Karlheinz Schreiber testifies at the Oliphant Commission in Ottawa on Thursday. (Adrian Wyld/Canadian Press)

The handwriting of Karlheinz Schreiber on a memo purporting to outline the business relationship between the German-Canadian businessman and Brian Mulroney was not traced, a professional analysis has concluded.

Schreiber had previously testified at the federal inquiry that while some of the handwriting on the document — which includes names of his businesses — was his, he had never actually written on the paper.

Schreiber’s alleged handwriting is of particular note because it raises questions about whether Schreiber discussed the mandate memo with Fred Doucet, who crafted the document, and to what extent Schreiber agreed with its contents.

At his first appearance at the inquiry Schreiber said “it’s a miracle” when asked how his handwriting could have gotten on the document.

On Thursday, however, lead commission counsel Richard Wolson said that an expert in handwriting analysis had ruled out the possibility that someone could have traced Schreiber’s handwriting on the document.

“These notations exhibit all signs of having been produced naturally and free from conscious execution. There is no evidence the writings having been traced,” Wolson said, reading from the report on the handwriting.

Wolson asked Schreiber, who was making his second appearance at the inquiry: “On reflection is it possible you put those markings on that document?”

“I have not the smallest recollection, and on top of that, it makes no sense,” Schreiber said.

Clarifying their relationship

The mandate memo was crafted by Doucet, a former aide to Mulroney, and presented to Schreiber at a Feb. 4, 2000, meeting between Schreiber and Doucet. Doucet has said he created the memo because it was important to clarify Mulroney and Schreiber’s business relationship because of possible media speculation.

Schreiber has testified he gave Mulroney $300,000 in three instalments from 1993 to 1994 to lobby domestically on behalf of the Bear Head project — a plan for a light-armoured vehicle plant in Nova Scotia.

This conflicts with Mulroney's testimony at a federal ethics committee in which he said he was paid $225,000 and that the money was payment for his efforts as an international lobbyist on behalf of the German company Thyssen.

The mandate memo, as typewritten by Doucet, stated that Mulroney was to “develop economic opportunities” and to travel abroad to meet with “government and private sector leaders to assist in opening new markets" for Schreiber's products.

The document includes the typewritten mandate along with handwritten notes, some in Doucet’s writing and some in Schreiber’s writing.

The document also contains the handwritten entries: “the mandate is accurate” and “the amount paid over the three years is $250,000.”

Schreiber has testified that he and Doucet had no discussion about the memo and that he never saw those handwritten entries on the document. He said the document he received only had the typewritten mandate and nothing else.

Schreiber said he just took the memo from Doucet and later gave it to his lawyer.

Meeting about a friend in trouble

Schreiber also testified that parts of the typewritten memo are inaccurate, namely the clause about Mulroney travelling abroad to meet with government and private sectors.

But Doucet has testified the two men discussed the memo and that Schreiber had told him he had paid Mulroney $250,000, which Doucet then wrote on the document.

The inquiry also heard on Thursday that a private meeting between Mulroney and Schreiber that had fuelled some speculation was only to discuss a mutual friend going through personal problems.

During testimony on April 16 at the federal inquiry, Schreiber was asked about the times he met privately with Mulroney.

Schreiber said there was only one time, in his office, but he would not discuss the details.

“I don't recall the day but I know what the event was but I don't want to talk about this now,” Schreiber said then

On Thursday, Wolson attempted to clarify the purpose of that the meeting.

“What's left out there, is a suspicion, because there are lot of suspicions … and I want to clear up that suspicion,” Wolson said.

Schreiber confirmed that the meeting was about a man who was a mutual acquaintance of Schreiber and Mulroney who was having some personal difficulties and that they were trying to see if they could help the man.

It has absolutely nothing to do with the matters before this inquiry,” Wolson said.

“No,” Schreiber said.

Mulroney is scheduled to testify for four days next week, beginning on Tuesday.