Transmenu powered by JoomlArt.com - Mambo Joomla Professional Templates Club

As a matter of proper investigation technique, the ACA should first show Lingam the tape the subject of the investigation, then record his statement about it and every aspect of his conversation.. Very simple if he denies the whole thing and says it's a fabrication or it's not him (or any other explanation), Further questions can be asked about the factual content such as to whether that is his house, his tea cup, does he drink wine , does he know VT, TM TA, what is his relationship with them,etc. After that the CJ statement must be taken,after showing him the tape.ONLY IF LINGAMS STATEMENT CLEARLY STATES that the whole video is a forgery, manufactured etc ,should the ACA question the source. BY asking to produce the source now, those being investigated, if guilty will do their best to get access (we know evidence leaks) to not only the statement of the source but other witnesses and also the surrounding circumstances (as revealed by the source) which is so vital to contradict those very persons IF THEY LIE.

Obviously should those being investigated get hold of the sources statement they will have a better opportunity to make up a convenient tale. The advantage now is they don't know the full evidence available against them (eg balance of recording,people in rm,etc)and therfore had better make a truthful statement or risk being contradicted by maybe more than one witness or documents. That is why the prime suspects have very little to say at this stage. They is also a risk that attempts may be made to compromise witnesses once their identity is disclosed before the statements of the suspects are recorded Don't they teach this at ACA101.

Derek John Fernandez

Dear Derek,

I agree with you. What the authorities, the ACA in this case and the police in the nude squat case, are doing is setting up a very dangerous precedent. Instead of investigating the suspect first, there is a trend to investigate the source/whistleblower! If I have knowledge of or come across any evidence suggesting impropriety. misconduct and crime being committed especially by well connected person, I will hesitate to divulge the same to the authorities for fear of being victimised and prosecuted!

In fact, if I have children and one of them goes missing, I will hesitate to lodge a police report because the IGP may want to charge me for negligence as in Nurin's case!

I think an investigation must be carried out on the manner investigation is being carried out by the authorities. Why such a procedure being adopted? Who gave the instructions? Oh dear.... what is happening to our country???

Kelvin Ng Sin Huat

Typical. We all expected this. Go after the whistle blowers instead of getting to the root of the problem.

Absolutely sickening.

Puteri Shehnaz Majid

This is just typical of the Malaysian way of doing things isn't it? Instead of going after the culprit, they're busy going after the whistle-blower.

Get your priorities straight!! The ACA should be REWARDING the whistle-blower for disclosing the misdeeds instead of investigating him! What's wrong with you people?!! This is the worst case of cover up someone could try.

Looks like Malaysia is going down in the transparency ranking again after moving up slightly the past year.

Justin Chin E-Loong

I hope they seek a declaration that what the ACA wants to do is unlawful.

I hope more peaceful demonstrations by the rakyat will occur.

I hope that in the worse case scenario, Sivarasa and Sim will risk it all and go to jail, to prove a point to the whole world that our UMNO-Baru led government has gone bonkers!

Alex Tan Ken Seng

Isn't it expected of the Government to act the way they do?

Sarah Binti Mohd Zakaria

What happened to the much awaited Whistleblower Act? Must have disappeared into thin air.

Raymond Yap Soon Hock

Given how high-profile this matter is, the ACA had pressurised the PKR to reveal the identity of the source without offering any sort of protection to them. Is this meant for helping the panel or just for the sake of exposing the source to whosoever? Having the source revealed is not the only way to determine the genuity of the clip, instead, it might put the source in danger then the whole matter will go down the drain quietly as usual. Is this what we want?

Shim Wai Loon

It is a simple equation really. Remove the whistleblower or at least scare him/her enough then all will be forgotten. And all will be well again in Bolehland. We can then preach to Myanmar how to behave and how to handle protestors.

Bolehland will then be the pride of ASEAN and be the shinning example as to how governments are to behave. Quite a brilliant plan actually.

We should be proud that our nation is doing its best to get the whistleblower. He/she must be stopped/arrested/persecuted at all costs. Period.

Visvanathan Murugiah