Regarding the journal of Grigory Rodchenkov, his notes look really weird. Many believe the majority of the notes were made later, dictated by Western agents. My colleague Nikolai Sokolov showed the notes to a handwriting expert that drew a rather curious psychological portrait of their author. When revealed in the media, such news always attracts attention. They were likely counting on it.
The journal of Grigory Rodchenkov who informed the FBI of Russian allegedly doped athletes was published in the US. However, the article recites the journal rather than quoting it.
Words from the journal: "Rodchenkov criticized the Russian officials for not clearly reporting the transportation of hundreds of ounces of clean urine that the best athletes had been gathering for months, storing it in the jars of baby food and empty soda bottles".
Not all the pages get published, only some choice extracts. Still, the partial publication of the journal caught the interest of handwriting experts. Unclear descriptions and constant shifting between the topics within a small passage. Seemingly, the main goal wasn't to convey the information but rather to create controversy.
Irina Bukhareva, handwriting expert: "He can't clearly express his thoughts and ideas. He's expressing his thoughts ambiguously. One thought can be understood in two different ways".
The text is quickly written and sometimes illegible. Quite possibly he was writing under pressure. But what kind of pressure?
Irina Bukhareva, handwriting expert: "The handwriting is often illegible. It's hard to make out anything. Some letters are ambiguous as well. Is it i (и), n (н), or k (к)? It's really hard to tell. People write like this when they're trying to present dubious facts pursuing their own benefit".
Many handwriting experts refuse to judge anything by the photos. The popular American newspaper has no scanned excerpts just photocopies. In modern jurisprudence a journal can serve as evidence but it must be studied.
Vladislav Kochergin, lawyer: "If he originally designed it as a provocation he could have intentionally written it and now he could be trying to offer it as evidence. I doubt it can be treated as a piece of evidence. The limitation period can also be checked".
A group of Russian experts wasn't allowed to examine the journal and the other files. The people mentioned in the manuscript weren't allowed either. The journal could have been falsified but it would be extremely hard to prove it. The media has already acquired the journal. By the way, the US along with Russia and Europe has one of the best graphology schools. An experienced specialist can not only determine the author but in some cases forge the text or add some extra pages to it.
Nikolai Sokolov for Vesti.
