Salam... Live Report From Palace Of Justice Prosecutions appeal against Anwar Ibrahims acquittal of Sodomy II 12.25pm: Shafee shows Anwars notice of alibi and that at the time the opposition leader was not at the Desa Damansara condominium unit where the alleged incident took place. What Anwar stated in the notice is that he was in the next door unit and this was a devious manouevre, adds the lawyer. There are 14 witnesses, they say, but none were called to support the notice of alibi. 12.15pm: Shafee says the pictures and video recording at the scene proved Anwar was there. Not a whisper of an alibi was produced. The defence is dishonest when confronted with the video, they dropped the entire defence without a whisper. 12.05pm: Court now asks whether the trial judge accepted Anwars statement from the dock. Shafee, in describing the High Court judgment, says it is like reading an Agatha Christie thriller. It is only in the final two points, the judge decides to acquit. The judge is for the prosecution all the way but in defence he was about 90 per cent for the prosecution. It is only in the final two points, he decided otherwise.” Shafee says the judge never took into account of the accused’s statement from the dock. It was a mere denial (statement from the dock) and it is a classic bare denial. A denial of this sort after he gave a notice of alibi. He (Anwar) said he was never there but no witnesses are called to support the alibi. 11.55am: Shafee contrasts this case with another case where three test tubes were not sealed but the court accepted the evidence as there was no broken chain of evidence. In this (Anwar’s) case, the chemist received the samples sealed, yet this resulted in an acquittal. 11.45am: Shafee says the trial judge made the mistake when he misconstrued that the individual bottles containing the samples were tampered with. Actually, it is only the plastic bag which defence witness David Wells agreed had been tampered with, he adds. However, when asked by (former solicitor-general II Mohd) Yusof ( Zainal Abiden) the witness said he remains uncertain if the integrity of the samples were compromised.” Shafee points out that in a criminal case, one should argue on balance of probabilities. He adds that the IO followed the IGSO under scientific assistance, where all items should be packed differently and not mixed together and labelled clearly. In this case, HKL doctors placed all the samples in a plastic bag. 11.30am: Court in session. Shafee says Anwars foreign expert Dr David Wells said that the plastic bag in which the samples were placed were not tamper proof. The appointed lawyer argues that in Australia they may not extract samples after 36 hours but that is not gold standard. 11am: Justice Balia remarks that all evidence are sealed. Shafee further submits that the seals have the doctors and Saifuls signatures on them. This is an added precaution... As normally the doctors signature is sufficient, he said. Court takes a 15-minute break. 10.50am: Shafee says if the chemist took all the precaution from the hospital and the IO, how could the judge ignore this. There is silence in the gallery. The appointed DPP says the Borang Pengendalian (handling form) revealed that the samples were sealed by Dr Siew. It is difficult to say the doctors and IO conspired. I would say the IOs evidence is impeacheable. 10.46am: Shafee shows judges the HKL plastic bag used to keep the samples, that was cut open by Jude.It was cut open with the bottom portion still dangling. But all the samples are placed in separate envelopes according to the IGSO as explained earlier. The chemist, Shafee says, did not reject any of the samples given by Jude despite this. 10.40am: Chemist Dr Seah Lay Hong testifies that the seals on the samples taken at Hospital Kuala Lumpur remained intact.The security label placed remained intact. The seals remained intact. 10.30am: Shafee says there is no evidence of tampering as the seal on the recepticles remained intact despite being placed in envelopes. 10.25am: Shafee says the investigating officer placed the bottles in separate envelopes. The exhibit inside remains intact and the seal remains intact. He adds that the judge made the mistake in deciding that the plastic bag with the samples sealed were torn amounting to tampering. I suspect he (the trial judge) must have confused it with the bottles that were sealed. 10.13am: Shafee says the samples retrieved from Saifuls rectum was in pristine condition despite it being retrieved 56 hours after the alleged incident. He says the trial judge took the easy way out, when they accepted the foreign experts testimony. He claims these these experts relied on textbooks as compared to the local chemist, Dr Seah Lay Hong, who is a specialist in her field and has done extensive field work. The learned judge misconstrued the facts. There were several bottles sealed and put in a plastic bottle. The doctors did not mark any numbers they write upper rectum, low rectum and peri-anal. The bottles were all sealed and signed by the doctors and counter signed by Saiful. Shafee says the samples were placed in a plastic bag. However, the investigating officer (Jude) said according to the IGSO (Inspector General Standing Orders), the samples had to be separated and not all placed in one plastic bag. 10.10am: According to Shafee, sometimes you cannot find injury to the anus when a lubricant is used (the KY jel). He says from the fingernails of Saiful, there were skin traces of the accused. 10.08am: Shafee says there is no explanation how the accused (Anwars) sperm was in Saifuls anus. With the conclusive finding of the discovery of the sperm, the doctors concluded there was penile penetration. 10.05am: Shafee says the collecting of samples was done by the three Hospital Kuala Lumpur doctors and according to them, there is penetration in Saifuls high and low rectum. Lembah Pantai MP and Anwars eldest daughter Nurul Izzah and her husband are also in court but both are standing at the back. 9.55am: In term of reasonable doubt, Shafee says there is no need to create 100 percent reasonable doubt. He refers to Section 3 of the Evidence Act, what needs to be proved is a fact of issue is a balance of probabilities and not 100 percent. It is a probability test. How do we prove a case beyond reasonable doubt, all facts must be gathered and the cumulative facts to prove the case. The judge imposed a high burden that the integrity of the sample is compromised. That generated the acquittal by raising the doubt, he says. 9.45am: According to Shafee, the foreign chemist hired by Anwar had created doubts to the integrity of the samples. This is despite the judge earlier had ruled in accepting the testimonies by the prosecution witnesses resulting in Anwars defence being called. However, there is nothing in the written judgment to say the court was convinced by the foreign experts. The judge only says there is no 100 percent certainty that the samples remained intact, says Shafee. 9.45am: Shafee says there is a mistake on the part of the trial judge to question the integrity of the samples from Saifuls rectum. He adds the trial judge also made a mistake in questioning the chemist report and the DNA findings. The chemist, he says, had taken into consideration of all factors. There is no evidence of the samples from the rectum were tampered as the seal is intact, argues Shafee. The judge also failed to take into consideration of corroborative evidence. 9.40am: Shafee says there is one single issue that results in the acquittal of Anwar, namely the DNA exhibits recovered from Saifuls rectum was compromised. He says the question is whether there was tampering by investigating officer Jude Pereira, the integrity of the samples that were preserved by the two chemists and whether their testimony could be relied upon. Shafee said the petition of appeal is focused on this. 9.35am: Shafee introduces all the parties involved in the case. Also present is complainant Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlans counsel Zamri Idrus. Shafee says the prosecutions submission had been tendered on July 19. Seats inside the courtroom are all occupied with many more unable to get in waiting outside. 9.30am: Court is now in session with justice Balia Yusof Wahi leading the three-member Court of Appeal panel. 9.29am: Unlike yesterday, the situation outside the Palace of Justice appears quiet. There is a small group of Anwar supporters under the watchful eyes of a dozen of police officers. 9.28am: Also in the courtroom are Kelana Jaya MP Wong Chen and Wangsa Maju MP Dr Tan Kee Kwong. Outside is another opposition representative, Seri Setia assemblyperson Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad. 9.21am: Pandan MP Rafizi Ramli and a dozen of supporters from the Malaysian Indian Force and PKR Youth are blocked from entering the court house. However, only Rafizi is allowed into the courtroom. 9.20am: Shafee Abdullahs prosecution team is already in court. Now awaiting for defence lawyer Karpal Singh. 9.19am: The court room is packed to the brim. International observers from Lawasia, International Commission of Jurists and Inter Parliamentary Unions representative Mark Trowell are among those in the public gallery. 9.10am: Anwar Ibrahim and his wife, PKR president Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, arrive at the court house. They are accompanied by two of their daughters. They go directly the Court of Appeal on the second floor of the Palace of Justice. 9.05am: Following yesterdays incident where a crowd of Muslim NGOs attempted to storm the court house, security has been tightened at the Palace of Justice. People are not allowed to enter the back entrance and must use only the front entrance despite both the back and front sections are equipped with X-ray scanning machines. The Court of Appeal panel will be chaired by justice Balia Yusof Wahi. The others are justices Aziah Ali and Mohd Zawawi Salleh. 8.53am: Security is very tight as police set up roadblocks near the back entrance of Palace of Justice in Putrajaya where the case will heard.
Posted on: Thu, 06 Mar 2014 05:14:17 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015