Designation:E1658−08StandardTerminologyforExpressingConclusionsofForensicDocumentExaminers1ThisstandardisissuedunderthefixeddesignationE1658;thenumberimmediatelyfollowingthedesignationindicatestheyearoforiginaladoptionor,inthecaseofrevision,theyearoflastrevision.Anumberinparenthesesindicatestheyearoflastreapproval.Asuperscriptepsilon(´)indicatesaneditorialchangesincethelastrevisionorreapproval.1.Scope1.1Thisterminologyisintendedtoassistforensicdocumentexaminersinexpressingconclusionsoropinionsbasedontheirexaminations.1.2ThetermsinthisterminologyarebasedonthereportofacommitteeoftheQuestionedDocumentSectionoftheAmericanAcademyofForensicSciencethatwasadoptedastherecommendedguidelinesinreportsandtestimonybytheQuestionedDocumentSectionoftheAmericanAcademyofForensicScienceandtheAmericanBoardofForensicDocu-mentExaminers.22.ReferencedDocuments2.1ASTMStandards:3E444GuideforScopeofWorkofForensicDocumentExaminers3.SignificanceandUse3.1Documentexaminersbeginexaminationsfromapointofneutrality.Thereareaninfinitenumberofgradationsofopiniontowardanidentificationortowardanelimination.Itisinthosecaseswhereintheopinionislessthandefinitethatcarefulattentionisespeciallyneededinthechoiceoflanguageusedtoconveytheweightoftheevidence.3.2Commonsensedictatesthatwemustlimittheterminol-ogyweuseinexpressingourdegreesofconfidenceintheevidencetotermsthatarereadilyunderstandabletothosewhouseourservices(includinginvestigators,attorneys,judges,andjurymembers),aswellastootherdocumentexaminers.Theexpressionsusedtodifferentiatethegradationsofopinionsshouldnotbeconsideredasstronglydefined“categories”.Theseexpressionsshouldbeguidelineswithoutsharplyde-finedboundaries.3.3Whenaforensicdocumentexaminerchoosestouseoneofthetermsdefinedbelow,thelistenerorreadercanassumethatthisiswhattheexaminerintendedthetermtomean.Toavoidthepossibilityofmisinterpretationofatermwheretheexpertisnotpresenttoexplaintheguidelinesinthisstandard,theappropriatedefinition(s)couldbequotedinorappendedtoreports.3.4Theexamplesaregiv...
