Sodomy II: What conspiracy?


Why did Saiful go and see Najib a few days before the police report was made, wonders Tota.


In the current Anwar’s Sodomy 2 trial, chief prosecutor Shafee posed the question, “What conspiracy?” in response to the claim by the defence that the sodomy charge against Anwar was political and a despicable conspiracy by Umno to destroy the Pakatan leader and his political career.
Well, in the Sodomy 1 trial, Anwar’s sodomy act was supposed to have taken place at the Tivoli apartments – which did not exist then! The police got the date and time wrong too.

The presiding judge, Augustine Paul aka Mr Irrelevant, instead of throwing out the case, allowed the prosecution to keep changing the charges almost half a dozen times.

The police confiscated Anwar’s passport and conveniently lost it to deny Anwar a foolproof alibi. Again, this strange judge refused to accept a photocopy of the passport as evidence. On this count alone, the judge should have thrown out the case.
Finally, if there was no conspiracy why was Anwar’s DNA taken from the hospital by the police? Little wonder then that Sodomy 1 collapsed.

Anwar was convicted of abuse of power and imprisoned for six years. If it comes to abuse of power, no one was better at it then ex-PM Mahathir.

Coming to Sodomy 2, why did Saiful go and see Najib a few days before the police report was made? Why did Najib initially tell a lie that he did not meet Saiful?

When a photograph showing him with Saiful emerged, Naib shamelessly admitted that he did meet Saiful, who, he claimed, had come to see him for a scholarship.

READ MORE:  High-stakes political posturing leaves many befuddled

The university dropout did not know that the right person to go to was the Minister of Education. Najib entertained him and did not refer him to the right authorities, and there is no record of the ministry’s rejection of his appeal for a scholarship.

It was alleged at that time that Shafee was also present at Saiful’s meeting with Najib. Shafee, however, merely denied his presence there. He did not do what others were doing – swear on the Qur’an! But then again, a lie-detector test would have established the truth.
Would legal experts who have handled rape and sodomy cases have commented that victims are always severely traumatised and feel violated, unclean and contaminated by the attackers and go to great lengths, even to the extent of hurting themselves, to scrub, clean and wash themselves many times to get rid of any trace of the attacker on their bodies.

Saiful, an able-bodied man, could easily have resisted and violently overpowered a 67-year-old Anwar. Instead, Saiful brought along KY lubricant like he had a DIY plan!

The next day, he is happily having or serving tea and cakes with Anwar. He admitted that he did not bathe or wash himself for two days!

Why did the police ask Dr Osman, who examined Saiful first and concluded that there was no penetration, to change his report?
With regard to Anwar’s DNA, the officer entrusted with it, broke the seal and kept it in a steel cabinet for kept it for a day but by the time it went for analysis it was 96 hours. The DNA should have been kept in a freezer to prevent contamination. Shafee claims that no contamination is possible.
With regard to doping tests in sports, Dr Jegathesan explained that there is no possibility of anything going wrong as the international standard is adhered to from how a sample is collected, who observes it, how it is transported, what is the chain of custody and where it goes.

READ MORE:  Bar welcomes appellate court decision to quash contempt of court order against lawyer

With regards to urine Sample A and Sample B, he said an athlete could choose a pair of new and unopened bottles to store his urine. Then the athlete will pour the urine in two bottles, seal them and put them into a polystyrene bag and seal it too.

Eventually, all those collected for the day will be put into another bag and sealed. At the lab, a machine will open the A bottle and lab technicians will test it.
Compare this to how stupidly Anwar’s DNA was handled. It is mind-boggling.
In the case of a sportsman or woman found guilty, a suspension of the athlete based on the seriousness of the case is handed out.
In Anwar’s case, he faces imprisonment. If there is a conspiracy or frame-up, I think those involved should be imprisoned for subverting the law.
NB: I have taken a bet with my well-educated and knowledgeable friend who studies Umno politics, that Shafee will be the next attorney general for outstanding services rendered.
Tota is the pseudonym of an occasional contributor to our Thinking Allowed Online section.

Thanks for dropping by! The views expressed in Aliran's media statements and the NGO statements we have endorsed reflect Aliran's official stand. Views and opinions expressed in other pieces published here do not necessarily reflect Aliran's official position.

Our voluntary writers work hard to keep these articles free for all to read. But we do need funds to support our struggle for Justice, Freedom and Solidarity. To maintain our editorial independence, we do not carry any advertisements; nor do we accept funding from dubious sources. If everyone reading this was to make a donation, our fundraising target for the year would be achieved within a week. So please consider making a donation to Persatuan Aliran Kesedaran Negara, CIMB Bank account number 8004240948.
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
13 Nov 2014 7.44am

I am not a lawyer and before you go into all the controversial evidence please tell me how come this AI had the need, not to mention the funds needed, to take his ‘coffee boy’ abroad just to make him his daily cup of coffee ?

17 Nov 2014 9.42am
Reply to  charleskiwi

For us ordinary Malaysians, this conspiracy issue is definitely larger than the person of Anwar as it extends to the perversion of some vital institutions of the nation. Anwar’s Sodomy cases are merely the manifestations of the rot that has set into the very institutions that are meant to provide lawful and constitutional protection to us ordinary citizens. One does not need a lawyer to see that an accusation in which its contents are continuous revised when rendered baseless by counter arguments or evidences produced by the accused has no basis altogether. But the judge in the Sodomy 1 trial consented to the revisions of the charges by the prosecutor multiple times; each time the course of prosecution hit a brick wall. To add to the absurdity, the same judge also expunged the things said or evidence produced that are unfavorable to the prosecution as though the oaths taken in the court proceeding are meaningless. Regarding this, not only were the dates in which the alleged offense supposedly happened were changed but a piece of much publicized prosecution evidence in the form of a large mattress… Read more »