Adverse media focus propagating perceptions quite contrary to reality about the ‘Calibri font’ is meant to discredit the allegations of alleged forgery pertaining to trust deeds in which Maryam Nawaz figures prominently. This concerted ‘whitewash’ campaign implies that Robert Radley, the forensic expert who analysed the trust deeds, accepted in cross-examination that while the font came into commercial use in 2007, it was accessible two years before that. Other than the normal paid hacks, even credible analysts are being used to propagate a coloured version of the witnesses’ statements, engaged in portraying fake news as real and real news as fake. This deliberate misreporting has swayed a great many people who were once convinced that the documents were forged and that Maryam had obviously committed perjury. Goebbels would have been proud! The video-link testimony and cross-examination of the two witnesses, the prosecution and investigation team by the two defence counsels took place in the premises of the Pakistan High Commission London on February 22, 2018. The first Prosecution Witness (PW), Robert Radley is a forensic expert and belongs to the Radley Forensic Document Laboratory. Established over five decades ago, this practice is one the longest existing private independent laboratories in the UK. They deal exclusively in the forensic examination of signatures, handwriting and the general forensic examination of documents. It deals with the examination of questioned documents for a variety of courts in the UK and abroad, both civil and criminal. Not an ordinary run-of-the mill institution, it has to be extra careful about its credibility. Areas of examination include signature examination to determine authenticity, handwriting identification, identification of ESDA impressions (electrostatic or indented writing impressions on documents from other documents), sequence determination of writing and impressions, non-destructive differentiation of inks, printing and typewriting comparisons to determine common sources, determination of common sources of photocopies, identification of alterations, page substitution, deciphering of erasures and obliterations, determination of sequence of writings, dating of documents and paper examination. Radley Laboratory also assesses reports from other experts, commenting, supplementing and, if necessary, criticising the same so that clients can fully appreciate the significance of the evidence presented. Why would a prototype version of a font be used just for one set of documents? Radley deposed that he received a copy of a set of two trust deeds from ‘Quist Solicitors’ London, one pertained to Neilson & Nescol (BVI Companies) owning Avenfield properties, whereas the other pertained to Coomber (BVI Company) comprising of three pages each. The forensic examination of the two trust deeds revealed that pages two and three of the two deeds were identical. Moreover, the deeds clipped with eyelets appeared to have been removed with some instrument and re-locked again. Furthermore, the two trust deeds also bore multiple staple pin holes, however the number of staple holes on the top pages of the two deeds and below appended pages were different, leading to the finding that the subsequent pages were substituted. Radley further deposed that he could also determine the relative age of staple holes on the top pages and subsequent pages of the two deeds if the court allowed him to unlock the eyelets. The notarisation dates on both the deeds were found tampered with and the date digits of 2006 were actually from 2004, which was tampered with to turn into 2006. He was sent another set of two deeds, subsequently comprising of fine coloured copies (provided by the JIT, submitted by the accused while their appearance before JIT). The Coomber deed was different from the previous one whereas the Neilson/Nescol deed was identical to it. Cross-examined, Radley stated that before 2007 that there was no commercial use of the Calibri font, and that it would be impossible for anyone to download it in 2005 without a particular ‘software engine’ which could only be operated by IT experts. Even then, it would take quite some time to do this. Why should it be used — especially for one particular trust deed? Why not for others? The defence cross-examined Radley about the Calibri font (a Windows Vista program). The PW explained that the beta version (prototype) of software was introduced in 2005, purely for trial testing by restricting it only to licensed IT experts and hardware manufacturers for rectifying bugs. It was commercially launched on January 31, 2007, hence prior to that, it was not available for routine use. While explaining this, he was referring to his research notes. The defence objected to the PW reading his notes. Radley replied that he was authorised to do so under British law and that he also discussed his research notes with the prosecution team beforehand. Whereupon, the defence then made a mistake by asking for the copy for their cross-examination, this became marked as evidence. On being read out his testimony, Radley objected to two narrations wrongly attributed to him. The judge corrected these after going through the video recording and confirming Radley’s contention. The second witness, Raja Akhtar recorded his statement covering his commentary on the orders of the Queen’s Court London regarding Al-Tufeeq litigation (involving the Avenfield properties) and his correspondence with notary public Jeremy Freeman, who witnessed the alleged two trust deeds in 2006. He had sent an E-mail along with scanned copies of the two trust deeds, notarised by Freeman, raising queries regarding the notarisation date and fulfilment of other pre-requisites while notarising the deeds. Freeman responded that he notarised the documents in the presence of Hussain Nawaz and Mr. Waqar (Hussain Nawaz’s manager). Raja Akhtar emphasised that a close analysis of the two alleged trust deeds prima-facie revealed forgeries and that was why he referred the matter to a forensic expert on the instructions of the JIT. Given the power that the placement of ads has over the media whether printed as news, comments, opinion or services — recent ads opposing each other’s stance published by the APNS and the CPNE highlights how payment for ads placed by the government never reaches media houses considered anti-government. This has driven the ‘disloyal’ print media to bankruptcy; conversely the ‘loyal’ media in connivance with the government has the power (and financial clout) to twist facts into fiction. Indulgence in such malpractices must be investigated by a JIT. Other than being jailed, guilty parties should be blacklisted from having anything to do with the fourth estate. Misrepresenting court proceedings is a crime; the actual version of events had to be brought on record so that white collar criminals, with financial clout or influence should not be allowed to get away with their crimes. The writer is a defence and security analyst Published in Daily Times, March 11th 2018.