The prosecution in Anwar Ibrahim’s second sodomy trial raised the possibility today that for sperm to be planted in the alleged victim’s rectum, a possible 'third person' must have obtained the semen from the accused.

NONELead prosecutor Mohd Yusof Zainal Abiden (right) asked second defence witness Dr David Wells, a forensic pathologist from Australia, whether this was possible.

This was asked in relation to the defence team’s assertion that there was contamination and tampering of evidence resulting in semen traces being found on complainant Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan’s rectum.

This question left the normally quick-witted Wells pausing for a while before choosing not to comment.

Yusof: If a person plants a sperm, you must have the sperm of the person there?

Wells: (Long pause) This is something I would leave to the DNA expert.

Chemist Dr Seah Lay Hong had testified at an earlier hearing that she found sperm in semen samples retrieved from Saiful's rectum.

Another chemist, Dr Nor Aidora Saedon, had also earlier testified that she compared the DNA retrieved from the sperm with another given for comparison and said the sperm belonged to Anwar.

Wells was also asked how long sperm could last in the open and he replied it could be between 36 and 48 hours.

"I will not be comfortable if I have to retrieve samples beyond 36 hours," he said.

NONEIn Saiful's case, the sample was retrieved in 56 hours, two days after the time he was allegedly sodomised by Anwar. The samples were retrieved when he went to the Hospital Kuala Lumpur (HKL).

Yusof then showed Wells (left) a 30-year-old medical literature, which cites an observation that sperm can last up to 65 hours, and the witness agreed there is such a literature.

Yusof: There is a study where the sperm head can last for 65 hours.

Wells: I would caution (over this study) that yes, this is a 30-year-old literature, but all cannot depend on this solitary case alone. There have been some reservations to this finding.

The specialist maintained he was not happy with the words “no conclusive finding that there was penetration”, saying the term 'conclusive' should not be used in the report.

He agreed that semen could not be seen with the naked eye, and hence it must be retrieved with a cotton swab, and that semen stains could remain for hours, despite one taking a shower and cleaning oneself.

Referring to the medical report, Yusof said there were testimonies that swabs taken from Saiful's peri-annal, lower rectum and upper rectum indicated the presence of semen, to which Wells replied that the matter should come from the laboratory report.

On the issue of contamination, Wells pointed out that it could come from hospital attendants and police vehicles as well, since the skin of the victim could have had contact with people and vehicles.

Risks of contamination should be minimised

“It would be better if we minimise the risk of contamination by reducing the number of people involved in the investigation,” he said.

Yesterday, Wells told the court in reply to questions from Sankara Nair that he was sceptical of getting any specimen if this was done after 56 hours of the alleged sodomy.

Anything that comes into contact with the skin or surface can be contaminated, he warned. It was therefore vital that proper procedures were adhered to, including cleaning the examination room as contaminants may come from the examiners, individuals the complainant met with and even from clothing.

“Contamination can occur during (medical) procedures, but there is a need to reduce it,” he said, adding he agreed that when a protoscope is inserted beyond 4cm, it would reduce contamination as the walls of the rectum or vagina are closed.

Injuries to the victim

Wells also agreed that in sodomy cases, there could be instances of no injury to the person sodomised.

He agreed with Yusof that the degree of the injury would depend on the force used, the type and size of the implement and whether lubrication was used.

During re-examination, Wells said in reply to a suggestion from Sankara that there could be injury to Saiful from the way the complainant described the sexual act.

Sankara: If Saiful claims the act was "laju dan rakus" (fast and furious) and he felt "senak" (pain), could there be injury?

Wells: There is a likelihood of injury.

Sankara: It depends on how much force?

Wells: Yes.

Sankara: It could cause trauma or tear?

Wells: There is an increasing likelihood of such happening.

The witness reiterated that based on his observation and medical checks done in Australia, he could not find sperm that lasted more than 48 hours.

He also pointed out that the presence of a third DNA sample on Saiful denoted there was contamination of the specimen, and that it would have have been good if the doctors had taken DNA samples of other people in the examination room.

The trial continues tomorrow with DNA specialist Dr Brian McDonald, also of Australia, taking the stand.

VIDEO l 2.08 mins

Related stories:

Najib-Rosmah on course to testify in Sodomy II

Sodomy II: Original medical report nowhere to be found

Contradictions abound in Sodomy II case