Calling the accuser as the 'puppet' in the plot, Anwar's defence team claims Saiful had inserted a plastic object into his anus to make it seem like he had been sodomised.
KUALA LUMPUR: Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan has been accused of using a plastic object to injure his anus to make it seem as though he was sexually assaulted.
This was the new theory put forward by Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim’s defence lawyer Sankara Nair during his closing submissions at the High Court this morning.
Sankara said this was a plausible reason why Saiful mentioned that he was assaulted with a plastic object to the first doctor who examined him — Dr Mohamad Osman Abdul Hamid, who was then with the Pusrawi Hospital.
Sankara submitted that Saiful had done so on the advise of police officer SAC Mohd Rodwan Mohd Yusof, whom he described as the “puppeteer”, while he called the former Inspector-General of Police Musa Hassan, the “director” of the political conspiracy against Anwar.
“In this sordid episode… the puppeteer is SAC Rodwan and by extension behind Rodwan is Musa Hassan, the director… the puppet is Saiful,” he said.
The plastic object issue had been debated during the trial as it affected the credibility of Saiful as a witness.
As a defence witness, Dr Osman had testified that Saiful told him about being assaulted with a plastic object, which he had joted down in his his medical notes. Saiful had previously denied telling Dr Osman about the plastic object and accused the doctor of lying.
Sankara today attempted to answer the question of “why would Saiful mention ‘assault by plastic’?”, explaining that: “One plausible view is that he was well advised by Rodwan on June 24, 2008 to use a plastic object to cause injury to his anus – to make it seem consistent with proof of penetration.”
“That was why Saiful, after attempting to injure his anus with a plastic, did not go to Hospital Kuala Lumpur straight away to make the allegation but instead went ‘doctor shopping’ to first ascertain whether he succeeded in causing some injury to his anus,” he said.
Sankara claimed that Saiful’s “modus operandi” was to pretend to complain of “tenesmus, constipation and pain in the anus when passing motion so that he could get a doctor to examine his anus to see whether there were injuries.”
“It is worth noting that he employed the same modus operandi at both Pusrawi and HKL, by at the first instance complaining about pain when passing motion and later alleging sodomy,” he said.
Dr Osman had previously testified that Saiful complained of being sodomised only after he had finished the examination, and after telling the latter that his anal condition was normal and good.
“Being somewhat disappointed and astounded that Dr Osman found no injuries… this must have then caused Saiful to mutter aloud about the ‘plastic’ (assault) which then led to Dr Osman recording it contemporaneously,” said Sankara.
KY Gel theory
The lawyer said when Dr Osman’s examinations were negative, Saiful had no choice but to seek another opinion, while he went missing between 4pm and 6pm, “possibly to get further instructions”.
“This ties in well with our KY Gel theory because unfortunately for him the plastic injury plan did not work out.
“It is submitted that the whole plot started after the meeting with SAC Rodwan on June 24. Saiful was asked to find an opportunity to be seen or to be in contact with Anwar on a possible one-to-one situation to be able to make the allegation and being asked to go to Unit 1151 of the Desa Damansara condo was the opportune moment and he seized it,” he added.
During the trial, Saiful had testified that he had contacted both Musa and Rodwan over the alleged sodomy incidents before lodging a police report on June 26.
Sankara said since the plan to self-injure did not work, the prosecution later produced the KY Gel as a method to explain why Saiful had no injuries in his anus.
He submitted that the prosecution’s earlier allegation that Dr Osman had added the word “plastic” later was “ludicrous and defied logic”.
“The prosecution says Anwar got to Dr Osman on June 28, or soon after that and got him to insert the plastic story. This is a preposterous story as Anwar never knew Dr Osman. How can that be? Unless Anwar was a fantastic ‘Tok Nujum’ (fortune teller) who can predict or foresee things in advance,” he said.
After hearing submissions from both defence and prosecution, High Court judge Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah said he would deliver his verdict on Jan 9.
This was the new theory put forward by Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim’s defence lawyer Sankara Nair during his closing submissions at the High Court this morning.
Sankara said this was a plausible reason why Saiful mentioned that he was assaulted with a plastic object to the first doctor who examined him — Dr Mohamad Osman Abdul Hamid, who was then with the Pusrawi Hospital.
Sankara submitted that Saiful had done so on the advise of police officer SAC Mohd Rodwan Mohd Yusof, whom he described as the “puppeteer”, while he called the former Inspector-General of Police Musa Hassan, the “director” of the political conspiracy against Anwar.
“In this sordid episode… the puppeteer is SAC Rodwan and by extension behind Rodwan is Musa Hassan, the director… the puppet is Saiful,” he said.
The plastic object issue had been debated during the trial as it affected the credibility of Saiful as a witness.
As a defence witness, Dr Osman had testified that Saiful told him about being assaulted with a plastic object, which he had joted down in his his medical notes. Saiful had previously denied telling Dr Osman about the plastic object and accused the doctor of lying.
Sankara today attempted to answer the question of “why would Saiful mention ‘assault by plastic’?”, explaining that: “One plausible view is that he was well advised by Rodwan on June 24, 2008 to use a plastic object to cause injury to his anus – to make it seem consistent with proof of penetration.”
“That was why Saiful, after attempting to injure his anus with a plastic, did not go to Hospital Kuala Lumpur straight away to make the allegation but instead went ‘doctor shopping’ to first ascertain whether he succeeded in causing some injury to his anus,” he said.
Sankara claimed that Saiful’s “modus operandi” was to pretend to complain of “tenesmus, constipation and pain in the anus when passing motion so that he could get a doctor to examine his anus to see whether there were injuries.”
“It is worth noting that he employed the same modus operandi at both Pusrawi and HKL, by at the first instance complaining about pain when passing motion and later alleging sodomy,” he said.
Dr Osman had previously testified that Saiful complained of being sodomised only after he had finished the examination, and after telling the latter that his anal condition was normal and good.
“Being somewhat disappointed and astounded that Dr Osman found no injuries… this must have then caused Saiful to mutter aloud about the ‘plastic’ (assault) which then led to Dr Osman recording it contemporaneously,” said Sankara.
KY Gel theory
The lawyer said when Dr Osman’s examinations were negative, Saiful had no choice but to seek another opinion, while he went missing between 4pm and 6pm, “possibly to get further instructions”.
“This ties in well with our KY Gel theory because unfortunately for him the plastic injury plan did not work out.
“It is submitted that the whole plot started after the meeting with SAC Rodwan on June 24. Saiful was asked to find an opportunity to be seen or to be in contact with Anwar on a possible one-to-one situation to be able to make the allegation and being asked to go to Unit 1151 of the Desa Damansara condo was the opportune moment and he seized it,” he added.
During the trial, Saiful had testified that he had contacted both Musa and Rodwan over the alleged sodomy incidents before lodging a police report on June 26.
Sankara said since the plan to self-injure did not work, the prosecution later produced the KY Gel as a method to explain why Saiful had no injuries in his anus.
He submitted that the prosecution’s earlier allegation that Dr Osman had added the word “plastic” later was “ludicrous and defied logic”.
“The prosecution says Anwar got to Dr Osman on June 28, or soon after that and got him to insert the plastic story. This is a preposterous story as Anwar never knew Dr Osman. How can that be? Unless Anwar was a fantastic ‘Tok Nujum’ (fortune teller) who can predict or foresee things in advance,” he said.
After hearing submissions from both defence and prosecution, High Court judge Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah said he would deliver his verdict on Jan 9.
No comments:
Post a Comment