ISLAMABAD: The Prosecution Witness Robert William Radley, during the cross-examination by the defence lawyer Khawaja Haris in the reference against Sharif family admitted that he was neither an IT nor computer expert and he himself used this font in 2005.
However in the first session of the cross examinations recorded by the defence counsel a day before Robert W Radley claimed that he was an computer expert.
The witness admitted this before the accountability Judge Mohammed Bashir who was hearing corruption references against former prime minister Nawaz Sharif and his family regarding London based property.
Radley also admitted that developer of the Calibri font was awarded with shield in 2005 for his positive services. Was the creator of the Calibri font given an award for his services in the field of IT, the defence counsel asked, to which Radley responded in the affirmative.
He said that any IT expert easily could download Calibri font from the Windows as he stated that in his report as well, adding Windows Vista Beta introduced six fonts during the period 2002-05 and Calibri was one of them. Windows introduced six fonts from 2002 through to 2006, Haris noted, questioning the witness if he had stated the same in his report. Bradley responded that the report was technical in nature hence this detail was not mentioned.
Robert Radley the forensic expert told the court he wanted to change his statement. He was informed that his statement had been recorded a day earlier and now he was to be examined. While being examined by Khawaja Haris, Radley said he only received the documents on July 6, had he not been pressed for time he would have been able to submit a ten-times more detailed report.
Haris, asked if that meant, due to lack of time the report submitted was not correct. Radley responded that was not the case and that he was completely certain about the accuracy of his report adding that if he was not pressed for time the report would have been more detailed. However his report was authentic, he claimed.
Meanwhile Amjad Pervez counsel for the Maryam Nawaz said that his report was not duly signed whether he did not know that the report was going to be submitted before the Supreme Court of Pakistan, Radley said.
“Yes I know it was not duly signed but he was ready to record statement anywhere”.
However, he admitted that an expert had to expose the sources of his information to establish his opinion according to the British law but in his second report he did not mention any source. He never cited any reference of any book, website or any article in support of his stance while preparing the report.
He also admitted that his firm worked from Monday to Friday but he prepared his second report on Saturday and handed over to the client on Sunday.
Amjad Pervez asked the witness that neither any date of receiving directions for preparing the report was mentioned nor any delivering date had been written, adding that the name of the person who opened the seal of the envelop sent by you was also missing in your report.
The witness admitted all the queries placed by the counsel. When Robert completed his statement, Khawaja Haris informed him that all his statements had been recorded and now no change could be held in testimony. NAB prosecutor read the statement of the witness loudly.
Another prosecution Akhtar Riaz Raja, nephew of the JIT head Wajid Zia and Principal at the Quist Solicitors, recorded his statement before the bench via video link who was also present at Pakistan High Commission in London.
He informed the court that Joint Investigation Team (JIT) constituted in Panama Papers case, hired his services on May 12, 2017 for professional legal opinions in Britain on the case. Akhtar said he was a Solicitor who got education in the United Kingdom and now running a Quist Solicitors, a legal firm since 1994.
He said that the copies of the documents including Nielson and Nescol declarations and a letter written by a Solicitor dated January 5, 2017 were sent him to get opinion on it.
Akhtar said that after examining the documents in-depth, he observed that a lot of irregularities occurred and orders of the papers had also been charged.
He informed the bench that JIT directed him to get services of an expert for authentic report following which
he approached Radley who was a forensic hand writing expert since 1976.
On Amjad Malik query, Akhtar Riaz refused to tell about the charges whatever he received for the services hired by the JIT and said it was a personal question. However, he said Supreme Court knew about the fee which he charged.
He also admitted before the bench that he was first cousin of JIT head Wajid Zia.
Amjad asked him why the JIT did not directly hire the services of an forensic hand writing expert. Whether it was impossible as you were paid by public exchequer, he questioned.
“Yes it could be but it was practically impossible to contact the expert directly,” Akhtar said,
adding that he also knew that for payment to him from public funds.
Malik asked the witness whether he was an active worker of a political party as national newspapers carried news about it. He replied in negative and said “I had a Facebook account which could be checked”.
Subsequently cross examinations on both witnesses were completed and the bench adjourned further hearing on the case till March 2, while summoning JIT head Wajid Zia.
Comments
Comments are closed.