The Anwar Sodomy2 Appeal proceeding is probably set for July 2013 almost one and a half years after his acquittal.... interesting note from the written Judgement of the High Court:
The 80-page written judgment by High Court judge Datuk Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah revealed that there was penile penetration but it was uncorroborated by other evidence.
The Anwar Sodomy2 is really a legal and dramatic saga starting from the day he was put on trial on 3rd February 2010 until he was acquitted 2 years later by the High Court Judge on 9 January 2012 which cited that "there is no evidence to corroborate the evidence of Mohd Saiful on factum of penetration".
The 80 pages written Judgement by Judge Mohamad Zabidin only came out in July 2012 and the AG's Chambers promptly filed an Appeal to the Court on 9 July 2012, citing 10 legal reasons for the appeal, read here.
As a layman in many things legal, two points of the 10, strikes me as being pertinent:
1. The judge, according to the prosecution, had also erred in law and fact in finding that there were doubts on the integrity of the DNA samples obtained from Mohd Saiful when he (judge) had called Anwar to enter his defence on the charge at the end of the prosecution's case.
2. It (the prosecution) argued that the judge also failed to take into account that there was other evidence which supported Mohd Saiful's testimony, and had erred in law and fact when placing the burden of proof higher than the burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt on the prosecution to prove its case.
1. The judge, according to the prosecution, had also erred in law and fact in finding that there were doubts on the integrity of the DNA samples obtained from Mohd Saiful when he (judge) had called Anwar to enter his defence on the charge at the end of the prosecution's case.
2. It (the prosecution) argued that the judge also failed to take into account that there was other evidence which supported Mohd Saiful's testimony, and had erred in law and fact when placing the burden of proof higher than the burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt on the prosecution to prove its case.
Correct me if I am wrong but it seems that by accepting Saiful's testimony as evidence of penile penetration, then based on 'beyond reasonable doubt' principle, wouldn't that be enough for conviction, and the presence of DNA is just one supporting evidence which need not be taken into account? It sure is a great thing that our Judicial System have the Appeal system.
My point is I fear that if the Prosecution failed in their appeal at the Appeal and/or finally at Federal Court level, then wouldn't it be possible that a rapist who uses a condom can get away with his dastardly crime if he simply discard his DNA(semen) in the condom into the river, this despite the poor victim having positively identified the rapist, confirmed where the act was done and its exact time?
I pray that my fears are unfounded.
No comments:
Post a Comment