Defence continues digs at clashing statements
Hazlan ZakariaPublished: Jun 22, 2011 4:39 PM | Updated: Jun 22, 2011 9:24 PM
The defence continued to pick at the glaring differences between the eight statements given by Ditamas Sdn Bhd director Shamsuddin Hayroni to the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) before he was charged and the ones after his charges were mysteriously dropped.
The defence continued to pick at the glaring differences between the eight statements given by Ditamas Sdn Bhd director Shamsuddin Hayroni to the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) before he was charged and the ones after his charges were mysteriously dropped.
“You informed him that he has to tell the truth?” lead defence counsel M Athimulan asked the MACC officer investigating the case.
“Yes,” answered acting senior enforcement officer Chang Ching.
“You also informed him of the consequences if he does not tell the truth?” prodded the lawyer further.
“Yes,” Chang again confirmed.
Athimulan was cross-examining the investigating officer on the tenth day of former Selangor MB Dr Mohd Khir Toyo’s corruption trial.
Chang is the twenty-fifth and last prosecution witness to be called before the Shah Alam High Court.
The MACC investigator’s testimony marked the end of the prosecution’s case as announced by lead DPP Abdul Wahab Mohamed afterward.
The officer related how 13 statements altogether were recorded from Shamsuddin (left) by the anti-graft body.
Eight of them were made prior to him being charged, one after he was arrested and charged and the other four after his charges were dropped.
Chang related that he personally recorded three of the statements from the Ditamas director while his colleagues recorded the others.
Zeroing in on the eight statements
Athimulan then zeroed in on the eight statements as being the ones in which he was interested.
Prior to this the defence had called into question the glaring differences between Shamsuddin’s statements, in particular the part where he previously said he was a willing seller to Khir’s willing buyer in the sale of the mansion and properties at lot 8 and 10 off Jalan Suasa Section 7 Shah Alam.
Shamsuddin later said that he did not sell the house below market price willingly, but under duress fearing his business operations in Selangor, where Khir was then the MB, might be adversely affected.
During Shamsuddin’s testimony earlier in the trial, the defence had also suggested that he was lying and the statements implicating Khir were the just his fabrications.
However, Shamsuddin maintained that his statements after his charges were dropped were “the truth” and his earlier statements “different” as he was following orders from Khir not to implicate the former MB.
Shamsuddin’s testimony is important to the prosecution’s case as his is the only one that implicated Khir, which made him and his differing statements a major target for the defence.
After Chang’s cross-examination by the defence, presiding judge Justice Mohtarudin Baki fixed July 13 for the winding up by the prosecution.
PNSB board rejected Shamsuddin's appeal, court told
“You informed him that he has to tell the truth?” lead defence counsel M Athimulan asked the MACC officer investigating the case.
“Yes,” answered acting senior enforcement officer Chang Ching.
“You also informed him of the consequences if he does not tell the truth?” prodded the lawyer further.
“Yes,” Chang again confirmed.
Athimulan was cross-examining the investigating officer on the tenth day of former Selangor MB Dr Mohd Khir Toyo’s corruption trial.
Chang is the twenty-fifth and last prosecution witness to be called before the Shah Alam High Court.
The MACC investigator’s testimony marked the end of the prosecution’s case as announced by lead DPP Abdul Wahab Mohamed afterward.The officer related how 13 statements altogether were recorded from Shamsuddin (left) by the anti-graft body.
Eight of them were made prior to him being charged, one after he was arrested and charged and the other four after his charges were dropped.
Chang related that he personally recorded three of the statements from the Ditamas director while his colleagues recorded the others.
Zeroing in on the eight statements
Athimulan then zeroed in on the eight statements as being the ones in which he was interested.
Prior to this the defence had called into question the glaring differences between Shamsuddin’s statements, in particular the part where he previously said he was a willing seller to Khir’s willing buyer in the sale of the mansion and properties at lot 8 and 10 off Jalan Suasa Section 7 Shah Alam.
Shamsuddin later said that he did not sell the house below market price willingly, but under duress fearing his business operations in Selangor, where Khir was then the MB, might be adversely affected.During Shamsuddin’s testimony earlier in the trial, the defence had also suggested that he was lying and the statements implicating Khir were the just his fabrications.
However, Shamsuddin maintained that his statements after his charges were dropped were “the truth” and his earlier statements “different” as he was following orders from Khir not to implicate the former MB.
Shamsuddin’s testimony is important to the prosecution’s case as his is the only one that implicated Khir, which made him and his differing statements a major target for the defence.
After Chang’s cross-examination by the defence, presiding judge Justice Mohtarudin Baki fixed July 13 for the winding up by the prosecution.
PNSB board rejected Shamsuddin's appeal, court told
View Comments0