Module 5 - Polygraph Testing & Forensic Document Analysis

Writing Style

Another way to individualize a piece of writing is to examine its overall style, the way the writing on the page is arranged.  The way a person organizes writing on a page is a personal habit and a distinctive part of personal writing style. A few examples of writing style characteristics that a forensic expert may look for include

• size of margins
• spacing between letters
• spacing after punctuations
• paragraph indentations
• spacing between words
• punctuation
• grammar
• spelling.

First page of the now-famous three page ransom letter found at JonBonet Ramsey’s home.
Permission pending, www.cnn.com

Some noticeable writing style features of the above document include

• large margins on both the left and right side of the page
• large paragraph indentations
• consistent spacing at the start of each sentence

Collection of Writing Samples

To individualize a forensic document sample, a collection of known writings from a suspect or suspects is necessary.  These samples are then compared to the original criminal document.  Sound easy? Unfortunately, obtaining a useful and valid writing sample from a suspect is actually much more difficult than it sounds because a suspect can easily consciously alter his or her writing. 

Some steps taken by forensic experts to obtain useful comparative writing samples and to minimize the alteration of writing samples include

• having the suspect write several pages
• using the same or similar type of paper as the suspect document
• using the same or similar writing instrument as used in the suspect document
• having the suspect use many of the words and sentences found in the suspect document
• not providing any assistance with spelling, punctuation, or with use of lower or upper case letters
• telling the suspect what to write (verbal dictation)
• having the suspect write the same verbal dictation three separate times

Did you know?

“Anything that's signed by me on EBay is a forgery and not authentic.”

- Brett Hull (NHL Hockey Player)

Continue to read a case study involving graphology...

Document Criminal Profiling

Forensic experts use handwriting samples not only to identify a suspect, but recently they have begun using handwriting samples to create criminal profiles.  A criminal profile created from a suspect handwriting sample outlines the linguistic and behavioral characteristics of the culprit. Speculation about such characteristics can assist police investigators in the search for and identification of a suspect.  To understand what a criminal profile is, read about a famous crime case from history in which a criminal profile was created from handwriting samples.

Unsolved Mystery: The Infamous 9/11 Letters

Anthrax-laced letter mailed to Tom Brokaw and the Editor of the New York Post.
Image courtesy of the FBI (www.fbi.com)

Anthrax-laced letter mailed to U.S. Senator Leahy and U.S. Senator Daschle.
Image courtesy of the FBI (www.fbi.com)a

September 11, 2001, was the day of the horrific terrorist attacks upon the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Washington D.C. On this same day, a number of anonymous threatening letters were sent to various news agencies and politicians.  The envelopes contained the disturbing handwritten messages and anthrax spores.  Five people died, and thirteen people became ill because of this exposure to anthrax.

Anthrax is an infectious microscopic bacteria called bacillus anthracis. Anthrax normally infects animals such as sheep, cattle, goats, and camels in warmer climates such as South America, Africa, and the Middle East, but it can infect humans.  The anthrax bacterium must live within a host to survive, but it has the unique ability to develop into spores, a dormant form of the bacterium. When these spores are introduced to a living organism, they become active and rapidly reproduce.

Anthrax  infections are of three types:

1. Cutaneous (skin) - About 95% of anthrax cases are cutaneous, the mildest form of anthrax. The anthrax spores in the Anthrax Letter Scare were of this variety.  The cutaneous form causes a rash and swelling; it has a 20% chance of causing death if left untreated.  When treated, the survival rate is 99%. 
2. Intestinal (eating) - The intestinal form of anthrax causes stomach pains and vomiting, causing death 25- to 60% of the time.
3. Inhalation (breathing) - The inhalation form of anthrax causes cold-like symptoms and causes death 90% of the time.

Two identical anthrax-laced letters were mailed on September 11, 2001 to  Tom Brokaw (former NBC News Anchor) and the Editor of the New York Post. Two similarly anthrax-laced letters were mailed to U.S. Senator Leahy and U.S. Senator Daschle.  In the hopes of apprehending the suspect who wrote the anthrax letters, the FBI released to the public photos of the actual letters (see above) and a detailed criminal profile of the culprit.

Continue to read the analysis of the 9/11 letters...

• Author used dashes (-) in the writing of the date 09-11-01 , whereas many people use the slash (/) to separate the day/month/year.
• Author chooses to use a formalized, more detailed version of the number one (1) instead of the simple vertical line.
• Author uses the words can not although many people spell it as one word, cannot.
• Author writes all upper case letters. In the first letter, the first word of each sentence is written in slightly larger upper case lettering. 
• The first letters of all names are slightly larger. This is apparently the author's way of indicating a word should be capitalized. For whatever reason, he or she may not be comfortable or practiced in writing in lower case lettering.

The FBI reminded the public that these same handwriting characteristics may be evident in other letters, greeting cards, or envelopes written by the suspect.

Behavioral Assessment

The forensic document experts at the FBI suggested some interesting behavioral characteristics about the suspect based on various aspects of the letters. They believed that the author of the anthrax letters

• is likely an adult male
• is likely employed and in a position requiring little contact with the public or other employees (He may work in a laboratory. He is apparently comfortable working with an extremely hazardous material. He probably has a scientific background to some extent or at least a strong interest in science.)
• has likely taken appropriate protective steps to ensure his own safety, which may include the use of an Anthrax vaccination or antibiotics
• has access to some laboratory equipment such as microscope, glassware, or centrifuge
• is familiar with the area the letters were sent from (Trenton, New Jersey) (This does not mean he currently lives in the Trenton, NJ. He is comfortable travelling in and around this locale.)
• did not select victims randomly (He made an effort to identify the correct address, including zip code, of each victim and used sufficient postage to ensure delivery. The offender deliberately selected NBC News, the New York Post, and the offices of Senator Tom Daschle and Senator Leahy. These targets are probably very important to the offender. They may have been the focus of previous expressions of contempt that may have been communicated to others.)
• is a non-confrontational person, at least in his public life (He lacks the personal skills necessary to confront others. He chooses to confront his problems long distance and not face-to-face. He may hold grudges for a long time, vowing that he will get even with them one day. There are probably other, earlier examples of this type of behavior. He may have chosen to anonymously harass other individuals or entities that he perceived as having wronged him. He may also have chosen to utilize postal service on those occasions.)
• may have become mission-oriented following the events of September 11, 2001 (He may have become more secretive and exhibited an unusual pattern of activity. He may have started taking antibiotics unexpectedly.)

Conclusion As far as the public knows, the FBI has not arrested any suspect or suspects responsible for the anthrax letter writing campaign.  The person or persons to blame for murdering five people, causing the pain and suffering of thirteen people, and causing further anxiety in a public already in a state of shock from the deaths of thousands in the 9/11 attacks still remains at large. Did you know? The FBI Forensic Document Analysis unit has experts who analyze typewriter ribbons, photocopiers, graphic arts, and plastic bags. This unit maintains a number of databases: the Anonymous Letter File, the Bank Robbery Note File, the National Fraudulent Check File, and the Watermark File.

FBI police car, iamge courtesy of the FBI Click the image to enlarge it

Continue to read about chromotography...

Chromatography

Chromatography is a scientific technique used by forensic experts to determine the type of pen used to create a suspect document. During this technique, mixtures are separated to analyze, identify, or quantify their individual components. Chromatography is used by forensic document analysis experts to separate the chemical components within ink samples to identify the source of the ink. 

The simplest way to perform this technique is the paper chromatography method that involves applying a small amount of ink to an absorbent material such as paper (such as ordinary paper or filter paper).  The molecules making up the ink are absorbed into the paper and then begin to migrate upwards and separate.  To speed this upward migration, a solution of acetone or ethanol is added. As this movement occurs, the chemical components are deposited at certain points along the paper according to their relative mass. 

This movement of ink molecules through paper creates a chromatographic pattern.  Every compound (including ink) creates a different chromatographic pattern according to the unique components.  Thus, the blue ink in two different pens might look the same, but these samples can be differentiated from one another according to the distinct chromatographic patterns they create.

The chromatographic techniques that forensic experts use are more elaborate and precise than paper chromatography; however, they are based on the same principle.  Forensic document experts use equipment that is automated and the results are transferred into a computer for analysis.  Using a computerized system speeds the process while at the same time increases the accuracy of the results.

Did you know?

Since 1968, the United States Treasury Department has maintained the International Ink Database. This database contains the chemical composition and chromatographic patterns of over 6 000 different types of ink for forensic comparison purposes. Every year this database is updated as major manufacturers of inks tag their inks or add unique trace dyes to their inks. This tagging program allows inks to be dated to the exact year they were made.

Continue to try a chromotography lab...

Chromatographic Analysis of a Mock Ransom Note
(Optional Activity)

Purpose:

To identify the pen used to write a mock ransom note.

Materials:      

• tape
• scissors
• paper towels
• ruler or tape measure
• piece of blank white paper           
• 2-3 clear glass jars or clear drinking glasses
• 3 different black pens or 3 different blue pens   
• acetone (nail polish remover) Caution do not drink or let acetone get onto your eyes ! 
                         

Procedure:    

Part 1:  Creating 3 Comparative Ink Samples

1. Cut out 3 narrow but long strips of blank white paper.  Make sure each strip of paper will fit inside each jar/glass.
2. Near the top of each paper strip write down the following in pencil:   A, B, & C.        
3. Place 1 large dot 2 cm from the bottom of each strip of paper using a different pen for each dot.  Keep track of which pen you used to create each dot.

4. Place 2 capfuls of acetone into each of the 3 jars/glasses.
5. Now place each of the 3 paper strips into the 3 jars/glasses.  The bottom 1 cm portion of the strip should be submerged in the acetone, but do not allow the ink dot to get submerged - the acetone needs to be below the ink dot.  ( To prevent the paper strip from slipping down into the acetone you can tape it to your glass.)
6. Allow the strips to remain in the jars/glasses for about 5  minutes or until the acetone has past each ink dot. You will notice each of the ink dots separating in a distinct way due to the upward absorption of acetone into the paper. 

7. Remove each of the 3 strips after the acetone has just been absorbed  past each ink dot.  Place the strips on a paper towel. These 3 samples will serve as comparison samples to your mock ransom note.
8. Pour the acetone in each of the 3 jars/glasses down a toilet.  Keep 1 of the jars/glasses for part 2 of this experiment.  If you used drinking glasses - do not drink from any of these until each has been thoroughly washed with soap and water.

Part 2: Determining Which Pen Wrote the Mock Ransom Note

1. Have a friend or relative write a mock ransom note using 1 of the 3 pens you used in part 1 of this experiment (eg. “Hand over 1 million dollars or else!!”).  Try not to look at which of the 3 pens they use – it’s your job to figure out which one they used.  Be sure to tell your friend/relative to remember which pen they used!
2. Place 3 capfuls of acetone into a jar/glass.
3. Cut a strip from mock ransom note and place one end of this strip in the jar/glass containing acetone.  The bottom 1 cm portion of the strip should be submerged in the acetone.

4. Allow the strip to remain in the jar/glass for 5-10 minutes or until the acetone has past at least the first 2-3 letters in the mock ransom note.
5. Compare this mock ransom note with your original 3 ink strips you completed in part 1 and try to identify which pen was used to write it (see 2 photos below).

Can you determine which pen was used to make this ransom note? Click here for the answer.

Did you know?

In the early 1980’s, a German publishing firm claimed to have 27 volumes of the diaries of Adolf Hitler. Forensic handwriting experts were called in to determine the authenticity of these priceless historically significant documents.  All the experts agreed that the diaries were written by the same person - however this neither proved nor disproved that they were written by  Hitler.

The truth was revealed after analysis of the paper and ink used in the dairies.  Using ultraviolet light, forensic document experts discovered that the paper contained a bleaching agent introduced in 1954 - well after Hitler’s death in 1945.  Analysis of the ink revealed that it only been on the paper for about a year - again further proof the diaries were an elaborate forgery.

Continue onward to the Lesson 3 Assignment.

Polygraph testing and forensic writing analysis are similar in that an expert interprets and gives his or her opinion about the evidence obtained through each investigative technique.  A very different feature of these two methods is that forensic writing analysis results are accepted in courts of law while polygraph test results are not accepted in courts of law.
 
The following lesson examines three crime case studies that involve polygraph testing and forensic writing analysis:

1. Nine Long Days - The Susan Smith Case (true story)
2. The Kidnapping of the Lindbergh Baby (true story)
3. Hair Salon Embezzlement (fictional)

Crime Case Study #1:  Nine Long Days - The Susan Smith Case

Susan Smith being escorted in handcuffs to court by law enforcement officials.
Image courtesy of the Union County Sheriff s Department, 2006 (Union, South Carolina, U.S.A.).

Background Information

Susan Smith had been separated from her husband, David Smith, 24, for several months. Susan had been seeing a successful businessman named Tom Findlay. Mr. Findlay had recently broke off their short relationship saying that he was not comfortable about getting involved with someone who had children. After this break up, Susan threatened suicide on several occasions.

Susan's Story

On the evening of October 24, 1994, Susan Smith, 23, frantically pounded on the front door of a house in the town of Union, South Carolina.  When the unsuspecting homeowner opened the door, Susan began sobbing and screaming that her children had been kidnapped. 
           
When police arrived, Susan told them that a middle-aged black man with a gun had forced her out of the car while she was waiting with her two children at a red light.  The suspect then drove off with her two young children:  Alex, 1, and Michael, 3.  The alleged kidnapping occurred near John D. Long Lake, and an extensive search of the area was completed .

Police Become Suspicious

When police found nothing during their search, they began questioning Susan Smith more extensively.  Questioned for 6 hours, Ms Smith was asked to recount the ordeal numerous times. Investigators soon became concerned about inconsistencies in her story. The first police investigator to become highly suspicious of Susan Smith was a police sketch artist who interviewed her the night her children disappeared. He found that her initial physical descriptions of the suspect were vague, but they became increasingly detailed as the interview continued. This behavior is typical of someone who is  making up a visual description as they go along.   A truthful person tends to give a very detailed physical description in the beginning of an interview and the description becomes vague near the end of the interview.
           
Three days after the incident, David and Susan Smith were given separate polygraph tests.  Polygraph testing indicated that David did not know anything about the disappearance of his children. However, Susan' s test results were inconclusive and indicated she was being deceptive.  Over a series of nine days, Susan was given a polygraph test after every police interview, and the results were "inconclusive". 
           
Susan continued to deny any involvement in the disappearance of her children. A suspicious aspect to her story was that she said the kidnapper approached her car at a red light on Monarch Mills Road. Susan stated she was the only car stopped at this intersection.  However, this was impossible because at night the lights at this intersection were programmed to change colour only when more than one car was waiting to proceed.  When confronted with this, Susan changed her story, saying that the abduction occurred at a different intersection more than two miles from the original location. When she changed her story, an FBI official accused Susan of killing her children. Instead of confessing, Susan became angry and walked out of the interview. Police needed a new approach to get the truth because they did not want Susan to refuse further interviews. Some were concerned that she may commit suicide before the truth was determined.

The Set-Up

Police began a new approach with Susan by bringing in Pete Logan, an FBI agent with 30 years experience. Agent Logan was a soft-spoken,  grandfatherly-type of person, a trained polygraphist.  During his interviews with Susan, he gently managed to gain her trust. After every long interview, he asked Susan, Do you know where your children are? Susan continued to insist that she did not, and each time the polygraph test results revealed she was likely not telling the truth.
           
On November 3, 1995, nine days after the disappearance of Alex and Michael, Susan Smith and her ex-husband David made several national television appearances in the morning pleading for the safe return of their missing children. That afternoon, Susan again met with Agent Logan where she repeated that she was mistaken about being at the Monarch Mills intersection.  She stated that the kidnapping definitely occurred at the Carlisle intersection. Agent Logan then said he had to leave Susan to answer a phone call. There was no phone call -- this was part of the interrogation plan. 
           
Sheriff Tom Wells, the initial investigating officer before FBI involvement, then went to talk to Susan. Sheriff Wells had known Susan Smith for many years, and he told her that the kidnapping could nothave happened at the Carlisle intersection. He told Susan undercover police officers were at that site on the night in question conducting a drug investigation, and they had witnessed nothing out of the ordinary that night.  This was a carefully fabricated lie; there were no police officers at Carlisle that night. Sheriff Wells then asked her to pray with him ending his prayer with, Lord, we know that all things will be revealed to us in time. He then looked at her and said, It is time, Susan.   Susan then admitted she was depressed, lonely, and wanted to kill both herself and her children.  She stated that she placed her car in neutral at a boat ramp on John D. Long Lake and at the last minute she had got out of the car and left her children to drown as the vehicle rolled into the lake.

Conclusion

A team of divers confirmed this story. The car had drifted more than 30 metres from shore, further than police suspected.  The vehicle was found upside down, resting on the lake bottom.  Alex and Michael were found inside the car, still strapped into their seats. Susan's wedding album and a breakup letter from Susan' s ex-boyfriend, Tom Findlay, were also found in the car.
           
On July 25th, 1995, Susan Smith was found guilty and sentenced to thirty years to life in prison. She will be eligible for parole in 2025. Polygraph testing played a pivotal role in obtaining a full confession from the culprit responsible for killing Alex and Michael Smith. 

Continue to read the next case study...

Nine Long Days - The Susan Smith Case

Susan Smith being escorted in handcuffs to court by law enforcement officials.
Image courtesy of the Union County Sheriff s Department, 2006 (Union, South Carolina, U.S.A.).

Background Information

Susan Smith had been separated from her husband, David Smith, 24, for several months. Susan had been seeing a successful businessman named Tom Findlay. Mr. Findlay had recently broke off their short relationship saying that he was not comfortable about getting involved with someone who had children. After this break up, Susan threatened suicide on several occasions.

Susan's Story

On the evening of October 24, 1994, Susan Smith, 23, frantically pounded on the front door of a house in the town of Union, South Carolina. When the unsuspecting homeowner opened the door, Susan began sobbing and screaming that her children had been kidnapped.

When police arrived, Susan told them that a middle-aged black man with a gun had forced her out of the car while she was waiting with her two children at a red light. The suspect then drove off with her two young children: Alex, 1, and Michael, 3. The alleged kidnapping occurred near John D. Long Lake, and an extensive search of the area was completed .

Police Become Suspicious

When police found nothing during their search, they began questioning Susan Smith more extensively. Questioned for 6 hours, Ms Smith was asked to recount the ordeal numerous times. Investigators soon became concerned about inconsistencies in her story. The first police investigator to become highly suspicious of Susan Smith was a police sketch artist who interviewed her the night her children disappeared. He found that her initial physical descriptions of the suspect were vague, but they became increasingly detailed as the interview continued. This behavior is typical of someone who is making up a visual description as they go along. A truthful person tends to give a very detailed physical description in the beginning of an interview and the description becomes vague near the end of the interview.

Three days after the incident, David and Susan Smith were given separate polygraph tests. Polygraph testing indicated that David did not know anything about the disappearance of his children. However, Susan s test results were inconclusive and indicated she was being deceptive. Over a series of nine days, Susan was given a polygraph test after every police interview, and the results were always inconclusive .

Susan continued to deny any involvement in the disappearance of her children. A suspicious aspect to her story was that she said the kidnapper approached her car at a red light on Monarch Mills Road. Susan stated she was the only car stopped at this intersection. However, this was impossible because at night the lights at this intersection were programmed to change colour only when more than one car was waiting to proceed. When confronted with this, Susan changed her story, saying that the abduction occurred at a different intersection more than two miles from the original location. When she changed her story, an FBI official accused Susan of killing her children. Instead of confessing, Susan became angry and walked out of the interview. Police needed a new approach to get the truth because they did not want Susan to refuse further interviews. Some were concerned that she may commit suicide before the truth was determined.

The Set-Up

Police began a new approach with Susan by bringing in Pete Logan, an FBI agent with 30 years experience. Agent Logan was a soft-spoken, grandfatherly-type of person, a trained polygraphist. During his interviews with Susan, he gently managed to gain her trust. After every long interview, he asked Susan, Do you know where your children are? Susan continued to insist that she did not, and each time the polygraph test results revealed she was likely not telling the truth.

On November 3, 1995, nine days after the disappearance of Alex and Michael, Susan Smith and her ex-husband David made several national television appearances in the morning pleading for the safe return of their missing children. That afternoon, Susan again met with Agent Logan where she repeated that she was mistaken about being at the Monarch Mills intersection. She stated that the kidnapping definitely occurred at the Carlisle intersection. Agent Logan then said he had to leave Susan to answer a phone call. There was no phone call -- this was part of the interrogation plan.

Sheriff Tom Wells, the initial investigating officer before FBI involvement, then went to talk to Susan. Sheriff Wells had known Susan Smith for many years, and he told her that the kidnapping could nothave happened at the Carlisle intersection. He told Susan undercover police officers were at that site on the night in question conducting a drug investigation, and they had witnessed nothing out of the ordinary that night. This was a carefully fabricated lie; there were no police officers at Carlisle that night. Sheriff Wells then asked her to pray with him ending his prayer with, Lord, we know that all things will be revealed to us in time. He then looked at her and said, It is time, Susan. Susan then admitted she was depressed, lonely, and wanted to kill both herself and her children. She stated that she placed her car in neutral at a boat ramp on John D. Long Lake and at the last minute she had got out of the car and left her children to drown as the vehicle rolled into the lake.

Conclusion

A team of divers confirmed this story. The car had drifted more than 30 metres from shore, further than police suspected. The vehicle was found upside down, resting on the lake bottom. Alex and Michael were found inside the car, still strapped into their seats. Susan's wedding album and a breakup letter from Susan s ex-boyfriend, Tom Findlay, were also found in the car.

On July 25th, 1995, Susan Smith was found guilty and sentenced to thirty years to life in prison. She will be eligible for parole in 2025. Polygraph testing played a pivotal role in obtaining a full confession from the culprit responsible for killing Alex and Michael Smith.

Continue to read the next case study...

 Kidnapping of the Lindbergh Baby

One of the most famous ransom notes in history, left behind by the kidnapper of the young son of Charles Lindbergh, a famous American aviator. Image courtesy of Ronelle Delmont, 2006.

Background Information

In 1927, Charles Lindbergh gained international fame as the first pilot to fly non-stop across the Atlantic Ocean alone.  He flew from New York to Paris in 33.5 hours in a single-engine airplane named The Spirit of St. Louis. 

Charles Lindbergh, Jr., the 20-month-old son of the famous aviator was kidnapped around 9:00 p.m. on March 1, 1932, from his nursery on the second floor of the Lindbergh estate in New Jersey.

The Letters

A search of the house was immediately completed after his disappearance was discovered. A ransom note demanding $50 000.00 was found by a window in the nursery.  When police were called to the scene, they discovered that a large wooden ladder that did not belong to the Lindbergh' s was used to gain access to the baby' s room.  The ladder had broken either during the abduction or after the abduction; it was found in two pieces.

A total of 13 handwritten ransom notes were sent to Charles Lindbergh over a series of months.  Some of the notes increased the ransom demand; others outlined the details and location for pick up of the ransom money. Examination of the ransom notes by various FBI handwriting experts resulted in the unanimous opinion that all the notes were written by the same person.  Also, experts stated they thought the writer was likely of German descent. 

The Body is Found

In April 1932, after $50 000.00 in gold certificates was given to the kidnapper by a friend of Charles Lindbergh, the kidnapper revealed that the baby was on a boat on Martha' s Vineyard. However, he was not found, and this was considered to be a fabrication.

In May 1932, the body of the kidnapped baby was found accidently by a local man.  The baby' s partly buried and badly decomposed body was found about four miles from his home.  Examination of the body showed that he had been dead for about two months and the cause of death was a blow to the head.

The Conclusion

Two years after the kidnapping, a gas station attendant suspicious of a man who paid for his gas using a ten-dollar gold certificate wrote down his license plate number and gave it to police.  The license plate number was traced to Bruno Hauptmann from Bronx, New York. Hauptmann was 35 years old and born in Germany. He occasionally worked as a carpenter, he had a criminal record for robbery, and he had spent time in prison. A short time after the kidnapping, Hauptmann began investing heavily in the stock market and quit working.

When police confronted Bruno Hauptmann and searched him, they found a twenty-dollar gold certificate in his wallet and more than $13,000 in gold certificates were found hidden in his garage.

After his arrest, FBI writing analysis experts compared samples of Hauptmann's handwriting to the ransom notes received by the Lindbergh family.  Many similarities resulted in the conclusion that Hauptmann wrote the ransom notes.  The photo below illustrates a similarity that was found:

Both photos above courtesy of the FBI. www.fbi.gov/libref/historic/famcases/lindber/lindbernew.htm

This handwriting proof along with other evidence (such as tool marks on the ladder matching the suspect''s tools, wood from ladder matching wood in flooring of suspect' s home, phone number and address of Lindbergh' s friend found inside the suspect' s closet) resulted in a jury finding Hauptmann guilty of the kidnapping and murder of young Charles Hauptmann, Jr..  He was sentenced to death and in April of 1936 Bruno Hauptmann was electrocuted.

Continue to read the next case study...

Hair Salon Embezzlement Mystery

Janet Milton, owner of a successful hair salon called Janet' s Hair Boutique, contacts the local police after she notices $5000.00 missing from her business account. Ms Milton turns over to police a withdrawal slip for $5000.00 upon which she says her signature had been forged (sample evidence A).  Janet denies completing this withdrawal and suspects one of her three managers because each is familiar with her business bank account.

Janet Milton provides the police with three old deposit slips, each of which has been filled out by her managers: 

• Sasha Bennett (sample evidence B)
• Carol Downing (sample evidence C)
• Christine Bright (sample evidence D)

Each manager had been responsible for one of these deposits and, therefore, the handwriting on each deposit slip could be used for comparison purposes. Investigators ask Janet to provide them with a copy of an old withdrawal slip with her handwriting on it as well (sample evidence E). 

Continue to the Lesson 4 Assignment..