For the second day in a row, Kuala Lumpur High Court judge Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah hears the submission to the prosecution's case in the controversial Anwar Ibrahim sodomy trial.
Solicitor-general II Mohd Yusof Zainal Abiden had yesterday attempted to join the dots to the prosecution's case in highlighting the compatibility of the DNA found from the semen in alleged complainant Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan's anus and the three items retrieve from Anwar's cell proves the opposition leader was the perpetrator.
Yusof claimed the two independent chemist reports should be accepted and Saiful's testimony was adequate and argued that the possibility of the sodomy incident happening was made stronger with the CCTV recordings at Desa Damansara condominium to show Anwar and the complainant were both there.
In his submission for the defence, lead counsel Karpal Singh had warned the court from accepting Saiful's testimony wholeheartedly and falling into the same trap that resulted in former High Court judge Ariffin Jaka finding Anwar guilty in Sodomy I, only to see it overturned by the Federal Court.
He also accused Saiful a liar in saying that the sexual act was non-consensual but his actions showed as if it was consensual.
Karpal argued that there were many opportunities for Saiful to run but he did not do so and that the university dropout had also allegedly willing to sit down for 20 minutes to have curry puffs and coffee after the alleged act.
Meanwhile, defence lawyer Ram Karpal also showed the inconsistency in the chemist findings especially Dr Seah Lay Hong and pointed out that her testimony should not be accepted.
Another defence lawyer Sankara Nair raised the possibility of contamination and degradation of the samples as they were only handed to the chemist after 97 hours.
He also pointed out the possibility of tampering the investigation officer DSP Jude Blacious Pereira had opened the package and repackage it and kept the samples in his drawer instead not following the recommendation that it be kept in the freezer.
Solicitor-general II Mohd Yusof Zainal Abiden had yesterday attempted to join the dots to the prosecution's case in highlighting the compatibility of the DNA found from the semen in alleged complainant Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan's anus and the three items retrieve from Anwar's cell proves the opposition leader was the perpetrator.
Yusof claimed the two independent chemist reports should be accepted and Saiful's testimony was adequate and argued that the possibility of the sodomy incident happening was made stronger with the CCTV recordings at Desa Damansara condominium to show Anwar and the complainant were both there.In his submission for the defence, lead counsel Karpal Singh had warned the court from accepting Saiful's testimony wholeheartedly and falling into the same trap that resulted in former High Court judge Ariffin Jaka finding Anwar guilty in Sodomy I, only to see it overturned by the Federal Court.
He also accused Saiful a liar in saying that the sexual act was non-consensual but his actions showed as if it was consensual.
Karpal argued that there were many opportunities for Saiful to run but he did not do so and that the university dropout had also allegedly willing to sit down for 20 minutes to have curry puffs and coffee after the alleged act.
Meanwhile, defence lawyer Ram Karpal also showed the inconsistency in the chemist findings especially Dr Seah Lay Hong and pointed out that her testimony should not be accepted.
Another defence lawyer Sankara Nair raised the possibility of contamination and degradation of the samples as they were only handed to the chemist after 97 hours.
He also pointed out the possibility of tampering the investigation officer DSP Jude Blacious Pereira had opened the package and repackage it and kept the samples in his drawer instead not following the recommendation that it be kept in the freezer.
After hearing the submissions from both sides, judge Mohamad Zabidin will set a new date when he will deliver his decision on whether to proceed with the trial or throw it out of court.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.