|
©New
Straits Times (Used by permission)
by Anis Ibrahim
• ‘I did not have Ahmad Fairuz’s phone number’
• Lingam: Man in clip looks and sounds like me
KUALA LUMPUR: Lawyer Datuk V.K. Lingam was definitely sober the night he was
speaking on the telephone, said Loh Gwo Burne, the man who taped the
conversation.
Gwo Burne, 33, who said he was in Lingam's house with his
father Loh Mui Fah in December 2001, said: "It was early in the evening, only
7.30 to 8.30pm and Lingam hadn't drunk that much.
"Even by the end of the night, he wasn't that drunk."
His testimony contradicted that of Tourism Minister Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor,
who testified last week that Lingam was "either mad or drunk" when he was filmed
speaking in the video clip.
It also ran counter to the claim by Lingam who said he must have had "too much
to drink" and "didn't know what he was talking about".
Replying to his counsel Alex de Silva on whether Lingam appeared to have been
play-acting, Gwo Burne said during Lingam's telephone conversation, he could at
times make out a voice at the other end of the line.
"No, he didn't give me the impression that he was acting. I could hear a man's
voice on the other end of the line. I couldn't hear what he was saying, but it
was a man's voice."
Gwo Burne, who works as a consultant in Shanghai, China, was the 12th witness to
give evidence to the Royal Commission of Inquiry on the Lingam video tape. The
hearing began last Monday.
In a testimony punctured with humour, he said Lingam had spilt curry on his
shirt during dinner and had excused himself, saying that he wanted to go and
change.
This, he said, was presumably why Lingam's shirt was hanging out in the video
while it was tucked inside his trousers in a photograph that had been taken
after dinner and the telephone conversation.
"He split some curry on his shirt and excused himself, saying that he wanted to
change.
"When he came back, his shirt was tucked in," he said.
Lingam's counsel R. Thayalan:, who disputed that the telephone conversation had
taken place before dinner, asked: "So it is your evidence that at 9pm in his own
house, he went to change into a long-sleeved white shirt and tucked it in?"
When Gwo Burne replied that this was so, Thayalan: asked: "How can you be sure
that he changed into a new shirt?"
Gwo Burne replied: "Well, he said, 'I'm going to change' and when he returned,
the stain was no longer there, so he must have changed the shirt. I didn't go
into his room."
Thayalan: then asked him about the voice he had heard on Lingam's phone.
"How did you know it was a man's voice? How did you identify it was a male or
female voice?" Thayalan: asked.
"Through experience," replied Gwo Burne, to laughter in the public gallery.
When Salehuddin Saidin, counsel for former chief justice Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh
Abdul Halim, asked the witness how far away he was from Lingam during the
conversation, Gwo Burne said the distance varied because the lawyer moved around
as he spoke.
"Because he was moving about, sometimes he was near me, sometimes he was far.
When he was near, he was about one to two metres away.
"At other times, he was about two to four metres away."
When Salehuddin asked: "Wasn't your father in a better position to hear?", Gwo
Burne replied: "I might have better hearing."
Commission chairman Tan Sri Haidar Mohamed Noor quipped: "That's quite logical,"
drawing more laughter.
Earlier, questioned by inquiry officer Datuk Nordin: Hassan, Gwo Burne said he
had videotaped Lingam's phone conversation by mistake.
Gwo Burne said he had bought a new digital camera, a Sony 707, two weeks
earlier.
Nordin:: On Dec 20, 2001, did you and your father visit V.K. Lingam's
house?
Gwo Burne: I don't recall the date Dec 20 but I recall it was in late
December 2001.
Nordin:: What was the purpose of the visit to V.K. Lingam's house?
Gwo Burne: He invited us to his house for dinner and to discuss our legal
matters.
Nordin:: Did V.K. Lingam know you had a camera with you?
Gwo Burne: Yes. Through the course of the evening, he asked me to take
photographs and in fact, as soon as we arrived, I asked if I could take videos
of his house and he said 'yes'.
The 14-minute video of Lingam speaking on the telephone was played, after which
Gwo Burne said it was the video he shot.
Nordin:: We are all very curious, why did you shoot the video?
Gwo Burne: Actually at that time, I was trying out my new camera and trying to
take a picture of the vase in the lounge. Halfway through, I realised my camera
was on video recording mode, but I decided to continue anyway because I was
bored and fed up.
Nordin:: Why were you bored and fed up?
Gwo Burne: Well, we were there at his (Lingam) house supposedly to discuss our
legal matters but he was constantly on the phone, receiving so many calls, so I
was very bored and fed up of waiting.
Nordin:: Was Lingam aware you were recording the conversation?
Gwo Burne: I don't believe so.
Nordin:: Did you hear what Lingam was saying on the phone?
Gwo Burne: Yes I did.
Nordin:: Was your father aware you were recording the conversation?
Gwo Burne: No, I didn't tell him.
Nordin:: Did you also hear the conversation between your father and Lingam?
Gwo Burne: Yes I did.
Nordin:: What time did you leave Lingam's house that night?
Gwo Burne: I would say about 11pm, together with my father.
Nordin:: What did you do with the video recording and photos after that?
Gwo Burne: I downloaded the contents of my memory card into my PC (personal
computer). I also gave the photographs I took to my father. About a month later,
I burned all the contents onto a compact disc.
Nordin:: Where is this compact disc?
Gwo Burne: It's been a long time, I don't know where it is right now.
Nordin:: Did you transfer the photos and the video clip anywhere else?
Gwo Burne: Before I left for China in 2004, I downloaded the entire contents of
my PC into DVDs and took them all to China.
Nordin:: Did you give the video and photos to anyone?
Gwo Burne: In 2002, I burned an additional disc and gave it to the late Manjit
Singh.
(Lawyer Manjit Singh, who arrived in the house later, appears in a photograph
together with Lingam and Mui Fah which Gwo Burne and Mui Fah say was taken after
the telephone conversation. In the clip, Lingam is seen telling Mui Fah he was
speaking to the chief judge of Malaya Ahmad Fairuz, adding: "You don't tell this
to anybody please. I cannot tell this to Manjit.")
Nordin:: Do you have any idea who released the clip to the public?
Gwo Burne: Initially I thought it was Manjit Singh, then I found out that he'd
died so now I have no idea.
Nordin:: Can you locate the original copy of the clip?
Gwo Burne: The original PC is not around anymore, and when I went to China, I
left copies of my files and the contents of the PC in the various towns I worked
in China, but if I really tried, I would be able to locate these files.
Nordin: then called Lingam for Gwo Burne to identify.
Nordin:: In this V.K. Lingam, speaking on the telephone in the video clip?
Gwo Burne: Yes.
Gwo Burne's counsel Alex de Silva then began his questions.
De Silva: Did you understand the contents of Lingam's telephone conversation?
Gwo Burne: No, I didn't know what was being said.
De Silva: You said earlier you'd given a disc which you burned to Manjit Singh.
When was this?
Gwo Burne: Around mid 2002.
De Silva: Why did you give it to him?
Gwo Burne: I was with Manjit at that time, we were complaining about Lingam, I
was complaining that he was always busy and whenever we met him, he was always
busy with other matters. Manjit was saying that he wasn't being paid.
(Mui Fah had earlier testified that Manjit was his counsel in a court case).
Gwo Burne: Manjit was always saying that Lingam was always 'politics, politics,
politics' so I said, 'Maybe you should check this thing out', so I gave him a
copy of the CD which contained the video and the pictures.
De Silva: Did you tell your father you gave the CD to Manjit?
Gwo Burne: No.
De Silva: You said earlier you had left the data in various towns in China. Did
you stay in many places?
Gwo Burne: I moved around a fair bit, Shenzhen, Beijing, Dalian but I'm
primarily in Shanghai.
De Silva: Why did you leave your things in various places?
Gwo Burne: Because I returned to these places periodically.
De Silva: In transferring data from the PC to the CDs, did you at any time edit,
tamper or interfere wit the video clip?
Gwo Burne: No.
It was then Thayalan:'s turn to question him.
Thayalan:: What happened to the photos and the video recording which were stored
in the memory card?
Gwo Burne: I deleted the memory card after that.
Thayalan: then went into the technicalities of the recording process, asking
whether the original memory card would have more than just the 14-minute clip.
Gwo Burne said the memory card would have additional data but denied that his
recording was incomplete.
Thayalan:: Do you agree that without the original memory card, the Commission
cannot compare the video clip with other materials in the memory card?
Gwo Burne: I disagree. The video clip is a separate file from other recordings
in the memory card. When you stop a recording then start again, the second
recording will be a new data file.
Commisioner Datuk Mahadev Shankar: Are you saying that this segment is complete
in itself from start to finish and this is one complete segment?
Gwo Burne: Yes.
‘I did not have Ahmad Fairuz’s phone number’
KUALA LUMPUR: Lawyer Datuk V.K Lingam would not commit on the authenticity of a
14-minute video clip until his expert had the opportunity to verify it.
"Until I get the original recording and the equipment that
was used to record it, I maintain, irrespective what others say, that the man in
the clip looks and sounds like me," he said.
Lingam said this when he was questioned by Datuk Nordin Hassan, who is assisting
the Royal Commission of Inquiry.
He said he had yet to see the clip nor the equipment used in the recording.
"I will get my expert to do the verification," he added.
At the outset of the hearing, Lingam told Nordin that he had
viewed the clip online while he was abroad last year and later, Anti-Corruption
Agency officials played it for him in the course of their investigation.
(The clip was played in court yesterday.)
Nordin: Are you the man speaking in the clip?
Lingam: He looks like me.
Nordin then told Lingam that some witnesses and scientific evidence had
established that he was the man in the video.
"Irrespective of what others have to say, he sounds and looks like me," he
declared.
Nordin: Who were you speaking to in the clip?
Lingam: I don't know who I was speaking to. Certainly I was not speaking to
Ahmad Fairuz (Sheikh Abdul Halim) on the phone. I do not have his number nor has
he mine.
The witness said he had never spoken to Ahmad Fairuz on the telephone.
Nordin then referred Lingam to the transcript on the alleged conversation the
lawyer had with Ahmad Fairuz, who retired as chief justice last October.
Nordin: Can you tell when the conversation took place?
Lingam: I don't know. I can't recall the occasion.
Nordin: Can you tell why Loh (Mui Fah) came to see you?
Lingam: He came to see me as a social friend. In the past, he had come with his
son, mistress or second wife Thong May Nam.
Lingam said he did not know who recorded the clip
The lawyer repeatedly said: "I don't remember having said this", when Nordin
took him through 12 statements in the transcript which had a reference to Ahmad
Fairuz.
Commission member Datuk Mahadev Shanker told Lingam that his reply to Nordin
could give an inference that he (Lingam) had made such statements, only that he
could not remember now.
Examined by his counsel R. Thayalan, Lingam said he could have been drunk as the
clip showed several liquor and wine bottles on a table.
"I must have had one too many a drink and that I could not recollect what I had
said. I might have talked rubbish."
Lingam said the so-called confidential information about judicial appointments
were obtained from rumours and gossip from the legal fraternity.
Questioned by Amerik Singh, who is appearing for Loh Mui Fah, Lingam said he
only consumed liquor at home and at certain private functions.
Amerik: How many glasses would make you drunk?
Lingam: Normally, I will get high after taking two to three glasses."
Lingam: Man in clip looks and sounds like me
by V. Anbalagan and Anis Ibrahim
KUALA LUMPUR: Datuk V.K. Lingam refused to confirm or deny that he was the man
in the controversial video clip allegedly brokering judicial appointments.
He told the Royal Commission of Inquiry yesterday that the man "looks and sounds
like me".
Earlier, Loh Gwo Burne, 33, who recorded the clip, told the commission that it
was Lingam in the clip and that he was speaking to a man on the telephone.
Gwo Burne said Lingam was not drunk on the night he and his father, Loh Mui Fah,
called at his house one evening in late December 2001.
Gwo Burne said he had taped the 14-minute video clip at Lingam's house.
He then passed the video recording in a CD format to the late
Manjit Singh, a lawyer who had acted as counsel in a family legal matter.
Deputy public prosecutor Datuk Nordin Hassan also pointed out to Lingam that
businessman Mui Fah had testified last week that Lingam had told him that the
person he was talking to on the telephone was Datuk Ahmad Fairuz Abdul Halim,
the then chief judge of Malaya.
- Tourism Minister Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor had also told the commission the
man featured in the clip was Lingam.
- A scientific analysis concluded the clip was not doctored and tests showed the
voice in the video was similar to the lawyer's.
- Former chief justice Tun Mohd Eusoff Chin had also given evidence that the man
appeared like Lingam.
When Nordin turned to a transcript of the clip to verify the content of the
conversation, Lingam, 57, said he does not recall uttering such statements to
Ahmad Fairuz on judicial appointments and divisions in the judiciary.
When Nordin referred to 12 statements which contained references to Fairuz, the
witness said "I don't remember having said that" to each of them.
He also denied having spoken to former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad,
businessman Tan Sri Vincent Tan or influenced anyone to appoint Ahmad Fairuz as
chief judge of Malaya, Court of Appeal president or chief justice.
Ahmad Fairuz who was named the chief justice -- the country's top judge -- in
March 2003, retired last October.
Lingam said he may have been intoxicated when the alleged clip was recorded
because the footage showed wine and whisky bottles.
Counsel Americk Singh and Alex de Silva, representing Mui Fah and Gwo Burne,
also questioned Lingam as the lawyer claimed that he had never represented the
Lohs' legal interest at any time.
Lingam had said that he was only the lawyer for Mui Fah's father, Kim Foh.
He told the commission that Mui Fah and Gwo Burne were merely social friends and
had come to his home in Kelana Jaya on at least three occasions for a drink.
Bar Council lawyer Robert Lazar also questioned Lingam on his relationship with
Tan.
Lazar asked Lingam whether he knew the late Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah, a former
attorney-general and Federal Court judge.
Lingam said he knew Mohtar in 2001 and they were close because both were
neighbourhood friends in Kelana Jaya.
(Mohtar was a High Court judge from 1991 to mid-1994 when he became the
attorney-general. He was promoted to Federal Court judge in 2001. He died in
2003. Lingam in the transcript had allegedly told Ahmad Fairuz that he was
working hard to make Mohtar the chief judge of Malaya.)
Lingam said he, Tan and Mohtar had gone for a holiday with their wives to Spain
and Morocco in 1995 or 1996.
Lazar also referred to Lingam's apparent close ties with Eusoff, whose name was
mentioned in the clip, but Lingam's counsel R. Thayalan objected, saying this
was outside the terms and reference of the commission.
He submitted that Lingam's association with Eusoff was irrelevant.
Commission chairman Tan Sri Haidar Mohamed Noor then adjourned the hearing to
today to give other counsel time to prepare their submission on the point raised
by Thayalan.
 |
News/Articles 
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Report: LAWASIA Fact-finding Mission to Pakistan
Malacca Bar: Conference on the Roadmap to Local Government Elections 
