In Texas, X died testate. The will identifies Legatee A (who is the son of X) as a beneficiary of a legacy. However, Xs will is amended by "Codicil 1" which states that legatee A refuses to accept any legacy or devise under this will. The will states: "Codicil 1 is attached to this will and amends this will to the extent so provided in Codicil 1". "Codicil 1" purports to have been signed by legatee A. Legatee A brings suit against the executor of the will on grounds that Legatee A did not sign "Codicil 1". Legatee A claims the signature of Legatee A in "Codicil 1" is a forgery. Which of the following statements, if any, is correct regarding the law in Texas?

a. The best expert to use for analysis of handwriting by comparison is one who works for the DPS Crime Lab as a handwriting analyst. Other such experts who do not work for the DPS Crime Lab are equally competent to testify over an objection as to competence.

b. None of the other choices are correct.

c. Anyone who has been trained by a DPS Crime Lab handwriting analyst is competent to testify about handwriting by comparison over objection as to competence.

d. The only expert competent to testify to handwriting by comparison is one who works for the DPS Crime Lab as a handwriting analyst. Any other expert in analysis of handwriting by comparison can testify provided there is no objection to competence.

e. Whether an expert is competent to testify as a handwriting analyst depends on the judge's discretion. Whether the expert is one who works for the DPS Crime Lab as a handwriting analyst is irrelevant. Whether there is an objection to the expert's competence is also irrelevant.