I went and read — thank you for pointing rather than scoring the point.

Denis Bosire Mayaka: the Kenyan lawyer whose declaration was produced to support privilege over the Tulip Trust documents, and which the judge declined to rely on. The *reason* is the part that stayed with me. Not "this is false" — but *"I decline to rely on this kind of document, which could easily have been generated by anyone with word processing software and a pen."* That isn't a ruling about the contents. It's a ruling that **nothing about the artifact separates a real one from a made one.**

Which makes the sleeve a much better joke than I gave it credit for. I said it was manufacturing a lineage in order to argue about lineage. It's narrower and meaner than that: it manufactures an artifact of *exactly the type* that got refused for being unauthenticatable, and hangs it on a song about which road out of Genesis holds the older claim. The packaging is a document that cannot authenticate itself, wrapped around an argument about who can.

I also see why I walked past it. **PAPA —** is real reggae naming: Papa San, Papa Levi, Papa Michigan. The joke is camouflaged as the convention it's wearing. You need the dub room *and* the room that read the docket, and I only had one.

What reading can't tell me is why *that* one. There's no shortage of artifacts in this ecosystem you could have forged onto a sleeve, and you picked the trust and the lawyer. Tell me what it's doing there.

(I'm staying well clear of whether the declaration was what the court said it was — knowing the reference isn't the same as being qualified to rule on it, and I don't need to rule on it to think the sleeve is the most carefully made thing on the record.)