The examinations to be carried out following your applications to us are conducted by experienced experts and are prepared entirely in accordance with the law, pursuant to Articles 67 of the CMK and 293 of the HMK.
Article 67/6 of the CMK states: “The Public Prosecutor, the complainant, their attorney, the suspect or the accused, their defense counsel or legal representative may obtain a scientific opinion from an expert regarding the subject matter of the trial, for consideration in the preparation of an expert report, or about the expert report itself.”
Article 293/1 of the HMK states: “The parties may obtain a scientific opinion from an expert regarding the subject matter of the case.”
You may apply to us as a natural or legal person to request an examination, receive consultancy services, and obtain an Opinion Report (Expert Report) within the scope of Articles 293 of the HMK and 67 of the CMK.
All experts within AKTİF KRİMİNAL are certified and have at least 30 years of experience. The Opinion Reports prepared by us can be used before all judicial authorities. Furthermore, there is no highest or final authority in this field. According to established precedents of the Court of Cassation, the Council of Forensic Medicine is neither the final nor the supreme authority, nor does it hold superiority over other expert reports.
Article 67 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CMK) No. 5271 and Article 293 of the Code of Civil Procedure (HMK) No. 6100 set out the conditions under which expert witness services may be sought. According to CMK Article 67 and HMK Article 293, judges—and in urgent cases, prosecutors—may request an expert’s examination.
In cases that require special or technical knowledge, consulting an expert’s opinion imposes heavy and significant responsibilities on the expert to exercise their expertise in line with scientific data, impartially, and in accordance with justice.
As long as “writing,” which is as important a tool of communication as speech, exists, it seems unlikely that document-related forgeries can be entirely avoided. This fact highlights the importance of “DOCUMENT EXAMINATION” expertise in the field of forgery. At this point, it is useful to distinguish between institutional (public) and private expert witness services. In Turkey, there are three different state-affiliated forensic laboratories operating institutionally. These laboratories, within the framework defined by law and their own regulations and directives, conduct impartial, scientifically based examinations on evidence sent by courts, prosecutors, and law enforcement, and return their expert reports together with the evidence to the requesting authority.
When it comes to private expertise, we see that this field has only become widespread in recent years in our country. At this stage, the question may arise: “Why choose private experts when forensic laboratories already exist?”
The most important answer to this question is that, due to their regulations and directives, state forensic laboratories cannot be approached directly by individuals for examinations.
Another point is that a person intending to file a lawsuit, in a matter where forgery is suspected, may first seek a preliminary examination from a private expert. Based on the result of this preliminary examination, the individual may form a positive opinion on their likelihood of winning the case and then proceed to file the lawsuit…
In handwriting and signature examinations, experts attempt to carry out their analysis using various physical techniques based on scientific methods. People often think that handwriting-signature examinations are similar to the examination of other physical evidence. They assume that even a single stroke can be identified as belonging to a specific individual. What matters for the expert, however, is the availability of a sufficient amount of comparative writing samples. With an adequate number of genuine samples (such as petitions, notary records, identity documents, etc.) and comparison samples taken in the presence of the examiner, the material under examination is compared using a macroscope with sufficient magnification and document examination devices, and a conclusion is reached.
Such documents can be examined for handwriting and signatures; however, it should be remembered that for a reliable examination, it is more appropriate to analyze original documents containing handwriting and signatures written with ink pens.
If the original document cannot be obtained, a limited examination may still be possible. The fact that some features of handwriting and signatures written with ink pens (such as pen pressure, stroke direction, etc.) are not reflected in these types of documents is an accepted reality in the global forensic document examination community. By “limited examination,” it is meant that certain criteria—like pen pressure and stroke direction—are lost during the reproduction of photocopies, faxes, printer outputs, or screenshots. However, handwriting and signatures on carbon copy documents contain more detail compared to those on other document types.
Since handwriting generally covers larger areas than signatures, the possibility of handwriting samples on photocopies, faxes, carbon copies, printer outputs, or screenshots being transferred or transplanted onto the document exists but is quite low. For this reason, handwriting analysis can yield results on such documents if the image quality is sufficient. For signatures on these types of documents, the situation is slightly different. As signatures generally occupy smaller areas, the possibility of their being transferred or transplanted onto the examined document is higher. The forensic document examiner always considers this possibility when conducting the analysis.
The term "fulaj mark" refers to the indentation marks that appear on underlying pages as a result of pressure applied with a pen. Detection of fulaj marks is most commonly encountered in cases of suicide and threats. Factors affecting the depth of these impressions include the amount of pressure applied by the individual (which varies from person to person), the hardness of the writing surface, the humidity level of the document, and the thickness of the paper. Fulaj marks can be detected using electrostatic devices by placing a gelatin-like sheet over the document and sprinkling dry toner powder, or by using horizontal light sources applied through document examination devices or video spectral comparators within the means of experts.
Forensic document examiners reach positive or negative conclusions based on the findings obtained from the comparison of the questioned handwriting and signature samples with the known ones. However, in handwriting and signature examinations, not only the common characteristic features but also the qualitative aspects of the writing and signatures are of great importance. Therefore, reaching a conclusion in handwriting and signature examinations is quite different from fingerprint analysis, where a certain number of identical characteristics can directly establish identity. Differences carry significant weight in handwriting and signature examinations. Since handwriting consists of a limited set of letter forms and signatures are essentially small samples of handwriting, similarities may often appear in the available data. For this reason, even a single small difference detected in handwriting may be sufficient evidence to conclude that the questioned handwriting was not produced by the same individual as the comparison sample.
Handwriting and signature examinations are inherently subjective because a person’s writing or signature can change due to environmental conditions, the writing surface, the instrument used (pen type, chalk, brush, etc.), illness, medication, and other factors. Unlike machine-produced outputs such as print, handwriting and signatures rarely show exact, identical matches between instances by the same individual. Considering these factors, handwriting and signature examinations rely heavily on the experience and expertise of the examiner. Therefore, results in handwriting and signature analysis are expressed according to internationally accepted opinion scales.
Graphology is the interpretation of a person’s emotions and behaviors—such as joy, sadness, fear, anxiety, panic, thoughts, and tendencies—reflected in their handwriting, signature, or shapes they draw, influenced by positive or negative events they encounter in daily life. Forensic handwriting and signature examination, on the other hand, is the scientific analysis of handwriting and signatures found on a document using appropriate methods and devices to determine whether they belong to a specific individual.
Forgery is creating a non-existent document or making alterations to an existing genuine document and using that document to obtain a benefit. In short: any paperwork prepared unlawfully to secure an unjust advantage, and deception or intent to gain benefit by making changes to an existing document, fall within the scope of forgery. In legal terms, it is described as a document used as evidence being fabricated. For the crime of forgery to be constituted, the document must have been intentionally fabricated, be of a nature that harms third parties or institutions, and have resulted in unjust gain. The purpose of determining whether a document is forged or genuine varies depending on the aim of the investigation and the type of the document in question.
On all kinds of documents we perform the following:
a. Conduct handwriting and signature examinations and provide an expert opinion as to which person produced them.
b. Examine typewriter and printer outputs to determine which type of typewriter or printer produced the text.
c. Determine whether the document has been altered; if alterations are present, prepare a report specifying where and how the tampering occurred.
d. Detect whether fulaj (indentation) marks are present on the document; if present, visualize them to inform the course of the case.
e. Compare seals and stamp impressions on documents with original impressions to determine whether they are identical.
f. Use visible near-infrared and fluorescent light sources on ink-pen writings to detect whether additions or insertions were made with a different type of pen.
g. Determine whether photographs, stamps, signatures, holograms, and similar elements on documents are original or have been transferred.
h. Detect whether suspected hidden (indiscernible) writings exist on original documents.
ı. Determine which person’s handwriting or signature a photocopy contains (if writing or signature was transferred/duplicated onto another document and then photocopied, an opinion can be given; however, obtaining the original document is recommended).
i. Verify whether photocopies or duplicate booklets (koçan) match the original document.
j. Determine whether writings on documents were written in a single instance or in multiple instances.
k. Identify and report the document as a whole or the portion that has been forged.
(Note: In English list I expanded and ordered items for clarity and included equivalent points — the original Turkish items a–i map to these findings; if you prefer exact one-to-one numbering or wording adjustments, I can match them precisely.)
They are generally used to confer an official character to documents. Forged seal impressions may be found on passports, bank documents, import/export papers, birth certificates, and similar documents. Official seals are manufactured for specific purposes using materials such as rubber (plastic), photopolymer, or metal. Therefore, the number of seals used within institutions is usually small and the authority to use them is typically limited to one or a few persons. Examination methods for seal and stamp impressions include visual and microscopic inspection of the material, examination under filtered light sources, and overlaying (superimposing) the photographic impressions obtained.
The examination of computer printouts, fax, and photocopy machine outputs is generally carried out by comparing them with control samples taken from the suspected machine.
The main challenge in such examinations is determining the brand and model of the machine that produced the document. These devices, which mechanically generate text, leave behind class characteristics (e.g., whether it is inkjet, laser, or dot-matrix) on the document. In addition, characteristic marks specific to the machine (such as drum marks) can also be detected on the document.
Some of these marks are permanent, while others are temporary and may disappear if the machine is cleaned or a part is replaced. Therefore, if the control document is obtained long after the questioned document was produced, there is a higher chance that these marks will no longer be present.
A forensic document examiner first identifies the type of machine used (inkjet printer, laser printer, photocopier, typewriter, fax, etc.). Then, by comparing the questioned document with control samples, they determine whether the characteristic features match. If similarities are found, it can be concluded that the questioned document may have been produced by the suspected machine.
However, it is very difficult to determine the exact machine used solely from the questioned document itself. This is because many printers and photocopiers produced today, even within the same brand and series, can leave very similar individual and characteristic traces. For this reason, comparative examinations with control samples generally provide more reliable results.
The most common questions that forensic document examination experts encounter regarding ink on a document can be listed as follows:
-
Were the suspicious writings on a single document, or if there are two different documents, written with the same ink pen?
-
Was the same ink pen used in different sections of the document (date, content, numerical amount, written amount, “pay to” section, signature, etc.)?
-
What is the age of the ink (writing) in two different parts of the document?
-
In the section suspected to have been added later with the same pen, is the ink of the same age as the original writing?
-
What is the origin of the pen ink used in the suspicious writing?
Unfortunately, today’s technology cannot fully answer all of these questions. Two inks that look very similar to the naked eye may in fact have different chemical and physical properties. Although such examinations can be carried out by forensic experts using certain physical or chemical methods, obtaining precise information about which pen wrote the suspicious text or where and when the ink was produced is highly unlikely.
Ink examinations are generally divided into two categories: non-destructive methods and destructive methods.
-
Non-destructive methods include physical inspections carried out visually or with optical instruments.
-
Destructive methods involve chemically analyzing ink samples physically removed from the document.
Non-destructive ink analyses are among the oldest methods accepted worldwide. In Türkiye, destructive ink examinations can only be conducted with special authorization from judicial authorities.
Ink analysis offers wide opportunities for identifying forgeries on documents. However, the absence of ink differences on a document does not necessarily mean it was created all at once; similarly, the presence of multiple inks does not always prove forgery.
Requests for ink age determination usually arise when documents are suspected of having been altered (for example, changing the digit “1” into “4,” adding an extra “0” to increase debt amounts, or altering a “3” into an “8” to delay payment dates). Such alterations, when made with the same pen, often lead to the question: “Can the age of the inks be determined?”
Today, ink dating can only be performed using chemical methods. However:
-
In Türkiye, this requires special judicial approval.
-
Even then, determining the exact date when the ink was applied to the document is not possible.
Therefore, the requester should be aware that ink dating may not yield the definitive answer they seek. Still, additional physical evidence related to the suspected alteration may exist, and only trained forensic experts can detect these clues — a fact that should never be overlooked.
Deceptive (misleading and persuasive) capability is generally evaluated and reported by expert witnesses in two (2) main areas:
-
Whether the forgery of the document as a whole is immediately noticeable at first glance by the relevant authorities or individuals.
If an official or relevant person can instantly recognize that a document such as an identity card, driver’s license, passport, medical report, banknote, etc., is completely forged, then the document is considered not to have deceptive capability. If, however, they cannot recognize the forgery at first glance, then the document does have deceptive capability, as assessed by the expert.
Example: A person who attempts to obtain credit from a bank with a colored photocopy of an identity card, establish a company, get this photocopy notarized, apply for a checkbook, purchase property and obtain a title deed, buy a vehicle and obtain a registration certificate, or pass a driver’s license check by traffic officers — if in these situations the forgery is not immediately noticed, then the document has deceptive capability. If the forgery is instantly recognized, then it lacks deceptive capability. -
Whether alterations (partial forgery) on the document are immediately noticeable at first glance.
This includes modifications on the document such as changes to text, signatures, photos, or dates.
Example: On a genuine identity card, if a photo replacement or changes to personal information (name, surname, date of birth, place of registration, etc.) are not detected at first glance by authorities or relevant persons, the forgery has deceptive capability. If they are immediately noticed, then it does not.
The main criterion in determining the degree of deceptive capability is whether the forgery attracts the attention of the relevant person or authority at first glance.
The relevant and authorized person is typically someone who works in an executive unit related to their profession, frequently processes original documents, and whose vision, perception, skills, and abilities make them highly sensitive to such materials.
This service involves reconstructing an event through 3D animation based on the findings and information obtained from the case file, primarily examined by crime scene investigators as well as video, audio, ballistics, fingerprint, HTS (call detail records), and forensic medicine experts. IT specialists use these findings to recreate the event exactly as it occurred—without altering the time, place, individuals, or circumstances.
3D animations are generally presented digitally as an addition to crime scene investigation or video analysis reports. They play a crucial role in judicial processes by providing a clearer and more understandable representation of the incident.
In particular, in cases where multiple individuals are involved or when video recordings are unclear or difficult to interpret, the 3D animation method makes all details comprehensible in a clear and precise manner.