MORE PICS & Video – Day 40 –Altantuya Murder Trial; Document from Azilah’s office Matches Abdul Razak’s Handwriting; Tonny A/K Lunggan an Indian
See Below, Update on Day 41 Trial on Sep 27 07
Day 40 Trial on Sep 26 07
MORE PICS & Video – Day 40 –Altantuya Murder Trial; Seized Document from Azilah’s office Matches Abdul Razak’s Handwriting; Tonny A/K Lunggan mistaken as an Indian
Malaysiakini is too preoccupied with the Bar Council Long March or Walk (and inter alia, see Below) to cover the Mongololian Altantuya Trial on its 40th Day
Bar United in their demand
Ambiga: We’ll give inquiry panel a chance
= == = == == == == == = == = == = == = = = =
Handwritings match Abdul Razak's'
Cpl assumed ASP Tonny A/K Lunggan an Indian
R. Surenthira Kumar and Maria J. Dass; the SUN
DAY 40
ABOVE & BELOW: Accused arriving in court on Day 40 of Trial
SHAH ALAM (Sept 26, 2007): A document examiner testified in the Altantuya Shaariibuu murder trial that handwritten notes on the sheet of paper seized from Chief Insp Azilah Hadri’s office matched Abdul Razak Abdullah’s handwriting.
Wong Kong Yong, 48, (ABOVE) an accredited document examiner with the Chemist Department, said he came to the conclusion after finding 18 similarities in the handwriting, based on comparisons between the document taken from Azilah’s office and notes written by Abdul Razak on sheets of A4 size papers and two small notebooks. The A4 size document seized from Azilah’s office contained the name and address of Abdul Razak’s father - Datuk Abdullah Malim Baginda and 22, Jalan Setiajaya, 50490 Damansara Heights, Kuala Lumpur - a handphone number 012-2132303, name of private investigator P. Balasubramaniam’s assistant, Suresh, Hotel Malaya room number 823 and address, Jalan Hang Lekir and the word 'Amina'.
"My conclusion is, the handwriting in P80A and the specimen handwriting in P105A, P105B, P85A, P86A, except for the handwriting in the middle right portion of P80A, is written by one and the same person," said Wong. P80A is the A4 size single sheet of paper seized from Azilah’s office, P105A and P105b are two sets of documents containing five sheets of A4 size paper each, and P85A and P86A are the two small notebooks. The 10 sheets of A4 size papers and notebooks contained jottings made by Abdul Razak. Wong was replying to questions by Deputy Public Prosecutor Manoj Kurup during examination-in-chief on the 40th day of the murder trial before judge Datuk Mohd Zaki Md Yasin.
Asked what he looked for when making comparisons between the specimen documents and the document in question, Wong who has testified in about 100 cases, said among the things he looked out for were similarities and characteristics in the handwriting, formations of letters and numbers in the handwriting, connecting strokes and pen-lift between letters as well as sequence of strokes of writing letters. He said the differences in characteristics that was observed were in terms of the size of the writing.
Asked to elaborate on the similarities found by him during his examination, Wong said he discovered the following;
* the formation of the numbers 4 and 2;
* the connecting strokes between figure 5 and 0, and the sequence of stroke for the number 9;
* the formation of letter H;
* there was no pen-lift for the letters g, h, t and s from the word Heights;
* the sequence of stroke of the formation of the letter g; * the formation of the letters L and e from the word Lekir and S and u from the word Suresh; * the formation of the number 5;
* sequence of stroke for the formation of the words Setiajaya, Abdullah and Jalan;
* sequence of stroke for the formation of the alphabet P;
* the formation of the letter L and the numbers 7, 2, 3 and 8;
* there was a pen-lift between the letter I and s from the word "Isnin"; and
* the formation of the letters m and i for the word "Amina".
Asked if he found any differences during the examination, Wong said the only difference was in the overall size of the handwriting. He said the only part in the document, where the handwriting did not match was in the middle portion of the sheet of paper seized from Azilah’s office. It was not told in court what the portion contained, as Wong only pointed the portion to Mohd Zaki. Asked by DPP Manoj Kurup as to what his conclusion was with respect to the authorship of all the documents, Wong said: "I found the questioned handwriting on the documents P22A, P22B, P22C, P22D, P22E, P23A and P21A shows similar handwriting characteristics, and therefore I am of the opinion that these questioned handwritings were all written by the same person."
"You are able to come to these conclusion even without specimen samples?," asked Manoj.
Wong : "Yes. By inter-comparison of all the questioned handwriting on the documents."
Cpl assumed ASP Tonny A/K Lunggan an Indian
SHAH ALAM (Sept 26, 2007): Tun HS Lee police station information office chief Cpl Siros Mat Isa had the court puzzled and tickled at the same time when she said she assumed that ASP Tonny Lunggan was of Indian origin, because of his name spelled as.
"That may be my mistake,"
She said her assistant L/Cpl Ramzan Kamarudin had typed out the report based on what she had written in her 24-hour report.
Later when grilled by Tun Abdul Majid on the mistake Ramzan said he had just retyped the summary of the report given to him by
"Why did you blindly copy this down?" asked Tun Abdul Majid, to which Ramzan replied: "I also do not know."Both Siros and Ramzan denied that Zulkarnain had indeed interrogated an Indian man and that could be why the reported stated as such, when questioned by Sirul’s counsel Ahmad Zaidi Zainal. Both police personnel only realised that Tonny was not an Indian when they met him at the Kuala Lumpur Contingent Headquarters later on prior to the commencement of this trial.
Earlier C/Insp Ahmad Abu Bakar, 35 from the
He said although Abdul Razak asked him why he needed to take his handwriting sample again on Nov 15 since he had already done so the day before, the latter was cooperative on both occasions. On both occasions Abdul Razak had written out on five sheets of paper what was dictated to him by Ahmad.
Ahmad said it was a norm to get writing samples from suspects- three days in a row. He said he the handed over the samples to Investigating Officer ASP Tonny
= == = following Bernama brief report ONLY on Corporal's mistake and NOTHING on the matching of Abdul Razak handwriting. See how truth (incriminating testimony) is being suppressed from people. No MORE to come in report?
Corporal Admits Mistake In Naming Investigating Officer A Suspect
SHAH ALAM, Sept 26 (Bernama) -- The trial for the murder of Mongolian Altantuya Shaariibuu which entered its 40th day today, heard a corporal admitting her carelessness in naming an investigating officer a suspect in the police log.
Cpl Siros Mat Isa, 46,(ABOVE) a counter supervisor of the Dang Wangi Police Station, said she could not remember how the mistake happened but admitted that it was due to her working round-the-clock on Nov 7 last year. Asked by Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) Tun Abdul Majid Tun Hamzah during examination-in-chief on how it could have happened when the police report, about a cautioned statement, was made by investigating officer ASP Zulkarnain Samsudin and not by ASP Tonny Lunggan (another investigating officer), she said: "I am not sure."
= = == == = =Watch the Video Clip 1 min - Day40 Trial
being edited now & loading later
= == = == = == = ==
Go H E R E for More Pics Update & Loaded Video (included Interview with Tan Sri Haidar Mohd Noor) On
MORE PICS & Video – Thousands Marched For Justice -Putra Jaya Sep 26 07; Cars & Buses Blocked - Hundreds Walked; A 4-member delegation submitted 2 Memos to PM Office
and a preview of Nazri's & Chairman, Tan Sri Haidar Mohd Noor of Independent Panel Reactions to Independent Panel to Probe authenticity of Video Clip= == == = =
= = == == Preview of Next Post
MORE PICS & Video – Day 41 –Altantuya Murder Trial;
Touch 'n Go evidence on Sirul's movement on day Altantuya went missing
R. Surenthira Kumar and Maria Angela
DAY 41 (some call it Day 42) – Sep 27 07
SHAH ALAM (Sept 27, 2007): Evidence was introduced by the prosecution in the Altantuya Shaariibuu murder trial today to show Cpl Sirul Azhar Umar’s movements on the day the Mongolian woman went missing. Operations executive for Rangkaian Segar Sdn Bhd, the operators of the Touch ‘n Go card, Wan Abdullah Wan Ali, 30, testified records revealed the smartcard, issued under Sirul Azhar’s name was utilised on four occasions on Oct 19, 2006, the night of Altantuya’s disappearance. He was replying to questions posed by Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) Tun Abdul Majid Tun Hamzah during the examination-in-chief on Wan Abdullah,(BELOW) on the 41st day of the murder trial.
Touch ‘n Go card is used as a mode of payment for highways, public transportation, parking at selected places and theme parks. Each time a consumer uses the Touch ‘n Go card, the electronic card reader will deduct the exact fare or charges from the value stored inside the card. The consumers can top-up or reload the card with a pre-defined amount to continue using it.
Wan Abdullah said the details of the smartcard transactions were made available by his company following a request from the police, in connection with the investigations into Altantuya’s murder.
Tun Abdul Majid took Wan Abdullah through the printout copies of the Touch n’ Go card transactions made with the card belonging to Sirul Azhar. He then zoomed into the transactions of the smartcard on
Wan Abdullah said the records showed Sirul Azhar had used the Jalan Duta and Kota Damansara toll plazas during the time and each time he exited, the toll was deducted from the smartcard.
Tun Abdul Majid: (ABOVE) Refer to document P115. Transaction 62833, dated
Wan Abdullah: The Kota Damansara toll plaza.
Tun Abdul Majid: Does this mean, Sirul Azhar entered the highway through the Kota Damansara toll plaza?
Wan Abdullah: Yes.
Tun Abbdul Majid: And he exited through the Jalan Duta toll plaza?
Wan Abdullah: Yes.
Tun Abdul Majid: Transaction time,
Wan Abdullah: Exit time.
Tun Abdul Majid: Why is the entry time not registered?
Wan Abdullah: We only record the time when payment is made during exits. Its because when a user enters the highway, payment is not immediately imposed.
Tun Abdul Majid: For transaction 62833, at the Kota Damansara toll plaza, a fee was not imposed?
Wan Abdullah: No.
Tun Abdul Majid: The next transaction, 62832?
Wan Abdullah: The user entered through the Jalan Duta toll plaza and exited at the Kota Damansara toll plaza at
Tun Abdul Majid: Where was the fee imposed on the user?
Wan Abdullah: At the Kota Damansara toll plaza.
Tun Abdul Majid: And the deduction can be seen at the card blance in the last column of the printout?
Wan Abdullah: Yes.
Tun Abdul Majid: Transaction 62831?
Wan Abdullah: On
Tun Abdul Majid: Transaction 62830?
Wan Abdullah: On
Tun Abdul Majid: Transaction 62829?
Wan Abdullah: On
Razak Baginda
Wan Abdullah also told Tun Abdul Majid, there was no chance of a Touch n’ Go card user’s transactions not being recorded when it is utilised. He however admitted the timing recorded on the print-out differed with the timing recorded on the closed-circuit television (CCTV) located at the toll plazas. The lapse of a few seconds, he explained was due to the separate software systems used by Rangkain Segar and the toll concessanaires.
Wan Abdullah told this when he was asked to look at the printouts of the CCTV recordings made at the toll plazas on
Tun Abdul Majid also told the court, the police also sought for the information on Touch n’ Go cards registered under L/Cpl Rohaniza Roslan and Chief Insp Azilah Hadri.
Queried on the differing format in the printout produced by him and the one furnished by his former superior officer, Wan Abdullah said the additional two columns, showing other details of the transactions, could not be printed out by him as he did not have the necessary access.
Tun Abdul Majid then asked for an adjournment for them to summon Wan Abdullah’s former superior, who is now attached to Bank Islam in
ABOVE: Abdul Razak Baginda arriving in Court always looking up for daughter Roweena & Wife Mazlinda waiting up there and BELOW: The hooded ones coming out of the Car Park on Day 41 of Trial
During cross examination, Sirul’s defence counsel Kamarul Hisham Kamaruddin asked Wan Abdullah to explain the differences that were evident between ID 120 which was a transaction record of a Touch and Go which was printed on Nov 2, 2006 and P29 which is the same transaction details printed later on May 31, 2007.
Wan Abdullah also admitted he was not able to answer all the technical questions pertaining the operations of the computer programme as he does not have the expertise to do so. When Kamarul asked Wan Abdullah to explain why there were differences in the card refill date on the two documents, the latter replied: "This programme has a few versions, there is one version for customers, versions for banks and so on."
"The latest version has additional information which is to be updated by the call center," he added. Among the other discrepancies between the two documents were the fact that some of the entry toll plazas which were named in ID120 were not named in P29.
Kamarul: Do you have the expertise to explain why some of the toll plazas were named in one document but not in the other, and why this is so?
Wan Abdullah: No
Kamarul: This has to be referred to a programmer?
Wan Abdullah: Right
Kamarul: You can’t explain why it is named in one document and not in the other.
Wan Abdullah: Yes
Kamarul: You are not familiar with the computer programme and operating software and it’s usage.
Wan Abdullah: Right
Wan Abdullah said that he printed P29 but does not know who printed out ID120.
Kamarul also questioned Wan Abdullah on time differences recorded.
ID120 (Touch n Go transaction) stated that Sirul had exited Jalan Duta at
However the picture of his vehicle entering the PLUS Kota Damasara toll heading to Jalan Duta shows
To this was Wan Abdullah said that there may be differences of a few minutes between the times shown by Plus Highway CCTVs and the time recorded by Touch n Go, however he said the discrepancies are not recorded anywhere.
Wan Abdullah also said that he could not tell if the Suzuki jeep in the picture was coming in or going out of the Kota Damansara toll.
He also agreed that he could not say for sure that the vehicle in the picture is the same vehicle using the Touch n Go card (which transaction is recorded in ID120).
The hearing continues tomorrow.
ABOVE & BELOW: Close up on the Hooded ones on Day 41 trial. The attire is different but who is who?
= == = = = Watch the Video Clip- Day 41 Murder Trial
being edited and loading
= = == = == = =
MORE PICS & Video – Probe Panel Appointed; Najib: Don't Questioned Integrity of Members; ACA Grills PKR Sivarasa - 2 hrs On Video Clip; Haidar Conflict of Interest
posted by multidimid at 9:58 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home