Microsoft’s default font is at the center of a government corruption case

[Radd-ul-Fasaad]

And the most important thing is law firms are not beta testers they domt use beta fonts to write official documents

Yeah, I can't link the sources as I am a new user but check out Companies House UK website, Freeman Box was a dormant company.

 

[Canuck786]

He wasn't wrong. He was correct in saying that the fonts were commercially made available in January 2007. The creator of the fonts, Groot has confirmed that the verson of Calibri used in the forged documents was not available on February 4, 2006.

The characters used in English language are identical in all versions of Calibri i.e. .90, .98, 1.0, and later ones to 6.19 now. The only difference is languages added to those fonts.

.90 avaiaibility

If you look at the preview of each version above they identical for all versions

 

[friendly_troll96]

And the firm Freeman Box who attested the documents have been dissolved on 30 May 2017, interesting date
View attachment 411472

 

[expert]

The characters used in English language are identical in all versions of Calibri i.e. .90, .98, 1.0, and later ones to 6.19 now. The only difference is languages added to those fonts.

View attachment 411480

.90 avaiaibility

View attachment 411481

If you look at the preview of each version above they identical for all versions

The number of characters is not an indication of whether or not the characters themselves have changed over the years. The "1" has changed from the first version.

 

[VCheng]

The number of characters is not an indication of whether or not the characters themselves have changed over the years. The "1" has changed from the first version.

Can you post up a comparison for the number 1 from different versions to show that they are indeed different? (Besides, MS Office 2010 still uses the first version.)

 

[expert]

Can you post up a comparison for the number 1 from different versions to show that they are indeed different? (Besides, MS Office 2010 still uses the first version.)

“In the early days in 2004, the number ‘1’ looked different from the latter versions when it was finally shipped in the office products. So in case someone would have made a document before 2006 they probably would have had different numbers,” Groot added.

https://www.geo.tv/latest/149222-extremely-unlikely-calibri-used-in-feb-2006-says-font-creator

It's not a surprise that you have the old version in 2017, but it's impossible to have had the new version in 2006. You've been repeating your argument about Office 2010 but it doesn't help your argument in any logical way.

 

[VCheng]

https://www.geo.tv/latest/149222-extremely-unlikely-calibri-used-in-feb-2006-says-font-creator

Unlikely, but not impossible, and even the originator admits to this fact. And a side by side comparison of the numbers shows them to be the same.

 

[expert]

Unlikely, but not impossible, and even the originator admits to this fact. And a side by side comparison of the numbers shows them to be the same.

It can easily be checked. It not subjective. In any case, Maryam will need a forensic expert that is willing to refute the arguments of the original expert if it is to have any value in court. The new expert will have to say that this font was available in 2004 AND it was exactly the same.

 

[Canuck786]

Can you post up a comparison for the number 1 from different versions to show that they are indeed different? (Besides, MS Office 2010 still uses the first version.)

 

[expert]

View attachment 411607

You're right. All the versions seem identical to me. In any case, a forensic expert will be required to testify before a Court on behalf of the respondents. If it is proved they're the same, the Court will have to decide based on all available evidence on the criminal standard of proof, beyond reasonable doubt, if the documents were forged.

 

[Canuck786]

Just to document it here is the comparison of all the alphabets

 

[VCheng]

It can easily be checked. It not subjective. In any case, Maryam will need a forensic expert that is willing to refute the arguments of the original expert if it is to have any value in court. The new expert will have to say that this font was available in 2004 AND it was exactly the same.

It will take all of sixty seconds to show that the same font can be used for the document when it was supposedly written. This is where the forensic analysis is clearly mistaken, but there is a whole lot of other evidence to explain nonetheless.