YOURSAY ‘Did the court allow details heard in camera be revealed in public?’
Shafee goes X-rated at Umno's Sodomy II forum
Proarte: Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan was also not charged for consensual sodomy because charging him would discourage others in similar circumstances from lodging reports, according to lawyer cum prosecutor Muhammad Shafee Abdullah.
How many people pray tell are in 'similar circumstances' where they can be entertained by the deputy PM who doubles as an 'agony uncle' to discuss one's sex life and how to get a scholarship?
How many in 'similar circumstances' are given access to the IGP (inspector-general of police), the senior most police officer in the land? The answer is no one.
Let Shafee answer this question. If the sodomy act was consensual, the vital question is whether PM Najib Razak and the IGP advised Saiful not to indulge in this criminal act again?
Why did Saiful meet senior assistant commissioner (SAC) II Mohd Rodwan Mohd Yusof in Concorde Hotel soon after his meeting with Najib and just before the alleged sodomy act which Anwar was convicted for?
Rodwan was involved in the Sodomy I trial and crucially he was accused of tampering with DNA evidence in that trial.
Anonymous #44199885: This is both disgusting and against public decency. Anwar has been convicted and now he is being character assassinated without being given any chance of rebuttal.
These brutal tactics or rather antics of Shafee after the verdict only serves to heighten suspicion that Anwar was the victim of political persecution and not given a fair trial. Why else the need to keep on and on talking about it and defending not only himself but the government and the judiciary.
Shafee should answer the key question honestly - why is Saiful not charged for the same sexual offence?
Fairnsquare: The revelation by Shafee gives credence to the allegation by some that Saiful was Anwar's willing partner, who was paid by those with political ambitions to turn prosecution witness.
The question of Anwar's sexual preferences was not the issue and would have had its own impact on him at the ballot box. However, the political conspiracy theory becomes more explicit with Shafee's revelation.
While the court may have ruled that there was sodomy, the possibility of it being a political conspiracy was not ruled out by the people’s court. The use of the judiciary for any form of conspiracy is unacceptable in a democracy.
Ourvotesdecide: Now it is becoming indisputably and crystal clear that the charge, prosecution and conviction of Anwar for alleged consensual sodomy with Saiful was indeed a political conspiracy to get rid of or to finish off Anwar politically.
The sequence of events, the many strange coincidences involving those who had always harboured hatred against Anwar, the weird actions of Saiful, for example, bringing KY Jelly and allegedly not washing himself or not passing motion for two days because he was angry after being sodomised all pointedly showed the written script by the masterminds in which Saiful was meticulously guided to execute against Anwar.
Now it justifies and requires Malaysians to urgently clean up all our institutions to save our beloved nation, Malaysia.
Hang Babeuf: Once more and yet again: clear proof of the "high" moral tone and character of public life and culture under Najib's Umno government.
The appalling thing here is not the alleged events but the use of them in this way by government. And especially by a lawyer, appointed to act as the people's representative and in the public interest, who is accordingly supposed to act without any distorting bias or zeal.
"High"? Highly dubious, inadequate and offensive.
Umno demeans itself, and now completes its own destruction, by its readiness to trade publicly in this filth. And they haven't got a clue what they are doing, not just to others but even to themselves.
Casey: Muhammad Shafee had just owned up and affirmed three things that the world has already known:
1. That Umno was indeed behind this malicious prosecution or political persecution.
2. Having an axe to grind, Shafee should have been recused as a prosecutor on the ground of conflict of interest so that justice is, manifestly and undoubtedly, seen to be done.
3. That the conviction is a scam and bad at law.
Anonymous #40538199: Is this ethical to do for a practising lawyer and contract public prosecutor? Did the court allow details heard in camera to be revealed by the prosecutor in public? Is Saiful going to allow Shafee to keep shaming him in the public? D
Did Shafee spice up the details and if he did, what can the court do about it? And what is the Bar Council going to do about it?
Odin: Arifin Zakaria, 'in camera' is where the public and press are not allowed to observe the procedure or process of the court.
What we have here is Shafee publicising what has been heard in camera. As the chief justice of Malaysia, you must now inform the populace whether it is permissible to divulge to the public statements heard or acts seen in camera.
If it is permissible, why, then have such a process? If it is not permissible, you must initiate and effect the appropriate action against Shafee; otherwise, you will have tainted the judiciary - not that it is not tainted yet.
Gen2indian: What sort of legal conduct is this that Shafee gets to go into such great detail on a political platform when the accused is already in prison without any opportunity to defend himself?
Bar Council, an there no code of conduct relating to professional behaviour? -Mkini
Shafee goes X-rated at Umno's Sodomy II forum
Proarte: Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan was also not charged for consensual sodomy because charging him would discourage others in similar circumstances from lodging reports, according to lawyer cum prosecutor Muhammad Shafee Abdullah.How many people pray tell are in 'similar circumstances' where they can be entertained by the deputy PM who doubles as an 'agony uncle' to discuss one's sex life and how to get a scholarship?
How many in 'similar circumstances' are given access to the IGP (inspector-general of police), the senior most police officer in the land? The answer is no one.
Let Shafee answer this question. If the sodomy act was consensual, the vital question is whether PM Najib Razak and the IGP advised Saiful not to indulge in this criminal act again?
Why did Saiful meet senior assistant commissioner (SAC) II Mohd Rodwan Mohd Yusof in Concorde Hotel soon after his meeting with Najib and just before the alleged sodomy act which Anwar was convicted for?
Rodwan was involved in the Sodomy I trial and crucially he was accused of tampering with DNA evidence in that trial.
Anonymous #44199885: This is both disgusting and against public decency. Anwar has been convicted and now he is being character assassinated without being given any chance of rebuttal.
These brutal tactics or rather antics of Shafee after the verdict only serves to heighten suspicion that Anwar was the victim of political persecution and not given a fair trial. Why else the need to keep on and on talking about it and defending not only himself but the government and the judiciary.
Shafee should answer the key question honestly - why is Saiful not charged for the same sexual offence?
Fairnsquare: The revelation by Shafee gives credence to the allegation by some that Saiful was Anwar's willing partner, who was paid by those with political ambitions to turn prosecution witness.
The question of Anwar's sexual preferences was not the issue and would have had its own impact on him at the ballot box. However, the political conspiracy theory becomes more explicit with Shafee's revelation.
While the court may have ruled that there was sodomy, the possibility of it being a political conspiracy was not ruled out by the people’s court. The use of the judiciary for any form of conspiracy is unacceptable in a democracy.
Ourvotesdecide: Now it is becoming indisputably and crystal clear that the charge, prosecution and conviction of Anwar for alleged consensual sodomy with Saiful was indeed a political conspiracy to get rid of or to finish off Anwar politically.
The sequence of events, the many strange coincidences involving those who had always harboured hatred against Anwar, the weird actions of Saiful, for example, bringing KY Jelly and allegedly not washing himself or not passing motion for two days because he was angry after being sodomised all pointedly showed the written script by the masterminds in which Saiful was meticulously guided to execute against Anwar.
Now it justifies and requires Malaysians to urgently clean up all our institutions to save our beloved nation, Malaysia.
Hang Babeuf: Once more and yet again: clear proof of the "high" moral tone and character of public life and culture under Najib's Umno government.
The appalling thing here is not the alleged events but the use of them in this way by government. And especially by a lawyer, appointed to act as the people's representative and in the public interest, who is accordingly supposed to act without any distorting bias or zeal.
"High"? Highly dubious, inadequate and offensive.
Umno demeans itself, and now completes its own destruction, by its readiness to trade publicly in this filth. And they haven't got a clue what they are doing, not just to others but even to themselves.
Casey: Muhammad Shafee had just owned up and affirmed three things that the world has already known:
1. That Umno was indeed behind this malicious prosecution or political persecution.
2. Having an axe to grind, Shafee should have been recused as a prosecutor on the ground of conflict of interest so that justice is, manifestly and undoubtedly, seen to be done.
3. That the conviction is a scam and bad at law.
Anonymous #40538199: Is this ethical to do for a practising lawyer and contract public prosecutor? Did the court allow details heard in camera to be revealed by the prosecutor in public? Is Saiful going to allow Shafee to keep shaming him in the public? D
Did Shafee spice up the details and if he did, what can the court do about it? And what is the Bar Council going to do about it?
Odin: Arifin Zakaria, 'in camera' is where the public and press are not allowed to observe the procedure or process of the court.
What we have here is Shafee publicising what has been heard in camera. As the chief justice of Malaysia, you must now inform the populace whether it is permissible to divulge to the public statements heard or acts seen in camera.
If it is permissible, why, then have such a process? If it is not permissible, you must initiate and effect the appropriate action against Shafee; otherwise, you will have tainted the judiciary - not that it is not tainted yet.
Gen2indian: What sort of legal conduct is this that Shafee gets to go into such great detail on a political platform when the accused is already in prison without any opportunity to defend himself?
Bar Council, an there no code of conduct relating to professional behaviour? -Mkini
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.