LATEST !! ( 13th July 2008)
Political analyst Abdul Razak Baginda's private investigator P. Balasubramaniam on Friday RETRACTED the statutory declaration which he made less than 24 hours ago.UPDATE:
The NEW statutory declaration WITHDREW ALL statements that Balasubramaniam had revealed to a packed press conference organised by PKR de facto leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim at party headquarters on Thursday.This included the fact that he had informed police what political analyst Abdul Razak Baginda had purportedly told him prior to Altantuya's murder.
PKR vice-president R. Sivarasa said the retraction was something serious and called for an independent investigation. He believed Balasubramaniam had been under pressure by "interested parties" to withdraw the first statutory declaration that had been released on Thursday where he alleged that Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak had a sexual relationship with Mongolian translator Altantuya Shaariibuu, among other things.
Balasubramaniam’s lawyer for his first SD, Americk Singh Sidhu, told Malaysiakini that Balasubramaniam received a phone call from the police soon after his press conference yesterday to report to the Brickfields police station.
“I advised him that as a law-abiding citizen, he should go and see them. So I fetched him to the Brickfields police station at 4.45pm yesterday and I haven’t heard from him since,” he said stressing that he has failed to contact Balasubramaniam since this news broke out.
The Police owes to the Malaysian public a full explanation as to what transpired in the meeting between the police and Balasubramaniam at the Brickfields police station yesterday evening and after, resulting in his bizarre second SD.
READ HERE FOR MORE AND HERE
DPM Najib DISMISSED the statutory declaration filed by private eye P Balasubramaniam, who was hired by Najib's close associate Abdul Razak Baginda to deal with the Altantuya problem, as "concocted" claims.P.Balasubramaniam at the press conference:
Najib said, "I see the statutory declaration as a horrible lie, fabrication, malicious, slanderous and to tarnish my image.'
Asked on whether he had sexual relationship with Altantuya as stated in the statutory declaration, Najib answered: "No, absolutely not."
On whether he conspired or attempted to cover up the murder, Najib reiterated: "No, absolutely not because I NEVER, NEVER met her at all."
Read here for more on Malaysiakini
Balasubramaniam said Razak had given him all this information about Najib "in an attempt to persuade me to continue my employment with him.""Having been a member of the Royal Malaysian Police Force for 17 years, I am absolutely certain NO police officer would shoot someone in the head and blow up their body without receiving specific instructions from their superiors first.
....I was sitting just beside Razak and he told me he had sent an sms to Najib and never received a reply. When we were sitting together, he received the reply. That's how he showed me the reply and also to the lawyer.
At the period of time I was in the lock up, I was on 40 days prayer and I was supposed to leave to India and I didn't get good vegetarian food in the lockup.
After seven days, when the police officers brought me the statement and asked me to sign, I signed it. The police officers did not wear their names tags and show what ranks they are.
As a man in the lock up, if you have had experience in the lock up, definitely you will sign the statement. I have 3 children (to think about).
I was arrested under (section) 302 (for murder under the Penal Code.). What's the reason? In the first place there was no reason for the police to put me in the lock up.
They can call me everyday to take a statement. I was the private investigator for Razak."
He said the police however, omitted all this information in his police statement of Nov 2006 but he signed it anyway because after being in the lockup for seven days.
Balasubramaniam's Americk Sidhu said Balasubramaniam did not say anything about the information Razak shared with him on Najib and Altantuya in court when he testified in the Altantuya trial because the prosecution did not ask him any questions about it.
He also stressed that Balasubramaniam's statutory declaration was "not a statement of truth" but rather what had been said to him by both Razak and Altantuya. Whether true or not - he doesn't know for sure. He just told what was told to him, adding that the purpose of the press conference was to bring to light there is "there is this evidence available. And if the prosecution wants to use it, Bala is available at anytime," he said.
To a question, Balasubramaniam said now that he has come out with the statutory declaration, he was worried about his personal safety.
------END OF UPDATE ----
Earlier related postings on Malaysians Unplugged Uncensored :
Mongolian Woman's Murder: Attempted Cover-up, Miscarriage of Justice, Submarine Scandal and Linkage to DPM Najib Mongolian Woman's ( Altantuya Shariibuu) Murder: Justice MUST Be Done and Be SEEN to be Done Murder of the Mongolian Woman in Malaysia: Anwar Ibrahim said DPM Najib Tun Razak Should Also be Investigated Mongolian Woman's Murder Trial: The Attorney-General Compromises Malaysian Justice System and the Rule of Law Mongolian Woman Murder Case: Statutory Declaration in KL High Court Alleging DPM Najib's Wife at Murder Scene Mongolian Woman's ( Altantuya) Murder Trial: Owner of the Suzuki Vitara Car No: CAC 1883 Identified CLICK HERE: SEE VIDEO IMAGES/PHOTOS AND A SHORT STORY OF ALTANTUYA SHARIIBUU'S LIFE. (And a short video clip of her sick, young child , Atanshagai, 3 years old AT THE END OF THE VIDEO CLIP,) - or, if unable to view video clip, click HERE
BELOW is the full text of the STATUTORY DECLARATION signed on July 1st by P. Balasubramaniam, a private investigor employed by Abdul Razak Baginda.Quote:
" Altantuya had introduced herself .... as ‘Aminah’... (and) she was there to see her boyfriend Abdul Razak Baginda.
Abdul Razak Baginda informed me that:1) He (Razak Baginda) had been introduced to Aminah by Najib Razak at a diamond exhibition in Singapore.Whist I was talking to Aminah ( a.k.a Altantuya), she informed me of the following:
2) Najib Razak informed Abdul Razak Baginda that he had a sexual relationship with Aminah and that she was susceptible to anal intercourse.
3) Najib Razak wanted Abdul Razak Baginda to look after Aminah as he did not want her to harass him since he was now the deputy prime minister.
4) Najib Razak, Abdul Razak Baginda and Aminah had all been together at a dinner in Paris.
5) Aminah wanted money from him as she felt she was entitled to a US$500,000 commission on a submarine deal she assisted with in Paris.1) That she met Abdul Razak Baginda in Singapore with Najib Razak .
2) That she had also met Abdul Razak Baginda and Najib Razak at a dinner in Paris.
3) That she was promised a sum of US$500,000.00 as commission for assisting in a submarine deal in Paris.
4) That Abdul Razak Baginda had bought her a house in Mongolia but her brother had refinanced it and she needed money to redeem it.
5) That her mother was ill and she needed money to pay for her treatment.
6) That Abdul Razak Baginda had married her in Korea as her mother is Korean whilst her father was a Mongolian/ Chinese mix.
7) That if I wouldn’t allow her to see Abdul Razak Baginda, would I be able to arrange for her to see Najib Razak. ..."
-P. Balasubramaniam
Private Investigator of Razak Baginda
(Statutory Declaration)
I, Balasubramaniam a/l Perumal ... do solemly and sincerely declare as follows:
1. I have been a police officer with the Royal Malaysian Police Force, having joined as a constable in 1981 attached to the police field force. I was then promoted to the rank of lance corporal and finally resigned from the police force in 1998 when I was with the Special Branch.
2. I have been working as a freelance private investigator since I left the police force.
3. Sometime in June or July 2006, I was employed by Abdul Razak Baginda for a period of 10 days to look after him at his office at the Bangunan Getah Asli, Jalan Ampang between the hours of 8am to 5pm each working day as apparently he was experiencing disturbances from a third party.
4. I resigned from this job after 2½ days as I was not receiving any proper instructions.
5. I was however re-employed by Abdul Razak Baginda on the Oct 5, 2006 as he had apparently received a harassing phone call from a Chinese man calling himself ASP Tan who had threatened him to pay his debts. I later found out this gentleman was in fact a private investigator called Ang who was employed by a Mongolian woman called Altantuya Shaaribuu.
6. Abdul Razak Baginda was concerned that a person by the name of Altantuya Shaaribuu, a Mongolian woman, was behind this threat and that she would be arriving in Malaysia very soon to try and contact him.
7. Abdul Razak Baginda informed me that he was concerned by this as he had been advised that Altantuya Shaaribuu had been given some powers by a Mongolian ‘bomoh’ and that he could never look her in the face because of this.
8. When I enquired as to who this Mongolian woman was, Abdul Razak Baginda informed me that she was a friend of his who had been introduced to him by a VIP and who asked him to look after her financially.
9. I advised him to lodge a police report concerning the threatening phone call he had received from the Chinese man known as ASP Tan but he refused to do so as he informed me there were some high-profile people involved.
10. Abdul Razak Baginda further told me that Altantuya Shaaribuu was a great liar and good in convincing people. She was supposed to have been very demanding financially and that he had even financed a property for her in Mongolia.
11. Abdul Razak Baginda then let me listen to some voice messages on his handphone asking him to pay what was due otherwise he would be harmed and his daughter harassed.
12. I was therefore supposed to protect his daughter Rowena as well.
13. On Oct 9, 2006 I received a phone call from Abdul Razak Baginda at about 9.30am informing me that Altantuya was in his office and he wanted me there immediately. As I was in the midst of a surveillance, I sent my assistant Suras to Abdul Razak Baginda’s office and I followed a little later. Suras managed to control the situation and had persuaded Altantuya and her two friends to leave the premises. However Altantuya left a note written on some Hotel Malaya notepaper, in English, asking Abdul Razak Baginda to call her on her handphone (number given) and wrote down her room number as well.14. Altantuya had introduced herself to Suras as ‘Aminah’ and had informed Suras she was there to see her boyfriend Abdul Razak Baginda.
15. These three Mongolian girls however returned to Abdul Razak Baginda’s office at the Bangunan Getah Asli, Jalan Ampang again, the next day at about 12 noon. They did not enter the building but again informed Suras that they wanted to meet Aminah’s boyfriend, Abdul Razak Baginda.
16. On Oct 11, 2006, Aminah returned to Abdul Razak Baginda’s office on her own and gave me a note to pass to him, which I did. Abdul Razak Baginda showed me the note which basically asked him to call her urgently.
17. I suggested to Abdul Razak Baginda that perhaps it may be wise to arrange for Aminah to be arrested if she harassed him further, but he declined as he felt she would have to return to Mongolia as soon as her cash ran out.
18. In the meantime, I had arranged for Suras to perform surveillance on Hotel Malaya to monitor the movements of these three Mongolian girls, but they recognised him. Apparently they become friends with Suras after that and he ended up spending a few nights in their hotel room.
19. When Abdul Razak Baginda discovered Suras was becoming close to Aminah he asked me to pull him out from Hotel Malaya.
20. On the Oct 14, 2006, Aminah turned up at Abdul Razak Baginda’s house in Damansara Heights when I was not there. Abdul Razak Baginda called me on my handphone to inform me of this so I rushed back to his house. As I arrived, I noticed Aminah outside the front gates shouting “Razak, bastard, come out from the house”. I tried to calm her down but couldn’t, so I called the police who arrived in two patrol cars. I explained the situation to the police, who took her away to the Brickfields police station.
21. I followed the patrol cars to Brickfields police station in a taxi. I called Abdul Razak Baginda and his lawyer Dirren to lodge a police report but they refused.
22. When I was at the Brickfields police station, Aminah’s own private investigator, one Mr Ang arrived and we had a discussion. I was told to deliver a demand to Abdul Razak Baginda for US$500,000 and three tickets to Mongolia, apparently as commission owed to Aminah from a deal in Paris.
23. As Aminah had calmed down at this stage, a policewoman at the Brickfields police station advised me to leave and settle the matter amicably.
24. I duly informed Abdul Razak Baginda of the demands Aminah had made and told him I was disappointed that no one wanted to back me up in lodging a police report. We had a long discussion about the situation when I expressed a desire to pull out of this assignment.
25. During this discussion and in an attempt to persuade me to continue my employment with him, Abdul Razak Baginda informed me that:1) He had been introduced to Aminah by Najib Razak at a diamond exhibition in Singapore.26. On Oct 19, 2006, I arrived at Abdul Razak Baginda’s house in Damansara Heights to begin my night duty. I had parked my car outside as usual. I saw a yellow Proton Perdana taxi pass by with three ladies inside, one of whom was Aminah. The taxi did a U-turn and stopped in front of the house where these ladies rolled down the window and wished me ‘Happy Deepavali’. The taxi then left.
2) Najib Razak informed Abdul Razak Baginda that he had a sexual relationship with Aminah and that she was susceptible to anal intercourse.
3) Najib Razak wanted Abdul Razak Baginda to look after Aminah as he did not want her to harass him since he was now the deputy prime minister.
4) Najib Razak, Abdul Razak Baginda and Aminah had all been together at a dinner in Paris.
5) Aminah wanted money from him as she felt she was entitled to a US$500,000 commission on a submarine deal she assisted with in Paris.
27. About 20 minutes later the taxi returned with only Aminah in it. She got out of the taxi and walked towards me and started talking to me. I sent an SMS to Abdul Razak Baginda informing him “Aminah was here”. I received an SMS from Razak instructing me “to delay her until my man comes”.
28. Whist I was talking to Aminah, she informed me of the following:29. After talking to Aminah for about 15 minutes, a red Proton Aeroback arrived with a woman and two men. I now know the woman to be lance corporal Rohaniza and the men, Azilah Hadri and Sirul Azahar. They were all in plainclothes. Azilah walked towards me while the other two stayed in the car.1) That she met Abdul Razak Baginda in Singapore with Najib Razak.
2) That she had also met Abdul Razak Baginda and Najib Razak at a dinner in Paris.
3) That she was promised a sum of US$500,000.00 as commission for assisting in a submarine deal in Paris.
4) That Abdul Razak Baginda had bought her a house in Mongolia but her brother had refinanced it and she needed money to redeem it.
5) That her mother was ill and she needed money to pay for her treatment.
6) That Abdul Razak Baginda had married her in Korea as her mother is Korean whilst her father was a Mongolian/Chinese mix.
7) That if I wouldn’t allow her to see Abdul Razak Baginda, would I be able to arrange for her to see Najib Razak.
30. Azilah asked me whether the woman was Aminah and I said “Yes”. He then walked off and made a few calls on his handphone. After 10 minutes another vehicle, a blue Proton Saga, driven by a Malay man, passed by slowly. The drivers window had been wound down and the driver was looking at us.
31. Azilah then informed me they would be taking Aminah away. I informed Aminah they were arresting her. The other two persons then got out of the red Proton and exchanged seats so that lance corporal Rohaniza and Aminah were in the back while the two men were in the front. They drove off and that is the last I ever saw of Aminah.
32. Abdul Razak Baginda was not at home when all this occurred.
33. After Oct 19, 2006, I continued to work for Abdul Razak Baginda at his house in Damansara Heights from 7pm to 8am the next morning, as he had been receiving threatening text messages from a woman called ‘Amy’ who was apparently ‘Aminah’s’ cousin in Mongolia.
34. On the night of Oct 20, 2006, both of Aminah’s girlfriends turned up at Abdul Razak Baginda’s house enquiring where Aminah was. I informed them she had been arrested the night before.
35. A couple of nights later, these two Mongolian girls, Mr Ang and another Mongolian girl called ‘Amy’ turned up at Abdul Razak Baginda’s house looking for Aminah as they appeared to be convinced she was being held in the house.
36. A commotion began so I called the police who arrived shortly thereafter in a patrol car. Another patrol car arrived a short while later in which was the investigating officer from the Dang Wangi police station who was in charge of the missing persons report lodged by one of the Mongolians girls, I believe was Amy.
37. I called Abdul Razak Baginda who was at home to inform him of the events taking place at his front gate. He then called DSP Musa Safri and called me back informing me that Musa Safri would be calling handphone and I was to pass the phone to the inspector from Dang Wangi police station.
38. I then received a call on my handphone from Musa Safri and duly handed the phone to the Dang Wangi inspector. The conversation lasted 3-4 minutes after which he told the girls to disperse and to go to see him the next day.
39. On or about Oct 24, 2006, Abdul Razak Baginda instructed me to accompany him to the Brickfields police station as he had been advised to lodge a police report about the harassment he was receiving from these Mongolian girls.
40. Before this, Amy had sent me an SMS informing me she was going to Thailand to lodge a report with the Mongolian consulate there regarding Aminah’s disappearance. Apparently she had sent the same SMS to Abdul Razak Baginda. This is why he told me he had been advised to lodge a police report.
41. Abdul Razak Baginda informed me that DPS Musa Safri had introduced him to one DSP Idris, the head of the criminal division, Brickfields police station, and that Idris had referred him to ASP Tonny.
42. When Abdul Razak Baginda had lodged his police report at Brickfields police station, in front of ASP Tonny, he was asked to make a statement but he refused as he said he was leaving for overseas. He did however promise to prepare a statement and hand ASP Tonny a thumbdrive. I know that this was not done as ASP Tonny told me.
43. However ASP Tonny asked me the next day to provide my statement instead and so I did.
44. I stopped working for Abdul Razak Baginda on Oct 26, 2006 as this was the day he left for Hong Kong on his own.
45. In mid-November 2006, I received a phone call from ASP Tonny from the IPK Jalan Hang Tuah asking me to see him regarding Aminah’s case. When I arrived there I was immediately arrested under Section 506 of the Penal Code for criminal intimidation.
46. I was then placed in the lock up and remanded for five days. On the third day, I was released on police bail.
47. At the end of November 2006, the D9 department of the IPK sent a detective to my house to escort me to the IPK Jalan Hang Tuah. When I arrived, I was told I was being arrested under Section 302 of the Penal Code for murder. I was put in the lock up and remanded for seven days.
48. I was transported to Bukit Aman where I was interrogated and questioned about an SMS I had received from Abdul Razak Baginda on Oct 19, 2006 which read “delay her until my man arrives”. They had apparently retrieved this message from Abdul Razak Baginda’s handphone.
49. They then proceeded to record my statement from 8.30 am to 6pm everyday for seven consecutive days. I told them all I knew including everything Abdul Razak Baginda and Aminah had told me about their relationships with Najib Razak but when I came to sign my statement, these details had been left out.
50. I have given evidence in the trial of Azilah, Sirul and Abdul Razak Baginda at the Shah Alam High Court. The prosecutor did not ask me any questions in respect of Aminah’s relationship with Najib Razak or of the phone call I received from DSP Musa Safri, whom I believe was the ADC for Najib Razak and/or his wife.
51. On the day Abdul Razak Baginda was arrested, I was with him at his lawyers office at 6.30am. Abdul Razak Baginda informed us that he had sent Najib Razak an SMS the evening before as he refused to believe he was to be arrested, but had not received a response.
52. Shortly thereafter, at about 7.30am, Abdul Razak Baginda received an SMS from Najib Razak and showed, this message to both myself and his lawyer. This message read as follows: “ I am seeing IGP at 11am today … matter will be solved … be cool”.
53. I have been made to understand that Abdul Razak Baginda was arrested the same morning at his office in the Bangunan Getah Asli, Jalan Ampang.
54. The purpose of this Statutory declaration is to:1) State my disappointment at the standard of investigations conducted by the authorities into the circumstances surrounding the murder of Altantuya Shaaribuu.55. And I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same be true and by virtue of the provisions of the Statutory Declaration Act 1960.
2) Bring to the notice of the relevant authorities the strong possibility that there are individuals other than the three accused who must have played a role in the murder of Altantuya Shaaribuu.
3) Persuade the relevant authorities to reopen their investigations into this case immediately so that any fresh evidence may be presented to the court prior to submissions at the end of the prosecutions case.
4) Emphasise the fact that having been a member of the Royal Malaysian Police Force for 17 years, I am absolutely certain no police officer would shoot someone in the head and blow up their body without receiving specific instructions from their superiors first.
5) Express my concern that should the defence not be called in the said murder trial, the accused, Azilah and Sirul will not have to swear on oath and testify as to the instructions they received and from whom they were given.
Balasubramaniam a/l Perumal
July 1, 2008
PRESS STATEMENT FROM ANWAR IBRAHIM
From the Office of Anwar Ibrahim: 3 July 2008, Petaling Jaya, Malaysia
Today we witness another episode of a consistent pattern of abuse of power and manipulation of the criminal justice system.
Recently one of the witnesses in the Altantuya trial approached us with detailed information of events connected to her disappearance and murder. The information was shocking.
Mr. P. Balasubramaniam, who was engaged by Abdul Razak Baginda as a private investigator was advised to seek legal counsel and document his story independently.
Today he is releasing a statutory declaration dated 1st July 2008 to the public detailing the story that he has to tell about what actually happened and what was told to him by key personalities in this saga including Abdul Razak Baginda and Altantuya herself.
These revelations speak for themselves. They reveal, amongst others, the following allegations:However the allegations revealed by him raise key questions of public interest:1.Mr. Balasubramaniam was engaged by Abdul Razak Baginda to deal with alleged harassment by Altantuya in relation to debts owed to her (Paragraph 5 and 6).
2.Altantuya was promised a commission of USD 500,000 for assisting in a submarine deal in Paris (Paragraph 22, Paragraph 25.5 and Paragraph 28.2 and 28.3 ).
3.Altantuya was introduced to Razak Baginda by Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak at a diamond exhibition in Singapore ( Paragraph 25.5 and Paragraph 28.1).
4.Altantuya, Datuk Seri Najib and Razak Baginda had all been seen together at a dinner in Paris (Paragraph 28.2).
5.After the disappearance of Altantuya, a commotion took place in front of Razak Baginda’s house several days after 20 December 2006 where girl friends of Altantuya and one Mr.Ang (Altantuya’s own private investigator) arrived searching for Altantuya. Balasubramaniam had to call the police. A patrol car arrived shortly. Shortly thereafter an investigating officer from Dang Wangi Police Station who was handling the missing persons report lodged by one of Altantuya’s girl friends arrived. Balasubramaniam then informed Razak Baginda who was at home to inform him of the events taking place at his front gate. Razak then called one DSP Musa Safri who called him back informing him that Musa would be calling him on his handphone and that he was to pass the phone to the inspector from Dang Wangi Police station. Balasubramaniam then received the call from Musa Safri and duly passed the phone to the inspector. After the conversation of 3 - 4 minutes, the inspector told the girls to disperse and to see him the next day (Paragraphs 34 - 38). We believe DSP Musa Safri was aide-de-camp to Datuk Seri Najib at the material time.
6.Balasubramaniam was interrogated at Bukit Aman for seven consecutive days and his statement recorded at the end of November 2006. He says that he told the police all that he knew including everything Razak Baginda and Altantuya had told him about their relationships with Najib. These details were omitted from the statement he was asked to sign (Paragraph 49).
7.During the trial of Sirul, Azilah and Razak Baginda at at the Shah Alam High Court, the prosecutor did not ask him any questions in respect of the relationship Altantuya had with Datuk Seri Najib or of the phone call that he had received form DSP Musa Safri (Paragraph 50).
8.When Razak Baginda was arrested, Balasubramaniam was told by him that he had sent an SMS messsage to Najib the evening before (Paragraph 51). Razak also informed Balasubramaniam that he had received an SMS from Najib and showed it to him; the message read “I am seeing IGP at 11 A.M. today …. matter will be solved … be cool”.Mr. Balasubramaniam’s evidence also mentions the extent of the relationship between Altantuya and Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak. We are not interested in the personal nature of the relationship. That is entirely his own business and hers.
a)Suppression of evidence by the police investigating officers and those responsible for prosecuting this case. Such suppression could only have happened with the full knowledge of top public officials such as the IGP and the AG.
b)The question is also raised as to whether such suppression of evidence was the reason behind the last minute switch in DPP’s handling the case - where the head of the Criminal Division of the AG’s Chambers, Datuk Yusuf Zainal Abiden was completely sidelined from the case leading him and the senior DPP originally slotted for the case Sallehudin Saidin to put in papers for early retirement some months later.
c)Questions can be raised now with regard to the sudden switching of the judge fixed to hear the case which took place in March 2007 - why was this really done?
d) Did Datuk Seri Najib lie when he said that he had never met Altantuya before?
e) Did Datuk Seri Najib lie when he said that he was not involved in any commission deals for the purchases of the Scorpene submarines”Mr.Balasubramaniam’s evidence vindicate what we have been saying all along; there has been no proper investigation of the murder of Altantuya and the investigation and proceedings in court seem to following a pre-arranged script for a pre-arranged outcome.
This has serious implications for the administration of justice in the country where the integrity and credibility of our key institutions such as the police, the AG’s chambers and the judiciary are already severely tarnished.Today’s revelations further confirm a clear and consistent pattern of manipulation of the criminal justice system that we have witnessed in this country since 1998.
The allegations revealed here warrant a full Royal Commission of Inquiry.
ANWAR IBRAHIM
HARIS IBRAHIM (of People's Parliament) REPLIES TO RABID UMNO-SUPPORTER 'BIG-DOG'
Read here:Why not in court? " and " How true is Balasubramaniam’s SD? "on Big-Dog's blog
Read here Haris Ibrahim's response on People's Parliament. "All the whores and the Uniten man could not put poor C4-ed Najib together again"
Excerpts:
Big Dog asks:
“If any of these were true, why Balasubramaniam chose to talk about this on PKR platform? Why did he not do it on the stand in court, since he was a prosecution witness?’And I always thought the only problem with this canine was an excess of blubber and nothing else. Didn’t know he also had a mean RACIST streak in him.
Is this the HINDRAF thingy that PKR enjoyed so much from Indians, lately?"
Almost regret now for having apologised for having called him a low-down piece of excreta before.
Big Dog’s first question belies his ignorance of court proceedings.
Yes, Bala was a prosecution witness. It was for counsel for the prosecution to ask the questions that would have enabled Bala to say in court what he has disclosed through his SD. The prosecution NEVER asked the questions. And so Bala never got to share in court when he testified what he shared with us today.
And this, then, was the culmination of the suppression of evidence to protect people in high places that Anwar spoke of.
When asked why he was only coming forward now and not earlier to disclose what he had just disclosed, Bala’s lawyer, Americk, explained that only after the prosecution closed its case did it became clear to Bala that the details that he had rendered to police whilst he was remanded and being investigated and which are now contained in the SD would not be made known to the trial court.
Bala was also asked to explain why he had signed his statement given to and prepared by the police if details of what he had said were omitted. He very candidly explained that he had been remanded for 7 days and was in the midst of a 48 day religious fast. All he wanted was to get out of the cell.
One other thing that Bala said got me wondering.
Bala explained that whilst in remand and under questioning, one Salehuddin had taken down his 73-page statement. If this was Sallehuddin Saidin who was initially part of the prosecution team that was dropped at the eleventh hour, it may be that Sallehuddin was aghast to find that the statement signed by Bala was different from that which he had himself taken down. He may have protested and that may have been the reason for the last minute switch of the prosecution team.
Add to this a change of trial judge and the mysterious..uninvestigated deletion of Altantuya’s entry details with our immigration authorities and Anwar’s contention of suppression of evidence to shield someone would not appear to be without substance.
If all that Bala says is true, it would mean that :
- Najib lied that he did not know Altantuya.
- Najib knew Altantuya well.
Too well for Altantuya’s own good, alas.
-Haris Ibrahim
No comments:
Post a Comment