I swear to tell the whole truth if it’s convenient, half-truths when it’s necessary, and lies to save some asses
Practitioners of the law will tell you that the worth of a witness’s testimony turns on how much of what he or she says remains intact and uncontradicted after cross-examination and re-examination.
By Haris Ibrahim
There are two ongoing inquests.
Teoh Beng Hock’s.
Gunasegaran’s.
Both having the same objective.
To get to the truth of why and how these two men died.
Practitioners of the law will tell you that the worth of a witness’s testimony turns on how much of what he or she says remains intact and uncontradicted after cross-examination and re-examination.
I have not received the transcript of the testimony in Teoh’s case.
Like most of you, I depend on the online alternative news portals for accounts of what has transpired in Teoh’s case.
In Gunasegaran’s case, I am sent the notes of proceedings taken by someone who faithfully attends court to record as best he can all that is said.
I am behind in reporting to you on Gunasegaran’s case. I shall post them as soon as I can.
____________________________________________
On 19th February, the Teoh inquest resumed hearing after having been adjourned to allow for a second, court-ordered, postmortem to be performed on the remains of the deceased. This arose following the earlier testimony of Thai pathologist Dr Porntip Rojanasunand that based on photographs and the first post-mortem report, she suspected that there was an 80 percent likelihood Teoh’s death was homicidal.
That second postmortem was carried out by Sungai Buloh hospital resident pathologist Dr Shahidan Md Noor.
He gave his evidence-in-chief on 19th February.
He disputed Porntip’s suggestion that there was a manual strangulation injury on the neck of the deceased.
He said that although there was a round bruise “berry” mark on the left side of the neck of the deceased, he believed it was not as a result of strangulation.
“If there was strangulation the degree of force applied by the fingers would be different and would not result in such marks. It would require a great degree of force to result in asphyxia, where there would be signs of force to the neck. The injuries to the neck is consistent as a result of falling from a high place“, he is reported to have said.
Shahidan said there was bruising at the thyroid of the deceased and a permanent blood clot at the back of the tongue near the neck. He went on to confirm that the injuries found on Teoh’s neck was caused by the fall.
Shahidan also said that the two pathologists, Dr Khairul Azman Ibrahim from Klang Hospital, and Dr Prashant Naresh Samberkar, from Universiti Malaya Medical Centre, who performed the first post mortem had done their job well.
This aspect of Shahidan’s testimony has been extracted from this Malaysiakini report.
Shahidan was cross-examined on his evidence-in-chief on 1st March.
He said that in any death-in-custody case, two procedures have to be observed:
1) examination for evidence of pressure imposed on the neck, such as signs of strangulation
2) Dissection of limbs and certain muscles would need to be carried out to ascertain whether there were beatings
He agreed that failure to perform these procedures in post-mortems in custodial death cases might suggest an attempted cover-up.
He then confirmed that the limb dissection procedure were not performed during the first post-mortem.
Read more at: I swear to tell the whole truth if it’s convenient, half-truths when it’s necessary, and lies to save some asses
