PNP defends ‘Jose Pidal’ signature findings

Police handwriting experts defended yesterday their findings on the signature specimens Sen. Panfilo Lacson presented to the public last Monday supposedly to prove that First Gentleman Jose Miguel Arroyo was involved in money laundering.

But as the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) prepared to release its own findings today, Philippine National Police (PNP) Crime Laboratory officials challenged Lacson to get a second opinion from the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Scotland Yard.

But the Crime Laboratroy insisted on its finding that the First Gentleman did not sign alleged bank documents under the fictitious name "Jose Pidal" as Lacson claimed in his privileged speech on Aug. 18.

"Senator Lacson knows the (Crime Laboratory) uses scientific and careful ways in our investigation since he was once our PNP chief," said PNP Crime Lab director Chief Superintendent Restituto Mosqueda.

"We are just doing our job, it’s nothing personal. Our findings are based on the documents presented by Senator Lacson during his privileged speech and documents from Mr. Arroyo’s lawyers," he said.

"He is entitled to his own opinion but we are also entitled to defend our own findings," Mosqueda added, disputing Lacson’s claim that the experts who examined the documents were appointed by President Arroyo.

The crime lab chief lamented that Lacson would make such a statement since the senator should know that they were already in the police long before Lacson became PNP chief.

"We don’t owe anybody any favors because we are career officials and (were) never appointed, politically or otherwise. We take pride in our job and are not doing things in exchange (for) any favor ," Mosqueda said.

For her part, Dr. Mely Sorra, chief of the Crime Lab’s questioned documents section, said their expertise in handwriting analysis is acknowledged by the courts and expressed confidence that both the FBI and Scotland Yard would come to the same conclusion.

Sorra announced on Friday that the First Gentleman and the person who signed the "Jose Pidal" signature Lacson presented could not have been the same person because of seven critical differences.

Among the differences are the curvature of the oval and height of junction in the connecting stroke in the letter "J," the width of the opening atop the letter "o," the manner of connection of the letter "s" and the manner of the terminal stroke of the letter "e."

Sorra said there was "no percentage of error" in their findings that the "Jose Pidal" signature was not written by the First Gentleman.

"Based on our presentation and as seen by the naked eye, the two signatures were not written by the same person," Sorra said.

At the same time, the First Gentleman’s spokesman, lawyer Patricia Bunye, challenged Lacson anew to file charges in court so Arroyo could answer his allegations and so that Lacson would not be able to hide behind his parliamentary immunity.

"See you in court. We are ready to face you," Bunye said even before the NBI handwriting experts could release its findings on the two signatures.

The day after Lacson made his privilege speech, Arroyo’s lawyers requested the authorities to analyze the signatures the senator presented and determine if they were really signed by the First Gentleman.

But the NBI experts said they need original samples of the two signatures before they could make a finding on the signatures. — With Cecille Suerte Felipe