Will this throw Gobind's letter out of the window?

Letter from good MACC officers accusing the bad MACC officer

August 21, 2009 by jebatmustdie

The mysterious letter which suddenly appeared and was given to Gobind Singh on Tuesday afternoon drew a lot of attention from the public.

Gobind did not state who had given him the said letter. All he said was, and I quote from the opposition aligned The Malaysian Insider:

Gobind said the letter was handed directly to him late Tuesday afternoon, just as he was leaving the court here.

So, who actually gave Gobind the letter when he was about to leave the court? If we know the person who sent this letter, surely it will direct us to the authors of the letter.

So, if we follow the trail from the person who handed all the way to the writer, we can now establish who had actually written it. Surely Gobind is curious as to who had composed that letter. Everyone is.

This is important when the issues described in the letter are discussed and cross-referenced in the court of law.

Don’t get me wrong. I love it when this letter appeared. Thank God it did.

If we throw away a pertinent point such as credibility (where we neglect the existence of real, actual persons representing the accusations in the letter), the writings in it had actually cleared up a few things with regards to the current inquest on the death of Teoh Beng Hock.

First and foremost, I am happy to note the MACC as a whole is not a murdering pack of Malay officers bent on killing the chinese (as alluded by DAP leaders and also racist commentators in several opposition portals like Malaysian Insider and Malaysia Today and also some from this very own blog).

I have written in my past article that it would be silly to accuse the MACC to murder Teoh Beng Hock, especially when there inquest had not even started yet. I wrote that there are a few scenarios that could have explained his death besides the usual ‘MACC the murderer’. I also wrote that the propaganda of the racist DAP had far too easily trying to divert attention by accusing the MACC as a mass murdering government machinery.

But now the letter had proven otherwise.

There are indeed many MACC officers doing their honest work in this government institution. Thank God they have clear conscience to tell the truth albeit through this anonymous letter.

Therefore, the assertions that all government officers in all government institutions are no more than a bunch of murdering hooligans on a killing spree are not true at all. Kudos to the MACC as a whole.

This letter in a way had pointed out who the bad apples are. As we all know, in any barrel of apples, there are bound to be a few.

Secondly, the letter had in a way accused the MACC State Deputy Director, Hishamuddin Bin Hashim as the main officer in charge of interrogating Teoh Beng Hock a few hours before his death.

It made great effort to tell us that Hishamuddin always hold the belt of anyone he is interrogating and lifting that person many times during the interrogation.

This is new to all of us. The person writing this must be someone who had seen Hishamuddin doing this many times. But again, without knowing who the writer of this letter is, it is hard to see this as a real fact. Nevertheless, lets assume for now, it is true – that this is an insider information.

Regardless, the logical thing to do now is to perform another DNA check on this officer so that we can now be extra certain that the DNA of Male 1 identified by the experts were indeed to be Hishamuddin’s (just like how the letter suggested to do). Perhaps now we will know that there were physical contact between one of the MACC officers and Teoh Beng Hock during the inerrogation.

The letter however, did not tell us that it was Hishamuddin who caused the death of Teoh Beng Hock. Indeed, as suggested by The Malaysian Insider, the letter ‘does not say how Teoh actually died, which is the subject of the ongoing magistrate’s inquest’.

Instead, it had inadvertently told the public that Hishamuddin has got nothing to do with Teoh’s death.

How?

Well, the letter said that this officer, Hishamuddin left the building at 6.10 in the morning. The letter specifically said that he left the building at 6.10am but without punching out his punch card (MACC office still using punch card? How retro is that?)

This is what the letter said:

“Kami mengesyaki berdasarkan maklumat yang diperolehi bahawa TP tidak mengetuk kad perakam waktunya (punch-card) semasa beliau hendak balik daripada pejabat pada 16hb Julai 2009, jam 6.10 pagi. Ini penting kerana ia boleh membuktikan bahawa TP adalah orang yang terakhir melihat Teoh. Persoalannya, kenapa beliau tidak mengetuk kad perakamnya sedangkan beliau adalah seorang yang selalu mengetuk kadnya. Untuk rekod, beliau adalah seorang yang teliti dengan kad perakamnya.”

Anyway, the writers of the letter knew that Hishamuddin had gone back from the office that morning. They actually saw him going back home although he did not do the obligatory punch-out. It is quite peculiar for them to say that. Because, this immediately absolves Hishamuddin from ever been at the point of TBH’s death because according to experts, TBH time of death is from 8am to 9.30am.

Hmmm.. as we all know, one of the last person to see Teoh Beng Hock was Tan Boon Hwa and this was admitted by the latter who made the declaration that around 6am to 6.30am, he saw Teoh Beng Hock looking ‘tired and quiet’ in the pantry.

What do you think? Has the letter, purportedly written by a group of MACC officers, had somehow told us that Hishamuddin could be free of any accusation that he murdered Teoh Beng Hock? Many are using this letter to further strengthen their claims that MACC killed a member of the opposition.

The existence of this letter so far had only revealed to us that:

1) there are good officers with clear conscience in the MACC – the MACC is not an institution of pure evil

2) Teoh Beng Hock’s death could not be certain by this letter

The letter still could not determine how did Teoh Beng Hock die, when did he die, and why did he or other people want him to die.

Which now leaves us with the expert opinion of pathologists, investigators, coroners and toxicologists which had all pointed to the fact that Teoh Beng Hock could have committed suicide around 8am to 9.30am. The evidences are too many too ignore.

Note that the experts are there for a reason. They have the experience, the knowledge and the technical skills to ascertain the cause of death and how the person had died. Too bad these days, the public especially the opposition supporters think they have more expertise in forming opinion than the experts themselves.

However, there is also one big point of contention in the letter when it had seriously accused Hishamuddin of tampering with the crime scene i.e. the window on the 14th floor of Plaza Masalam.

It stated:

“Kami mendapat maklumat bahawa TP telah mengarahkan pegawai bawahannya untuk mengelap/mengesat kesan cap c(j)ari pada tingkap tingkap yang dipercayai tempat Teoh jatuh. Ini terbukti apabila pihak polis tidak menjumpai apa0apa kesan cap jari baru atau lama pada tingkap tersebut. Persoalannya, kenapa TP mengarahkan untuk bertindak sedemikian?“

Now, I find this piece of information quite odd because in the Inquest, we were told that there were fingerprints near the window. The investigators at the crime scene were grilled by Gobind himself at that time and it was revealed that there were as many as 8 fingerprints near the window sill.

Now if Hishamuddin had asked his subordinates to wipe clean the window, how come there are still fingerprints? Okay, lets give the benefit of the doubt that the subordinates had wiped the window halfheartedly (because these probably were the subordinates with conscience and good heart we mentioned earlier).

But how come the window, as testified by the investigators in the inquest as dirty and dusty? The reason why they cannot figure out the fingerprints was because of the dusty and dirty window sill.

Hence, there is a contradiction there. MACC officers had to wipe off the window for any fingerprint traces and yet, the dust and dirt on it remained untouched as what was claimed by the investigators.

Mind boggling.

Lastly, people had said that the letter uses the letterhead of the MACC. The opposition aligned Malaysia Today did not reveal to us how this letterhead looks like. What a pity. I sure would like to see how does the whole letter looks like as compared to just the body shown in the Malaysia Today website. Then, we can compare the letterhead from the letter to the official letterhead of the MACC.

Anyway, like I said earlier, I am glad this letter came out.

Too bad the letter had focused more on something unrelated to how Teoh had died but instead began to accuse Khir Toyo and his corruption shenanigans.

But it is still okay. We now have an information about Khir Toyo’s corruption practices (what’s new anyway?), that Hishamuddin supposedly has assets beyond his means and he was caught in a “khalwat” raid early this year.

As the regular readers know, this blog is not fond of any corruption practices. Be it by the Umnoputras or the opposition. If they have evidence, please do a thorough investigation. Too bad that the letter was written by anonymous people. If it wasn’t, the person who wrote this letter can appear in court and nail Khir Toyo once and for all.

However, Khir Toyo had denied the allegations contained in the letter. I guess somehow, this drama from the opposition and the accused party will still go on for quite some time.

source : jebatmustdie.wordpress.com

Will this throw Gobind's letter out of the window?

Jebat Must Die's detective work. The blogger's latest posting, Letter from good MACC officers accusing the bad MACC officer, may just grab Gobind's "mysterious" letter by the belt and halfway out of the window, if you follow my drift.

Excerpt 1:

Well, the letter said that this officer, Hishamuddin left the building at 6.10 in the morning. The letter specifically said that he left the building at 6.10am but without punching out his punch card (MACC office still using punch card? How retro is that?)

This is what the letter said:

“Kami mengesyaki berdasarkan maklumat yang diperolehi bahawa TP tidak mengetuk kad perakam waktunya (punch-card) semasa beliau hendak balik daripada pejabat pada 16hb Julai 2009, jam 6.10 pagi. Ini penting kerana ia boleh membuktikan bahawa TP adalah orang yang terakhir melihat Teoh. Persoalannya, kenapa beliau tidak mengetuk kad perakamnya sedangkan beliau adalah seorang yang selalu mengetuk kadnya. Untuk rekod, beliau adalah seorang yang teliti dengan kad perakamnya.”

Anyway, the writers of the letter knew that Hishamuddin had gone back from the office that morning. They actually saw him going back home although he did not do the obligatory punch-out. It is quite peculiar for them to say that. Because, this immediately absolves Hishamuddin from ever been at the point of TBH’s death because according to experts, TBH time of death is from 8am to 9.30am.

Hmmm.. as we all know, one of the last person to see Teoh Beng Hock was Tan Boon Hwa and this was admitted by the latter who made the declaration that around 6am to 6.30am, he saw Teoh Beng Hock looking ‘tired and quiet’ in the pantry.

Excerpt 2:

However, there is also one big point of contention in the letter when it had seriously accused Hishamuddin of tampering with the crime scene i.e. the window on the 14th floor of Plaza Masalam.

It stated:

“Kami mendapat maklumat bahawa TP telah mengarahkan pegawai bawahannya untuk mengelap/mengesat kesan cap c(j)ari pada tingkap tingkap yang dipercayai tempat Teoh jatuh. Ini terbukti apabila pihak polis tidak menjumpai apa0apa kesan cap jari baru atau lama pada tingkap tersebut. Persoalannya, kenapa TP mengarahkan untuk bertindak sedemikian?“

Now, I find this piece of information quite odd because in the Inquest, we were told that there were fingerprints near the window. The investigators at the crime scene were grilled by Gobind himself at that time and it was revealed that there were as many as 8 fingerprints near the window sill.

Now if Hishamuddin had asked his subordinates to wipe clean the window, how come there are still fingerprints? Okay, lets give the benefit of the doubt that the subordinates had wiped the window halfheartedly (because these probably were the subordinates with conscience and good heart we mentioned earlier).

But how come the window, as testified by the investigators in the inquest as dirty and dusty? The reason why they cannot figure out the fingerprints was because of the dusty and dirty window sill.

Now what do you thin? In any case, I agree with blogger Jebat, that we need to follow the trail of the surat layang. Find out who gave Gobind the letter and we'd be able to get the truth.

p.s. In the spirit of Ramadhan, I'd like to plead for abstinence from obsceneties when making comments. Bro Warrior 231, show 'em the way please ....

Teoh Beng Hock inquest: Why 8 fingerprints on window not lifted

2009/08/19

SHAH ALAM: Eight fingerprints were found on the window of the 14th floor of Plaza Masalam which Teoh Beng Hock was believed to have fallen from.

However, police forensic witness Chief Inspector Mazli Jusoh said the prints did not have enough characteristics to be lifted to determine who they belonged to.

Mazli, 31, from the Shah Alam police headquarters, said this yesterday on the 11th day of the inquest.

"I instructed my officers to dust the window for fingerprints but the results were negative," said Mazli.

"So, I did not record or take photographs of the prints as none of them had enough characteristics to be lifted."

These prints were found at the broken window latch and around the window pane and sill.

"Usually, if prints are successfully lifted, we would send them to Bukit Aman who would then check for criminal records and refer it to the National Registration Department."

"But in this case, the results were negative."

He also agreed with counsel Gobind Singh Deo that he could lift partial fingerprints, but explained that he did not do so in this case as the window was dirty and dusty.

Gobind: Did you know that the window is used by MACC officers as a smoking area?

Mazli: Yes.

He said fingerprints existed on surfaces due to sweat cells which would stick when touched.

Gobind: Did you swab the window for DNA profiles?

Mazli: No, because when we conduct dusting method to trace for prints, it would damage the DNA profiles. If we swabbed the window, we would damage the prints.

Gobind then said that Mazli had dusted the entire window and damaged the evidence there, to which counsel Tan Hock Chuan retorted that he was doomed both ways.

MACC and DAP: Finding the inconvenient truth

July 29, 2009 by jebatmustdie

I believe a lot has been said about the tragic death of Teoh Beng Hock.

He was a witness of an MACC investigation pertaining the alleged misappropriation of funds by the Seri Kembangan state assemblyman, Ean Yong Hian Wah.

Apparently, MACC sniffed several corruption practices within the administration of the Selangor Government. This should not be a surprise to all as this serious allegations had been brought up non other than members of parliament from Pakatan Rakyat itself; namely MP Wee Choo Keong and MP Azmin Ali.

Both saw it fit to state that some of the exco members in Selangor are involved with the criminal world of organised crimes and underworld elements. The latter even suggested that most of the Selangor members are not fit to govern and should be replaced!

In his blog, Wee Choo Keong stated :

Personally I’ve had and continue to receive many complaints from the Pakatan Rakyat members and business communities in Selangor that the office of a certain exco member had been and is continuing to be used as a meeting place for people connected with the “underground business activities.” This is an open secret within the Selangor State’s administrative office.

Today, a DAP assemblyman in Johor revealed that the Johor DAP is being infiltrated by the secret society members. This is very disturbing as the trend seemed to be widespread and not only occurs in the state of Selangor.

The assemblyman, Dr Boo Cheng Hau related:

He said he believed north Johor DAP has members with underworld background and he was once forcibly stopped from attending a party meeting in the area by people claiming to be party members.

Boo said they were from north Johor told him he was not welcome on their turf, and told him to take care of only his area (constituency) as other areas were none of his business.

He said he had also received complaints that some new branches have recruited members who are linked to the underworld.

This showed that certain people in the party are using secret societies to strengthen their positions, he said, adding that what they were doing was extremely dangerous. – The Sun.

I believe he is aware of what is besieging his party and I also believe that his concerns about the underworld rearing its ugly head in the party are genuine.

Hence, with top 3 politicians within the Pakatan Rakyat showing concerns and making revelations to the public about the underworld powers behind the DAP, should there be any reason the MACC not to make any investigations?

Or, do we honestly believe MACC should not make any kind of effort into these allegations?

Well, do we?

If we do believe that MACC should investigate, how then should MACC approach the case?

As we ponder on, I would like to clarify a few matter here regarding the MACC and Teoh Beng Hock.

Firstly, Teoh Beng Hock was a witness of a corruption investigation by the MACC. He was not a suspect.

The public should be aware that there are several kinds of witnesses. During my days as an investigative auditor, there are actually 4 types of witnesses which we will encounter during a criminal investigation:

1) A cooperative one. Voluntary giving statements and evidences as and when asked by the fact-finding interviewers.

2) A passive one. Involuntary and often withhold evidence.

3) A difficult one. Will not cooperate at all with the interviewers. Sometimes they will not tell the truth.

4) A witness cum suspect. They will be treated differently as criminal suspects would have different sets of rights and laws that govern them. For instance, they can be hold in custody in a certain period of time before a criminal charge is brought against them.

The other issue that needs to be highlighted is that there are no set rules on how to extract information from witnesses. Meaning, there are no fixed laws or procedures that governs the rights of a witness. The witness is not a suspect, therefore, he has the rights of a free man. He can come and go anytime he wants.

That is why, witnesses under interrogation by the MACC can be called upon many times to shed more light on the investigation.

The ex MP for Serdang, Yap Pian Hon was interrogated by the MACC from 8pm to 6am just to shed some light into a corruption case.

Khir Toyo went up to the MACC office many times to give further assistance to the MACC on his own corruption case. At one point, he was there at odd hours just to cooperate with the MACC.

Now, there is this question on why witnesses are sometimes being called upon at odd hours of the day by the MACC.

Here, common sense takes centrestage.

There are 3 reasons why witnesses will be called to divulge information. MACC will act promptly upon receiving leads and would straight away call the witness so that:

1) the corruption acts will still be fresh in the memory of the witness. The witness may not remember what had happened if he was only called upon a month after a report has been made.

2) the witness will not be influenced/threatened by external parties. Imagine if the MACC made appointment with a witness for a session in two weeks time. That will give ample time for anyone to exert influence to the witness.

3) the risk of the witness disappear or go out of the country or unavailable will be reduced.

Bear in mind, all witnesses are called upon to be at the MACC office on voluntary basis. They are not suspects. That is why Teoh Beng Hock was never remanded or ‘be in custody’ of the MACC. He was a free man throughout the interrogation session.

He even had a late night supper with the MACC officers outside the MACC premise on the night of his death. Hence, all these assertions that he was in custody and he was subjected to a ‘grueling marathon’ and sleep deprivation are not true at all.

If eating at a nasi kandar restaurant at midnight and going back at 3.45am is grueling then RPK should have pity on all the auditors of a Big 4 firms where they go home exactly at that time during the long months famously known as the ‘peak period’.

Besides, sleep deprivation kicks in if you had not have enough sleep for more than 5 days.

If MACC is labeled as torturing Teoh by not letting him to sleep until 3.45am, then I believe many employers are subjected to imprisonment for torturing their workers. How many of us had stayed up late till wee hours in the morning just to finish a project?

Anyway, I am digressing.

What is important to know is that Teoh Beng Hock, went there willingly and had cooperated in a fact-finding session with the MACC.

He was allowed to go back home by 3.45am but instead, on his own freewill, loitered around the MACC office and had a conversation with Tan Boon Wah, a Kajang municipal councillor up until 6am.

This was admitted by Tan Boon Wah himself.

Unbeknown to many of us, the MACC had actually called 3 persons that night. Besides Teoh Beng Hock and Tan Boon Wah, a contractor by the name Lee Wye Wing was also called. He is the technical advisor of WSK Services. He came in as a witness as his name was reported to the MACC. Allegedly, he was the beneficiary of the many projects initiated by DAP Selangor particularly in Sg. Pelek.

He was also in contact with Teoh Beng Hock moments before he died. The reason why his name did not appear in the newspaper was the fact that he immediately flew to China as the body of Teoh Beng Hock was discovered the next day.

Fortunately, the police got hold of him for questioning the moment he returned from China a few days ago.

These two persons, Lee and Boon Wah are the key witnesses to the investigation of the death of Teoh Beng Hock.

Since the DAP played racial card and showed their racist sentiments towards the Malays and accusing the MACC as the murderer of Teoh Beng Hock, it is naturally logical for any level headed people to admit that any persons seen last with the victim should automatically be a suspect. But that’s just me. Perhaps I saw too much CSI series.

Barely a day after TBH passed away, the DAP wasted no time in finger pointing who the killer is (picture taken from Teo Nie Ching's blog)

Tan Boon Wah on the other hand made contradictory statements over a certain period of time. He admitted to have met the deceased in the wee hours of the morning. To make a police report over false imprisonment had very much contradict his own admission that he ‘hung-out’ at the pantry or even went to the toilet without any escort. Remember, only a suspect is treated with handcuffs and an escort anywhere they go. But not a witness.

Tan Boon Wah

Now, it is known that pathologists found traces of DNA on Teoh Beng Hock’s back. The police is making the normal investigation procedure by acquiring the DNA samples of all the persons connected to the case. According to sources, all the MACC officers had voluntarily gave their DNA samples.

Guess who refused to assist the police in trying to find a piece of the puzzle? There are two persons who, till this date refused to acquiesce to the police request.

They are Tan Boon Wah and Lee Wye Wing.

What kind of persons who do not want to cooperate with the police? Are they not interested in letting the public know the truth? Why are they sabotaging the investigation with their unwillingness to cooperate?

I believe if such situation persists, the public will never know what had happened that night.

The DAP is harping on continued uncooperative stand with regards to the on going investigation but at the same time crying out for the government to be transparent about the whole incident.

This tactic by the DAP in rallying racist sentiments among its supporters by accusing the government as racist and chinese killer is a well known modus operandi by the opposition to gain support.

The DAP and the opposition are guilty for their heinous act of accusing Tun Abdul Razak, Datuk Harun Idris and Tun Dr Mahathir as the architects of the racial riot in 1969.

They are also guilty of accusing the current Prime Minister of uttering damning words of ’soaking the keris with chinese blood’ when it was apparent that what they accused was without any shred of evidence.

Both of the accusations above was rebuked without even a whimper of protest or rebuttals from the opposition.

And yet, was there any apology by the racist leaders within Pakatan Rakyat? There was nothing. Only vile arrogance.

I specifically put the word vile because only people with insidious nature would stir hatred among the chinese towards the malays using that kind of way.

Where is your dignity? Obviously the quest for power knows no bounds in human decency.

Teoh Beng Hock’s death was tragic. It was unthinkable.

He could have been pushed (hence traces of another person’s DNA was found on his back). If there was any struggle, the pathologists will definitely find signs of induced trauma on the skin especially when rigor mortis sets in. This is where cooperation from those two people who were last seen with Teoh Beng Hock is vital.

The police will just have to counter check their DNA, together with the DNA samples of all the MACC officers in order to get a clearer picture.

It could have been a freak accident where he accidentally tripped over an open window while peering out.

He could have also committed suicide.

Cases of witnesses committing suicide right after being interrogated by the police or anti-corruption agencies are not new.

Even in Hong Kong, where its anti-corruption agency is arguably one of the best in the world (ICAC is the role model of MACC by the way), had numerous cases of suicides after the witnesses were interrogated by its officers.

Was the pressure by the MACC during a interrogation session so great that he was willing to commit suicide right after he was released? Assuming the interview session was so torturous, the moment he was released and be free, he jumped out from the window?

What do normal people do after a supposedly ‘grueling’ session is concluded? Would you jump out of the window? What would trigger this sort of reaction?

If I was the MACC, when a witness had willingly divulged all evidences pertaining an allegation of corruption, would it not be imperative to take care of this witness? He will surely be called upon during a future corruption trial to pin the perpetrator of the said crime. Therefore, what benefit will MACC get from Teoh Beng Hock’s death?

Nevertheless, people are more interested to lay blame on the MACC as a simple way to divert attention. What are these people diverting from?

The simple matter of the truth. I mean, the real truth.

What good is a prolonged inquest or Royal Commision which many say will be independent when the MACC had been unfairly victimised by the opposition from the very beginning?

The real victim here is Teoh Beng Hock and his family members. They have the right to know the real truth. Even when the truth will hurt. But in order to get to the bottom of it, everyone must give their utmost cooperation. The real truth is when we have found out the reasons and the ‘hows’ of Teoh Beng Hock’s untimely death.

After the inquest being postponed to 5th August, the only people who get the benefit are the criminals. The ones who are involved in corruption behind this tragic case.

For every single day this matter been sidestepped, the corrupt will benefit more and more.

Instead of the MACC investigating the corruption allegation, it is now the MACC who is being investigated. Then who is monitoring the corruption activities now especially when more than 20 MACC officers are being subpoenaed and the lead officer being reassigned?

People lose focus by the drama that is unfolding. The ones that was alleged by Wee Choo Keong and Azmin Ali as having involvements with the underworld are smiling secretly right now.

Dr. Boo Cheng Hau was right in raising his concerns. We should be concerned too.

source : jebatmustdie.wordpress.com