|
PETALING JAYA: A chief investigator in the Altantuya Shaariibuu murder case, who is a complainant in the Raja Petra Raja Kamarudin sedition trial, has testified that it was not C4 plastic explosive that was used to blow up the Mongolian beauty.
When asked by Raja Petra’s defence counsel Gobind Singh Deo how Altantuya was murdered, Supt Gan Tack Guan said: “If I am not wrong, one kind of plastic explosive was used to blow up her body at an empty place at Puncak Alam. It was not C4.” Supt Gan, 49, who is Interpol’s National Centre Bureau assistant director based at Bukit Aman, said during the blogger’s sedition trial that he did not know how the explosive was placed on the woman’s body before it was detonated. He added that he worked on the case with another investigating officer Asst Supt Tonny Lunggan. This resulted in Gobind Singh suggesting that he was a “useless investigating officer”. It caused lead prosecutor DPP Ishak Mohd Yusof to interject that the lawyer should not humiliate their witness. Gobind Singh said he needed to grill Supt Gan on Altantuya’s murder as it was related to the substance of the sedition charge against Raja Petra. Upon hearing this, Sessions Court judge Rozina Ayob said her court should not be used to attack or criticise anyone. Gobind Singh then asked Supt Gan if Altantuya was still alive when the explosive was placed on her body. The officer, who is the fifth witness, said he did not know. At this juncture, DPP Ishak said he wanted clarification from the court over the line of questioning by the defence counsel because the prosecution was concerned as the Shah Alam High Court is scheduled to deliver its decision on the Altantuya murder trial on Oct 31. “It is our concern that such questions, if allowed, will be subjudice concerning the murder trial,” said the prosecutor on the fourth day of the trial yesterday. DPP Ishak said the defence should concentrate on finding out if the article posted online was seditious or not and not if Altantuya was blasted or strangled. Gobind Singh said he needed to query Supt Gan for his client’s defence as the witness had lodged a police report over the alleged seditious article. Gobind Singh said he needed to establish the basic aspect on why the murder had stirred up public anger. Lawyer J. Chandra said it was crucial for the court to note that the first information report was made by Supt Gan after he read the alleged article online, analysed its content and found that part of the article was concocted. “This report was made on April 30 when the Altantuya trial was going on in Shah Alam,” he said. Chandra contended that Section 3(2) (b) of the Sedition Act gives the defence the right to say that “the publication shall not be deemed to be seditious by reason only that it has a tendency to point out errors in the administration of justice”. The judge said she would make a ruling on the line of questioning related to the Altantuya trial on Monday. Earlier, the defence team also questioned the prosecution over an appendix of the sedition charge saying that it was not similar to the actual seditious article posted online. Gobind Singh said the article did not have the alleged heading of “Let’s send the Altantuya murderers to Hell”. DPP Ishak said he needed time to “observe and consider the charge”. The judge set Monday for continuation of the hearing. At the outset of hearing yesterday, Supt Gan told DPP Ishak that he had read the seditious article twice on April 30. He said he lodged a police report over the article upon finding that several issues raised in the article were untrue and concocted. He said he lodged another police report upon detecting a mistake in the date the article was posted online, and confirmed that the article was posted by Raja Petra on April 25 based on the date that appeared in the posting. - The Star
 |
The Blogs 
or maybe name will be submitted for awards next year
