The Australian DNA expert cross-examined in the Sodomy II trial admitted today that three cotton swabs retrieved from complainant Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan's anus contain the "Male Y" DNA.
While Dr Brian McDonald had been quite apprehensive about the findings the whole day to questions from solicitor-general II Mohd Yusof Zainal Abiden, he finally concurred with the finding on the "Male Y" DNA.
The swabs marked B7 and B8 (high rectal swab) and B9 (low rectal) were the ones said to have been identified by government chemist Dr Seah Lay Hong to have "Male Y" (purportedly that of Anwar Ibrahim) DNA.
"Looking at the results of the three swabs, there is presence of 'Male Y' DNA in the male fraction," McDonald said.
Earlier in the morning, he steadfastly defended his assertion that Seah performed a flawed procedure.
"There are certain procedures that she should have done to separate the cells from the spermatozoa. The DNA derived in the examination also comes from the epithelial cells and not only from the sperm.
"What she should have done is following the cleaning process, she should slide the sample on a receptacle to ensure there is no more epithelial cell. If one does not slide the results, one cannot check for the presence of non-related cells," the witness said.
McDonald said Seah had not correctly conducted the extraction process. However, the Australian agreed with Yusof when he was asked whether one can never have clean samples all the time.
Yusof: Seah recovered spermatozoa in Saiful's anus before the extraction process.
McDonald: There are two cell types and two contributors. Seah must prove that the sperm cell type produced the right DNA.
Witness says prosecutor misleading court
While Yusof had accused McDonald of misleading the court yesterday following his attacks on Seah during his examination-in-chief, the tables were turned against the lead prosecuting officer when the witness accused him of misleading the court, not once but twice.
This followed certain statements put by Yusof that the slide procedure need not be done.
"You (Yusof) are misleading the court. You need to take slides at the different processes of cleaning up the samples," McDonald said, adding that he noted Seah did take the slide before the first extraction.
He also pointed out that there was DNA of an unidentified person's profile, which was not reported by Seah.
"It does not belong to Saiful or 'Male Y'. However, it is not reported despite the high peaks in the graph."
Yusof also asked as to how the expert could conclude that Saiful's sperm was found in his own anus, to which McDonald replied he based it on the results given by Seah that Saiful's DNA was also in there.
However, he said this could have been avoided if the cleaning process was done properly.
ISO 17025 accreditation of lab questioned
McDonald also defended his position on strong assertions made by Yusof that the Petaling Jaya forensic laboratory was properly accredited and could conduct tests well, replying: "The lab is not accredited under ISO17025."
Yusof: Is the lab not competent?
McDonald: There will be consequences, as it may result in the view the lab is incompetent.
Yusof: Where did she say it is certified by ISO17025? When she gave evidence, testifying as head of forensics?
McDonald: The question was put to her by the lawyer and she said '17025'. If it was only accredited by ISO9000, then she should have said ISO9000.
On the issue of degradation, Yusof said the prosecution could not agree with McDonald's suggestion that the samples were in "pristine condition", to which McDonald agreed there was some degradation.
"What Seah answered is that there was a slight degradation but not sufficient to destroy the DNA, which is readable," said the solicitor-general II.
The witness then pointed out to a number of chart and graph readings that showed signs of degradation, and he accused Yusof a second time of trying to mislead the court by suggesting he made no assertions that there were no signs of degradation.
Yusof said it was widely reported in the media, quoting McDonald, that the sample was in "pristine condition" and this led to the witness to reply: "And now we are relying on newspapers. What you are trying to do is misleading."
Hearing continues tomorrow with the re-examination of McDonald by Ram Karpal Singh.
While Dr Brian McDonald had been quite apprehensive about the findings the whole day to questions from solicitor-general II Mohd Yusof Zainal Abiden, he finally concurred with the finding on the "Male Y" DNA.
The swabs marked B7 and B8 (high rectal swab) and B9 (low rectal) were the ones said to have been identified by government chemist Dr Seah Lay Hong to have "Male Y" (purportedly that of Anwar Ibrahim) DNA."Looking at the results of the three swabs, there is presence of 'Male Y' DNA in the male fraction," McDonald said.
Earlier in the morning, he steadfastly defended his assertion that Seah performed a flawed procedure.
"There are certain procedures that she should have done to separate the cells from the spermatozoa. The DNA derived in the examination also comes from the epithelial cells and not only from the sperm.
"What she should have done is following the cleaning process, she should slide the sample on a receptacle to ensure there is no more epithelial cell. If one does not slide the results, one cannot check for the presence of non-related cells," the witness said.
McDonald said Seah had not correctly conducted the extraction process. However, the Australian agreed with Yusof when he was asked whether one can never have clean samples all the time.
Yusof: Seah recovered spermatozoa in Saiful's anus before the extraction process.
McDonald: There are two cell types and two contributors. Seah must prove that the sperm cell type produced the right DNA.
Witness says prosecutor misleading court
While Yusof had accused McDonald of misleading the court yesterday following his attacks on Seah during his examination-in-chief, the tables were turned against the lead prosecuting officer when the witness accused him of misleading the court, not once but twice.
This followed certain statements put by Yusof that the slide procedure need not be done."You (Yusof) are misleading the court. You need to take slides at the different processes of cleaning up the samples," McDonald said, adding that he noted Seah did take the slide before the first extraction.
He also pointed out that there was DNA of an unidentified person's profile, which was not reported by Seah.
"It does not belong to Saiful or 'Male Y'. However, it is not reported despite the high peaks in the graph."
Yusof also asked as to how the expert could conclude that Saiful's sperm was found in his own anus, to which McDonald replied he based it on the results given by Seah that Saiful's DNA was also in there.
However, he said this could have been avoided if the cleaning process was done properly.
ISO 17025 accreditation of lab questioned
McDonald also defended his position on strong assertions made by Yusof that the Petaling Jaya forensic laboratory was properly accredited and could conduct tests well, replying: "The lab is not accredited under ISO17025."
Yusof: Is the lab not competent?
McDonald: There will be consequences, as it may result in the view the lab is incompetent.
Yusof: Where did she say it is certified by ISO17025? When she gave evidence, testifying as head of forensics?
McDonald: The question was put to her by the lawyer and she said '17025'. If it was only accredited by ISO9000, then she should have said ISO9000.
On the issue of degradation, Yusof said the prosecution could not agree with McDonald's suggestion that the samples were in "pristine condition", to which McDonald agreed there was some degradation."What Seah answered is that there was a slight degradation but not sufficient to destroy the DNA, which is readable," said the solicitor-general II.
The witness then pointed out to a number of chart and graph readings that showed signs of degradation, and he accused Yusof a second time of trying to mislead the court by suggesting he made no assertions that there were no signs of degradation.
Yusof said it was widely reported in the media, quoting McDonald, that the sample was in "pristine condition" and this led to the witness to reply: "And now we are relying on newspapers. What you are trying to do is misleading."
Hearing continues tomorrow with the re-examination of McDonald by Ram Karpal Singh.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.