Dr Chua Soi Lek and woman getting ready for annal sex why was he not arrested for anal sex bloody barisan musa hassan
Dr Chua Soi Lek and woman getting ready for annal sex why was he not arrested for anal sex bloody barisan musa hassan
![[mob1900_sodomyII.jpg]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgjw2SehU8fpJUoqPWBEkqAloIQ-RVxcawikl-ihAljJRTZCSJz9G7Lz7QeBGtEr8R5FnIU2sGmRyrr9cbzNoY6d3E2hHHTM2-fmjviY2-1vpu6pLqWqrL5LiHlJ3KhEKO9PXmXeZ60BFrf/s1600/mob1900_sodomyII.jpg)
As a matter of national shameA traitor is a traitor, with or without a uniform.
.
Raja Petra KamarudinThe following police report was made at 5.45 pm on Saturday, 28 June 2008,
by Mohd Saiful Bukhari Bin Azlan (IC no: 850706-01-5687), who turned 23 last
month: Saya, Mohd Saiful Bukhari b Azlan, ingin melaporkan bahawa saya telah
diliwat oleh majikan saya. Perkara ini berlaku tanpa kerelaan saya. Kejadian
terakhir berlaku 26/6/08 di Unit 1151, Kondominium Desa Damansara, Jln Setia
Kasih, KL. Oleh itu, tujuan laporan ini dibuat untuk mendapat pembelaan dan
keadilan keatas diri saya. Saya juga berasa bimbang dengan keselamatan diri
dan keluarga saya jika perkara ini tersebar luas di khalayak ramai. Majikan
saya Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim – Ketua Umum PKR.Yes, that police report was made at 5.45 pm on Saturday, 28 June 2008. By
why did it take that long for Saiful to make his police report? Let us
retrace the steps that led to this police report.At 2.30pm on Wednesday, 25 June 2008, Saiful met Senior Assistant
Commissioner (SAC) II Mohd Rodwan Mohd Yusof in room 619 of the Concorde
Hotel in Kuala Lumpur. Prior to this secret meeting, Rodwan and Saiful spoke
on the phone at least eight (8) times.
In fact, they can’t really remember how many phone calls it was. They say it
was at least eight times although it could have been maybe ten or twelve
times. But who’s counting anyway? Eight, ten or twelve doesn’t really
matter. The crux of the matter is: they spoke over the phone many times
prior to meeting up in room 619 of the Concorde Hotel — a ‘secret’ meeting
that can’t be very secret if Malaysia Today knows about it.
We must remember one thing. Rodwan is the same police officer who was
involved in fabricating the 1998 sodomy allegation against Anwar. Rodwan was
implicated as the man who illegally took Anwar’s specimens, which
subsequently mysteriously reappeared as ‘stains’ on a mattress. It was so
apparent the mattress was planted as evidence the judge subsequently
rejected the mattress as evidence and ordered that all references of it be
expunged from the court records.
That was all it took. When they realised that the mattress was hurting more
than helping their case, they threw the mattress out of the court and
deleted all records of it ever appearing in court. And, all of a sudden, the
mattress no longer existed. It vanished into thin air. It ‘never appeared’
in court although for weeks it was paraded in and out of court for the whole
world to witness.
This is what lawyer and Parliamentarian Sivarasa Rasiah had to say about the
matter:
“In 1998-1999 trials, Anwar experienced the phenomenon of fabrication of DNA
evidence. We had SAC Rodwan illegally removing DNA samples from forensic
custody. In cross-examination of the prosecution’s witnesses it was exposed
that DNA taken from blood samples was planted on the infamous mattress.”
“When confronted with this fact the prosecution amended its charge and
persuaded the judge, Augustine Paul, to expunge the entire DNA evidence from
the record, preventing Anwar’s lawyers from responding.”
There were, in fact, other so-called ‘damaging evidence’ that they created
against Anwar to convince the public that he is indeed guilty of sodomy. In
time, Malaysia Today will parade these witnesses and reveal this evidence to
demonstrate to the public that the slime-ball IGP and scumbag AG, plus their
slithery minion, Rodwan, fixed Anwar’s ass good and proper (pun intended).
Now, Rodwan met Saiful three days earlier and these two exchanged at least
eight phone calls. Nevertheless, no police report was made until Saiful had
visited two hospitals — three days later. Why engage in eight phone calls
and have a secret meeting with Rodwan in a hotel room, and only after visits
to two hospitals does Saiful make his police report?
Let us look at the timeline again.
1) Saiful and Rodwan speak over the phone at least eight times over a few
days.
2) At 2.30pm on 25 June 2008, Saiful and Rodwan meet in room 619 of the
Concorde Hotel in Kuala Lumpur.
3) On 26 June 2008, Saiful’s ass allegedly gets ‘raped’ by Anwar.
4) At 2.00pm on 28 June 2008, Saiful goes to Pusat Rawatan Islam
(Pusrawi, a ‘halal’ hospital) to complain that he can’t ***. He tells the
doctor he can’t *** because someone buggered his *** — whereas that
would instead have made it easier for him to ***.
5) The doctor peeps into Saiful’s *** and discovers that his ***
is still as virgin as Raja Petra Kamarudin’s.
6) The doctor then suggests, for purposes of the police report, he goes
to a government hospital for a second opinion.
7) However, instead of getting a second opinion, Saiful goes to the
pondok polis at the hospital to lodge a police report. Sources in Hospital
Kuala Lumpur (HKL) say that no second medical examination was done whereas
the police say it was. Considering that the police report was made within an
hour or two after Saiful left the first hospital, it is highly likely the
hospital is telling the truth while the police are lying.
It must be noted that Saiful met the police BEFORE the so-called sodomy act
took place. The sodomy was supposed to have happened on 26 June while Saiful
met the police on 25 June. And it was not until 28 June that he went to
hospital and made the police report a couple of hours later. And all this
culminated not only after the secret meeting in the hotel room on 25 June
but after eight phone calls as well.
If Saiful was sodomised, would he not tell Rodwan about it during the secret
meeting in room 619 of the Concorde Hotel on 25 June 2008? And why in the
first place did they meet in secret in room 619 of the Concorde Hotel on 25
June 2008? Should they not be meeting in a police station or in the police
headquarters? And, most important of all, would you not want to meet the
police AFTER instead of before the so-called sodomy took place (never mind
whether the meeting is in secret in a hotel room or conducted the right way,
in a police station)?
Would anyone in his or her right mind believe this latest sodomy allegation?
Okay, I said ‘right mind’. Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi wants the
police to charge Anwar while the Cabinet is against it. The Cabinet feels
there is no evidence, not only to convict Anwar, but even to charge him in
the first place. But Abdullah wants the police to pursue the case and to
charge Anwar. As I said, no one in his right mind would believe the
allegation against Anwar but then Abdullah is not a person known to be in
his right mind.
And why does Abdullah want so much for the police to charge Anwar? Simple:
because his Deputy, Najib Tun Razak, would invariably get dragged into this
whole mess. The police have recorded both Najib’s and his wife’s statements
under Section 112. So that means Najib and Rosmah would both have to take
the witness stand to testify during the course of the trial. Once that
happens, everything will flow freely like *** through an *** that’s
been sodomised.
During the course of Anwar’s impending trial, Malaysians will be told of the
link Saiful has with Mumtaz Jaafar. Malaysians will also be told who Mumtaz
Jaafar is and what her ‘special’ links with Rosmah are. Further to that,
Malaysians will be told about the relationship between Najib’s Special
Officer, Khairul Anas, and Saiful — and the less than manly reputation
these two buggers had while still in school. Yes, the excitement and kinky
sex that is going to spill over from this trial will cause Astro to lose a
lot of business.
The Anwar sodomy trial will hurt Najib more than it will hurt Anwar. At the
end of the trial the court will declare that there is not enough evidence to
secure a conviction. It will be a long five or six years but eventually
Anwar will be free. However, during the course of the five- to six-year
trial, Anwar will have to sit in jail because he will be denied bail. Yes,
Anwar will be free in the end, but only after spending five to six years in
jail without bail.
.
Raja Petra KamarudinThe following police report was made at 5.45 pm on Saturday, 28 June 2008,
by Mohd Saiful Bukhari Bin Azlan (IC no: 850706-01-5687), who turned 23 last
month: Saya, Mohd Saiful Bukhari b Azlan, ingin melaporkan bahawa saya telah
diliwat oleh majikan saya. Perkara ini berlaku tanpa kerelaan saya. Kejadian
terakhir berlaku 26/6/08 di Unit 1151, Kondominium Desa Damansara, Jln Setia
Kasih, KL. Oleh itu, tujuan laporan ini dibuat untuk mendapat pembelaan dan
keadilan keatas diri saya. Saya juga berasa bimbang dengan keselamatan diri
dan keluarga saya jika perkara ini tersebar luas di khalayak ramai. Majikan
saya Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim – Ketua Umum PKR.Yes, that police report was made at 5.45 pm on Saturday, 28 June 2008. By
why did it take that long for Saiful to make his police report? Let us
retrace the steps that led to this police report.
At 2.30pm on Wednesday, 25 June 2008, Saiful met Senior Assistant
Commissioner (SAC) II Mohd Rodwan Mohd Yusof in room 619 of the Concorde
Hotel in Kuala Lumpur. Prior to this secret meeting, Rodwan and Saiful spoke
on the phone at least eight (8) times.
In fact, they can’t really remember how many phone calls it was. They say it
was at least eight times although it could have been maybe ten or twelve
times. But who’s counting anyway? Eight, ten or twelve doesn’t really
matter. The crux of the matter is: they spoke over the phone many times
prior to meeting up in room 619 of the Concorde Hotel — a ‘secret’ meeting
that can’t be very secret if Malaysia Today knows about it.
We must remember one thing. Rodwan is the same police officer who was
involved in fabricating the 1998 sodomy allegation against Anwar. Rodwan was
implicated as the man who illegally took Anwar’s specimens, which
subsequently mysteriously reappeared as ‘stains’ on a mattress. It was so
apparent the mattress was planted as evidence the judge subsequently
rejected the mattress as evidence and ordered that all references of it be
expunged from the court records.
That was all it took. When they realised that the mattress was hurting more
than helping their case, they threw the mattress out of the court and
deleted all records of it ever appearing in court. And, all of a sudden, the
mattress no longer existed. It vanished into thin air. It ‘never appeared’
in court although for weeks it was paraded in and out of court for the whole
world to witness.
This is what lawyer and Parliamentarian Sivarasa Rasiah had to say about the
matter:
“In 1998-1999 trials, Anwar experienced the phenomenon of fabrication of DNA
evidence. We had SAC Rodwan illegally removing DNA samples from forensic
custody. In cross-examination of the prosecution’s witnesses it was exposed
that DNA taken from blood samples was planted on the infamous mattress.”
“When confronted with this fact the prosecution amended its charge and
persuaded the judge, Augustine Paul, to expunge the entire DNA evidence from
the record, preventing Anwar’s lawyers from responding.”
There were, in fact, other so-called ‘damaging evidence’ that they created
against Anwar to convince the public that he is indeed guilty of sodomy. In
time, Malaysia Today will parade these witnesses and reveal this evidence to
demonstrate to the public that the slime-ball IGP and scumbag AG, plus their
slithery minion, Rodwan, fixed Anwar’s ass good and proper (pun intended).
Now, Rodwan met Saiful three days earlier and these two exchanged at least
eight phone calls. Nevertheless, no police report was made until Saiful had
visited two hospitals — three days later. Why engage in eight phone calls
and have a secret meeting with Rodwan in a hotel room, and only after visits
to two hospitals does Saiful make his police report?
Let us look at the timeline again.
1) Saiful and Rodwan speak over the phone at least eight times over a few
days.
2) At 2.30pm on 25 June 2008, Saiful and Rodwan meet in room 619 of the
Concorde Hotel in Kuala Lumpur.
3) On 26 June 2008, Saiful’s ass allegedly gets ‘raped’ by Anwar.
4) At 2.00pm on 28 June 2008, Saiful goes to Pusat Rawatan Islam
(Pusrawi, a ‘halal’ hospital) to complain that he can’t ***. He tells the
doctor he can’t *** because someone buggered his *** — whereas that
would instead have made it easier for him to ***.
5) The doctor peeps into Saiful’s *** and discovers that his ***
is still as virgin as Raja Petra Kamarudin’s.
6) The doctor then suggests, for purposes of the police report, he goes
to a government hospital for a second opinion.
7) However, instead of getting a second opinion, Saiful goes to the
pondok polis at the hospital to lodge a police report. Sources in Hospital
Kuala Lumpur (HKL) say that no second medical examination was done whereas
the police say it was. Considering that the police report was made within an
hour or two after Saiful left the first hospital, it is highly likely the
hospital is telling the truth while the police are lying.
It must be noted that Saiful met the police BEFORE the so-called sodomy act
took place. The sodomy was supposed to have happened on 26 June while Saiful
met the police on 25 June. And it was not until 28 June that he went to
hospital and made the police report a couple of hours later. And all this
culminated not only after the secret meeting in the hotel room on 25 June
but after eight phone calls as well.
If Saiful was sodomised, would he not tell Rodwan about it during the secret
meeting in room 619 of the Concorde Hotel on 25 June 2008? And why in the
first place did they meet in secret in room 619 of the Concorde Hotel on 25
June 2008? Should they not be meeting in a police station or in the police
headquarters? And, most important of all, would you not want to meet the
police AFTER instead of before the so-called sodomy took place (never mind
whether the meeting is in secret in a hotel room or conducted the right way,
in a police station)?
Would anyone in his or her right mind believe this latest sodomy allegation?
Okay, I said ‘right mind’. Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi wants the
police to charge Anwar while the Cabinet is against it. The Cabinet feels
there is no evidence, not only to convict Anwar, but even to charge him in
the first place. But Abdullah wants the police to pursue the case and to
charge Anwar. As I said, no one in his right mind would believe the
allegation against Anwar but then Abdullah is not a person known to be in
his right mind.
And why does Abdullah want so much for the police to charge Anwar? Simple:
because his Deputy, Najib Tun Razak, would invariably get dragged into this
whole mess. The police have recorded both Najib’s and his wife’s statements
under Section 112. So that means Najib and Rosmah would both have to take
the witness stand to testify during the course of the trial. Once that
happens, everything will flow freely like *** through an *** that’s
been sodomised.
During the course of Anwar’s impending trial, Malaysians will be told of the
link Saiful has with Mumtaz Jaafar. Malaysians will also be told who Mumtaz
Jaafar is and what her ‘special’ links with Rosmah are. Further to that,
Malaysians will be told about the relationship between Najib’s Special
Officer, Khairul Anas, and Saiful — and the less than manly reputation
these two buggers had while still in school. Yes, the excitement and kinky
sex that is going to spill over from this trial will cause Astro to lose a
lot of business.
The Anwar sodomy trial will hurt Najib more than it will hurt Anwar. At the
end of the trial the court will declare that there is not enough evidence to
secure a conviction. It will be a long five or six years but eventually
Anwar will be free. However, during the course of the five- to six-year
trial, Anwar will have to sit in jail because he will be denied bail. Yes,
Anwar will be free in the end, but only after spending five to six years in
jail without bail.
If the purpose of admitting an out-of-court statement is to prove the truth of its contents then it would fall foul of the common law rule against hearsay. The maker of that statement has to be present in court. Even then it is not the out-of-court statement that is the evidence but the testimony of the witness (maker of the statement).
If the purpose is not to prove the truth of its contents, then it is not hearsay. You may have made an out-court-statement to the police (witness statement) which is inconsistent with your testimony in court and counsel wants to admit that statement into court to prove inconsistency, he may do so. It is not hearsay.In a trial involving sexual offences like rape, the credibility of the accuser is key. If, for example, the victim of the offence had taken four days to report the offence to the police, it casts doubt on the allegation that the sex was forced and not consensual. Rape is defined as penetration without consent. Failure to make a report immediately is not proof that the rape was not committed. It only goes to consent but in a case involving sodomy of course consent is irrelevant. Credibility of the accuser is still key.
Sexual crimes like rape by their nature rarely involve eye witnesses. The credibility of the accuser then becomes key in the defense of the witness. As a general rule character evidence is inadmissible. But if your counsel introduces character evidence then that leaves open for the opposing counsel to call character witnesses to rebut the allegations made against his or her client.
Anwar Ibrahim is not charged under syariah law and the court the blog host attended was not a syariah court. Why then the references to the Koran and the requirements of four eye witnesses etc?
Prosecution IS LICKING DRY ROSMA'S PUSSY
by Din Merican
a branch of legal studies called “Critical Legal Studies”
(inspired by Marxism).
We have come up with a Made-in-Malaysia branch called
“Creative Legal Studies” (inspired by UMNO).
John Yoo should use Malaysian examples of “Creative Legal Studies” such as this Saiful case and the Altantunya case in his
lectures at U of California, Berkeley law school.
I can’t say whether DSAI is guilty, but I am sure that:
1. a rape victim will not go into the bathroom as instructed, clean himself, and come out from the bathroom wearing towel. (I think most people will fight the raper off, or just go into the bathroom and lock themselves in it, or try to run out of that house..)
2. the first thing rape victim will normally do is clean themselves because they will feel dirty of the whole act (not waiting for 3 days with the “dirty liquid” in your a*s and even go to the masjid with it!!!!!)Karpal is a seasoned trial lawyer and very clear that the whole case rest upon Saiful Bukhari. Only Saiful knew who and what was shoved up his dirty arse hole. According to the medical report, there was no sign of penetration and Saiful initially claimed it was a plastic bottle. Since Saiful has taken the moral high ground to make an Islamic Oath, he must be tested according to that Islamic yardstick. That’s what Karpal did and suceeded – that if the incident did happen, Saiful the Liar who tries to appear “warak” by performing Friday prayer had actually performed an invalid prayer because he was in a state of impurity. Indeed he was and indeed he is a LIAR that God had warned will be obliterated from the face of this earth!
That compulsive Liar even tries to charade as a pious person by the two black marks that he scratched on his forehead to give that mark of perpetual prostration (tanda sujud di kepala) for his court appearance. It is amazing the theatrics that he puts on, he deserves an Oscar for this performance.
This dirty arsehole story demeans and is a stain on the whole Malay race! especially when you dont even know me. so Ilham dont call anyone stupid it is againt the Laws espoused in the qur’an ok. It is commanded even the most ignorant ones you must have time for them and educate them and discourse with all in a respectful manner ok. dont do it again. tak baik.
for carlos’s”: fair question. I really have to find it. I was referring to having witnessess to a sexual misconduct. in the Miralce of the Qur’an. sexual misconduct has to have 4 witnesess . The Qur’an expressly states an affair outside marriage. for a serious sexual misconduc allegation Allah commands four witnessess to guard against false allegations and wrongdoings against another person and defaming his otherwise good character with ordinary people and wrongly doing so. So I was really thinking of that when I said that. I will do my research. However in this sad case here, it is an allegation of sexual misconduct albeit of the worst kind most frowned upon and unnatural act ( thats about as far as I would go in mentioning it without saying the actual word because I cannot stomachh doing so) and therefore would require the same strict demand by teh Qur’an witnesees to make sure that we do not prosecute wrongly, unfairly and in criminal law beyond reasonable doubt that Anwar has actually perpertrated the said act. Now back to my comment and this is the reason WHY I believe in my heart that the miracle of the Qur’an is also sent from the realm of beyond to guide humans in code of conduct,to live in honor and when judging someone in the courts of Man the laws of man that we do not err and destroy an otherwise innocent persons character and defame him or her. that is why I believe that teh miracle of the Qur’an is also the most comprehensive LEGAL Document of fairness and justice sent to this physical world because God knows the heart of men and the greed of men. and how it can destroy all in its path.Yesterday, the road to the Courts’ Complex in Jalan Duta was choked. Security was very tight. Entry into the courts was heavily screened as the trial of Dato’ Seri Anwar Ibrahim (DSAI) in Sodomy II started. This is a repeat of the self inflicted embarrassment and humiliation that we, Malaysians, suffered in 1999 as a nation pre-occupied with unnatural sex. We were made out to be like the people of ancient Sodom that God obliterated from the face of the earth.Liwat (Anal Sex)
People of my generation, more so the Malays, have difficulty using the word “anal sex”. There is no Malay equivalent for that word. Being ever so polite and gentle, the Malay word for that is “liwat”. It is derived from the root word “excess/excessive”, as a description of an excessive sex beyond the norms. Even the official dictionary, the Kamus Dewan 1984 version published by Dewan Bahasa could only muster enough courage to define “liwat” as “bersetubuh dengan binatang”.
The Malays could not say “fornicate”, what more to describe the abomination of “anal sex” as “main buntut”. The Indonesians are somewhat a bit more forthright and very open. In their Kamus Besar Bahasa Indonesia of the 1995 Edition, “liwat” is described as “ persetubuhan sesama lelaki”. The point is that- to the Malays, “liwat” is an animalistic act.
And yet, in Sodomy I, the Malays have been internationally scandalised as an animalistic society. Why do I say that? Because, Sodomy I involved the highest strata of Malay society- the Malay (UMNO) Leadership. The charge was brought by a Malay(?) Prime Minister against a Malay Deputy Prime Minister. The alleged victim is a Malay. All the key actors, from the witnesses to the prosecutors and the judges (with one exception the Late Augustine “Not Relevant” Paul) are all Malays. The moral of the Malay society was dragged to its lowest ebb. Even Niccolo Machiavelli of Florence could not be more proud.
If there is anything to redeem Sodomy I, it is the fact that the victim, Azizan Abu Bakar, appeared rather coy, almost like a reluctant performer. Sodomy II, on the other hand, blows the mind away. Here, we have Mohd Saiful Bukhairy Azlan almost proud to claim that his backside was diddled with. When the medical report did not support his story, he went to a mosque in Jalan Duta to make an Islamic Oath under the glare of the tv cameras.
Saiful was intent on having his day in court to show how DSAI could overpower him to have a taste of his backside. In the various press conferences that Saiful Bukhary gave, the mainstream media attempted to make him look like a martyr, like a man seeking justice. And justice for what? For proclaiming to the world that his arse hole was poked!
Saiful’s Day in Court with Karpal Singh
Yesterday and for the next few days, it will be Saiful’s day in court. The day that he exposes the truth in order to seek his justice. But already on the first day of trial, all did not seem well for the prosecution. Saiful met his first test when the contemporaneous evidence in the form of the medical report made on July 28, 2008 at 2pm could not support his story that his arse was buggered. So Saiful took the most convenient suggestion made by Karpal Singh, he accused the Pusrawi Hospital doctor of lying. He accused the doctor of lying for stating that his anus hurt because a plastic instrument had been inserted into it. The next few days will see him accusing a lot more people just to prove that he was indeed buggered.
What is so pitiful is that PM Najib is implicated in this. Saiful has already admitted that just two days before the alleged sodomy, PM Najib had met Saiful. And the person who brought Saiful to meet the PM was none other than Najib’s Personal Assistant, Dato’ Prof Dr Anas. Just ask about anyone in the PM’s Department, and they will tell you what they know of Prof Anas’s sexual orientation! If the Sikhs (we call them Bai’s) were previously unfairly disparaged for this, in the spirit of 1Malaysia, the Malays too are now filling up this quota, a legacy of the NEP.
And Saiful Bukhairy is the kind of witness that AG Gani relies on to form a case against DSAI. Did anyone die? Was anyone blown to pieces? Yet, when it came to Razak Baginda, the central figure in the Altantuya murder, AG Gani was quick to say no evidence to proceed against Razak. Razak has since run away from Malaysian shores, hoping that the public would soon forget him. What is so unfortunate is that the PM Najib is implicated in both these crimes.
In the Razak Baginda Altantuya murder case, PM Najib’s security escort, the Unit Tindakan Khas (UTK) was involved. While in Sodomy II, PM Najib’s PA, Dr Anas, is responsible for bringing forth Saiful to be the protagonist. In the Altantuya case, AG Gani tries to bury (or blow up) the evidence, while in Sodmomy II, AG Gani is trying to dig (korek) the evidence. AG Gani sure knows his priorities!
Rosli Dahlan’s Case: Kevin’s “Tak Tahu, Tak Tahu” makes Malaysian Legal History
I was in court for DSAI’s case and also to hear the ruling in the Rosli Dahlan’s Trial which I have been reporting last week. Day 2 and 3 of Rosli’s trial were taken off when MACC DPP Zulqarnain persistently tried to divert and delay the trial after MACC Deputy Director of Prosecution, Anthony Kevin Morais, was caught lying countless times during cross examination. His “Tak Tahu, Tak Tahu, Tak Tahu” evasive replies will now be etched in stone of the legal annals just as the infamous quote from VK Lingam’s “Correct, Correct, Correct” video. Only that Kevin’s video will be official as it is in the Court’s electronic recording system!
It is indeed an irony that in DSAI’s case, we have Saiful Bukhary, a physically able bodied young man, who eagerly took to 
swearing an Islamic Oath in order to get DSAI charged for burggering his backside. While in Rosli Dahlan’s trial, we have a known Pondan witness in the form of MACC’s DPP Kevin Morais giving false evidence in order to convict Rosli. Kevin broke all the rules of his Catholic upbringing, as set out in the Ten Commandments, when he lied through his teeth and was evasive when cornered during cross examination. Kevin was assisted by an Islamic University law graduate (IIU), in the form of DPP Zulqarnain, who resorted to all the dirty ploys to divert and delay Rosli Dahlan’s trial. It appears that religion is just a tool for people like these.
Law of Evidence 101
That DPP Zulqarnaian was so desperate to scuttle the Trial was so evident when he made rambling unending legal submissions that certain evidence that were already produced in Dato Ramli’s trial can be automatically admitted and marked in Rosli Dahlan’s trial without the “maker” being called to tender that evidence. This was Law of Evidence 101, the stuff that even a first year law student would know.
The basic rule of evidence is that a documentary evidence can only be admitted if the maker is called to tender and explain the document. What DPP Zulqarnain was trying to do was to admit certain questionable evidence into Rosli Dahlan’s trial without the maker being called or cross examined. That was how desperate the MACC was. It was an attempt by the MACC to admit evidence by the back door- “Main Belakang”.
Fortunately, Judge Abu Bakar Katar, would have none of this backdoor entry or any “Main Belakang”. Previously, the Judge had made two rulings in Rosli’s favour. Now, for the 3rd time, the Judge again ruled in Rosli’s favour that MACC DPP Zulqarnain must adduce documentary evidence through the maker, by the front door as most straight people would!
No comments:
Post a Comment