Who the Fuck are you Umno lawyer Datuk Seri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah? Asshole Digger

Expert stumped over ‘planted sperm’ poser
Common Sense in a Coma Déjà Vu All Over Again  the  the Strategic Partnership in fabrication of evidence,.scientists from Israel help to plant evidence

RELATED ARTICLEJudge part of conspiracy to frame Anwar http://www.freeanwar.net/jan2003/facnews190303.htm

Who the Fuck are you Umno lawyer Datuk Seri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah? Asshole Digger

The  Attorney-General art of  conducting prosecution.?There is no way UMNO going to hand over the power peacefully if they lose in the next GE. Who in his right mind would want to relinquish his power without a fight, knowing very well that some of them might end up serving a long years in prison for corruption and some of them might even end up at the gallow for killing innocent sweet foreigner.

pro-Umno lawyer Datuk Seri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah

 FARAH AZLINA LATIF SEX WITH MOHD SAIFUL BUKHARI AZLAN ‘RUINS CREDIBILITY OF THE THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL’S CHAMBERS

 DAP chairman Karpal Singh wants pro-Umno lawyer Datuk Seri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah hauled up for contempt of court, saying the latter had interfered with proceedings in the ongoing Sodomy II trial.

On 11 August 2008, in an article called ‘The real dalang behind the Anwar sodomy allegation’, Malaysia Today wrote: Shafee was supposed to have led the prosecution against Anwar. A provision in the law called FIAT allows the Attorney-General to appoint an outsider to conduct the prosecution. If Shafee does well then he would most likely be appointed the next Attorney-General.

Since the publishing of article almost a year ago, Shafee has sued me and in his summons in chambers he applied to strike off my defence on grounds that my allegation did not have any particulars. Well, if it’s particulars he wants then it is particulars he shall get.

In the meantime, read what Malaysia Today wrote on 11 August 2008:
*************************************************

Sodomy II: Who stands to gain the most?

In the court of the rakyat, Anwar Ibrahim is not guilty of Sodomy II, and neither was he guilty of Sodomy I. He was initially found guilty of Sodomy I (that ‘judgment’ later reversed) in the most convoluted and illogical judicial process facilitated and engineered by top policemen, prosecutors and judges who were anything but the respected and responsible public servants for law and order and justice in a democratic country.

Today, we are on the verge of witnessing a repeat of that most shameful process in Malaysia's history. The question is why would anyone want to do this? Surely, Saiful (aged 13 during Sodomy I) knows the gravity, implications and consequences of his allegations against Anwar.

Assuming that Saiful has actually been sodomised, what does he gain by lodging a report? He says that he been sodomised eight times by Anwar, in which case he should have lodged a police report immediately after the first incident if he were the innocent law-abiding citizen that he (or rather various powerful interested parties are trying to portray on his behalf) is trying to portray.

On the basis of his own report and confession, Saiful now faces the possibility of being jailed for willingly engaging in sodomy (as Anwar's adopted brother was found guilty of and jailed for six months in Sodomy I) if his allegations against Anwar are ‘proven’. Furthermore, Saiful will now be the target of ridicule and harassment about his manhood and sexual preference. No young man will be able to live normally with such shame and accompanying torment and ridicule.

In fact, it is a well-known fact that genuine rape victims in general do not report the crime, and male victims in particular are more inclined not to report sodomy because of the greater shame and implications regarding their manhood. Furthermore, Saiful's allegations against Anwar are so flimsy that unless the Sodomy I process is repeated, Anwar will not be found guilty.

Given these facts, Saiful could be getting a huge reward for alleging that Anwar had sodomised him, a reward which adequately compensates for the stigma and guilt associated with being a partner willing or unwilling in several acts of sodomy The question is who is offering such a handsome reward? Who is so rich and powerful to be able to make an offer which Saiful cannot refuse? Or, more correctly, who stands to gain most from Sodomy II?

The popular arguments on the Net and in the coffee-shops point to Najib. Najib met Saiful on the day after the alleged sodomy. Saiful has access to Najib's aide. The allegation against Anwar has diverted the attention of the public from the revelations made by Private Investigator P Balasubramaniam about Najib in his first statutory declaration. Saiful's allegation has also put Anwar on the defensive and thwarted his plans to challenge the BN government for power by September.

All these suggest that Najib has much to gain from Sodomy II. The reality is that Najib is also a victim of Sodomy II. In the eyes of the public, Najib is not only involved in the Altanuya case but is also masterminding a conspiracy against Anwar. These perceptions will have serious consequences and will most surely weaken Najib's case to be the next PM. The way that Najib has responded to the sodomy allegation against Anwar suggests an individual who is blundering - not a mastermind who has crafted the whole thing, from positioning Saiful in PKR to getting him to accuse Anwar of sodomy. In conclusion, Najib does not stand to gain from Sodomy II.

As for Abdullah Ahamd Badawi, the people punished him on March 8 for his poor performance as PM. His popularity is at an all time low - the high petrol/diesel prices, high food prices, inflation, crime, etc. Sodomy II has added a major political crisis which Abdullah is ill-equipped to handle, even if he is inclined to do so at this time. Either way he will be a loser.

If Anwar is found ‘guilty’ of Sodomy II, the people will hold Abdullah responsible for victimising Anwar, and Abdullah may have to exit well before the declared 2010 deadline. If Anwar were found innocent, that would strengthen Anwar, enabling him to challenge BN and hasten Abdullah's exit. If Sodomy II drags on, there will be serious public unrest and this would also pose a major challenge for Abdullah. Thus, Abdullah is also a victim of Sodomy II.

It looks like that Anwar, Najib and Abdullah are all victims of Sodomy II in one way or another. So who is behind Sodomy II? Who will benefit from Sodomy II? Someone who will lose most if Anwar comes into power. Someone who will go to any extent to prevent Anwar's rise. Someone who no longer accepts Najib as a potential PM. Someone who wants instability in Malaysia. Someone who wants to topple Abdullah.

Someone who cannot accept the rise of the opposition. Someone who does not agree with the new direction that Malaysia is taking in matters such as the judiciary and law and order. Someone whose buddies (cronies) are badly affected by government actions such as termination of mega-projects. Someone who wants to prevent probe and investigation into government misdeeds and mal-practices of the past. Someone who wants to continue the legacy of the past.

Someone who is fully schooled in sodomy matters from Sodomy I. Someone who has strong allies in the government, especially the home ministry, police and AG chambers. Someone who is unscrupulous. Someone who will go any extent to get what he wants. Someone who is extremely rich and powerful. Someone who has finally readied an heir. So, who is behind Sodomy II? A Machiavellian par excellence.

Who is it?

Ken, Malaysiakini
*************************************************

That was what Ken wrote in Malaysiakini on 22 July 2008. I do not, however, agree with his prognosis. Without a doubt he is exonerating Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak and Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi from the crime of trying to frame Anwar Ibrahim and has painted them, plus Anwar, as the three victims in this attempted frame-up. And in that same breath Ken is insinuating that Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad is the real dalang behind the whole thing.

I do not quite agree with this assumption. Yes, Mahathir has no love for Anwar, and vice versa, but the Grand Old Man of Malaysian politics is not behind this latest move to frame Anwar on sodomy charges. And I say this because the behind-the-scenes goings-on prior to the sodomy issue exploding onto the Malaysian scene seem to point to Abdullah’s office, or at least to those within his inner circle.

Firstly, Saiful met Najib before the so-called sodomy took place. No doubt, at first, Najib denied meeting him and then later admitted meeting him but explained that it was for purposes of career guidance and to help the young man obtain a scholarship. Later on, Najib confessed he met Saiful to discuss the sodomy allegation against Anwar. This flip-flopping and inconsistency -- denial and then confessing only when it appeared like he could no longer deny it -- makes Najib appear like he is lying and therefore is trying to cover up an evil deed.

Najib’s responses certainly make him look like a liar and therefore he must have something to hide if he is lying. A lying man is certainly the mark of a guilty man, which makes it look like he is behind the conspiracy, or at least involved in the conspiracy to frame Anwar. But this is what they are trying to make us believe. Why this effort to make it appear like Najib is the culprit if not to deflect all attention from whoever is the real culprit?

Now, the day after Saiful met Najib, he met Rodwan in room 619 of the Kuala Lumpur Concorde. Najib did not know this of course. Prior to that meeting, Rodwan and Saiful spoke over the phone at least eight times. We can only assume that part of this conversation involved asking Saiful to go meet Najib and to make sure that everyone knows about it so that the conspiracy points to Najib. The fact that Saiful brought a friend along only reinforces this assumption, especialy when this friend is aligned to Anwar Ibrahim.

The man who is the real mastermind behind this latest conspiracy to frame Anwar is Shafee Abdullah. Just days before the sodomy allegation exploded, and even before Saiful’s meeting with Rodwan on 25 June 2008, Shafee was in Najib’s house to attend a gathering. And in front of scores of witnesses he asked to be excused early because he ‘had a very big fish to catch’. Shafee conveniently made it known that he is behind the move to catch the ‘big fish’ and he wanted all those in Najib’s house to be aware that Najib was in the know. Actually, Najib did not know what he was talking about and assumed that the ‘big fish’ meant Raja Petra Kamarudin and was with regards to the Statutory Declaration that he had signed just days earlier on 18 June 2008.

Shafee was supposed to have led the prosecution against Anwar. A provision in the law called FIAT allows the Attorney-General to appoint an outsider to conduct the prosecution. If Shafee does well then he would most likely be appointed the next Attorney-General. When word got out that he is heading the special police operations centre, which was located in his office, they had to abandon the whole idea.

Shafee’s hands are behind the whole thing. And this can only happen with Abdullah’s blessing. No, it is not Mahathir who is behind this. And it is not Abdullah, Najib and Anwar who are the three victims. The victims are Mahathir, Najib and Anwar. Abdullah is the hidden hand and Shafee is the henchman who was tasked with the job of implementing the evil deed. Politics is not what it always appears to be in Malaysia. That is how Malay politics is played out.

Source: Malaysia Today

Karpal urged trial judge Datuk Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah to issue a show-cause notice to Muhammad Shafee to explain the latter’s “unwarranted public attack” against Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s defence statement from the dock.

Anwar, a former deputy prime minister, now heads the three-party opposition Pakatan Rakyat (PR) pact. Besides being his political ally, Karpal is defending the PKR advisor who stands accused of sodomising a former aide, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, three years ago in a luxury condominium here.

“If what was uttered by Anwar was contemptuous, it would have been contempt in the face of the court. It was for Justice Mohamad Zabidin to hold Anwar in contempt. He did not do so.

“Who is Muhammad Shafee Abdullah to question the wisdom of the trial judge?” Karpal demanded in a media statement today.

Muhammad Shafee, among Malaysia’s legal elites, is regarded as an expert on media contempt laws and was cited yesterday in Umno-owned Mingguan Malaysia calling Anwar’s defence statement as contemptuous.

The top-earning lawyer was reported telling the Attorney-General to step into the row and initiate contempt proceedings against Anwar.

The news was replicated today in other mainstream media, including New Straits Times, which quoted Muhammad Shafee as saying: “This will also prevent the presiding judge from being involved in any possible conflict in which the judge may be blinded by it.”

Karpal objected to Muhammad Shafee’s argument for the A-G’s intervention as unprecedented and defying logic.

“That itself amounts to contempt of court on the part of the judge who does so,” he said.

“Shafee should know a judge cannot interfere in a judicial proceeding in another court. It is axiomatic. It is elementary,” the Bukit Gelugor MP added.

Muhammad Shafee has also come under fire online after Anwar’s unsworn statement of defence from the dock, purportedly for interfering with the news coverage of the controversial court case by issuing certain instructions to mainstream media editors and reporters.

Malaysia’s best-paid lawyer has denied conspiring with staff in the Prime Minister’s Office to subvert the media and end the political career of the man once deemed the biggest threat to the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN).

 Pakatan Rakyat (PR) has called on the High Court hearing Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s sodomy trial to haul up lawyer Datuk Seri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah over allegations that he conspired with the Najib administration to destroy the opposition leader’s image.

Opposition lawmakers told The Malaysian Insider that the court must find out if the prominent lawyer had met media chiefs along with staff from the Prime Minister’s Office to subvert media coverage of the high-profile trial.

“This raises doubt over the proceedings of the case and the court should call on Shafee to explain to ensure the credibility of the trial,” said PAS vice-president Datuk Mahfuz Omar(picture).

This was echoed by Perak DAP chief Datuk Ngeh Koo Ham, who said that as Shafee is frequently employed by and linked to backroom discussions with Barisan Nasional (BN) lynchpin Umno, he cannot be considered a neutral party.

“Justice must be seen to be served. This was also the lawyer who said openly to the media that it was 99.9 per cent sure that Anwar was the man in a sex video,” the Beruas MP said, referring to allegations earlier this year that the PKR de facto leader was the man recorded having sex with an unknown woman.

With Anwar’s ongoing sodomy trial winding to a close, the Permatang Pauh MP had given his statement from the dock, claiming that the accusation, which surfaced over three years ago, was a conspiracy by Datuk Seri Najib Razak to end his political career.

Muhammad Shafee has come under scrutiny online purportedly for interfering with the news coverage of the controversial court case by issuing instructions to mainstream media editors and reporters over their reporting of Anwar’s statement.

The alleged conspiracy was given more flavour by a blogger calling himself Ahmat Gaza who claimed that a clandestine meeting on August 23 at the swanky Le Meridien Hotel in the city here included one of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s media advisers, Abdul Jalil Hamid.

But the lawyer scoffed at the allegations, stating that the meeting with various media such asUtusan Malaysia, TV3 and The Star was not a secret and he was there to talk about the law of contempt.

Asked if Abdul Jalil was also present at that meeting, Muhammad Shafee said: “If Jalil was there, I vaguely think he was there, I’m not surprised if Jalil was there because he was there as a media person.”

He also admitted that he had commented on Anwar’s case, but defended his cutting remarks about the opposition leader’s statement from the dock as merely his opinion to illustrate what is contemptuous law because people had asked him about it with regards to the case.

“Why is Anwar relevant? Of course people want to know because it is the most controversial case going on right now,” he said.

 http://thebusinesstribune.blogspot.com/2011/08/if-theres-one-thing-that-net-savvy.html