Anwar's Sodomy II verdict on Jan 9
The lengthy sodomy trial against PKR de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim will stretch to next year, for the verdict is to be delivered on Jan 9.
The lengthy sodomy trial against PKR de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim will stretch to next year, for the verdict is to be delivered on Jan 9.
"I will deliver the judgment on Jan 9," Justice Mohamad Abidin Mohd Diah said today after the conclusion of submissions by both parties in the High Court in Kuala Lumpur.
The trial, which closed after 87 days of hearing last month, began almost two years ago.
Anwar is charged with sodomising his then aide, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, at the Desa Damansara Condominium on June 26, 2008.
In its reply to the prosecution's submission, the defence focused on three main areas – the evidence that plastic was inserted into Saiful's anus, the “pristine” condition of the DNA sample and the “speculative” testimony of Anwar's surgeon Dr Thomas Hoogland.
Second HKL doctor not called
Sankara Nair called into question the prosecution's decision to compare Hoogland with HKL physician Dr S Jeyaindran, who he said “is not qualified... to contend against a foremost spine surgeon”.
“Dr S Jeyaindran made a spectacle of himself. He did not conduct the necessary examination (to determine if Anwar was in pain). You can't just look at the movement of a person. No way, it cannot be accepted,” he said.
Asking Jeyaindran to testify on Anwar's back condition, Sankara said, was like “sending a client who wants to get divorce to a shipping lawyer and not matrimonial lawyer”.
To this, prosecution head and solicitor-general II Yusof Zainal Abidin replied that Jeyaindran was not called as a spine witness but to testify on the records he had made upon examining Anwar.
Sankara also urged the judge to “draw adverse inference” on the fact that Dr Ee Boon Leong, who had examined Anwar together with Jeyaindran, was never called to give evidence.
Counsel Ram Karpal said a perusal of the evidence also showed that Yusof was “erroneous” in saying that Dr Brian McDonald denied he had described the DNA sample as “pristine”.
Contrary to the prosecution's submission, Ram said no evidence was adduced on the issue of the lack of degradation found on the sample, left without preservation for about 96 hours before testing.
'No dispute over Male Y DNA'
Calling the prosecution “deceptive”, he said no expert was brought forward to dispute this.
He also called to question the issue of spill-over between the sperm and non-sperm fractions of the sample after separation, indicating that procedures were disregarded.
More than this, Ram said, it raised questions of contamination and did not truly identify if the sperm found belonged to the 'Male Y'.
To this, Yusof said the defence experts had never refuted that the 'Male Y' DNA was found in the samples.
Another area of focus was Anwar's statement from the dock, which Yusof on Tuesday submitted that it should not be given as much weight as it was never cross-examined, and was a “bare denial”.
Related stories
Saiful inserted plastic in anus, court told
Pusrawi doc 'demolishes' Saiful's testimony
Anwar vows to fight for justice, even from jail
Are you sure you want to delete this comment?
This action cannot be undone.