Another speculation on the Anwar acquittal

One of the more interesting speculation on the Anwar sodomy acquittal from Loyarburok.com here:

"In law, an accused who either remains silent or gives evidence from the dock basically has not given substantive primary evidence in defence of the charge against him. The courts have previously held that when an accused remains silent or gives evidence from the dock – which is equivalent to remaining silent – the court must in all likelihood convict him of the charge. Only when the accused puts into play evidence on oath, which can be cross examined for its truth or falsity will there be substantive evidence for the court to evaluate whether or not he is guilty or innocent"

excerpts Lord Bobo

"The prosecution presented its case. The judge then had to decide whether the prosecution case was strong enough to call for the defense to answer the charge. The judge decided that this was the case, and called for the defence. Anwar remained silent. The judge then decided to acquit him."

excerpts Lord Bobo

Read more of this very interesting piece here.

Me? I am still waiting to see the written judgement to explain the acquittal.