|
Call logs are flawed evidence, says counsel |
|
|
|
|
Tuesday, 05 August 2008 08:22am |
|
 •
Azilah's call records 'not genuine'
•
Exclude handphone logs as evidence, court told
©The
Star (Used by permission)
by Cecil Fung
SHAH ALAM: The call logs that placed C/Insp Azilah Hadri at the crime scene
around the time of Altantuya Shaariibuu's murder should not be accepted as
evidence, the High Court heard.
J. Kuldeep Kumar, counsel for the accused, said this was because the documents
failed to adhere to the Evidence Act and their entries were inaccurate,
inconsistent and contradicting.
He gave 17 reasons why the court should reject the Celcom call logs.
Among others, Kuldeep submitted that there had been a break in the chain of
evidence in relation to the production of those documents in court.
Kuldeep also pointed out that no electronic record had been tendered to court,
resulting in the absence of an audit trail for those call logs.
Noting that alterations and deletions had been carried out to produce the
documents for relevance sake, he said the absence of the original state of the
evidence made it difficult to determine if any of those logs had been tampered
with.
The lawyer added that there was a possibility of concoction of evidence as there
existed several suspicious circumstances, including one in which Haizal, while
searching for the transmission stations, managed to bring investigating officer
Asst Supt Tonny Lunggan to the crime scene.
“And ASP Tonny, who went a few times to the crime scene, could not remember
where it was,” he said.
Kuldeep said a witness had also admitted to a technical glitch in the
programming script used to extract data for C/Insp Azilah's cellphone number,
which subsequently resulted in errors.
Furthermore, he said there were a total of 117 discrepancies between P27 and C/Insp
Azilah's itemised bill.
Among Kuldeep's other arguments were that the coverage predictions of the
transmission stations did not show the scene of the crime and are inaccurate,
and that there was missing data that could exonerate his client.
The hearing continues today.
 |
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Circular No 297/2008
