This article focuses on the problematic issues that arise in the process of appointing a forensic handwriting examination, where the object of study are manuscripts performed in a state of intoxication. The reliability of the conclusions will largely depend on the correct quality and sufficient quantity of comparative material. This will be possible if the initiator of the study, after careful consideration of their work, qualitatively selects comparative material for the study. The purpose of this article is to further improve the purpose of forensic handwriting examination, the object of which is the study of manuscripts made in a state of intoxication, as well as to provide practical recommendations that will allow the initiators of the study to correctly select comparative material. Of particular importance in the conduct of forensic handwriting diagnostic examinations are information from the case file relating to the subject of examination, ie in the resolution, decision or statement must be indicated: first, it is information about the person - the actual or intended executor of the manuscript; second, essential information relating to the situation, the situation in which the manuscript in question was presumably performed, and in connection with it, the possible psychological attitude or emotional state of the person writing. When the initiator of the study informs the expert of the necessary information, he should not be afraid to "impose" a certain version, because the method of expert research is based on checking all the most likely alternatives (versions and counter version) and making decisions based only on objective data. Regarding the selection of comparative material provided for research in establishing whether a person was intoxicated, there are some peculiarities in the selection of experimental samples, because we cannot bring a person in such a state to take the necessary samples because the law prohibits harm to health, humiliation and infliction of moral suffering. They can be obtained without violating the law, by changing the condition, namely, you need to dictate the text at an extremely fast pace. The expert may also make a request, although the initiator of the study provided comparative material such as free, conditionally free and experimental samples, because there may be concomitant factors that the initiator did not take into account when selecting, such as experimental samples. The expert's request should be treated responsibly because the quality of the expert's opinion may depend on how well it is executed.
Vindicatory Damages in the Child Welfare Tort Cases