1MDB Trial: Handwriting Expert Says Najib's Signatures Inconclusive Without Originals

Barnama

05-05-2025

PUTRAJAYA, May 5 (Bernama) -- A forensic document examiner told the High Court here today that there were both similarities and dissimilarities in Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak's purported signatures on several 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB)-related documents, rendering her findings inconclusive.
Tay Eue Kam, a handwriting expert from PHA Handwriting Analysis Sdn Bhd, said she could not determine the authenticity of the signatures as she had only received photocopied documents from Messrs Shafee & Co for analysis.
'When dealing with reproductions, we cannot exclude the probability of signatures being copied and pasted (lifted and pasted). They need to be compared with the original copies.
'All of the documents received were reproductions, and (while) it has been established that examinations can be conducted on reproductions of good quality, poor quality reproductions present challenges in identifying some critical handwriting figures,' said the 26th defence witness.
The 59-year-old said this during examination-in-chief by Najib's counsel Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah at the former premier's trial for the alleged misappropriation of RM2.3 billion in 1MDB funds.
The expert had analysed 31 specimen documents, including numerous bank cheques and government letters and memorandums to identify whether Najib had indeed written the signatures and notes in seven impugned documents in relation to the 1MDB trial.
Tay said 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.
'However, I acknowledged that reproduction documents can occasionally be fabricated and I have duly considered these possibilities in my analysis,' she said.
On Oct 30 last year, Judge Datuk Collin Lawrence Sequerah ordered Najib to enter his defence, after ruling that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against him.