Mahkamah Tinggi Jenayah 3
Di hadapan Yang Arif Dato’ Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah
Pihak-pihak: Seperti terdahulu (dengan kehadiran Mr. Leung dan En. S. Suppiah bagi pihak Majlis Peguam)
ZI peguam pemerhati SP1
[09:56 am]
MY: Memperkenalkan pihak-pihak
KS: We have gone to the site just now
YA: SP1 dipanggil semula
SP1 bersumpah semula
(dalam BM)
KS: Dalam kehidupan seharian, ada bila-bila masa bercakap yang tidak benar?
A: You mean in the past? Ya
Q: Have you ever lied in your live? Of course not under oath?
A: Ya, ada
Q: Kamu bersumpah untuk cakap yang benar bagi keadaan masa lampau?
A:
Q: Pilihanraya kecil di Permatang Pauh?
A: Ulang soalan
Q: Slowly… ada angkat sumpah dalam masjid?
A: Ya
Q: Pada 15 Ogos 2008?
A: Dalam pertengahan bulan Ogos 2008
Q: Tarikh penamaan?
A: Tidak ingat
Q: Dekat dengan tarikh penamaan calon?
A: Ya
Q: Apabila angkat sumpah dekat dengan nomination day?
A: Ya
Q: Ini adalah kebetulan?
A: Ya
Q: Oleh itu tak tahu tentang pilihanraya kecil?
A: Sebelum itu tahu
Q: Bila dapat tahu?
A: Saya tak pasti tetapi saya tahu
Q: 2 minggu sebelum hari pencalonan?
A: Saya tak pasti tetapi saya tahu
Q: Bukan kebetulan?
A: No
Q: Bukan kebetulan pilih 2 hari sebelum itu?
A: Kebetulan
Q: Sebelum itu tak tahu?
A: Saya menunggu untuk AI angkat sumpah
Q: 2 minggu sebelum itu?
A: [SP1 tak sempat menjawab]
YA: He said coincident, then you said no, sampai bila?
KS: [][]
Q: Ada blog sendiri?
A: Ya
Q: Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan?
A: Ya
Q: Pada 2 Ogos 2008 ada menyatakan [dengan tunjukkan saksi satu dokumen]. Baca yang di’highlight’.
A: “Pada AI selamat bertanding”. Saya mengucapkan selamat bertanding. Saya ada cakap dalam blog.
Q: Cadang apa yang jadi adalah dirancang? Mengangkat sumpah sebelum hari penamaan?
A: Tidak
YA: Move on to the next questions
KS: Dalam keterangan ada menyatakan tidak langsung mengetahui perkahwinan Saidati dan Faez?
A: Saya kata saya tak pasti mereka berkahwin atau tidak
Q: Saya kata awak tahu?
A: Saya tahu mereka lari
Q: Bukan lari berkahwin?
A: Saya tak dapat sahkan mereka berkahwin atau tidak
Q: Saya kata mereka berkahwin?
A: Saya tahu mereka lari tetapi tak tahu mereka berkahwin atau tidak
YA: Dia tanya Saidati kahwin atau tidak?
A: Saya tahu dia lari, saya tahu dia kahwin
KS: Don’t lie in court, you know?
Q: Lari dengan Faez?
A: Ya
Q: Ada jumpa lepas perkahwinan?
A: Ada
Q: Many times?
A: 1-2 kali
Q: Ada diugut?
MY: May I object, I think the court should take guideline, section 148 dan s.153.
YA: Ya, apa relevant ini?
KS: I put it to him
MY: May I refer to s. 148 and s. 153 of Evidence Act 1950
KS: It goes to the credibility
MY: No, it’s wrong
MY: S.148 [read] Evidence Act 1950. I think that 148(b)(c) applied here. S.153 Evidence Act 1950 [read]. He said know, it’s not for KS to [][], S.153 applied here to [] on the matter that he testify.
KS: We all know this. This witness is lying and it goes to the credibility.
YA: Objection by MY sustained. Proceed with other points.
KS: May I put it to you that you’re lying when you said you don’t know this person and the marriage?
A: Maksud saya, saya tak dapat sahkan
Q: Tahu orang ini, Faez?
A: Ya
Q: Laporan polis oleh Faez atas ugutan atas dia?
A: Tidak tahu
Q: Dalam keterangan masa dulu, AI ada arahkan awak untuk hantar dokumen pada dia pada 25hb?
A: Tidak
Q: Ada atau tidak, atau 26hb?
A: 25hb pun ada, dokumen pada 25hb tidak. Hanya 26hb sahaja
Q: 26hb, En Ibrahim Yaacob yang suruh hantar dokumen?
A: Setuju
Q: Apa yang dinyatakan dalam keterangan khasnya yang terjadi dalam unit 11-5-1, langsung tidak benar?
A: Tak setuju
Q: Cadang, saya katakan AI dalam unit 11-5-2? Tidak dalam unit 11-5-1, tentang apa yang terjadi unit itu tidak benar?
A: Mohon untuk tanya masa. Dia berada dalam unit 11-5-1
Q: AI berada dalam 11-5-2?
A: Tidak
KS: Whether alibi witnesses are here, we need to identify them in court, the witnesses for alibi.
YA: The purpose is to put your defence ASAP, notice must be given, your defence is alibi
KS: Notice have been given long ago. As early as 2009
MY: I confirmed
KS: Other questions related to what happen in that unit, apply for a closed proceeding. MY can re-examine first.
MY: No, let’s us finish first.
YA: You can ask him. Keterangan lepas ini adalah tertutup, orang awam diminta keluar sekejap.
[10:22 am]
Prosiding ‘in camera’
KS: Dulu keterangan pada 4 Feb 2010, menyatakan antara lain adakah gel pelincir yang kamu arahkan untuk dibawa adakah sama dengan yang ditunjukkan? Yang ada ditunjukkan kepada kamu?
A: Ya
Q: Eksibit ini bila beri pada polis?
A: Kalau tidak silap saya pada 28hb di wad kecemasan dan saya diarahkan untuk simpan. Saya serahkan pada pagi 29hb
Q: Beri pada siapa?
A: IO, ASP
Q: Ada akuan terima?
A: Ada saya ada tandatangan
Q: Dalam keterangan in camera menyatakan ‘semasa saya diliwat, saya ada letakkan krim KY Jelly dan tertumpah pada carpet dan tepi tuala itu di sebelah kiri?
A: Ya
Q: KY Jelly adalah bahan yang penting dalam kes ini?
A: Saya rasa
Q: Sangat penting?
A: Saya rasa
Q: KY Jelly tak ada di mana-mana laporan, laporan chemist atau mana-mana laporan yang lain?
A: Saya tak faham soalan
Q: I’m suggesting that this KY does not appear in any report of the chemist?
A: Saya tak pernah tengok laporan, saya tak tahu
Q: Ini adalah ‘after thought’?
A: Saya tak faham
YA: Ini adalah satu pemikiran semula awak?
A: Maksud YA, mereka-reka? Tidak
Q: Diarahkan oleh AI untuk bawa KY jelly?
A: Ya
Q: Itu tak benar?
A: Tidak
Re-examination
MY: Kamu ditanyakan tentang sumpah kamu di masjid, cadangan peguam adalah ianya dirancang, kamu kata tidak benar, sila jelaskan?
Sepanjang awal Julai selepas saya buat laporan polis, beberapa ulama terkenal seperti Tok Guru Nik Aziz dan Mufti Besar Perlis, Dato’ Asri menyarankan saya dan AI bersumpah atau bermubahalah untuk menunjukkan siapa yang benar dalam kes ini. Jadi kalau tak silap, dalam pertengahan July, tak pasti dalam blog atau tidak, saya pertimbangkan saranan ulama, dan saya pelawa AI bersumpah seperti saranan. Selepas dicadangkan, saya tunggu respon AI dan selepas 2-3 minggu, mendapat respon yang negatif, pihak saya fikirkan memandangnkan AI tidak sudi, saya saja yang buat sumpah itu sendiri. Tempoh masa setelah menanti lebih dari 2-3 minggu dan kebetulan dekat dengan tarikh penamaan calon seperti cadangan peguam KS tadi.
MY: Itu saya, pohon saksi dilepaskan.
YA: Saksi dilepaskan, itu saja.
MY: Selepas ini Doktor.
YA: Stand down 5 minit.
[10:33 am]
[10:45 am]
JB: Kes dipanggil semula
MY: Pihak-pihak seperti yang sama, pohon dipanggil Dr. Mohd. Razali
KS: I’m asking permission for my expert to be here.
YA: Any problem MY?
MY: No
SP2 – Mohd Razali bin Ibrahim Angkat sumpah BM, pakar bedah am HKL, 37 tahun
Pemeriksaan Utama
MY: Doctor seorang pakar bedah am?
KS: It should be in English because he’s an expert.
YA: Up to the witness. He sworn in BM
MY: This is a trial, saksi bercakap mengikut Akta Bahasa Kebangsaan 1965 dalam BM
YA: Cakap dalam BM
SP2: Boleh
MY: Pakar bedah apa?
A: Bedah am
Q: Sebelum tanya tentang bidang tugas, apakah kelayakan Dr.?
A: Memulakan pelajaran di Kelantan, sambung pelajaran di USM, juga di Kelantan, menamatkan kursus perubatan pada 1998 dan mula menjalankan tugas pegawai perubatan siswazah di Hospital Ipoh, kemudian saya bertugas Hospital Selayang selama 3 tahun, kemudian tahun 2003, saya sambung Sarjana Pembedahan di HKL, di UKM. Kursus Master tamat pada 2007 dan bertugas sebagai pakar di HKL sehingga sekarang.
Q: Apakah bidang pengkhususan semasa di Sarjana?
A: Kita diajar untuk pembedahan mengenai masalah anggota manusia bermula dengan leher hingga ke bawah, spesifik di bahagian punggung, dubur, kalau di bahagian leher masalah seperti tirod, sinus dan [][]
Q: Bahagian dubur?
A: Akan dilakukan jika ada masalah
Q: Sehingga hari ini ada berapa banyak kes yang melibatkan pemeriksaan pesakit di bahagian dubur, dari Dr. mula bertugas hingga sekarang?
A: Ada banyak, lebih dari 100 kes
Q: Adakah melibatkan pemeriksaan luar dan dalam dubur?
A: Bergantung kepada kes yang datang, jika ada aduan tentang masalah dubur, akan lihat
Q: Bahagian dalam dubur, kes secara am?
A: Lebih kurang 100 kes tetapi saya tak ada dokumen details
Q: Apabila ambil sampel dalam dubur untuk tujuan apa?
A: Saya bahagian klinikal, biasanya jika ada jangkitan perlu ambil sampel untuk pemeriksaan makmal
Q: Pemeriksaan bagaimana?
A: Untuk pemeriksaan makmal
Q: Untuk sampel, apa peralatan digunakan, dari pakaian dsg?
A: Mesti gunakan peralatan yang steril untuk ambil sampel
Q: Bagaimana peralatan untuk ambil sampel?
A: Sampel boleh diambil dengan pelbagai cara, swab dan syringe untuk ambil sampel cecair.
KS: We are having problem in translating in BI on the spot, no point of having our expert here if he testify in BM.
YA: Stand down for a while
[10:54 am]
[11:00 am]
JB: Kes dipanggil semula
MY: Saya cuba untuk accommodate
YA: Boleh beri keteragan dalam BI? Selalu dalam BM tetapi ada expert di sini. Jadi lebih cepat kalau dalam BM
A: Boleh
SP2 – angkat sumpah semula
(dalam BI)
MY: You said that there is 3 methods to take sample?
3 methods -swab, syringe (picagari) and
Q: It must be sterile?
A: Yes
Q: What about yourself?
The person that taking the spesimen, if for micro-biology must be with good clothing []and with a mask to protect yourself.
Q: Glove?
A: Yes
Q: If for DNA?
A: I’m not an expert in DNA but in any hospital, the practise, is the same.
Q: Were you on duty on 28 June 2008?
A: I was on-call doctor
Q: As what?
A: Surgeon on call
Q: Time?
A: 24 hours, starting from 8 pm to 8 am the next morning
Q: In HKL?
A: Yes
Q: Now, at 7 pm did you received any call?
A: Yes, from my fellow officer that there was a case for me to attend. They wanted me to be there at 9 pm as other doctors involved as well
Q: What were you informed?
A: They told me there was a sodomy case; the patient was brought to a special room
Q: Where were you at that time?
A: At that time I was at home
Q: When were you expected to be?
I was expected to be at Special Unit at 9 o’clock
Q: Who were there?
A: When I arrived at the room, 2 specialists were there, Dr Khairul and Dr Siew and other person, I remember DSP Jude
MY: May I call Dr Khairul and Dr Siew for identification
SP2 identified Dr. Khairul Nizam bin Hassab and Dr. Siew Sheue Feng
YA: Nama penuh
Dr. Khairul Nizam dan Dr Siew Sheue Feng
Supt Jude
This is the police officer that was around, ASP Jude
SP2 identified Supt Jude
Q: What transpired in the room?
A: There was one police officer, who gave summary to what happen then, after discussed we decided to proceed with the examination of the person
Q: Was the person to be examined in that room?
A: Yes, in that room
Q: Can you identify?
A: Yes
Q: Did you know his name by that time?
A: Yes, Saiful
SP1 identified by SP2
Q: You, Nizam and Siew interviewed Saiful? Did any of you interview him?
A: The 2 specialists did that but I was not involved
Q: But were you there?
A: Yes, I was
Q: Was his story consistent with the Medical Officer (MO) and the briefing?
A: Yes, consistent with the MO and the briefing
Q: All 3 in the room?
A: Yes
Q: Who else?
A: Police officers, nurses and medical assistants
Q: Was the examination done the doctors, one by one?
A: Yes, it started by Khairul, me and Siew
Q: What did you examine?
A: Involve anal and rectum, after Dr Khairul, and after I get permission on the victim, I did examination by external part and followed by the internal part using proctoscope.
Q: Is this for the internal part?
[MY showing proctoscope with plastic wrapper to SP2]
A: Yes, this is the proctoscope. I’m using something similar like this. Yes, I used proctoscope for internal examination of the victim
Q: How to used?
[SP2 explained the process using proctoscope] to see the inner part of the victim
Q: Did you insert this with any assistant, that day?
A: When I checked Saiful, I tried to. I’m worried, since he claimed that he was sodomized, I tried not to put in anything, but I have problem putting proctoscope in, then I need to use lubricant.
Q: What lubricant did you used?
A: Lignociene Gel
Q: What did you find?
A: I managed to do the examination.
I checked him, and what I found externally, the anus was moist compared to any other area, but I did not found any injury, trauma on any other part. But I found a small haemorrhoid but of no significance.
Q: What happen if you did not used lubricant?
A: I might have probe putting in the proctoscope because of the nature of the body and if I were to try to push it further, it will cause injury.
Q: Would you know that Saiful have been examine before by other doctor, using a proctoscope?
A: Yes, I was informed
Q: But externally and internally, there was no injury?
A: Yes
Q: After examined, did u do anything else?
Dr. Siew was around, so we decided to take inner sample, by using the swab, I took sample from inside and outside. I take one swab from perinal, and one of swab of high rectum and while coming out slowly, one low rectum swab.
Q: When you took the sample, were you assisted?
A: Yes, by Dr. Siew
Q: After that what happen to the swab?
A: I passed it to Dr Siew for labelling of the specimen
Q: Did you know what he did?
A: I didn’t see it, I just passed it to him as I was not involved.
Q: Refer to swab stick, did you use this?
A: Yes, to take the swab
MY: Can we mark it as evidence, swab stick?
YA: Satu swab stick as P19
P19 – swab stick
P20 – proctoscope
Q: This P19, did you have to place in a container?
A: Yes
Q: Show SP2 to a container.
A: The same but colour might be difference but this is the container that we used.
MY: Mark as P21
P21 – container
Q: Did you jointly prepare a report, signed by the 3 of you?
A: Yes
Q: Show SP2 to a doctor, glance thru it and look at the last page, did you recognise that signature?
A: Yes, my signature in number 2
Q: Confirmed that this is the report based on the examination?
A: Yes
MY: Mark it as P22
P22 – Medical report HKL dated 13 July 2008
Q: In this report at page 2, on the anal and proctoscope examination, it stated here ‘no tear or contact bleeding’ and as a result of that at page. 4, the conclusion was that, no conclusive clinical finding suggestive of penetration’?
A: Yes
YA: Need the original, photostat is IDD16
MY: Original is with SP2
Q: In this report at page 2, on the anal and proctoscope examination, it stated here ‘no tear or contact bleeding’ and as a result of that at page. 4, the conclusion was that, no conclusive clinical finding suggestive of penetration’?
A: Conclusion number 1 is based on history and examination; there is nothing to say that there is penetration to the anus or rectum.
Q: In no. 2, lab, in order to conclusively say there is a penetration do you need the DNA test?
A: The reason we cannot come out with a definite conclusion was because we do not have the result from the lab and no definite location of the specimens.
Q: Can we confine to conclusion no 1, does it mean that no conclusive clinically finding suggestive of penetration, does it mean penetration at all?
A: No
Q: Look, now it is not equal, [][]?
A: If I don’t have the finding, I cannot say that because we can have a sodomy without injury
Q: The other Doctors, did they take sample also?
A: Yes
Q: All this, are they stated in the report?
A: There are 2 other sample of high rectal swabs kept in our Forensic Department in case anything happen in the lab
Q: Other than that, other than the rectal area, did the other doctors take sample from other areas?
A: Yes, in page 3
Q: If I may refer to page 3, all specimen labelled by Dr Siew and lab analysis revel the following “Presence of semen on swab label B5, B7, B8 and B9, so what did you guys are saying actually?
A: At that time when we have the report we did not know where the location of B5, B7, B8 and B9 were taken from?
Q: Item no 2, page 3?
A: “Presence of semen on swabs B5, B7, B8 and B9”
Q: You said, you did not know where the sample taken from?
A: Yes
Q: Do you know what Dr Siew do with it?
A: In general, he sealed it, packed it and then passed it to the IO
Q: Were you there?
A: I was there but I did not see it
Q: Did you see Jude leaving with the specimen?
A: No
Q: Was he there?
A: Yes, he was there
Q: If you today, in this court, know exactly the location B5, B7, B8 and B9, would you be able to conclude whether there was a penetration?
MY: I want to show a document handed to Jude, as ID to the witness
Q: Look at the document, what document is this?
A: This form of process handling the specimen and submitted to ASP.
Q: The date?
A: 29 June, early morning
Q: Document saying that specimen passed to Jude?
A: Yes
MY: Mark it as ID23
ID23 – borang pengendalian spesimen Mediko-Legal bertarikh 29 Jun 2008
Q: I will show you another document, read the 1st page?
A: Borang Polis Di Raja Malaysia, contoh-contoh dan / atau barang kes untuk pemeriksaan atau cerakinan
Q: This form sent to whom?
A: To Ketua Pengarah Jabatan Kimia / Ahli Kimia Kanan send by Jude Blacius and specimen to B to B10.
Q: Page 2 of the document, what did it say about B5, B7, B8 and B9?
B5 – Swab from perianal region diambil dari Mohd Saiful Bukhari bin Azlan.
B7- High Rectal Swab diambil dari Mohd Saiful Bukhari bin Azlan
B8 – High Rectal Swab diambil dari Mohd Saiful Bukhari bin Azlan
B9 – Low Rectal Swab diambil dari Mohd Saiful Bukhari bin Azlan
Q: All this is a sample that you took from rectal area of Saiful?
A: Yes
MY: Mark it as ID24
YA: ID24 – Borang Penyerahan Sample to Jabatan Kimia
MY: Now, I’ll straight go to the chemist report.
Q: What document is this?
A: It a report by Jabatan Kimia Malaysia
Q: You read the 1st para, can you confirmed refer to the specimen that Jude received from all of you?
A: Yes, I confirmed that all exhibit is from us to Jude
Q: Look in page 2, after the B7, B8, B9 and B10, you still did not know the location?
[read ]” no semen from other swabs”?
A: Yes
Q: Look at page 3?
Q: Put ID23, ID24 and chemist report with your medical report? Now can you tell where B5 from?
A: Yes, B5 is from perianal region, B7 is from high rectal swab, B8 is from high rectal swab and B9 is from low rectal swab.
Q: Based on the history, your examination and you know where B5, B7, B8 and B9, can you conclude that there is evidence of penetration?
A: Yes, if I know the location now, I can confirm that there was an anal penetration.
Q: Were you told by Saiful, if any aid were used?
A: Yes, a lubricant
Q: Is it consistent there is anal penetration, with a lubricant, and semen was found?
A: I gather that and I can conclude to anal penetration
Q: The report you and other 2 doctors signed, whether it was a complete report, bearing in mind of items taken and you did not know the location?
A: It is a complete report but without the knowledge of the location
Q: Now that you have known the location of B5, B7, B8 and B9, can you tell the court what is your conclusion?
A: With all the evidence now in front of me, there is an anal penetration
Q: Even without injury?
A: Yes
Q: Is it consistent with penile penetration?
A: With the DNA semen, I say there is a penile penetration
MY: May I mark chemist report?
ID25 – chemist report
KS: We reserved our cross
YA: You have your expert here
MY: I have a problem here. If they intend to reserved the cross examination yesterday, we can proceed with this witness yesterday, but we had to wait for their expert. KS want [] because their expert was not here, now their expert is here. Again we accommodate the defence, just now KS asked for SP2 to testified in BI even though he’s more comfortable in BM, [][] now what is the reason to reserved cross, I would agree if KS want to stand down for a while, I have no objection to that.
YA: Stand down for 10 minutes
[12:07 pm]
MY, NH, KS, PC, RK, CV masuk ke dalam kamar hakim
[12:28 pm]
Pihak-pihak keluar dari kamar hakim
[12:31 pm]
JB: Kes dipanggil semula
MY: Pihak seperti terdahulu. Pemeriksaan balas SP2
KS: We’re applying an adjournment until tomorrow to have a discussion with our expert we’ll proceed with the cross tomorrow morning
MY: I’m placing my objection to this, maybe we can start at 3 pm, but I’ll leave it to the court
YA: Saya benarkan tangguh hingga esok untuk peguam bincang dengan pakar mereka keterangan hari ini. Esok Jumaat sila awal sedikit
KS: Pukul 9 pagi
YA: Ya, 9 pagi. Mahkamah tangguh.
[12:34 pm]
source : malaysianstory
