The prosecution today listed five discrepancies in the testimony of their key witness lance corporal Rohaniza Roslan in the Altantuya murder trial.

Deputy public prosecutor Noorin Badaruddin told the court that the facts found in these five issues were different from what Rohaniza, 29 (far left) told the police in her first witness statement.

The policewoman affirmed that she had made those original statements and was asked by judge Mohd Zaki Md Yasin to justify each contradiction.

1. Ex-boyfriend not in green Suzuki Vitara

Original statement: In her police statement, Rohaniza said her ex-boyfriend Azilah Hadri - who is the first accused - and murder victim Altantuya Shaariibuu went off with an unknown man in a green Suzuki Vitara from the Bukit Aman police headquarters.

Yesterday: She testified that only the unidentified man went off with Altantuya in the Vitara. She said Azilah had instead walked to the Special Action Unit (UTK) office in Bukit Aman by himself, while she drove away in her own car.

Justification: Before I gave (my first) statement, I was kept in a hotel for two days by (investigating officers) DSP Gan (Tack Guan) and ASP Tonny (Lunggan) after my 14-day remand. They did not let me go back home or let me meet anybody.

I was remanded at the Travers police station. I gave the police statement in question at the D9 (Serious Crime Division). In D9, they threatened me that "Section 302 of the Penal Code (murder) may be used on you" and they did not write down what I said. They did not take down what was supposed to be taken down.

2. The pick-up point

Original statement: Rohaniza said in her statement that Azilah had asked her to pick him up with her car from the Sungai Buloh or Jalan Duta toll plaza after 12 on the night of the murder.

Yesterday: She said Azilah had asked her to pick him up from Rawang or Jalan Duta toll plaza but she wasn't sure which toll so she did not go. (She had later picked Azilah up at the Bukit Aman police headquarters and then drove him to Putrajaya).

Justification: I couldn't hear what Azilah was saying on the phone because I was in the karaoke bar. I merely guessed which toll plaza he said when I told the police and I was also guessing when I told the court yesterday. I am not sure which toll plaza he said.

3. Azilah quizzed on Altantuya

Original statement: The witness said that she asked Azilah three times about Altantuya on the way to Putrajaya on Oct 19, to which he told her: "You do not need to know anything." The way he said it was odd. In the statement given to investigators, she said she asked Azilah three times where the woman was.

"I felt that something might have happened," she said in the statement.

Yesterday: When she later picked Azilah up at his office around midnight on Oct 19, Rohaniza said she only questioned why he was late, and did not ask about the "Chinese woman." He told her he was out with a friend.

Rohaniza also told the court that she asked Azilah about Altantuya on the way to his parents' house in Sungai Pelek, Sepang, later that day. She said Azilah was not himself and remained quiet throughout the trip.

Justification: I don't remember the conversation. The conversation on the way to Putrajaya happened so long ago. I don't remember saying any of this in my statement to the police.

4. Azilah's different response

Original statement: Rohaniza said that when she asked Azilah about what had happened to Altantuya on the journey to his parents' house in Sungai Pelek, Sepang, he replied, "Nothing." She told him if he didn't tell her anything, she would check on this information with the police.

Yesterday: She told the court that during this journey, she asked him about Altantuya and he said he was anxious because he did not know how Altantuya disappeared. She then angrily told him to tell the truth but he remained quiet. Based on this, she told him that she would check with the police.

Justification: I don't remember making that statement to the police. The journey lasted quite long and I don't know which journey they were asking about. I felt that Azilah's "nothing" reply meant the same as keeping quiet.

5. Checks with police stations

Original statement: Rohaniza said she checked at various police stations a number of times to see if there were any reports on a kidnapped foreigner or a sudden death report. She had done this because Azilah was acting weird. She said she had only thought of those two crimes and not rape or battery because Altantuya looked burdened with a big problem so I thought she might be killed or kidnapped.

Yesterday: She told the court that she only checked for reports of rape and kidnap of a foreigner made in Brickfields or Travers police station by a police friend, lance corporal Leena Asing.

Justification: I am not even sure if I failed to mention rape during my statement to the police. I don't remember asking my friend (Leena) about rape reports. I don't remember making the statement about sudden death reports.

Police pressure

The court continued with the prosecution and defence teams questioning Rohaniza about her testimony and the alleged police pressure during her remand at the Travers police station.

The police pressure, according to her during cross examination by Azilah's counsel Hazman Ahmad, included being threatened, blackmailed, insulted, shouted at and being roughly handled.

"Questioning normally began at 8am or 9am and ended at 6pm or 7 pm. There were many different D9 officers and personnel questioning me. They took statements from me everyday," she told the court.

Hazman asked if she was promised anything during questioning, Rohaniza said she was promised that Azilah - who was her boyfriend of nine years - would be freed.

Rohaniza said she was threatened with disciplinary action and termination. She testified that she was also forced to agree to various 'facts' put to her.

The Petaling Jaya-based lance corporal described that she was constantly supervised by a female police officer when she was kept in a hotel and felt confused because she thought she would be freed after her remand period expired.

Political analyst Abdul Razak Baginda's counsel Wong Kian Kheong asked Rohaniza only one question - if she had seen or met his client before, which Rohaniza said "no".

Judge Mohd Zaki then asked Rohaniza what was Azilah doing in Putrajaya, she disclosed that UTK officers who were on duty stay in Putrajaya. Azilah was on duty at that time.

The judge affirmed that the prosecution team needed to submit on the impeachment only after the prosecution had wrapped up its case in questioning all its witnesses before adjourning the session for lunch.

All three face the death penalty if found guilty.

Razak's secretary: He told me Azilah killed her
3-minute video footage - around the court