ASTM E2289-03

Standard Guide for Examination of Rubber Stamp Impressions

SCOPE
1.1 This guide provides procedures that should be used by forensic document examiners (E 444) for examinations and comparisons involving rubber stamps and their impressions.
1.2 These procedures are applicable whether the examination(s) and comparison(s) is of questioned and known items or of exclusively questioned items.
1.3 These procedures include evaluation of the sufficiency of the material available for examination.
1.4 The particular methods employed in a given case will depend upon the nature and sufficiency of the material available for examination.
1.5 This guide may not cover all aspects of particularly unusual or uncommon examinations.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory requirements prior to use.

General Information

• Status: Historical
• Publication Date: 09-Mar-2003
• ICS: 03.160 - Law. Administration
• Technical Committee: E30 - Forensic Sciences

Relations

• Replaced By: ASTM E2289-03e1 - Standard Guide for Examination of Rubber Stamp Impressions
• Effective Date: 10-Mar-2003

Standards Content (Sample)

NOTICE: This standard has either been superseded and replaced by a new version or withdrawn.
Contact ASTM International (www.astm.org) for the latest information
Designation:E2289–03
Standard Guide for
Examination of Rubber Stamp Impressions
This standard is issued under the fixed designation E 2289; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of
original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. A
superscript epsilon (e) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
1. Scope 3.2.2 rubber stamp, n—any of a wide variety of hand
printing devices made of many materials not necessarily
1.1 This guide provides procedures that should be used by
rubber. Syn.—hand stamp, cachet.
forensic document examiners (E 444) for examinations and
comparisons involving rubber stamps and their impressions.
4. Significance and Use
1.2 These procedures are applicable whether the examina-
4.1 The procedures outlined here are grounded in the
tion(s) and comparison(s) is of questioned and known items or
generally accepted body of knowledge and experience in the
of exclusively questioned items.
field of forensic document examination. By following these
1.3 These procedures include evaluation of the sufficiency
procedures, a forensic document examiner can reliably reach
of the material available for examination.
an opinion concerning whether two or more impressions have
1.4 The particular methods employed in a given case will
a common origin or if a rubber stamp impression was created
depend upon the nature and sufficiency of the material avail-
by a specific rubber stamp.
able for examination.
1.5 This guide may not cover all aspects of particularly
5. Interferences
unusual or uncommon examinations.
5.1 Items submitted for examination may have inherent
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the
limitations that can interfere with the procedures in this guide.
safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the
Limitations should be noted and recorded.
responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro-
5.2 Limitations can be due to submission of non-original
priate safety and health practices and determine the applica-
documents, limited quantity or comparability, or condition of
bility of regulatory requirements prior to use.
the items submitted for examination (for example, impressions
2. Referenced Documents made with over-inked or inadequately inked stamps, partially
imprinted impressions, or variations in surface texture). Such
2.1 ASTM Standards:
features are taken into account in this guide.
E 444 Descriptions of Scope of Work Relating to Forensic
2 5.3 The results of prior storage, handling, testing, or chemi-
Document Examiners
2 cal processing (for example, for latent prints) may interfere
E 1732 Terminology Relating to Forensic Science
with the ability of the examiner to see certain characteristics.
E 2195 Terminology Relating to Forensic Document Ex-
2 Whenever possible, document examinations should be con-
amination
ducted prior to any chemical processing. Items should be
3. Terminology handled appropriately to avoid compromising subsequent ex-
aminations (for example, with clean hand coverings).
3.1 Definitions—For definitions of terms in this guide, refer
5.4 Consideration should be given to the possibility that a
to Terminology E 1732 and Terminology E 2195.
rubber stamp can be manufactured which duplicates the
3.2 Definitions of Terms Specific to This Standard:
impressions of another stamp, and that various forms of
3.2.1 coincidental peripheral printing, n—printing resulting
simulations, imitations, and duplicates of rubber stamps or
from an impression of unintended printing areas, often on the
rubber stamp impressions can be generated by computer and
periphery, of a stamp. This may be due to the manufacturing
other means.
process or the stamping technique.
6. Equipment and Requirements
6.1 Appropriate light source(s) of sufficient intensity to
allow fine detail to be distinguished.
This guide is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E30 on Forensic
Sciences and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee E30.02 on Questioned
NOTE 1—Natural light, incandescent or fluorescent sources, or fiber
Documents.
optic lighting systems are generally utilized. Transmitted illumination,
Current edition approved March 10, 2003. Published April 2003.
Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 14.02. side lighting, and vertical incident lighting have been found useful.
Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States.
E2289–03
6.2 Magnification sufficient to allow fine detail to be distin- 7.10 If none of the known specimen impressions are suit-
guished. able for comparison and no others are obtained, discontinue
these procedures and report accordingly.
6.3 Astamppad,stamppadinkandadequatesmooth(bond)
7.11 Conduct a side-by-side comparison of the questioned
paper or other suitable substrate to collect specimens from the
impressions, or the questioned impression to the known im-
rubber stamp if available.
pressions and/or to the rubber stamp(s).
6.4 Other apparatus as appropriate.
7.11.1 Compare class characteristics (for example, size,
6.5 Imaging or other equipment for recording observations
type style, text, shape). If different, discontinue and report
as required.
accordingly.
6.6 Sufficient time and facilities to complete all applicable
7.11.2 Compare individualizing characteristics in common
procedures.
such as wear and damage defects, reproducible blemishes,
impression voids, improper and extraneous inking, or coinci-
7. Procedure
dental peripheral printing.
7.1 All procedures shall be performed when applicable and
7.12 Evaluate similarities, differences, and limitations. De-
noted when appropriate. These procedures need not be per-
termine their significance individually and in combination.
formed in the order given.
7.13 Reach a conclusion and report accordingly.
7.2 Examinations performed, relevant observations, and
8. Report
results shall be documented.
8.1 Conclusion(s), opinion(s), or findings resulting from the
7.3 At various points in these procedures, a determination
proced
...