PUTRAJAYA: There were dissimilarities between the signatures of Datuk Seri Najib Razak and those that appeared in photocopied government documents relating to 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB), the High Court was told.
Forensic document examiner Tay Eue Kam, 59, testified that she had observed both the similarities and the differences of the specimens but her findings were inconclusive as she did not have the original documents.
“My opinion is inconclusive due to the existence of both similarities and differences.
“A conclusive determination would necessitate further assessments of the original document,” she said.
Tay, who was under examination-in-chief by lead counsel Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, is the 25th defence witness testifying in the former prime minister’s RM2.28bil graft trial involving 1MDB here yesterday.
The expert had analysed 31 specimen documents – including numerous bank cheques and government letters and memos – to identify whether Najib had indeed penned the signatures and notes in seven impugned documents in relation to the 1MDB trial.
All the documents, however, were reproductions, not the originals.
“It has been established that examination can be conducted on good quality reproductions but poor quality reproductions present challenges in identifying some critical handwriting figures.
“While specific details such as connection, line quality, and variations in pen pressure within the signatures in the reproductions were not explicitly deciphered, their structural formation, key features, and orientation were subject to examination and analysis,” said Tay on her findings.
Muhammad Shafee: Because it’s a reproduction, from your experience, can the signature (in the impugned documents) be lifted and pasted?
Tay: When we deal with reproductions, we cannot exclude that probability.
Muhammad Shafee: How do you prove if they are lifted or not?
Tay: It’s not an easy answer. It’s the way they do it. If they photocopy it... there will be lines erased. I have to compare it with the original.
According to the witness, it was not easy to identify fabrication without original documents to compare it against.
On Oct 30 last year, Najib was ordered by the High Court to enter his defence on four counts of using his position to obtain RM2.28bil gratification from 1MDB’s funds and 21 counts of money laundering involving the same amount.
The hearing continues before Justice Collin Lawrence Sequerah today.
