Zara Qairina inquest: Handwriting expert defends journal analysis despite rival's differing testimony

In an inquest into the death of 13-year-old Zara Qairina Mahathir, document examiner Nurul Atiqah Mohd Noh maintained her conclusions regarding handwriting linked to Zara, despite testimony from another expert, Dr. Linthini Gannetion.

Nurul affirmed that minor discrepancies, such as the use of different writing instruments, did not affect her overall determination of Zara's authorship.

While acknowledging that handwriting can change, particularly in adolescents, Nurul emphasized that this does not necessarily indicate multiple writers.

Both experts concurred that certain writings may have involved other individuals, but largely corroborated each other's findings concerning Zara's handwriting.

The inquest is set to continue in October.

KOTA KINABALU, Sept 11 — A document examiner stood by her findings on writings linked to Zara Qairina Mahathir, telling an inquest that the testimony of another forensic handwriting expert had not changed any of her conclusions.

Recalled witness Nurul Atiqah Mohd Noh said Dr Linthini Gannetion’s testimony had not altered any of her findings after she considered the expert’s evidence.

Nurul, the second deponent, was questioned by Deputy Public Prosecutor Dana Arabi Wazani during the inquest into the death of the 13-year-old student before Coroner Amir Shah Amir Hassan on Thursday.

Dana: Overall, after considering Dr Linthini’s testimony, is there anything in her testimony that caused you to change any of the conclusions contained in Exhibit I-31?

Dana: Dr Linthini also stated that in Y4B, part of the word “challenge” (“hallenge”) was written in pencil and the word “tauddin” in “Retauddin” may have been added later with a different pen, and that Y13A contained erased writing, including the phrase “Jala imut”. You concluded that Y4 and Y13 were written by the exemplar writer.

If there are scribbles, minor amendments or the use of different writing instruments on a small portion of an entry, in your opinion, does that alter the overall conclusion that the entry was written by Zara?

Dana: Dr Linthini emphasised that almost all the sheets from Y1 to Y15 were dated, except Y8B and Y13B, and described this as inconsistent with Zara’s habit of not always recording dates in her journal. In your opinion, is the frequency or pattern of writing dates a scientific criterion in forensic document examination for determining the writer or the existence of interference? Does the habit of writing dates not vary according to the type of entry, such as a daily journal entry compared with an entry addressed to someone, or according to the circumstances in which it was written?

Nurul: The frequency or pattern of writing dates is a characteristic that can be observed, but it is not the only characteristic to prove the identity of a writer.

Nurul was also asked about differences between her findings and those of Dr Linthini Gannetion, a certified handwriting expert who was previously called by Zara’s mother to testify on the examination of the questioned writings.

Dana: Dr Linthini stated that she used the “ACEV” method, namely Analysis, Comparison, Evaluation and Verification. Based on your understanding, what is done under this method, and is it essentially the same as the comparison method used by the Chemistry Department?

Nurul: Based on my understanding, this method is the same.

Dana: In your opinion, are the results of a handwriting examination determined solely by the use of instruments such as Video Spectral Comparator (VSC) or do they depend on the examiner’s skills in identifying, assessing and weighing the characteristics of handwriting?

Nurul: The use of instruments such as VSC is to assist the examination. A comprehensive examination depends on the skills of the document examiner.

Dana: Dr Linthini emphasised that the handwriting of a growing adolescent is volatile and can change within a short period, hence the most reliable comparison is with the most contemporary samples. Do you agree that a person’s handwriting can change over time?

Dana: If an adolescent’s handwriting is indeed volatile and changes over time, in your opinion, does every small difference in handwriting characteristics at a particular time necessarily indicate a different writer?

Nurul: Not necessarily.

Dana: Dr Linthini, in paragraph 25 of her witness statement, stated that she could not reach any conclusion regarding the writer of Y1A, Y1B, Y2A, Y2B, Y3A, Y3B, Y4A, Y4B, Y5A, Y5B, Y6A, Y6B, Y7A, Y7B, Y8A, Y9A, Y9B and Y10A, among others, due to the absence of contemporary handwriting samples for the period from November 2024 to January 2025.

In your opinion, does the opinion that “no conclusion can be made” mean that the writings were not written by the late Zara Qairina?

Dana: Does the opinion that “no conclusion can be made” mean that the writings were written by someone else?

Dana: In your previous testimony, you also stated that “Y1” to “Y7” and “Y9” to “Y15” were written by the same person. Is that correct?

Dana: Please refer to paragraph 21(i) of your second report. Your conclusion was that the writings in W1, W2, W3 and Y1-Y15 were written by the exemplar writer, Zara Qairina Binti Mahathir, correct?

Dana: Dr Linthini stated that in W2, pages 45, 49 to 51, 58, 59, 61 and 62 contained writings by other individuals besides the late Zara, and she concluded that other people may have had access to W2.

After your comprehensive examination of W2, did you find any pages or portions of W2 that were not written by the exemplar writer?

Nurul: There are writings with slightly different characteristics, but I cannot give an opinion on the writer because there are only a few characters.

Dana: If most of the entries in a journal were written by its owner but there were several lines or entries written by another person, in your opinion, does that necessarily mean that the main entries in the journal were not written by its owner?

Dana: Dr Linthini agreed that pages 2, 7 to 14, 25 to 37, 46, 58 to 64, 73 to 84 and 86 to 89 of W3 were not written by the late Zara. So far, are Dr Linthini’s findings consistent with your findings?

Nurul: Yes, consistent.

Dana: In your opinion, does the absence of contemporary samples automatically prevent an examiner from reaching any conclusion, or does it depend on the quality, quantity and consistency of the characteristics of similarities found in the material examined?

Nurul: It depends on the results of the examination, whether similarities or differences are found.

Dana: Based solely on presumptive observations and without confirmatory tests such as ESDA or ink and paper analysis, in your opinion, can an examiner conclude that there are signs of interference in Y1 to Y15?

Nurul: It depends on the type of interference found.

The inquest will resume in October. — Daily Express

‘Time has come for BN to lead’: Zahid demands GE16 held as soon as possible

Beyond data centres: What Budget 2027 needs to deliver, according to MBSB Investment Bank

Health cooperation gets fresh push as Asean, China face new threats

Zahid takes swipe at Pakatan petrol promise, blasts Budi95 policy flip‑flop, says Umno primed for GE16

在对 13 岁女孩 Zara Qairina Mahathir 的死亡进行调查时，尽管另一位专家 Linthini Gannetion 博士作证，文件检验员 Nurul Atiqah Mohd Noh 仍然坚持她关于与 Zara 有关的笔迹的结论。

努鲁尔断言，诸如使用不同的书写工具之类的细微差异，并不影响她对《扎拉》作者身份的总体判断。

努鲁尔承认笔迹可能会发生变化，尤其是在青少年时期，但他强调这并不一定意味着有多位书写者。

两位专家一致认为某些笔迹可能涉及其他人，但对于扎拉的笔迹，他们大多相互印证了对方的发现。

死因调查将于10月继续进行。

哥打基纳巴卢，9月11日讯——一名文件鉴定专家坚持其对与扎拉·凯里娜·马哈蒂尔有关的笔迹的鉴定结果，并在死因研讯中表示，另一位笔迹鉴定专家的证词并未改变她的任何结论。

被传唤的证人努鲁·阿蒂卡·莫哈末·诺表示，林蒂尼·甘尼顿医生的证词并没有改变她在考虑专家证据后得出的任何结论。

周四，在验尸官阿米尔·沙阿·阿米尔·哈桑主持的对这名 13 岁学生死亡的调查中，第二名证人努鲁尔接受了副检察官达纳·阿拉比·瓦扎尼的质询。

达娜：总的来说，在考虑了林蒂尼博士的证词后，她的证词中是否有任何内容导致你改变了附件 I-31 中包含的任何结论？

达娜：林蒂尼博士还指出，在Y4B中，“challenge”（挑战）一词的一部分是用铅笔写的，“Retauddin”中的“tauddin”可能是后来用另一支笔添加的；此外，Y13A中还有一些被擦掉的字迹，包括“Jala imut”这个词组。你由此得出结论，Y4和Y13是由那位范例作者所写。

如果在日记的一小部分上有涂鸦、细微修改或使用不同的书写工具，您认为这是否会改变日记是由 Zara 所写的总体结论？

达娜：林蒂尼博士强调，从Y1到Y15的几乎所有纸张都标注了日期，只有Y8B和Y13B例外，她认为这与扎拉并非总是在日记中记录日期的习惯不符。您认为，在法庭文件检验中，日期的书写频率或模式是否是确定书写者或是否存在篡改的科学标准？书写日期的习惯是否会因记录类型（例如，日常日记与写给某人的记录）或书写时的具体情况而有所不同？

努鲁尔：书写日期的频率或模式是一个可以观察的特征，但这并不是证明书写者身份的唯一特征。

努鲁尔还被问及她的发现与经认证的笔迹专家林蒂尼·甘尼顿博士的发现之间的差异。林蒂尼·甘尼顿博士此前曾被扎拉的母亲请来，就对有疑问的笔迹进行检验作证。

达娜：林蒂尼博士提到她使用了“ACEV”方法，即分析、比较、评估和验证。根据你的理解，这种方法具体包含哪些步骤？它与化学系使用的比较方法本质上相同吗？

努鲁尔：据我了解，这种方法是一样的。

达娜：您认为，笔迹鉴定的结果完全取决于视频光谱比较仪 (VSC) 等仪器的使用，还是取决于鉴定人员识别、评估和权衡笔迹特征的技能？

努鲁尔：使用诸如VSC之类的仪器是为了辅助检验。全面的检验取决于文件检验员的技能。

达娜：林蒂尼博士强调，青少年时期的笔迹变化无常，短时间内就可能发生变化，因此最可靠的比较方法是与最新的笔迹样本进行比较。您是否同意一个人的笔迹会随着时间而改变？

达娜：如果青少年的笔迹确实不稳定，会随着时间而改变，那么在你看来，特定时期笔迹特征的每一个细微差别是否都必然表明是不同的书写者？

努鲁尔：不一定。

达纳：林蒂尼博士在其证人陈述第 25 段中表示，由于 2024 年 11 月至 2025 年 1 月期间缺乏当代笔迹样本，她无法就 Y1A、Y1B、Y2A、Y2B、Y3A、Y3B、Y4A、Y4B、Y5A、Y5B、Y6A、Y6B、Y7A、Y7B、Y8A、Y9A、Y9B 和 Y10A 等的作者得出任何结论。

您认为“无法得出结论”的观点是否意味着这些文章并非已故的扎拉·凯里娜所写？

达娜：认为“无法得出结论”是否意味着这些文字是其他人写的？

达娜：你在之前的证词中也提到，“Y1”到“Y7”和“Y9”到“Y15”是同一个人写的。是这样吗？

达娜：请参考你第二份报告第21(i)段。你的结论是W1、W2、W3和Y1-Y15中的文章均出自范文作者Zara Qairina Binti Mahathir之手，对吗？

达娜：林蒂尼博士指出，在 W2 中，第 45、49 至 51、58、59、61 和 62 页包含已故 Zara 以外的其他人的文字，她由此得出结论，其他人可能接触过 W2。

在您全面审查 W2 表格后，您是否发现 W2 表格中有任何页面或部分内容并非由范文撰写者所写？

努鲁尔：有些作品风格略有不同，但因为作品篇幅有限，我无法对作者做出评价。

达娜：如果日记的大部分内容都是主人写的，但其中有几行或几条内容是其他人写的，你认为这是否一定意味着日记的主要内容不是主人写的？

达娜：林蒂尼博士同意W3文件的第2页、第7至14页、第25至37页、第46页、第58至64页、第73至84页以及第86至89页并非已故的扎拉所写。到目前为止，林蒂尼博士的发现与您的发现一致吗？

努鲁尔：是的，始终如一。

达娜：您认为，缺乏当代样本是否必然会阻止检验人员得出任何结论，还是取决于在所检验的材料中发现的相似特征的质量、数量和一致性？

努鲁尔：这取决于检验结果，看是发现相似之处还是不同之处。

达纳：仅凭推测性的观察，而没有像 ESDA 或墨水和纸张分析这样的确认性测试，您认为检验员能否得出结论，认为 Y1 至 Y15 存在干扰迹象？

努鲁尔：这取决于所发现的干扰类型。

死因调查将于10月恢复。——《每日快报》

“现在是国阵领导的时候了”：扎希德要求尽快举行第16届全国大选

MBSB投资银行认为，除了数据中心之外，2027年预算案还需要实现哪些目标？

东盟和中国面临新威胁，卫生合作再度加强

扎希德抨击希望联盟的汽油政策承诺，抨击布迪95政策反复无常，称巫统已为第16届全国大选做好准备