ANALISIS : 3 TEMBELANG BESAR KES SODOMI ANWAR DIDEDAHKAN !

Sebelum ini MiM telah menulis beberapa artikel tentang kes sodomi Anwar dari sudut analisis perubatan KLIK SINI

Sekarang sudah ada dokumen penuh Mahkamah Rayuan kes Sodomi Anwar Ibrahim telah dikeluarkan on-line. Anda boleh baca di sini : KLIK SINI

Post by Pecah Palak Mikir.

Masaalahnya ialah dokumen tersebut mengandungi 85 muka surat, 169 perenggan dan berbahasa Inggeris. MiM percaya ramai yang tidak faham dan lebih gemar mendengar sahaja atau membaca daripada akhbar-akhbar dan portal-portal berita.

Jika portal itu pro-pembangkang, sudah tentu banyak penemuan dan hujah-hujah tidak akan dilaporkan walau pun ianya bernas yang bersandarkan bukti-bukti.

Ada laporan pro-pembangkang yang bercampur aduk dengan perkara lain untuk menunjukkan kononnya Mahkamah Rayuan berat sebelah dan sebagainya, satu taktik kotor portal berita pro-pembangkang yang kita sudah tahu.

Kerana itu juga, tidak ramai orang tahu bahawa Anwar Ibrahim sebenarnya telah disahkan terlibat di dalam aktiviti homoseksual semasa kes Sodomi beliau sebelum ini.

Dokumen Mahkamah Rayuan ini sekaligus telah menjawab segala pembohongan jahat jijik dan putar belit kepimpinan pembangkang tentang kes sodomi Anwar Ibrahim yang mereka tabur di dalam ceramah-ceramah mereka dan portal-portal pro-pembangkang.

Manakala hujah-hujah hakim-hakim Mahkamah Rayuan bukan semudah kelentong pemimpin-pemimpin pembangkang semasa berceramah tetapi berdasarkan kepada fakta-fakta konkrit, hujah-hujah mahkamah dan bahan rujukan yang sah.

Di antaranya ialah semasa Mahkamah Rayuan memberi hujah tentang DNA Anwar Ibrahim :

[96] Dr. B.R. Sharma in his book ‘Forensic Science In Criminal Investigation & Trials’ 4th Edition at page 1118 states as follows:

6. The quantities of the DNA required for analysis are extremely small, in micrograms. In recent times the requirements have become even less, due to amplification of material clues through cell regeneration, technology – Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR).

7. An important advantage of DNA profiling is that the contamination of evidentiary clues by similar biomaterial may increase the difficulties but do not prevent the identification significantly.

[97] In the same vein, Jane Moira Taupin in ‘Introduction to Forensic DNA Evidence For Criminal Justice Professionals’, CRC Press states at page 18 that

“The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was a boon for forensic science, as it enables the analysis of minute quantities of blood and semen and is effective for degraded samples such as those commonly encountered at crime scenes. PCR is essentially a molecular photocopier that can amplify very small samples and allow them to be detected and analysed.”.[98] In States & Others v Jyotish Prasad & Others LNIND 2009 DEL 799, the High Court of Delhi held that :

“While, as a hypothesis, it may be stated that a vaginal swab kept in an unrefrigerated condition would be subject to degradation, but that has to be established as a fact. In the present case, the DNA analysis report does not indicate that the vaginal swab Exhibit-PW-14 obtained from the deceased had deteriorated to such a condition or, at all, which did not permit them to do DNA profiling in respect thereof. Begitu juga rujukan artikel buku Smith & Cook yang menyatakan :

‘spermatozoa may remain in the posterior fornix as long as 17 days, and may survive a menstrual period.’Berapa ramaikah rakyat Malaysia yang benar-benar faham terminologi perubatan dan maksud-maksudnya?

Kerana itu, kepimpinan pembangkang mengeksploitasikan ketidakmahiran rakyat ini untuk kepentingan mereka bukannya untuk menyatakan kebenaran.

Lebih menjadi masaalah ialah apabila rakyat mendapatkan info kes Anwar Ibrahim daripada portal-portal pro-pembangkang. Sudah tentu mahkamh yang akan disalahkan tanpa mereka melaporkan sepenuhnya tentang kes sodomi Anwar.

Lebih parah lagi ialah apabila ada rakyat bukannya mahu ingin tahu dan menilai sendiri keputusan Mahkamah Rayuan.

And believe me, tidak ada satu pun media pembangkang yang menyiarkan alamat on-line keputusan Mahkamah Rayuan itu iaitu http://www.kehakiman.gov.my/directory/judgment/file/W-05-19-01-2012_DatoBalia.pdf !

Sebabnya satu sahaja iaitu mereka tidak mahu rakyat tahu perkara yang sebenarnya dan rakyat boleh terus diperkudakan oleh Pakatan Pembangkang. Itu sahaja.

Di antara pembohongan kepimpinan pembangkang :

1. Mahkamah 'tali barut' kerajaan jahat kerana tidak memanggil saksi alibi Anwar Ibrahim

Jawapannya :

a. Pembohongan kepimpinan pembangkang kerap dimainkan di dalam ceramah-ceramah mereka. Realitinya, Anwar Ibrahim sendiri yang tidak memanggil alibi saksi untuk mempertahan diri beliau. Dan di antara saksi beliau ialah Wan Azizah.

b. Kita tentu hairan kenapa Anwar Ibrahim tidak menggunakan Wan Azizah untuk menafikan kes beliau. Apakah Anwar Ibrahim takut Wan Azizah akan tersasul tersilap skrip di dalam kandang saksi apabila disoal oleh peguam Saiful?

c. Apakah Anwar Ibrahim takut lebih banyak lagi cerita laki bini didedahkan?

d. MiM percaya peguam Saiful akan menggunapakai taktik peguam Anwar yang sebelum ini mengasak serta mendedahkan pelbagai perkara tentang saksi-saksi Saiful untuk menjatuhkan kredibiliti saksi supaya tidak diterima oleh mahkamah.

e. Keputusan Mahkamah Rayuan :

Alibi
[109] As we have noted earlier, the respondent’s line of defence was an alibi of which he had given notice before the commencement of the trial.
But at the trial, it appears that this defence was never pursued for reasons best known him.
It is pertinent to note that an alibi represents a complete defence to exculpate the respondent from the offence charged.
[110] It was submitted before us by the DPP that thefailure of the respondent to proceed to call any witnesses to support his defence of alibi raises questions on the bona fides of his defence.
Generally, we agree with the submissions of learned counsel for the respondent that no adverse inference can be drawn against an accused person in a criminal trial. 2. Pihak polis tukar sampel bukti

Jawapannya :

a. Pembohongan kepimpinan pembangkang ini turut ditaburkan di dalam ceramah-ceramah mereka.

b. Realitinya, Professor David Lawrence Wells (DW2) yang dipanggil oleh Anwar Ibrahim sendiri mengaku tidak dapat mengesahkan sampel bukti itu telah diusik.

[122] It is crystal clear that the learned trial judge was simply overwhelmed by the evidence of these two expert witnesses called by the defence.
We find that His Lordship had overlooked the testimony of DW2 under cross examination regarding the issue of tampering of the containers where DW2 admitted that he could not say that there had been tampering of the containers (see page 2234 appeal record). In cross examination, DW2 answered as follows:
S: Would you say that the containers were tampered?
J: No, I can’t. All I was saying yesterday is that this is the container that if any tampering occurred, it would be evident to others....c. Realitinya juga, bahan bukti swab dalam kontainer tidak pernah diusik oleh mana-mana pihak termasuk pihak polis seperti yang dibohongi oleh Pakatan Pembangkang :

[22] On 30.6.2008, at about 9 am, PW25 cut the bottom of exhibit P27 and put each container containing the swabs into individual envelopes which he marked as ‘B’, ‘B1’ to ‘B10’.
On the same day at about 7.55 pm, PW25 handed over the envelopes together with a handing over form ‘Pol.31’ (exhibit P24) to the chemist Dr Seah (PW5) who acknowledged receipt through exhibit P30.
In her testimony, PW5 confirmed that she found no evidence of any tampering to the seals on the various individual containers which contained the swabs.
According to her, had she found any evidence of tampering she would have stated it in her report.3. Anwar telah dizalimi oleh Mahkamah Rayuan.

a. Dakwaan ini merupakan satu lagi pembohongan jijik Pakatan Pembangkang.

b. Realitinya, pihak mahkamah telah memberi sepenuh ruang untuk Anwar Ibrahim mempertahankan diri beliau.
c. Kerenah peguam-peguam Anwar yang menangguh kes lebih daripada 60 kali tetapi Mahkamah tetap menerima alasan-alasan mereka.
d. Selain tidak memanggil alibi saksi beliau untuk memberi keterangan, beliau juga membuat kenyataan tidak bersumpah di dalam mahkamah.

e. Sesiapa sahaja yang waras akan terfikir, kenapa Anwar Ibrahim begitu liat tidak mahu bersumpah dan memberi keterangan membela diri beliau sendiri, sama ada di dalam kandang saksi mahkamah mahu pun di dalam masjid ketika dicabar oleh Saiful dan Dato' Eskay sebelum ini?

f. Padahal, segalanya itu akan memberi impak positif untuk beliau sendiri tetapi tidak dilakukan.

g. Maka, akan timbul persoalan bahawa Anwar Ibrahim tidak berani bersumpah kerana beliau memang bersalah. Very simple.

h. Keterangan Mahkamah Rayuan :

[107] In our view, the trial judge in the instant appeal could quite properly wonder why the respondent had elected to make an unsworn statement; that it could not be because he had conscientious objection to taking the oath since, if he had, he could affirm.
Could it be that the respondent was reluctant to put his evidence to the test of cross-examination?
If so, why? He had nothing to fear from unfair questions because he would be fully protected from this by his own counsel and by the court.

Sumber dan sambungannya rujuk Dr. MIM