Sirul said that he received instruction from the higher level on his recent claimed. Something was not right. Why now. Why not during the trial. Here is the statement from Sirul during the investigation which I found from the net. I believe it is genuine. Anyway, read it and make your thought about it. Also, you can read below some of the example murder case where the accused walk away after they proved themselves in court on their innocence. This is a genuine example that our court is fair and free to make decisions. If the accused able proved their innocence in court, they will walk. Unlike Sirul, the other way around.
A translation version on the reports :
NORITTA MURDER CASE
On Jan 9, 2005, the Court of Appeal upheld the High Court’s decision to acquit 40 year old Hanif Basree, a Shah Alam City Council engineer, of murdering Noritta, a business development executive and part-time guest relations officer, at a Puncak Prima Galleria Condominium apartment unit in Sri Hartamas, Kuala Lumpur, between 1.30am and 4am on Dec 5, 2003.
A witness statement was not challenged by the prosecution and neither was any attempt made to show any disagreement with that evidence during cross-examination. Prosecution’s case had become hampered with the existence of Unknown Male 1’s DNA and that several inferences could be made from the findings of such evidence on Noritta’s body. The discovery of Hanif Basree’s DNA profile on Noritta’s body per se was not sufficient to conclude that he had caused her death. Prosecution had failed to discharge its burden in this particular case as there was a reasonable likelihood of the existence of another person who could have committed the offence. Hanif Basree defensed himself all out and he has proven his innocence. By nature, if we are innocents as what we claim to be, and if we are facing death sentence, definetely we will defending ownself at all cost. Unlike Sirul, he didn't defend himself during the hearing, upon conviction and sentencing, he has so many to talk about. Ain't that weird with Mahfuz came to the picture, what has Pakatan Rakyat offering Sirul? Full pardon if Anwar becomes Malaysia Prime Minister?
DATO BALWANT SINGH MURDER CASE
Dato Balwant Singh was charged with an offence under s 302 of the Penal Code. He claimed trial to the charge. In support of its case, the prosecution called a total of 12 witnesses. According to the facts, there was an argument between the accused and the deceased while the former was in his car and the latter was riding his motorcycle. Dato Balwant was pulled out of his car by the deceased who had then attacked him with a stick as a result of which the accused had sustained injuries. Dato Balwant then fired two shots, the second of which killed the deceased. The judge having found that there was a prima facie case called for the defence. The defence was essentially that of private defence. A
preliminary issue for consideration was whether one exh D43 (a statement recorded from the accused under s 112 of the Criminal Procedure Code) was admissible, and if it were, who was entitled to rely on it.
Based on the facts of the case, the apprehension of danger that the accused had to his body and life was reasonable as the deceased was armed with a stick that was a thick branch, big enough to cause a person’s skull or bones to crack if hit with it. Thus, Dato Balwant was entitled to exercise his right of private defence. Dato Balwant Singh acquitted from the case. He is free from any charge. Dato Balwant Singh defensed himself all out and he has proven his innocence. By nature, if we are innocents as what we claim to be, and if we are facing death sentence, definetely we will defending ownself at all cost. Unlike Sirul, he didn't defend himself during the hearing, upon conviction and sentencing, he has so many to talk about. Ain't that weird with Mahfuz came to the picture, what has Pakatan Rakyat offering Sirul? Full pardon if Anwar becomes Malaysia Prime Minister?