Aminulrasyid case: Sept 15 decision for Jenain
Published: Aug 23, 2011 11:05 AM | Updated: Aug 23, 2011 11:08 AM
The Sessions Court in Shah Alam today set Sept 15 to decide on the fate of Corporal Jenain Subi, the policeman charged with causing the death of 15-year-old Aminulrasyid Amzah in April last year.
The Sessions Court in Shah Alam today set Sept 15 to decide on the fate of Corporal Jenain Subi, the policeman charged with causing the death of 15-year-old Aminulrasyid Amzah in April last year.
Judge Latifah Mohd Tahar fixed the date after hearing submissions by both parties at the end of the defence case.
The prosecution was represented by deputy public prosecutors Idham Abd Ghani, Mohd Dusuki Mokhtar and Adilla Ahmad, while Jenain was represented by lawyers M Athimulan, Salim Bashir and Halim Ashgar Mohd Hilmi.
Jenain, 48 (left), had been ordered to enter his defence to causing the death of Aminulrasyid between 1.10am and 2am at Jalan Tarian 11/2 in Shah Alam on April 26, 2010.
He is charged under Section 304 (a) of the Penal Code which carries up to 30 years jail and also can be fined, if convicted.
Aminulrasyid was reported to have died from gunshot wounds in the head.
In his submission, Salim said the defence had succeeded in raising reasonable doubts, among them, that Jenain had no intention to inflict injury that would cause the boy’s death.
He said that Jenain, in his defence, stated that he fired the shots to stop the car which Aminulrasyid was driving, and that when the shots were fired, his thought was that Aminulrasyid was involved in a criminal act.
‘First shot not fired by Jenain’
Salim also said the first shot was not fired by Jenain, but by another policeman, Constable Mohd Izham Mahayadin.
“A total of 10 shots were fired by Mohd Izham from a manual mode sub-machine gun which was different from the one used by the accused. The accused used an automatic sub-machine gun,” he added.
Salim also said that there were many patrol cars which went after the victim and although Jenain was the last person to fire the shot, it could not be used as the basis to say that he shot and caused the boy’s death.
“There are doubts on a bullet fired from Mohd Izham’s weapon which was found at Jalan Canggung 11/2F. If it was true that Mohd Izham had stopped shooting at the Bulatan Kayangan, how could the bullet be found about 100 metres from where the Iswara car driven by the boy skidded.
“The identity of the shooter could not be identified due to weaknesses at the crime scene investigation and the bullet from the victim’s head could also not be determined was fired from which weapon,” he added.
Meanwhile, Mohd Dusuki submitted that the defence by Jenain was a mere denial.
He said there were also contradictions in Jenain’s testimony during cross-examination and that the testimony was against the totality of evidence.
- Bernama
Judge Latifah Mohd Tahar fixed the date after hearing submissions by both parties at the end of the defence case.
The prosecution was represented by deputy public prosecutors Idham Abd Ghani, Mohd Dusuki Mokhtar and Adilla Ahmad, while Jenain was represented by lawyers M Athimulan, Salim Bashir and Halim Ashgar Mohd Hilmi.
Jenain, 48 (left), had been ordered to enter his defence to causing the death of Aminulrasyid between 1.10am and 2am at Jalan Tarian 11/2 in Shah Alam on April 26, 2010.He is charged under Section 304 (a) of the Penal Code which carries up to 30 years jail and also can be fined, if convicted.
Aminulrasyid was reported to have died from gunshot wounds in the head.
In his submission, Salim said the defence had succeeded in raising reasonable doubts, among them, that Jenain had no intention to inflict injury that would cause the boy’s death.
He said that Jenain, in his defence, stated that he fired the shots to stop the car which Aminulrasyid was driving, and that when the shots were fired, his thought was that Aminulrasyid was involved in a criminal act.
‘First shot not fired by Jenain’
Salim also said the first shot was not fired by Jenain, but by another policeman, Constable Mohd Izham Mahayadin.
“A total of 10 shots were fired by Mohd Izham from a manual mode sub-machine gun which was different from the one used by the accused. The accused used an automatic sub-machine gun,” he added.
Salim also said that there were many patrol cars which went after the victim and although Jenain was the last person to fire the shot, it could not be used as the basis to say that he shot and caused the boy’s death.“There are doubts on a bullet fired from Mohd Izham’s weapon which was found at Jalan Canggung 11/2F. If it was true that Mohd Izham had stopped shooting at the Bulatan Kayangan, how could the bullet be found about 100 metres from where the Iswara car driven by the boy skidded.
“The identity of the shooter could not be identified due to weaknesses at the crime scene investigation and the bullet from the victim’s head could also not be determined was fired from which weapon,” he added.
Meanwhile, Mohd Dusuki submitted that the defence by Jenain was a mere denial.
He said there were also contradictions in Jenain’s testimony during cross-examination and that the testimony was against the totality of evidence.
- Bernama
View Comments0