'Statements made to reinforce suicide theory'

A Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) officer was accused of trying to alter his testimony in order to reinforce the theory that Teoh Beng Hock committed suicide.

Bar Council lawyer Cheow Wee said today this could be seen in MACC enforcement officer Mohd Nazri Ismail’s statements to the internal probe of the agency’s complaints committee and the royal commission of inquiry.

“To the internal investigations committee, you said that Teoh looked normal, calm and relaxed but here to the royal commission you told us that the deceased looked restless, anxious, sombre and serious, now which is true?” asked Cheow.

Mohd Nazri replied that when he gave his statement to the internal committee he did not “give it much deep thought”.

“There were times he was calm and relaxed... but I can’t accurately describe and judge by his (Teoh’s) facial expressions because I don’t know him well,” said Mohd Nazri.

The internal probe was conducted by the MACC on all officers who were present at the anti-graft agency’s Selangor office on July 15 and 16, 2009.

On that day, Teoh, the political secretary of Seri Kembangan assemblyperson Ean Yong Hian Wah, was taken in a witness by MACC, which was running an operation on state funds misuse by elected representatives.

Teoh was questioned overnight at MACC’s 14th floor office in Plaza Masalam, Shah Alam and later found dead at the fifth floor landing of the same building.

An 18-month long inquest into his death delivered an open verdict ruling out suicide and inconclusive evidence to prove homicide in January.

The royal commission of inquiry was then set up to get to the bottom of Teoh’s mysterious death and if there were any violations in terms of procedures or human rights by the MACC.

“All I can confirm is that he was sighing and yawning,” said Nazri, taking on a different tune from what he had revealed last week.

He had told the royal panel that Teoh looked “sombre” throughout the time the officer spent with the latter to record his statement.

Cheow then pressed him on why he did not reveal Teoh’s condition to the police, the internal probe and royal committee in depth, but Nazri simply said: “I don’t know how to explain”.

The lawyer then asked if he was “coached” or “instructed” by a certain party to “reinforce the theory that Teoh had jumped from the window (on the 14th floor)”.

“Have you been listening to someone else? Tell us the truth,” Cheow pressured. However, Nazri said, “No”.

Another second investigation diary

Nazri also confessed to that he made amendments his investigation diary (ID) on Teoh after discussing with his colleagues.

The royal panel suggested that the enforcement officer was doing so in order to synchronise his account of the incident with others involved.

“I put it to you that you made additions in your second ID to coordinate the story after discussing with other officers,” suggested Cheow.

“Not with other officers... with the investigating officer,” denied Nazri, referring to Mohd Anuar Ismail, who was investigating the state fund misappropriation case.

“I just asked the investigation officer about the time,” said Nazri.

He explained that he prepared the second ID for the reference of the royal commission, which he had done sometime early this year.

A few MACC officers who have testified previously admitted to have readied a second ID, which they had said was more detailed than their first diary, suggesting there was manipulation.

Nazri, who prepared his first ID several days after Teoh’s death, insisted that his second ID was “far more detailed” because he wanted to recount everything that unfolded on the day Teoh died.

Commissioner T Selventhiranathan cornered the officer and said that he was attempting to “coordinate the story” to strengthen the MACC’s position in facing any other allegation.

But Nazri repeated that he only checked the time with Anuar.

“You can practically dismiss the second ID as it is an improvement... What kind of the ID is this? It’s worth nothing. Whatever that was left out you put it in to make it look good?” asked inquiry panel head James Foong.

“It is not a detailed but enhanced diary. Whatever is adverse to you, would you have put it in the ID?” he asked, but Nazri maintained that he kept to the true account.

Teoh’s signature could have been forged

On another matter, Cheow also pointed out that Teoh’s signature on the printed statement recorded by Nazri varied to the naked eye.

Teoh had signed the first and last page of the ten paged statement in full form and penned only his initials on the inside pages.

“The signature on the first page looks smooth and the signature of the last page looks as if it was signed by someone with shaky hands,” said Cheow.

Another Bar Council lawyer, Christopher Leong, said that “the loops and strokes” were different, but Nazri denied that it was forged when it was suggested.

The royal commission had then agreed to send the statement to the Chemistry Department to have a handwriting expert look into it.

Also making an appearance today was the mystery note which was supposedly a final testament penned by Teoh in Chinese character was also the subject of an altercation today.

Reading out the translation of the note, “saya kata dapat kelulusan YB... tapi meraka menaip ikut arahan YB” (I said I have your permission... but they typed following your orders), MACC lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah asked Nazri if he tried to put words into Teoh’s statement.

Last week, Nazri was accused of filling up Teoh’s statement to the MACC with his own words, to which he disagreed to.

He reiterated that he had consulted Teoh and verified it with the latter before the final copy of the statement was acknowledged and signed.        

The inquiry resumes tomorrow with Selangor MACC’s then-deputy director Hishammuddin Hashim, before proceeding on to Professor Dr Peter Vanezis, a British forensics expert who had testified in the inquest.