EN | TR
E-ISSN: 2587-0262
Evaluation of Unidentified Signatures According to Sending Location and Document Type
PDF
Cite
Share
Request
Research Article
VOLUME: 2 ISSUE: 1
P: 38-41
April 2014

Evaluation of Unidentified Signatures According to Sending Location and Document Type

Namik Kemal Med J 2014;2(1):38-41
Bahadır Kumral 1
H. Mehmet Akın 2
H. Bülent Üner 3
G. Nurhan İnce 4
1. Namık Kemal Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Adli Tıp AD, Tekirdağ
2. T. C. Adalet Bakanlığı Adli Tıp Kurumu Başkanlığı, İstanbul
3. İstanbul Üniversitesi, Adli Tıp Enstitüsü, İstanbul
4. İstanbul Üniversitesi, İstanbul Tıp Fakültesi Halk Sağlığı A.D, İstanbul
No information available.
No information available
Received Date: 14.04.2014
Accepted Date: 22.04.2014
Publish Date: 06.10.2020
PDF
Cite
Share
Request

ABSTRACT

Aim:

The meaning of the signature is explained as “The mark which is always used identically by a person to indicate that he/she writes or approves any document” in the official dictionary of the Turkish Language Association (TDK). In forensic science documents investigations, it is met with difficulties in regard to preparing a report related to the investigations about the identification of signatures appended by creating a straight line or irrelevant figures that are not generally described as signature. With this study, it was aimed to scrutinize the signatures for which an opinion was not expressed about the identification of appended signatures in the considerations given by the Courts and Public Prosecution Offices regarding the identification of signature or signatures in the questioned documents in 2011 and sent to Physics Specialization Department of the Council of Forensic Medicine.

Materials and Methods:

The study was performed with retrospective examination of the reports (the region sending the document, type of the court, type of the document, characteristic of the document) (n=889) delivered as the signature or signatures in the questioned documents were unidentified in the files (n=11.872) sent to Physics Specialization Department of the Council of Forensic Medicine by the Courts and Public Prosecution Offices in 2011.

Results:

The opinion was expressed on original copies of 867 documents (97,5%), photocopies and carbon copies of 22 documents. Documents were as followings regarding the type of the document: 352 muniments (39,6%), 182 cheques (20,5%), 170 papers prepared as document title (19,1%), 98 contracts (11,0%), 31 statements of employment and dismissal notices (3,7%), 25 papers prepared as record (2,8%), 13 acquittances, 16 other documents (rental contract, letter of attorney, pay roll etc.). 7.5% of documents was unidentified.

Conclusion:

To contribute to solution of judicial uncertainty created by unidentified signatures despite every type of investigation and to prevention of financial and emotional losses, it is essential to develop habits of appending accurate and reliable signatures.