|
©The
Sun (Used by permission)
by S.Tamarai Chelvi
SHAH ALAM (Sept 4, 2008): The prosecution has established a "prima facie" case
against Cpl Sirul Azhar Umar, the second accused in the Mongolian national
Altantuya Shaariibuu's murder case, the High Court heard today.
DPP Tun Abdul Majid Tun Hamzah, who was submitting at the end of the
prosecution's case, said Sirul failed to show on the balance of probabilities
that the alleged information (which led to the discovery of Altantuya's
jewelleries) should be excluded.
"It is the prosecution's submission that Sirul did give the information, which
led to the discovery of the jewelleries, though the information given during
interrogation was not specific in the sense that he did not reveal where exactly
he kept the items or his home address," said Tun Majid, adding that Sirul did it
voluntarily.
"If there was no information given by Sirul, then how could ASP Zulkarnain
Samsudin and his team and others reach his unit? Sirul claimed that he did not
tell Zulkarnain his home address. Sirul and Zulkarnain and his team did not know
each other," said Tun Majid.
Tun Majid said Sirul did not ask where the police were taking him and did not
even bother to ask Zulkarnain what were the items that he was required to
identify.
"If it is true that Sirul did not tell anything to Zulkarnain, why at the same
time he said he believed Zulkarnain would help him?" asked Tun Majid.
He said Sirul contended that Zulkarnain promised to help him and would not take
the matter to court if he spoke the truth.
"Sirul himself was familiar with interrogation. He knew its purpose and workings
or techniques," he said.
"Viewing the manner of interrogation by Zulkarnain, it is submitted that Sirul
was not the kind of person who would easily succumb to the pressure, threats,
inducement or promise as Zulkarnain had allegedly caused onto him," said Tun
Majid.
Tun Majid also submitted the fact remains the jewelleries were in Sirul's
jacket, which was hung in his closet.
"The unit was occupied by Sirul, the room was his. Sirul's housemate, Radzi Mohd
Tahir, testified that he had no access to Sirul's room when Sirul was away.
Hence, it is submitted that Sirul was in possession of the jewelleries," said
Tun Majid.
Tun Majid said the onus is on Sirul to persuade the court to exercise its
(discretion to exclude the information leading to the discovery.
Tun Majid also submitted the court should reject the explanation offered by a
witness, DSP Yusri Hassan Basri.
(An impeachment proceedings was held against UTK personnel Yusri on the sequence
of events that took place surrounding the discovery of the personal belongings
of the victim in Sirul’s apartment).
He said the effect of Yusri's evidence in view of the whole of the evidence
adduced by the prosecution would be that there was no discovery but recovery,
Sirul did not show where the jewelleries and that the discovery was a
fabrication.
He said the question for the court to decide is whether the explanation given
was satisfactory in order to save his credibility.
"Yusri was conscious and fully aware of the statement he gave. The alleged
intimidation only took place during the break when he took the stand. Clearly,
he had discussed his evidence and as a result of that he suddenly remembered
what had taken place," said Tun Majid.
Tun Majid also submitted that a photograph, in which Sirul allegedly holding a
jacket, was not a re-enactment or that Sirul was asked to pose.
The hearing before judge Datuk Mohd Zaki Md Yasin continues on Monday (Sept 8).
 |
News 
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Circular No 304/2008
