Yesterday, the prosecution questioned McDonald's credibility when it showed the court that some of his testimonies in other cases came under disrepute.
McDonald also conceded to making a mistake when he said during the examination-in-chief that it was wrong for chemist Dr Seah Lay Hong to have the acid phosphatase test on the cotton swabs retrieved from the victim.
He agreed with solicitor-general II Mohd Yusof Zainal Abiden over a finding in a journal that sperm can last in the rectum for 113 hours.
However, McDonald disagreed with the prosecution when shown a Thai hospital finding that semen can last for 19 days in a female's private part.
The prosecution is expected to finish its cross-examination of McDonald today.
LIVE REPORTS
8.56am: Among those present in the public gallery of the High Court in the Jalan Duta Court Complex in Kuala Lumpur is Machang MP Saifuddin Nasution and Baginda Minda.
Baginda was a defence witness in Anwar Ibrahim's first sodomy trial 10 years ago.
9.15am: The accused, Anwar Ibrahim, arrives in court with his wife and PKR president Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail.
9.40am: Lead defence lawyer Karpal Singh enters the courtroom.
9.42am: Defence lawyers Karpal Singh, Sankara Nair and Param Cumaraswamy, along with solicitor-general II Mohd Yusof Zainal Abiden and deputy public prosecutor Nordin Hassan go into judge Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah's chambers.
9.58am: Proceeding starts, with Justice Zabidin presiding.
9.59am: McDonald takes the witness stand, with cross-examination done by Yusof.
Yusof asks McDonald about differential extraction and whether he conducts such procedures in his labs.
McDonald says he does not have a lab as he is merely a consultant.
Yusof asserts that McDonald is testifying based on personal experience, but the witness says he does not understand the question.
10.02am: Yusof asks McDonald (right) if he had made the accusation that the procedure conducted by Seah was flawed.
McDonald disagrees with that statement, and explains that (he said) Seah did not do certain procedures to separate the cells.
The witness claims that the DNA came from epithelial cells, not the actual DNA of a proper person.
10.10am: Yusof is asking questions based on an article McDonald used in court.
10.11am: Yusof says if one does not do the slide, then one cannot see the cells below.
McDonald agrees.
10.28am: Yusof claims Seah had correctly conducted the extraction process.
McDonald disagrees with this.
Yusof says Seah (left) recovered spermatozoa in Saiful's anus before the extraction process.
McDonald replies that there are two cell types and two contributors. Seah must prove that cell type produced the right DNA.
10.34am: Yusof is focusing on where the slide procedure was to be done after extraction.
McDonald reads a paragraph showing it needs to be done.
An argument ensures.
10.37am: Yusof suggests McDonald is misleading the court. Sankara objects, saying it is an unfair allegation.
10.39am: McDonald says Yusof is wrong in suggesting that the slide procedure need not be done.
10.40am: McDonald says one needs to do the slide to provide a meaningful explanation process.
10.41am: Now, McDonald is accuses Yusof of misleading the court. "You need to take the slide at the different process."
10.43am: McDonald claims Seah did not do the slide after the first extraction process.
10.46am: Yusof says there was only one single profile from the B7 high rectum swab.
McDonald adds, allegedly.
Yusof says it came from the non-sperm fraction of the donor (Saiful).
10.50am: Yusof says if there are other DNA from non-sperm cells, it would also appear.
McDonald says yes.
10.54am: McDonald says that on the B9 swab there is an unidentified person's profile which was not reported.
"It does not belong to Saiful (right) or Male Y."
11am: Yusof asks how Saiful's sperm was found in his own anus.
11.02am: Yusof says if there was a rape victim and sodomy took place after that, you will also have the DNA of the victim from the act of sodomy. How is this possible in Saiful's case, as he is a male?
McDonald says he saw it in the results given by Seah. Saiful's DNA was in there.
11.05am: Yusof asks for short break.
11.43am: Court resumes. Yusof asks about the Petaling Jaya forensic lab accreditation.
11.47am: Yusof shows the required document.
11.48am: McDonald explains that there is a transition from ESCLAP Legacy to international programme.
"There are things which you have to comply to receive the ISO 17025 accreditation.
"The lab is not accreditated to the ISO 17025."
Yusof: Is the lab not competent?
McDonald: There will be consequences, as it may result in the view the lab is being incompetent.
11.53am: McDonald notes that the international certification lasts until next month, but the swab tests were done in 2008.
11.55am: Yusof asks McDonald whether he agrees that the international programme started in April 2009.
McDonald says he does not know the precise information.
11.57am: Yusof: Is accreditation an issue for the Petaling Jaya lab in 2008?
McDonald: I don't know, as no one has inspected the lab since 2005.
12pm: Yusof says that as far as 2008, the Malaysian lab is accreditated under the international programme.
McDonald: I do not have the information.
Yusof: There is no real reason for you bringing up the issue?
McDonald: Something was brought up, that the lab was accreditated under ISO 17025. But it was not.
12.05pm: Yusof shows McDonald the notes of proceeding. "Seah says the lab is accredited with ESCLAP 2005."
12.15am: Court adjourns to 2.15pm to give McDonald time to search where Seah said the lab is certified ISO 17025.
2.10pm: Johor PKR chief and former Health Minister Chua Jui Meng (left) arrives.
2.20pm: Court resumes.
McDonald showsSeah's testimonyin which she said the Petaling Jaya lab is accredited by ISO17025.
"I interpret it that Seah said Malaysia lab is accredited with ISO17025. She has not corrected it, anyway."
2.24pm: Yusof says Seah testified that the PJ lab was accredited with ESCLAP in 2005.
Yusof: Where is it did she say it is certified by ISO17025? When she gave evidence, she testified as head of forensics?
McDonald: The question was put and she said '17025'. If it was only accredited by ISO9000, then she should have said ISO9000.
2.34pm: Yusof suggests McDonald is making an inference.
McDonald says he may have made assumptions.
2.36pm: Yusof says there is a report that there was a question whether the lab had been accredited internationally.
McDonald says the ISO9000 is one certification and 17000 series is another.
2.42pm: Yusof asks what it is that Seah did not do.
McDonald says she did not do the slides as required.
2.48pm: Yusof asks whether Seah had said there was no degradation.
McDonald says not all samples were pristine.
Yusof says all newspapers reported the samples as being pristine.
2.53pm: McDonald says Seah said there was no degradation.
2.56pm: Yusof points to Seah's answer that there was a slight degradation but not sufficient to destroy the DNA, which is readable.
McDonald says he disagrees.
3pm: McDonald says the degradation may not be that severe. McDonald says there is no evidence of degradation.
3.13pm: McDonald says for the second time that Yusof is misleading the court, as Seah was trying to evade the question in her testimony.
3.15pm: Yusof asks McDonald where the questions to Seah are that shows degradation.
McDonald points to a number of questions that purported to show degradation. But Yusof disagrees, as the question refer to Saiful's underwear.
"What you are trying to do is mislead," McDonald tells Yusof.
3.21pm: Yusof asks McDonald to show evidence of degradation, so McDonald shows the graph showing there is degradation.
3.28pm: McDonald alleges Seah has not shown her computation data, and the prosecution has also failed to show the data.
3.30pm: McDonald says there is no evidence of degradation in some of the samples in B7, high rectal swab.
3.40pm: McDonald says Seah was wrong, because after 48 hours in room temperature, none of the cells would be alive.
3.50pm: Yusof asks McDonald to look at B7, B8 and B9 swabs at the male fraction.
3.54pm: McDonald says you can exclude Male Y, but it appears in all samples.
Court adjourns to 9am tomorrow.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.