Southworth has been using date codes on most of our watermarked grades since
at least 1941. The date code is a small straight line placed either over or under
a letter or number in the watermark. The date code is changed after the last time
the dandy roll (the device used to embed the watermark before the paper is totally
formed) is run in the calendar year. The dandy is sent out and the old code is
removed and the new code mark is carefully soldered in place. The reason for the
date code is so that Southworth can tell what year the paper was made.
Southworth has received numerous calls asking if we can determine when a particular
sheet of our paper was made. On approximately half of the calls we receive, we
identify that the paper was made after the document states it was written.
One of the calls that Southworth received was from Mr. Marvin H. Dawson, a Forensic
Document Examiner with Dawson Document Laboratory, L.L.C. Mr. Dawson wrote the
following article explaining first hand how important a date-coded watermark can
be.
Dating a Document through Watermarks
By: Marvin H. Dawson
One of the questions a forensic document examiner is asked to solve many times
is the age or common origin of two or more sheets of paper. For example, there
are times when one party in a probate dispute will allege a "page" was inserted
in a Will thereby changing the distribution of the estate to benefit an individual
"the family knows the decedent despised." Other times several family members may
submit a different Will to probate, each Will bearing a different date. For the
average examiner paper analysis alone does not resolve the question. The age or
common origin of the document(s) may be determined through typewriting, printing,
handwriting or even ink analysis; however, many times the problem may be quickly
solved if a watermark is noted on the documents(s). If there is a date mark on
the watermark, the case could move even more quickly.
Watermarks frequently establish the authenticity or spuriousness of the questioned
document(s), the genuineness of which may depend on the date of the watermark
or more importantly the date mark on the watermark. The following case history
demonstrates how a date mark on a watermark alone can expose a fraudulent document.
In 2001 a case was submitted to Dawson's Document Laboratory, L.L.C. in Spartanburg,
South Carolina alleging that "page 3" of a Will was fraudulent and was not prepared
at the same times page 1, 2, and 4 (the signature page) was executed. The decedent's
signature was on pages 3 & 4. An attorney's secretary testified she had prepared
the Will, witnessed each page and personally witnessed the decedent sign page
3 and 4 at the same time. According to the witness, all pages were executed at
the same time. Technically the page 3 signature was not necessary for the Will.
An elderly lady had passed away leaving two natural children and an adopted son.
Most of the family "recalled" the decedent leaving each child 1/3 of the Estate.
The Will submitted to probate left 90% to the daughter, 10% to a son and nothing
to an adopted son. An examination of the Will was conducted at the County Probate
Court and included a microscopic examination, an examination with VSC-4 instrumentation
to note any ink differences and a light box to identify and photograph watermarks.
The Will was dated 1998. All pages bore a Southworth dated watermark. Based upon
Southworth Paper records, pages 1, 2 & 4 were manufactured in 1997; the watermark
on page 3 dated year 2000. The document was submitted for probate in 2001. The
forensic document examiner testified the decedents signature on page 3 was a simulation
(forgery), the inks used for page 3 margin initials and decedents signature were
different from pages 1, 2 & 4; however, all of this was opinion testimony.
The real strike for justice in this case was an undisputed fact from the records
of Southworth, the watermark date proving that a sheet of paper was not in existence
when the Will was originally executed, thereby page 3 had been inserted at a later
date for the purpose of gain. The court threw out the fraudulent Will and probated
the decedents Estate under appropriate statue.
Mr. Marvin H. Dawson has over 25 years of experience in the Forensic Document
field. He has had extensive training from the FBI and Secret Service. He has contributed
testimony on numerous occasions as an expert in this area for the Federal Courts,
State Courts, Local Courts, Court Martial Proceedings and State Boards and Regulatory
Proceedings. In addition to being a Forensic Document Examiner, he is also a Forensic
Photographer.
