In COSCO Shipping Heavy Industry (Dalian) Co Ltd & Anor v Osta Fleet Sdn Bhd dealt with a case of how a Builder’s Certificate had been digitally manipulated and forged. The plaintiffs’ expert, a forensic document examiner, concluded that the signature of a representative on the disputed document was not genuine. It was an inkjet-printed toner image and not a handwritten signature. She also found that the Commissioner for Oaths’ stamp and signature affixed to the same document were similarly printed, not made in wet ink.
Justice Atan Mustaffa took note of the expert’s finding that the signatures and the Commissioner for Oaths’ stamps across these documents were not only identical in design, size, spacing, and alignment but also likely originated from a common source. These exhibits involved overlays and comparisons of the signatures and stamps from different documents, visually demonstrating their similarities. The expert had presented the evidence well, using the statistical improbability of such identical positioning of stamps and signatures across multiple documents, visual aids, and detailed analysis to show that the likelihood of this occurring naturally was “almost impossible.” His Lordship found that the forensic evidence overwhelmingly supported the conclusion that the document was artificially created through a cut-and-paste method, rather than being an authentic, originally signed document.
Interestingly, the methodology employ here is based on the traditional forensic comparative analysis – just like how physical documents are examined. One could also look into provenance analysis (examining the document’s origin, transmission path and related communication etc) or metadata analysis (examining hidden properties of a file etc). I look forward to seeing such technics being employed in digital forgery.
An earlier version of this case summary was published by Foong Cheng Leong on LinkedIn.
Leave a Reply