1 / 19

CHART 1 QUESTIONED DOCUMENT (P 1 )

vluna
Télécharger la présentation

CHART 1 QUESTIONED DOCUMENT (P 1 )

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Case No: B1356/2001 High Court No: 2Charts and Extracts from “Forensic Report” of 8th September 2010 byPADMA BHUSHAN Prof. Dr. P. Chandra SekharanM.A., M.Sc., PhD., B.L. D.E.L. F. Inst P (London)F.F. Sc. (INDIA), F.A.F.Sc., F.I.S.C., D.A.B.F.E.Fellow, American College of Forensic Examiners

  2. CHART 1 QUESTIONED DOCUMENT (P1) The disproportionate size of letters is indicated in P1 (See arrows). All the letters in line 1 are bigger compared to all the letters in line 2

  3. CHART 2 • Improper baseline alignment shown in red line and red arrows in P1. Improper baseline is not seen in P2. • Hesitancy in stroke making (blue ink arrow) shown in C,O,D,R and numeral 0 • Retouched and reworked strokes shown in green ink arrows. Note in line 6 of P1, letter “S” was written first and then letter “A” is written over it

  4. Chart 3P2, P3, P5interspersed with P1. Illustrates P1 letters placed in disorderly heap

  5. CHART 3 Contd. [P5 B, P6, P7 along with P1

  6. CHART 3 Contd [P1, P8, P9, P1

  7. Charts 4 to 13 (next slides) were prepared by slicing ten lines from P1 and placing each line along with the corresponding line prised out from P2, P3, P5, P6, P7, P8, and P9. Chart 14 is prepared slicing out the numerals in P1 and using the specimen numerals from P4. A cursory examination of these eleven charts would reveal patent differences in design and size of the letters and the numerals in questioned and specimen writings. The differences are indicated by highlighting letters in the charts. (Some of the most obvious fundamental differences are shown using red underline). The differences are strikingly very high in letters, B, T, U, C, W, S, Y, 8, M, 1, F, O, G, E, V and 4

  8. CHART 4 : Line 1 : MARINE MIDLAND BANK Questioned Document P1 P2 P3 P5[Top] P5 [Bot] Specimen Writings P6 P7 P8 P 9

  9. CHART 5 : Line 2 : MARINE MIDLAND CTR P1 Questioned Document P2 P3 P5 Top P5 Bot Specimen Writings P6 P7 P8 P9

  10. CHART 6 : Line 3 : BUFFALO P1 Questioned Document P2 P3 P5[top] P5[bot] Specimen Writings P6 P7 P8 P9

  11. CHART 7: Line 4 : NEW YORK 14240 P1 Questioned Document P2 P3 P5 top P5 bot Specimen Writings P6 P7 P8 P9

  12. CHART 8: Line 5 : ACCOUNT NAME P1 Questioned Document P2 P3 P5[top] P5[bot] Specimen Writings P6 P7 P8 P9

  13. CHART 9: Line 6 : THILAN M WIJESINGHE P1 Questioned Document P2 P3 P5 [top] P5[bot] Specimen Writings P6 P7 V P8 P9

  14. CHART 10: Line 7 : SHANIKA A WIJESINGHE P1 Questioned Document P2 P 3 P5[top] P5 [bot] Specimen Writings P6 P7 P8 V P9

  15. CHART 11: Line 8 : MONEY MKT SAV ACCOUNT P1 Questioned Document P2 P3 P5[top] P5[bot] Specimen Writings P6 P7 P8 P9

  16. CHART 12: Line 9 : ACCOUNT NUMBER P1 Questioned Document P2 P3 P5[top] P5[bot] Specimen Writings P6 P7 P8 P9

  17. CHART 13: Line 10 : 750 - 48 282 – 6 P1 Questioned Document P2 P3 P5[top] P5[bot] Specimen Writings P6 P7 P8 P9

  18. CHART 14: COMPARISON OF NUMERALS P1 and P4 P1 Questioned Document P4 Specimen Writings

  19. Summary of FindingsThere are fundamental differences in design and execution in respect of letters B, E, G, T, U, W, Y and numerals 1, 4 and 8 between the questioned and specimen writings, while small differences are noticed in other letters. This definitely establishes that the two sets of letterings are by two different writers. This is so because the design and the execution of the above letters involved in questioned writings are consistently repeated both in the 'request standards' and 'collected standards'.The above consistency between the 'request and collected standards' again indicates that there is no attempt on the part of Thilan M Wijesinghe to disguise handlettering in his specimen writings. In fact, in handwriting comparison, even small differences, if repeated, establish clearly that two specimens are the work of two individuals despite a great number of general similarities. In this case there are many patent significant repeated differences between the specimen writings (both 'collected and request standards') and the questioned writing. The design and execution of some letters found in the specimen writings of Thilan M Wijesinghe are not found at all in the questioned writing P1.Thilan M Wijesinghe did not execute the questioned writing P1

More Related