KUALA LUMPUR: The sodomy trial of Anwar Ibrahim today heard about the existence of an initial medical report on the history and examination of the complainant, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan.
The initial report, which was not tendered in court as evidence, was prepared before the full medical report dated July 13 was done and subsequently made available to the court.
Kuala Lumpur Hospital (HKL) general surgeon Dr Mohd Razali Ibrahim testified that the initial report, which was being kept at the HKL, was prepared by him and two other specialists, HKL emergency care specialist Dr Khairul Nizam Hassan and forensic pathologist Dr Siew Sheue Feng, after they examined Saiful for three hours on the night of June 28, 2008.
He told the court that he could not remember the date of the report, which was signed by all three of them.
Razali, however, said the date of the type-written report ought to be between June 28, 2008 and July 13, 2008.
The existence of this report came about when Razali was cross-examined by Anwar's lead counsel Karpal Singh.
"We (Razali, Khairul Nizam and Siew) examined the patient (Saiful) on June 28, 2008, at 9pm and we completed the examination three hours later," he said at the trial of Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim, who is charged with sodomising Saiful, 25, at Unit 11-5-1 of the Desa Damansara Condominium in Jalan Setiakasih, Bukit Damansara, between 3.01pm and 4.30pm on June 26, 2008.
Karpal Singh: On June 28, 2008 examination was conducted. Between June 28, 2008 and July 13, there’s another report during that time?
Razali: The history and examination of the patient.
Karpal: So the history is more detailed than in this report?
Razali: I can’t remember.
Asked by Karpal whether he (Razali) could produce the report in court because it was very important to the defence, Razali replied that the report was available at the HKL but he did not know where exactly the report was now.
Judge Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah then stood down the proceedings for the parties to discuss this report.
When the proceedings continued, Solicitor-General II Mohamed Yusof Zainal Abiden informed the court that Siew had an unsigned copy of the report.
Karpal replied that an unsigned copy had no consequence and that he wanted the signed copy as testified by Razali.
The hearing continues tomorrow to allow the doctors and the investigation officer to locate the initial report and produce it in court.
Earlier, when quizzed by Karpal as to who was present during the examination on Saiful at the hospital, Razali had said that throughout the three-hour examination, investigation officer Supt Jude Pereira was there.
Asked by Karpal what was the purpose of the police officer being present during the examination, explained that he was there as the case was considered as a medico-legal case.
Razali also told the court that the examination was conducted on June 28, 2008, and the clinical report on the examination was prepared on July 13, 2008.
Karpal: Was this report requested by anyone? By any authority?
Razali: I was not informed. By a higher authority.
Karpal: You assume it was requested by a higher authority?
Razali: Yes.
Karpal: Why is that?
Razali: Because usually the higher authority needs the report.
Karpal: Higher authority means the police?
Razali :I don’t know. Maybe.
Karpal:Normally in this case, by police?
Razali: Yes. Should be the police.
- Bernama
The initial report, which was not tendered in court as evidence, was prepared before the full medical report dated July 13 was done and subsequently made available to the court.
Kuala Lumpur Hospital (HKL) general surgeon Dr Mohd Razali Ibrahim testified that the initial report, which was being kept at the HKL, was prepared by him and two other specialists, HKL emergency care specialist Dr Khairul Nizam Hassan and forensic pathologist Dr Siew Sheue Feng, after they examined Saiful for three hours on the night of June 28, 2008.
He told the court that he could not remember the date of the report, which was signed by all three of them.
Razali, however, said the date of the type-written report ought to be between June 28, 2008 and July 13, 2008.
The existence of this report came about when Razali was cross-examined by Anwar's lead counsel Karpal Singh.
"We (Razali, Khairul Nizam and Siew) examined the patient (Saiful) on June 28, 2008, at 9pm and we completed the examination three hours later," he said at the trial of Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim, who is charged with sodomising Saiful, 25, at Unit 11-5-1 of the Desa Damansara Condominium in Jalan Setiakasih, Bukit Damansara, between 3.01pm and 4.30pm on June 26, 2008.
Karpal Singh: On June 28, 2008 examination was conducted. Between June 28, 2008 and July 13, there’s another report during that time?
Razali: The history and examination of the patient.
Karpal: So the history is more detailed than in this report?
Razali: I can’t remember.
Asked by Karpal whether he (Razali) could produce the report in court because it was very important to the defence, Razali replied that the report was available at the HKL but he did not know where exactly the report was now.
Judge Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah then stood down the proceedings for the parties to discuss this report.
When the proceedings continued, Solicitor-General II Mohamed Yusof Zainal Abiden informed the court that Siew had an unsigned copy of the report.
Karpal replied that an unsigned copy had no consequence and that he wanted the signed copy as testified by Razali.
The hearing continues tomorrow to allow the doctors and the investigation officer to locate the initial report and produce it in court.
Earlier, when quizzed by Karpal as to who was present during the examination on Saiful at the hospital, Razali had said that throughout the three-hour examination, investigation officer Supt Jude Pereira was there.
Asked by Karpal what was the purpose of the police officer being present during the examination, explained that he was there as the case was considered as a medico-legal case.
Razali also told the court that the examination was conducted on June 28, 2008, and the clinical report on the examination was prepared on July 13, 2008.
Karpal: Was this report requested by anyone? By any authority?
Razali: I was not informed. By a higher authority.
Karpal: You assume it was requested by a higher authority?
Razali: Yes.
Karpal: Why is that?
Razali: Because usually the higher authority needs the report.
Karpal: Higher authority means the police?
Razali :I don’t know. Maybe.
Karpal:Normally in this case, by police?
Razali: Yes. Should be the police.
- Bernama
No comments:
Post a Comment