PRESENT POINT POWER

For a complete documented record of the Trial, these are the proceedings for Day 68, 69 & & 70 of the Trial held on Dec 17, Dec 18 & Dec 20 respectively.

An unusual suggestion was made by counsel Kuldeep on Day 70 when he said the accused Azilah & girl friend were returning to Bukit Aman from Wangsa Maju
“on the Middle Ring Road 2 instead of Puncak Perdana as recorded, when a call was made to L/Kpl Rohaniza from the “019” number. Kuldeep said the couple was turning into Jalan Duta from Jalan Kuching to head towards Bukit Aman at 11.48pm”
in trying to establish an alibi.

The Alibi is not convincing. This is most ridiculous as if you are coming back from Wangsa Maju, one would take the shorter route via Jln Genting Kelang & Jln Pahang then Jln Kuching to Bukit Aman than take the exceeding long detour over to MMR2 from Jln Genting Kelang and at Selayang roundabout turned into left into Jln Kuching and then using the overpass to get into Jln Duta (Hokey Stadium) and then onto to Bukit Aman.

= == = == = == == = =

'Blast not necessary by an explosives' expert'

R. Surenthira Kumar,theSUN
DAY 68
SHAH ALAM (Dec 17, 2007): The Altantuya Shaariibuu murder trial was told today the blast which was carried out at the crime scene had not necessarily been carried out by an expert in explosives. Replying to questions posed by Deputy Public Prosecutor Noorin Badaruddin during re-examination, Bukit Aman post-blast investigations chief DSP Muhammad Koey Abdullah said "any person who had attended the basic course on explosives could have conducted the blast".He added that the scene of the crime where the blast occurred, was not an area which was ideal or would have been used for the disposal of bombs or explosives. Testifying on the 68th day of the trial in the High Court before judge Datuk Mohd Zaki Md Yasin, Muhammad Koey reiterated that explosives were placed on the top part of a human body at the scene of the crime. Muhammad Koey said he arrived at the conclusion based on the "360-degree effect of a blast".

ABOVE: Abdula Razak arriving on Day 68 Trial , Dec 17 07 and BELOW: having a glimpse of his Mom (right) and daughter Rowena (in white & spec)

He said the presence of bone fragments, lumps of hair, burnt wire reels, scorched tree barks and the positive and negative phases of a blast compounded his verification that a blast had occurred at the spot. Asked if a claymore mine was used in the blast, he told the court it was no more in use since the late 1990’s after the government signed and agreed to observe the United Nations’ Convention on the possession and used of anti-personnel mine. At one point during Muhammad Koey's testimony, there was some ‘alarm’ in the court room when he was asked to open an envelope containing the sample of a detonator. Muhammad Koey asked those in the court room to switch off their handphones as there was a danger of the detonator exploding due to presence of static electricity. "If it explodes it will be near you isn’t it?," quipped Mohd Zaki, while Noorin was seen turning away from Muhammad Koey. Mohd Zaki however stopped Muhammad Koey from taking out the detonator after he was told that it's a sample and not something retrieved from the blast site. Among other witnesses called to testify briefly today was a police personnel from the Bukit Aman Anti-Vice/Secret Societies division, Looi Kwee Pin, who was asked about a handphone line which earlier belonged to private investigator P.Balasubramaniam, which he subscribed to now. Looi said he was not aware of the previous owner and that he subscribed to the additional line under a family package.

Another witness, Aswami Fadillah (ABOVE Left) Mohd Ariffin, from Cyber Security Sdn Bhd, was recalled by defence lawyer Wong Kian Kheong, to provide verification as to the handphone numbers allegedly belonging to his client Abdul Razak Abdullah Baginda. Aswami said he was told by three police officers that the number belonged to Abdul Razak but he did not verify with Maxis Communications Bhd if the numbers actually belonged to Abdul Razak. Meanwhile, Celcom (M) Bhd executive Mohd Firdaous Mohd Omar, 30, told the court he helped retrieve information and data pertaining to several handphone numbers, upon a request from the police. Mohd Firdaous said among the numbers that he was asked to check was a line belonging to DSP Musa Mohd Safri.

He said the mobile number 019 3331824 was previously a post-paid line registered under the name of Amalina Mamat, but after the line was terminated by the user, Celcom recycled the number and turned it into a pre-paid line. He also told the court the line for the pre-paid number was active but the user was unidentified because the mandatory requirement for pre-paid users to register their names with the service provider came into effect only from last January. Mohd Firdaous was also asked about several other mobile phone numbers which the police had requested to be checked for details of the users and an itemised billing. (The other two numbers, based on the previous testimonies, allegedly belonged to L/Cpl Rohaniza Roslan and Chief Insp Azilah Hadri.) Mohd Firdaous said he also furnished the details of the SIM cards of the mobile phones which the police requested Celcom to check.
He continues with his testimony today.
WHAT HAPPENED - DAY 68
* DSP Muhammad Koey Abdullah testified
* Aswami Fadillah Mohd Ariffin from Cyber Security Sdn Bhd testified
* Looi Kwee Pin from Bukit Aman Anti-Vice/Secret Societies division testified
* Celcom (M) Bhd executive Mohd Firdaous Mohd Omar testified

= == = == == = ==
DAY 69
Handphone calls traced to Altantuya's murder scene

R. Surenthira Kumar
SHAH ALAM (Dec 18, 2007): A 20-second telephone call on the night of Oct 19, 2006, the day Altantuya Shaariibuu went missing, revealed the receiver of the call was located at Puncak Alam, the Mongolian murder trial was told today. Celcom (M) Bhd’s Special Projects and Investigations Department executive Mohd Firdaous Mohd Omar, 30, testified that the call was made from the mobile phone 012-3723584 to 019-3636153 at 10:43:46pm that day. The mobile phone number 012-3723584 was registered under L/Cpl Rohaniza Roslan’s name while the 019-3636153 number was registered under Norazila Baharuddin and Chief Insp Azilah Hadri’s name. Mohd Firdaous, 30, was replying to questions posed by Deputy Public Prosecutor Noorin Badaruddin in the Altantuya Shaariibuu murder trial in the High Court here.

ABOVE & BELOW: Abdul Razak arriving on Day 69 Trial

"Does this mean that on Oct 19, 2006, at about 10.43pm, the phone subscriber was at Puncak Alam, on the date and time mentioned?," asked Noorin, to which Mohd Firdaous agreed. She also showed another transaction, recorded in the 10-page transactions of three mobile phones subscribing to Celcom (M) Bhd’s services. Under one of the transactions, in which the call lasted 60-seconds, a call was made from Azilah’s handphone to Rohaniza’a mobile phone at 11.28pm on Oct 19, 2006, and the location of the caller was at Puncak Perdana. In yet another transaction, also on Oct 19, 2006, at about 11.48pm, a 104-second long call was made by Rohaniza to Azilah whose location was identified to be in Kota Damansara.

ABOVE & BELOW: The two hooded accused arriving & leaving on Day 69

Noorin told judge Datuk Mohd Zaki Md Yasin, the prosecution will be focusing on about 35 other similar transations involving three other mobile phone numbers. She then requested Mohd Firdaous and the defence lawyers to go through the more than 35 summarised transactions highlighted by the prosecution which Mohd Firdaous can verify when hearing resumes tomorrow.
Earlier, the spectre of yet another trial-within-a trial had loomed over the trial following an objection raised by a defence counsel over the admissibility and accuracy of the details of several mobile phone numbers tendered in court.

However, judge Datuk Mohd Zaki Md Yasin over-ruled the objection by J.Kuldeep Kumar who co-represents Chief Insp Azilah Hadri, and declared that there was no need for a trial-within-a-trial to be held.
Kuldeep had sought a trial-within-a-trial to decide on the admissibility of the evidence which he had objected to on the grounds that:
* there was non-compliance to the admissibility requirement under the Evidence Act;
* the entries in the document tendered in court was inaccurate, and the accuracy can only be established during cross-examination;
* there were contradictions and inconsistencies in the document, which defies human logic; and
* the document tendered was basically faulty.

Deputy Public Prosecutor Tun Abdul Majid, however, countered that the documents tendered in court as evidence complied with the requirements under the Evidence Act as the details of the mobile phone transactions were obtained from the computer systems of Celcom (M) Bhd, and are deemed to be accurate.
Abdul Majid said the court can call the person in-charge of the computer to verify the details produced in the documents tendered in court, and the accuracy of the evidence adduced can be tested by way of cross-examination. He said if the court finds the computer generated documents tendered in court are found to be inaccurate, false or had been tampered with, the court can set aside the evidence. He added that in this instance, it did not involve any statement/s made by an accused person, as previously, but instead a computer generated printout.
Hearing continues.

DAY 70 (Dec 19 )

Thursday December 20, 2007

Accused ‘was not in Puncak Alam’

By CECIL FUNG; STAR

SHAH ALAM: A High Court here heard that C/Insp Azilah Hadri was not in Puncak Alam, where Altantuya Shaariibuu was blown to bits, on the night the Mongolian woman disappeared.

The Unit Tindakan Khas (Special Action Squad) operative’s counsel J. Kuldeep Kumar made this contention yesterday when he cross-examined the 61st prosecution witness on Day 70 of the murder trial. The lawyer suggested to witness Mohd Firdaous Mohd Omar that his client was with his current girlfriend Norazila Baharuddin on Oct 19 last year at 9.41pm when a call was made to political analyst Abdul Razak Baginda from the “019” number registered under her name. Kuldeep: Says C/Insp Azilah and Norazila were at Bukit Aman and not at the Jalan Duta toll as stated in the records. Disputing records obtained from Celcom, he said C/Insp Azilah and Norazila were then at Bukit Aman and not at the Jalan Duta toll as stated in the records. Kuldeep said that at 10.43pm, the two were on their way to Wangsa Maju. He said they were not in Puncak Alam as stated in the call transaction records that logged the “019” number answering a call from L/Kpl Rohaniza Roslan, whom the UTK operative had been seeing at that time. The lawyer also said that C/Insp Azilah and Norazila were on their way back from Wangsa Maju at 11.28pm, and were on the Middle Ring Road 2 instead of Puncak Perdana as recorded, when a call was made to L/Kpl Rohaniza from the “019” number. Kuldeep said the couple was turning into Jalan Duta from Jalan Kuching to head towards Bukit Aman at 11.48pm when the “019” number was used to answer another call from L/Kpl Rohaniza. The lawyer said his client was not in Kota Damansara as stated in the telco’s records. However, Mohd Firdaous, a 30-year-old executive at Celcom’s special projects and investigations division, disagreed with all of these suggestions. Earlier, the prosecution tendered a list of phone transactions extracted from the phone log originally compiled by the witness for the court. This list showed the call transactions comprising voice calls and SMSes between the “019” number and three other numbers – L/Kpl Rohaniza’s, second accused Kpl Sirul Azhar Umar’s and a number registered under Abdul Razak’s name. According to it, there were 10 transactions between the “019” number and the political analyst’s number on Oct 18, eight transactions on Oct 19, one transaction on Oct 20, and 12 transactions on Oct 21 last year. Mohd Firdaous confirmed that there were 10 transactions between the “019” number and the number used by Kpl Sirul Azhar on Oct 19. Of these transactions, nine were between 8.36pm and 9.20pm, around the time Altantuya was last seen outside the political analyst’s house. As for the transactions between the “019” number and L/Kpl Rohaniza’s, Mohd Firdaous confirmed that there were six transactions on Oct 18, 15 on Oct 19 and 23 on Oct 20.