The Sun
by Tan Yi Liang
by Tan Yi Liang
KUALA LUMPUR (March 29, 2011): Teoh Beng Hock could have sustained one or two blows to the chest before his nine-storey fall on July 16, 2009.
This was the opinion of forensic medical science professor Dr Peter Vanezis today in his testimony at the Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) investigating Teoh’s death.
“I cannot rule out the possibility that (if looked at) in isolation, that there could have been one or two blows which could have caused light bruising (at the chest). But it is not clear tramline bruising,” said Vanezis when replying to a question from Bar Council lawyer Christopher Leong.
He added if someone had performed cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) on Teoh, bruises could have formed as CPR can cause “a lot” of bruising to the chest if pushed hard.
CPR featured in a theory put forward by Leong.
This was the opinion of forensic medical science professor Dr Peter Vanezis today in his testimony at the Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) investigating Teoh’s death.
“I cannot rule out the possibility that (if looked at) in isolation, that there could have been one or two blows which could have caused light bruising (at the chest). But it is not clear tramline bruising,” said Vanezis when replying to a question from Bar Council lawyer Christopher Leong.
He added if someone had performed cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) on Teoh, bruises could have formed as CPR can cause “a lot” of bruising to the chest if pushed hard.
CPR featured in a theory put forward by Leong.
“Teoh could have possibly been restrained. The neck lock could have injured the carotid artery or the vagus nerve and rendered him unconscious.
“The person or persons present did not know what happened and performed CPR. As they thought he was gone, they decided to throw him out the window. But somewhere during the fall, he revives,” said Leong.
The theory was dismissed by Vanezis who called the scenario “extremely unlikely” and a “great leap of faith”.
Vanezis said that the fractures to Teoh’s ribs identified in the post-mortem were “extremely unlikely” to have been caused by CPR and were most likely caused by transferred force.
He said the transferred force came from the fall, which he raised when questioned by conducting officer Amarjeet Singh.
“That is a possibility. The transmitted force would move the spine and this would cause fractures due to the difference in movement between the chest and the spine," said Vanezis.
To further questions from Leong, Vanezis said that there was “no pattern of injury” to indicate stamping, and agreed with Leong that it is possible for one to get sternum fractures if someone sat on the chest.
Asked by RCI chairman Tan Sri James Foong, Vanezis replied: “Yes, you could sit on someone and cause fractures to the sternum and leave no bruising."
To another question from Leong, Vanezis said that the 4cm fracture on Teoh’s skull were consistent “with someone hitting a hard surface”.
“It is a linear fracture, which is different from a depressed fracture which one would get if one was hit on the head with an object such as a hammer,” said Vanezis.
He however did not discount the possibility that a cricket bat could cause a linear fracture but added that one “would have to hit really hard” to cause such a fracture.
Vanezis explained that a linear fracture is caused by “hitting a flat surface with force”.
To questions from Amarjeet, Vanezis said that Teoh was conscious when he landed on a fifth floor landing of Plaza Masalam, Shah Alam.
Teoh, an aide to Seri Kembangan assemblyman Ean Yong Hian Wah, had been called into the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission’s (MACC) Selangor branch on the 14th floor of Plaza Masalam, Shah Alam, as a witness on July 15.
He was found dead the following day.
Vanezis cited the fact that Teoh landed on his feet as a sign that he was conscious during his fall.
“(Breaking of a fall) is an instinct even in a suicide. If a person is conscious and orientated when they’re falling, they try to land on their feet and put out their hands to break their fall,” he said.
“There was severe fragmented bone damage to the soles of the feet. You could quite clearly see the bone fractures had overlapped, indicating transmitted force from below upwards,” added Vanezis.
He said that Teoh would have landed where he did unless he took “a running jump” out of a window at the MACC office.
Vanezis said was impossible due to the level which the window could open, adding it was impossible to force someone out without leaving marks on the window.
“A person who is conscious and aware would leave some marks to small window as he would be struggling," said Vanezis
He added that he was told of a shoe mark found on the window frame.
Asked by Amarjeet about the bruising on Teoh’s neck, Vanezis said the bruising was most likely due to hyperextension of the neck when Teoh’s head was thrown back.
“The head may well have impacted at some point and moved the neck backward,” said Vanezis.
“Bearing that there had been this hyperextension to the neck, you would expect to find bruises in this area, bleeding from the muscles surrounding the spine as the neck had been stretched,” he added.
Vanezis explained why he ruled out strangulation when asked by Foong, saying that there was “no justification” for strangulation in his view.
“(There is) no evidence of fingernail scratches on the neck, no fracture to the larynx or hyoid bone, no deep bruising to the muscles around the larynx, no petichiae in the eyes,” said Vanezis.
He said however that he was unable to determine petichiae as Teoh’s eyes had “sunken and decomposed” by the time his body was exhumed for the second post-mortem.
The post-mortem, which was observed by both Vanezis and Dr Pornthip Rojanasunand, was performed on Nov 22, 2009.
To a question from Foong, Vanezis said a neck hold was possible, and added to a question from Amarjeet that neck holds “could cause asphyxiation”.
“It can be done but you would see signs in the face and petichiae in the eyes,” said Vanezis, who spoke of neck holds which could cause rapid unconsciousness which would not leave petichiae.
One such hold, said Vanezis was a “carotid sleeper”. “It would cut blood flow to the brain, the person would collapse and you could then put handcuffs on them,” said Vanezis.
Meanwhile, Negri Sembilan MACC head Hishamuddin Hashim testified that warrants were not needed for MACC operations involving government bodies.
Hishamuddin, who was the deputy director of the Selangor MACC, said a circular had been issued to all government departments by the chief secretary. “It requires full cooperation from all civil servants," Hishamuddin, who said he considered Ean Yong to be a civil servant.
He said not all situations required the MACC to go to the public prosecutor for a warrant. "This is because we want to build rapport with the public."
“The person or persons present did not know what happened and performed CPR. As they thought he was gone, they decided to throw him out the window. But somewhere during the fall, he revives,” said Leong.
The theory was dismissed by Vanezis who called the scenario “extremely unlikely” and a “great leap of faith”.
Vanezis said that the fractures to Teoh’s ribs identified in the post-mortem were “extremely unlikely” to have been caused by CPR and were most likely caused by transferred force.
He said the transferred force came from the fall, which he raised when questioned by conducting officer Amarjeet Singh.
“That is a possibility. The transmitted force would move the spine and this would cause fractures due to the difference in movement between the chest and the spine," said Vanezis.
To further questions from Leong, Vanezis said that there was “no pattern of injury” to indicate stamping, and agreed with Leong that it is possible for one to get sternum fractures if someone sat on the chest.
Asked by RCI chairman Tan Sri James Foong, Vanezis replied: “Yes, you could sit on someone and cause fractures to the sternum and leave no bruising."
To another question from Leong, Vanezis said that the 4cm fracture on Teoh’s skull were consistent “with someone hitting a hard surface”.
“It is a linear fracture, which is different from a depressed fracture which one would get if one was hit on the head with an object such as a hammer,” said Vanezis.
He however did not discount the possibility that a cricket bat could cause a linear fracture but added that one “would have to hit really hard” to cause such a fracture.
Vanezis explained that a linear fracture is caused by “hitting a flat surface with force”.
To questions from Amarjeet, Vanezis said that Teoh was conscious when he landed on a fifth floor landing of Plaza Masalam, Shah Alam.
Teoh, an aide to Seri Kembangan assemblyman Ean Yong Hian Wah, had been called into the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission’s (MACC) Selangor branch on the 14th floor of Plaza Masalam, Shah Alam, as a witness on July 15.
He was found dead the following day.
Vanezis cited the fact that Teoh landed on his feet as a sign that he was conscious during his fall.
“(Breaking of a fall) is an instinct even in a suicide. If a person is conscious and orientated when they’re falling, they try to land on their feet and put out their hands to break their fall,” he said.
“There was severe fragmented bone damage to the soles of the feet. You could quite clearly see the bone fractures had overlapped, indicating transmitted force from below upwards,” added Vanezis.
He said that Teoh would have landed where he did unless he took “a running jump” out of a window at the MACC office.
Vanezis said was impossible due to the level which the window could open, adding it was impossible to force someone out without leaving marks on the window.
“A person who is conscious and aware would leave some marks to small window as he would be struggling," said Vanezis
He added that he was told of a shoe mark found on the window frame.
Asked by Amarjeet about the bruising on Teoh’s neck, Vanezis said the bruising was most likely due to hyperextension of the neck when Teoh’s head was thrown back.
“The head may well have impacted at some point and moved the neck backward,” said Vanezis.
“Bearing that there had been this hyperextension to the neck, you would expect to find bruises in this area, bleeding from the muscles surrounding the spine as the neck had been stretched,” he added.
Vanezis explained why he ruled out strangulation when asked by Foong, saying that there was “no justification” for strangulation in his view.
“(There is) no evidence of fingernail scratches on the neck, no fracture to the larynx or hyoid bone, no deep bruising to the muscles around the larynx, no petichiae in the eyes,” said Vanezis.
He said however that he was unable to determine petichiae as Teoh’s eyes had “sunken and decomposed” by the time his body was exhumed for the second post-mortem.
The post-mortem, which was observed by both Vanezis and Dr Pornthip Rojanasunand, was performed on Nov 22, 2009.
To a question from Foong, Vanezis said a neck hold was possible, and added to a question from Amarjeet that neck holds “could cause asphyxiation”.
“It can be done but you would see signs in the face and petichiae in the eyes,” said Vanezis, who spoke of neck holds which could cause rapid unconsciousness which would not leave petichiae.
One such hold, said Vanezis was a “carotid sleeper”. “It would cut blood flow to the brain, the person would collapse and you could then put handcuffs on them,” said Vanezis.
Meanwhile, Negri Sembilan MACC head Hishamuddin Hashim testified that warrants were not needed for MACC operations involving government bodies.
Hishamuddin, who was the deputy director of the Selangor MACC, said a circular had been issued to all government departments by the chief secretary. “It requires full cooperation from all civil servants," Hishamuddin, who said he considered Ean Yong to be a civil servant.
He said not all situations required the MACC to go to the public prosecutor for a warrant. "This is because we want to build rapport with the public."
No comments:
Post a Comment