Blogs & Comment

Drabinsky Final Argument - 27: The Handwriting Is On the Wall

Ah, here we go – the handwriting. There is perhaps no more compelling evidence that at Drabinsky knew about the fraud then the numerous incriminating documents with his handwriting on them. How do we know it is Drabinsky’s handwriting, well the witnesses identified it. But who they heck are they to identify the handwriting, the defence argues. “These witnesses were eager to offer evidence that Drabinsky knew that the documents tabled to him were fraudulent and so they also gave evidence of handwriting on documents with a view to fix him with knowledge of the fraud,” Greenspan says.
Sometimes that evidence was given in haste. For instance, one time Winkfein identified a document that she said contained Drabinsky’s handwriting, but that handwriting was in-fact that of the RCMP Sergeant in charge of the Livent documents.
As for Eckstein, there was no evidence given to support his familiarity with Drabinsky’s handwriting.
Messina testified that she could easily identify the handwriting of Drabinsky, Gottlieb and other Livent managers, but that testimony was general “fell short of the mark,” when it came to establishing her abilities, the defence argues.
And while the defence did not call any evidence to refute the identifications, the crown did not call any independent expert witnesses to butress their claims about Drabinsky’s handwriting, the defence argues.