'13 yr DNA used to convict murderer, why not Anwar'

 

The prosecution in Anwar Ibrahim's appeal submitted that if a 13-year-old DNA sample could be retrieved in a rape and murder case in Australia to convict a person, then why can't the court use the politician's DNA to convict him of sodomy.
                                  
This point was raised by government-appointed prosecutor Muhammad Shafee Abdullah at the Federal Court.

Citing case law, he said Australian police had found a towel belonging to the victim and upon examination, discovered semen stains which were sent for analysis to pinpoint the perpetrator.

"The DNA was found on the towel where semen was found. The reading was considered matching and the accused was convicted for the murder after 13 years," he said, adding that in this sodomy case, the DNA sample was successfully retrieved from Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan 56 hours after the incident.

"In my case, the reading is perfect," he said in comparing the DNA samples retrieved from Saiful's rectum and the samples taken from the mineral water bottle, toothbrush and towel from Anwar's lock-up following his arrest on July 16, 2008.

It was previously reported that Saiful had gone to Hospital Kuala Lumpur two days after the sodomy incident, where the doctors there took 12 samples from the victim.

The samples were then given to the chemist 96 hours after the alleged incident.

The defence had raised the issue that the samples of the person identified as "Male Y" (Anwar) was in pristine condition and hence what was planted was fresh and Shafee had tried to debunk this.

The Umno-linked lawyer, who was appointed by the Attorney-General's Chambers to handle this case since last July, also tried to show other case law examples to prove that DNA could last long.

The prosecutor said while the sperm's tail may dissolve, the head still remained.

He further said there is various literature to prove that sperm and DNA can still be retrieved after 65 hours from a person's private parts.

Adverse inference on Anwar

Shafee, had been replying to the defence's submission since Friday.

He said while Anwar's lawyers had given an alibi notice to call 13 witnesses, including his wife and PKR president Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail as well as Hasanuddin Abdul Hamid, the owner of the condominium where the alleged incident took place, none of them were called.

Citing case law, the lead prosecutor said following the defence's failure to call them, despite giving notice, the Federal Court could make an adverse inference to incriminate Anwar.

"The prosecution has proven Anwar's presence in the particular condominium unit with Saiful as there are closed circuit cameras to show this,” he said, showing photographs to the court.

"The failure to call alibi witnesses is considered independent corroborative evidence," he added.

The senior lawyer said it was Anwar's duty to prove otherwise that he was not in the said condominium unit where the sodomy incident happened.

Shafee also said that despite defence expert Dr Brian McDonald's evidence that the sample taken from Saiful was pristine, his (McDonald's) testimony had not been accepted in his own country Australia and Brunei.

The prosecutor also tried to explain the presence of unidentified male DNA on Saiful's peri-anal region suggesting that it could have been that of Dr Mohd Osman Abdul Hamid, the Pusrawi Hospital doctor who was the first to examine Saiful.

"Possibly Dr Osman was not using a glove or was using a proctoscope which was not sterile," he told the court.

Shafee further suggested that the contamination may have come from the examination by three Hospital Kuala Lumpur doctors.

Shafee has concluded his submission and the defence, led by former Federal Court judge Gopal Sri Ram, will reply the points raised on Thursday.