What a review checks
- preservation and documentation of traces;
- quality of photographs and scales;
- sufficiency of comparison specimens;
- completeness of feature descriptions;
- substantiation of conclusions;
- the presence of contradictions;
- exceeding the limits of specialist knowledge.
Check the preservation and suitability of the trace
The reviewer needs to know whether the object itself, a replica or photographs were examined. This difference affects access to surface relief and details. A scale in a photograph does not guarantee accuracy if its position and the geometry of the shot are unknown.
Distinguish levels of comparison
Agreement in overall dimensions and shape does not establish identity with a specific tool or object. The report must make clear which features substantiate the level of the answer and how differences were considered.
- Is there a link between the overall view and the close-up?
- Is the comparison object identified?
- Were new marks introduced during an independent attempt at comparison?
- Does the conclusion match the completeness of the submitted material?
A deficiency is noted together with its effect on the answer. A review must not turn a hypothesis about a different mechanism into an established event without performing the necessary examination of its own.
On this subject: A trace on a surface: why scaled close-ups and overall views should be photographed separately.