingin quality or comparability can indicate that the examinershould discontinue or limit the procedure(s). It is a
19、t thediscretion of the examiner to discontinue the procedure at thatpoint and report accordingly or to continue with the applicableprocedures to the extent possible. Document the reasons forsuch a decision.7.4 Determine whether the submitted questioned impres-sion(s) were produced by a dry seal devi
20、ce. If the questionedimpression was not created by a dry seal device, discontinueexamination and report accordingly.7.5 Determine whether the examination is a comparison ofquestioned impressions; a comparison of a questioned impres-sion(s) with a known impression(s); or a comparison of aquestioned i
21、mpression(s) with a dry seal device.7.6 Determine whether the submitted questioned impres-sion(s) is suitable for comparison. If it is not suitable forcomparison, discontinue the procedure and report accordingly.Factors that affect the suitability include clarity, detail, degreeof embossing or condi
22、tion of the document.NOTE 2The original is usually necessary for the examination ofindividualizing characteristics.NOTE 3Limited sufficiency and comparability of the impressions canbe a restrictive factor in an examination and its conclusions but does notnecessarily require the discontinuation of th
23、e examination.7.7 If no known specimen impressions or dry seal device(s)were submitted, go to 7.13.7.8 If a known document(s) is submitted, determine whetherthe known document(s) is suitable for examination, or com-parison, or both. If it is not suitable, discontinue the procedureand report accordin
24、gly. Factors that affect the suitabilityinclude clarity, detail, or condition of the document.7.9 If the original is not submitted, evaluate the quality ofthe best available reproduction to determine whether signifi-cant details have been reproduced with sufficient clarity forcomparison purposes and
25、 proceed to the extent possible. If thereproduction is not of sufficient clarity for comparison pur-poses, discontinue these procedures and report accordingly.7.10 If a dry seal device(s) is submitted, its condition shouldbe noted (for example, clean, dirty, worn, damaged).7.10.1 Note, when applicab
26、le, class characterristics (forexample, typeface design and size).7.10.2 Note any visible features that reproduced on theimpression.7.10.3 Prepare appropriate specimens, as needed.7.11 Determine if any of the known specimen impressionsare suitable for comparison.7.12 If none of the known specimen im
27、pressions are suit-able for comparison and no others are obtained, discontinuethese procedures and report accordingly.7.13 Conduct a side-by-side comparison of the questionedimpressions, or the questioned impression to the known im-pressions and/or to the dry seal device(s).7.13.1 Compare class char
28、acteristics (for example, impres-sion format, typeface design, other present designs and relativesizes). If different, discontinue and report accordingly.7.13.2 Compare individualizing characteristics in commonsuch as wear and damage defects, embossment variationpatterns.7.14 Evaluate similarities,
29、differences, and limitations. De-termine their significance individually and in combination.7.15 Reach a conclusion and report accordingly.8. Report8.1 Conclusion(s) or opinion(s) resulting from the proce-dures in this guide may be reached once sufficient examina-tions have been conducted. The numbe
30、r and nature of thenecessary examinations is dependent on the question at hand.8.2 The bases and reasons for the conclusion(s), opinion(s),or finding(s) should be included in the examiners documen-tation and may also appear in the report.8.3 IdentificationWhen the examination reveals no sig-nificant
31、, inexplicable differences between two or more items,and there is agreement in all individualizing characteristics, anidentification is appropriate (that is, compared impressions orcompared impression and dry seal contain substantial signifi-cant similarities; there are no significant, inexplicable
32、differ-ences; and no limitations associated with absent characteristics;and any possibility of a duplicate dry seal can be eliminated).8.4 EliminationIf significant, inexplicable differences be-tween two or more items are found at any level of the analyses,an elimination is appropriate (that is, the
33、 impressions containsubstantial significant differences). There may be similarities.8.5 Qualified OpinionsWhen there are limiting factorsand the examination reveals similarities or differences oflimited significance between two or more items, the use ofqualified opinions can be appropriate (that is,
34、 the impressionsor observed features contain limited similarities or differences;or limitations associated with absent characters, individualiz-ing characteristics, or distorted impressions are present; or acombination of these). Qualified opinions require explanationof the limiting factors.8.6 No C
35、onclusionWhen there are significant limitingfactors, and the examination reveals no significant similaritiesor significant differences, a report that no conclusion can bereached is appropriate (that is, the impressions or observedfeatures contain insufficient significant similarities and insuf-ficie
36、nt differences). This opinion requires explanation of thelimiting factors.E22860829. Keywords9.1 dry seal; dry seal impressions; forensic sciences; ques-tioned documentsASTM International takes no position respecting the validity of any patent rights asserted in connection with any item mentionedin
37、this standard. Users of this standard are expressly advised that determination of the validity of any such patent rights, and the riskof infringement of such rights, are entirely their own responsibility.This standard is subject to revision at any time by the responsible technical committee and must
38、 be reviewed every five years andif not revised, either reapproved or withdrawn. Your comments are invited either for revision of this standard or for additional standardsand should be addressed to ASTM International Headquarters. Your comments will receive careful consideration at a meeting of ther
39、esponsible technical committee, which you may attend. If you feel that your comments have not received a fair hearing you shouldmake your views known to the ASTM Committee on Standards, at the address shown below.This standard is copyrighted by ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959,United States. Individual reprints (single or multiple copies) of this standard may be obtained by contacting ASTM at the aboveaddress or at 610-832-9585 (phone), 610-832-9555 (fax), or serviceastm.org (e-mail); or through the ASTM website(www.astm.org).E2286083
