Keempat-empat doktor itu adalah Dr. Razuin Rahimi, Dr. Khairul Nizam Hassan, Dr. Mohd. Razali Ibrahim dan Dr. Siew Sheue Feng.
Dr Razuin – Catat Rekod Latar Belakang Mangsa
Dr Razuin Rahimi
Dalam temubual selama 20 minit itu, Mohd Saiful memberitahu berlaku penetrasi (kemasukan zakar pemangsa ke dalam dubur mangsa) menggunakan bahan pelincir dan pancutan semen (air mani) ke dalam dubur mangsa.
Temu bual itu berlaku sekitar jam 8.40 malam hingga 9.00 malam.
‘‘Pada dasarnya, dia memberitahu saya tentang kejadian yang berlaku pada 26 Jun 2008 bahawa dia telah dipanggil oleh Anwar dan walaupun tidak merelakannya tetapi ia tetap berlaku.
‘‘Saya tanya tentang perhubungan jenis tersebut dan daripada pemeriksaan sama ada berlaku penetrasi, seks oral dan cecair pelincir digunakan,” katanya.
Mohd Saiful memberitahunya, sebelum diliwat, Anwar meraba-raba dadanya dan turut meminta mangsa melakukan seks oral ke atas penis milik Anwar, namun mangsa menolak untuk melakukannya.
Seterusnya, Anwar meliwat Mohd Saiful yang kesemuanya memakan masa lebih kurang 30 minit.
“Dia (Anwar) mengalami ejakulasi (pancutan) ke dalam (dubur mangsa). (Berlaku) penetrasi dan bahan pelincir digunakan, saya mencatat sepenuhnya apa yang diperkatakan oleh Mohd Saiful”, katanya.
Selepas Dr Razuin selesai mengambil latar belakang kejadian, Dr. Siew, pakar patologi forensik datang bersama pakar bedah, Dr. Mohd. Razali Ibrahim dan pakar unit kecemasan, Dr. Khairul Nizam Hassan.
Dr Razuin juga berperanan memberi taklimat kepada ketiga-tiga doktor tersebut dan memaklumkan mengenai borang protokol perubatan (pro-forma) sebelum ketiga-tiga doktor berkenaan melakukan pemeriksaan. Klik di sini
Pemeriksaan ke atas Mohd Saiful dilakukan di antara jam 9.30 malam sehingga pukul 11.30 malam.
Berikut Transkrip pemeriksaan utama Dr Razuin oleh Peguam Cara Negara II Datuk Mohamed Yusof Zainal Abiden pada 9 Mac 2011.
Mohd Yusof: 28 June, where were you around 6 pm?
Dr Razuin : I was at home.
Q: Were you at that time, received information or anything from the hospital?
A: Yes.
Q: What was informed to you and by whom?
A: I was informed by a medical officer in Emergency Department of HKL about an alleged sodomy case.
Q: Were you told who was involved?
A: At that time, during the telephone call, I was only informed that it involved a well known political figure in the country.
Q: Was any name mentioned then?
A: At that time, no.
Q: Exactly, what time did you received the call?
A: I received the call twice from the emergency. First, around 3.30 p.m, the second one was around 7.30pm.
Q: What was the call at 3.30 pm were about?
A: At that time, they informed me about an alleged sodomy case, however to my understanding at that time, the police report has not being lodged. So my advice to them was to lodge a police report first.
Q: After you have been informed around 7.30 pm, about this case and then a well known personality was involved, then what did you do?
A: I called the specialist in charge which was Dr. Siew Sheue Feng.
Q: After that?
A: He asked me to come to HKL first.
Q: Roughly what time did you arrive at OSCC?
A: Approximately at 8.30 p.m.
Q: Upon arrival, did you meet anybody there?
A: Yes, DSP Jude Pereirra.
Q: Did anything transpired between both of you?
A: Yes, he briefed me about the case.
Q: Roughly what did he brief you?
A: He informed me that this is an alleged sodomy case involving Mohd Saiful Bukhari bin Azlan and DSAI.
Q: Was this Saiful present at that time?
A: When DSP Jude briefed me, he wasn’t present.
Q: Did you at any time see him? I mean Saiful?
A: After that, DSP Jude introduced him to me.
Q: After being introduced to Mohd Saiful, what did you do?
A: Then I informed DSP Jude that I will take history from Saiful.
Q: Briefly, what Saiful told you in the course of history taking with regard to this allegation?
A: I was informed that he has been sodomised by DSAI a few times. And the latest incident took place on 26.6.08 at approximately 3.15 pm at Kondominium Desa Damansara.
Karpal : At this stage, we object to the evidence given in the earlier instance Yang Arif. In fact, the report had been expunged with regard to that.
MY: Yang Arif, if I may, let the witness say and Yang Arif can exclude after that because this is what had been told to her. She cannot change that.
Karpal: But the word had been expunged and it is admissible. I think that is elementary.
Yang Arif: Just expunge the word ‘few times’.
Karpal: I mean now, YA. Not later.
Yang Arif : Yes, it is excluded.
MY: What did he tell you actually? Did he consent to it or what?
Dr R: He said he did not consent to it.
Q: Then? Just tell whatever important that he told you with regard to the allegation.
A: So basically he informed me about the incident that took place on 26.6.2008. So he was sodomized by DSAI and even though he was unwilling but it still occurred and I asked him about the intercourse basically for i.e. whether there was penetration, oral sex, lubricant used such things.
Q: What did he tell you? Was there any penetration?
A: Yes there was.
Q: Was there any ejaculation?
A: Yes.
Q: Was there any lubricant used?
A: Yes.
Q: What else?
A: He informed me that DSAI also fondled with his breasts and the event occurred for about half an hour.
Q: Any oral sex?
A: According to Saiful Bukhari, it was attempted but he refused.
Q: What did you do after that?
A: I briefed the 3 doctors about the case, and I also showed Dr. Siew on a clinical forensic examination draft.
Q: Can you give more specific answer? Did you wrote down on a blank piece of paper of what? Or form?
A: The pro forma.
Q: Now, when you briefed them (the 3 doctors) about Saiful what he told you, then what took place after that?
A: Then 3 doctors interviewed him again
Q: Were you present?
A: Yes.
Q: Did you hear what he told the doctors?
A: Yes.
Q: Was there any difference from what he told you and what did he tell the doctors?
A: No.
Q: Then after the interview of history taking, what did the doctor do?
A: Then we started with physical examination.
Q: Were you present?
A: Yes.
Q: What was your role in this examination?
A: My role was to assist Dr. Siew in jotting down and taking notes.
Q: Be more specific.
A: I have to take notes of the history, as well as the physical examination findings.
Q: I refer you to page 5 now at para 1.5, if force and violence was used, then it was circled no. And then, did she put up resistance, you said yes. Was this given by Saiful during the interview when you asked him regarding the alleged sodomy?
A: Yes.
Q: Exactly what did he told you?
A: He told me that he was unwilling and his body became tense.
Q: Now, at para 1.6 under the heading ‘details of the act’, you circled oral attempted, and then the answer you put yes. Can you explain to the court?
A: It means that based on what Saiful told me, oral sex was attempted however it did not happen.
Q: Can you be more specific?
A: According to him, he was asked but he refused.
Q: Now, the next two lines, rectal attempted/performed ejaculation, the answer is yes. So what does it mean?
A: To my understanding, sodomy is anal intercourse. Hence, anatomically speaking, rectum is located above the anus. So this line, the word is confusing because I do not know at that moment in time, whether penetration did reach rectum. If the word given here is anal attempted or performed, then I would have circled performed.
Q: So now you said as far as you concern there was anal penetration but you are not sure whether or not it reach rectum.
A: Yes.
Q: What about ejaculation?
A: Yes, according to Saiful Bukhari, he ejaculated inside.
Q: So you circled?
A: Ejaculation yes, rectal attempted also yes.
Q: Meaning there was ejaculation?
A: Yes.
Dr. Khairul – Pemeriksaan Fizikal Mangsa
Dr. Khairul Nizam Hassan
Beliau turut mengambil gambar badan serta bahagian sulitnya selain mengumpulkan spesimen menggunakan calitan kapas daripada beberapa bahagian badan mangsa termasuk di bawah lidah dan puting.
Menurutnya calitan kapas spesimen dari tekak dan lidah Mohd Saiful diambil kerana mangsa itu memberitahu yang dia telah dipaksa melakukan seks oral, walaupun dia menolak untuk melakunya. Klik di sini
Transkrip pemeriksaan utama Dr Khairul oleh Timbalan Pendakwa Raya, Datuk Nordin Hassan pada 14 Oktober 2010.
NH: How did you conduct the examination on SP1 (Mohd Saiful)?
Dr K: I examine him from head to toe. During the process SP1 consented the examination process and I did external examination and leaving the anal examination to Dr. Razali and any finding would be done by the three of us.
Q: Apart from physical examination, did you take any specimen from SP1?
A: Yes.
Q: What are the specimens taken from SP1?
A: I collected samples from the left peritonsilar recess for seminal analysis, below the tongue for seminal analysis, left nipple and areolar for saliva analysis, right nipple and areolar for saliva analysis, body swab for saliva analyis.
Q: Did you take any blood samples?
A: Yes. Blood for FTA card, blood for HIV, HepatitisC and blood for alcohol and toxicology.
Q: Refer the witness with P6A,B,C,D,E,G,L,K. Are these all the samples taken from SP1?
A: Yes.
Q: Who seal all the containers?
A: All specimens were labelled and sealed by Dr. Siew.
Q: How did Dr. Siew assist in collecting the samples taken by you from SP1?
A: During the examination, if there is any finding I will alert the other two specialists, including the measurement, and the remaining work done by Dr. Siew and all clinical procedures were followed.
Q: Having known the site of samplings and the presence of semen, can you conclude there was anal penetration on SP1?
A: Yes.
Q: Having identified the semen from the high rectal swab taken from SP1 and recording of history, can you conclude there is penile penetration?
A: Yes.
Q: Can anal penetration happened without any sign of injury?
A: Yes. The possibilities are the duration of time taken by the victim from the incident present to the doctor, secondly from the allegation from victim there is no resistance, thirdly the use of lubricant.
Dr Razali – Pemeriksaan Dubur Mangsa
Dr. Mohd. Razali Ibrahim
Menurutnya sampel spesimen diambil dari tiga tempat iaitu peri anal, rektum bawah dan rektum atas. Kesemua sampel itu diserahkan kepada Dr Siew untuk ditanda dan di hantar ke Jabatan Kimia.
Katanya, sebelum pemeriksaan dilakukan beliau meminta mangsa berbaring secara mengiring dengan merapatkan kedua-dua lututnya pada bahagian dada untuk memudahkan pemeriksaan.
Pemeriksaan dimulakan di bahagian peri anal dan seterusnya di bahagian rektum bawah dan atas dengan memasukan protoskop berukuran 6.5cm ke dalam dubur mangsa.
Beberapa sampel spesimen diambil dari bahagian peri anal dan dua sampel spesimen daripada bahagian atas dan satu sampel spesimen diambil dari bawah rektum. Pengambilan sampel spesimen itu menggunakan putik kapas (swab).
Transkrip pemeriksaan utama Dr Mohd Razali oleh Peguam Cara Negara II Datuk Mohamed Yusof Zainal Abiden pada 3 Jun 2010.
Mohd Yusof : Apakah pemeriksaan dilakukan oleh para doktor, seorang demi seorang ?
Dr Razali : Ya. Ia bermula dengan Dr Khairul (Dr. Khairul Nizam bin Hassan), saya dan Dr Siew (Siew Sheue Feng)
Q : Apa yang telah anda periksa ?
A : Melibatkan anal dan rektum, selepas Dr Khairul, dan setelah saya mendapat izin daripada mangsa (Mohd Saiful), saya lakukan pemeriksaan oleh bahagian luaran (external part) dan diikuti oleh bahagian dalaman (internal part) menggunakan proctoscope.
Q : Selepas melakukan pemeriksaan, adakah anda lakukan perkara lain ?
A : Dr. Siew ada di sebelah, jadi kami memutuskan untuk mengmabil sampel-sampel di dalam dubur dengan menggunakan putik kapas (swab). Saya ambil sampel dari dalam dan luar dubur. Saya ambil sampel dengan putik kapas di bahagian sekitar luar dubur (perianal), sampel di rektum atas (high rectum) dan sampel di rektum bawah (low rectum).
Q : Apabila anda ambil sampel, adakah anda dibantu sesiapa ?
A : Ya oleh Dr. Siew
Q : Kemudian apa berlaku ke atas sampel-sampel itu ?
A : Saya berikan kepada Dr Siew untuk melabel sampel-sampel itu.
Q : Jika saya rujuk kepada laporan muka surat 3, semua spesimen yang dilabel oleh Dr Siew dan makmal analisis mendedahkan kenyataan berikut : “Kehadiran air mani (sperma) pada sampel B5, B7, B8 dan B9, jadi apa yang cuba kamu katakan sebenarnya ?
A : Pada masa itu, ketika kami membuat laporan kami tidak tahu di mana lokasi B5, B7, B8 and B9 yang telah kami ambil ?
Q : Laporan muka surat 2 apa yang telah dilaporkan tentang B5, B7, B8 and B9 ”
B5 – Diambil dari lokasi perianal Mohd Saiful Bukhari bin Azlan.
B7- Diambil dari Rektal Atas (High Rectal) Mohd Saiful Bukhari bin Azlan
B8 – Diambil dari Rektal Atas (High Rectal) Mohd Saiful Bukhari bin Azlan
B9 – Diambil dari Rektal Bawah (Low Rectal) Mohd Saiful Bukhari bin Azlan
Adakah sampel-sampel ini anda ambil dari lokasi rektal Saiful ?
A : Ya.
Q : Berdasarkan laporan itu adakah anda telah mengetahui lokasi-lokasi tersebut ?
A : Ya. B5 dari lokasi perianal, B7 dan B8 dari rektal atas, dan B9 dari rektal bawah
Q : Berdasarkan sejarah, pengalaman pemeriksaan anda dan anda telah mengetahui lokasi B5, B7, B8 dan B9, bolehkah anda simpulkan bahawa terdapat bukti kemasukan zakar dalam dubur (penetration) ?
A : Ya, setelah saya mengetahui lokasi sekarang, saya boleh mengesahkan bahawa terdapat aktiviti penetrasi anal .
Q : Adakah anda diberitahu oleh Saiful, jika terdapat alat-alat bantuan telah digunakan semasa aktiviti penetration itu ?
A : Ya, alat pelincir
Q : Adakah ia konsisten sebagai penetrasi anal, dengan bahan pelincir dan air mani yang dijumpai ?
A : Saya kumpulkan semua maklumat itu dan saya dapat membuat kesimpulan terdapatnya penetrasi anal.
Q : Sekarang setelah anda sudah tahu lokasi B5, B7 B8 dan B9, bolehkah kamu anda beritahu mahkamah apakah kesimpulan anda?
A : Dengan semua bukti-bukti yang ada di hadapan saya sekarang, saya simpulkan bahawa terdapat aktiviti penetrasi anal
Q : Walaupun tanpa kecederaan ?
A : Ya
Q : Adakah konsisten dengan penetrasi zakar (penis) ?
A: Dengan DNA air mani, saya mengatakan bahawa terdapat penetrasi dengan menggunakan zakar.
Dr Siew – Analisis Sampel Spesimen Mangsa
Dr. Siew Sheue Feng
Pada malam pemeriksaan mangsa, 28 Jun 2008, Dr Siew bertugas sebagai membantu Dr Razali dan Dr Khairul untuk mengasingkan dan dimasukkan ke dalam bekas plastik yang telah dinyah kuman sebelum dilabel dan dimeterai.
Semua spesimen-spesimen itu ditandatangani olehnya dan mangsa.
Menurutnya lagi, spesimen-spesimen tersebut kemudian diserahkan kepada pegawai polis, Deputi Supritendan (DSP) Judy Blacious Pereira pada pukul 12.25 tengah malam, 29 Jun 2008 untuk dihantar ke Jabatan Kimia untuk dianalisis.
Berdasarkan laporan perubatan yang dibuat secara bersama oleh ketiga-tiga doktor itu, beliau berkata, mereka membuat kesimpulan bahawa terdapat kehadiran asid deoksiribonukleik (DNA) lelaki pada empat calitan kapas terhadap spesimen yang diambil daripada mangsa.
Bagaimanapun, jelas Sheue Feng, kesimpulan awal itu dibuat kerana mereka tidak boleh membuat interpretasi tanpa mengetahui kedudukan spesimen-spesimen yang diambil seperti yang dinyatakan dalam laporan kimia.
Dr Siew memberitahu mahkamah Mohd Saiful memberitahunya dia telah dia diliwat sebanyak lapan kali tanpa menggunakan kondom termasuk di dalam dan luar negara iaitu, Hong Kong, Singapura dan Bangkok dan kejadian terakhir pada 26 Jun 2008, di Unit 11-5-1, Kondominium Desa Damansara, Jalan Setiakasih, Bukit Damansara, antara pukul 3.01 petang dan 4.30 petang.
Menurut Dr Siew, terdapat DNA air mani yang dominan yang dikenali sebagai “Lelaki Y’ di lubang dubur mangsa (Mohd Saiful) iaitu di B7 (rektal atas), B8 (rektal atas) dan B9 (rektal bawah).
Menurutnya hanya DNA air mani Lelaki Y sahaja terdapat di ketiga-tiga lokasi tersebut.
Pemeriksaan utama Dr Siew oleh Timbalan Pendakwa Raya, Datuk Nordin Hassan pada 14 Oktober 2010
NH: On that date, did you meet a patient by the name Mohd Saiful Bukhari bin Azlan?
Dr S : Yes.
Q: Can you identify him?
A: Yes. This is Mohd Saiful Bukhari bin Azlan.
Q: On 28th June 2008, where did you meet him?
A: At the One Stop Crisis Centre (OSCC) at the Emergency Department HKL.
Q: How did you meet him?
A: I was called by one Doctor. After I discuss with her, I decided to attend this case at 9.00 p.m. at the OSCC at the Emergency Department together with a specialist medical officer from the Surgical and Emergency Department.
Q: Who are these specialists?
A: Dr. Khairul from the Emergency Department, and Dr. Razali from the Surgical Department.
Q: Upon meeting them, did the three of you discuss on the sodomy case?
A: Yes, at the beginning we met the police, we received briefing from the police officer in charge of this case. Subsequently we discuss among ourselves our role in this case.
Q: What was the result of the discussion?
A: The 3 of us will attend the case together. Dr. Khairul Nizam is conduct examination on the bodily injury, Dr. Razali on the anal examination and my major role is conducting forensic specimen.
Q: Upon entering the OSCC room, what did you do with SP1 (Mohd Saiful) ?
A: Upon meeting SP1, I recorded the history and get his consent before we proceed with the examination.
Q: Why did you need to get consent from him?
A: The consent involve examination of bodily part and the private part, consent for taking photograph of the body and private part and also to take specimen from the body and private part.
Q: You said you get the history, can you tell the court what did Saiful told you?
A: He informs what happened to him that he is being sodomized by a high profile public figure for 8 times for at least the last 2 months and the last incident was on 26th June 2008. I asked whether any condom was used and he said no, but lubricant was used. I asked whether there is any penetration and he said yes.
I asked whether ejaculation occurred and he said yes. I asked whether there is any force used and he said no. SP1 also inform he has undergone an examination at a private hospital, i.e Hospital Pusrawi on 28th June 2008 before attended by us.
Q: Did you see the samples specimen taken by Dr. Khairul and Dr. Razali?
A: Yes.
Q: Please explain what was your role in sample collection?
A: I collect the specimen from Dr. Khairul and Dr. Razali, label and seal it, fill the form and hand it over to the police.
Q: What were the samples extracted by Dr. Khairul?
A: Dr. Khairul collected swab from the left peritonsilar recess for seminal analysis, below the tongue for seminal analysis, left nipple and areola for saliva analysis, right nipple and areola for saliva analysis, body swab for saliva analysis.
Q: What were samples taken by Dr. Razali?
A: Samples from peri anal region, low rectal swab, and high rectal swab.
Q: High rectal swab, one or two times taken?
A: Two times.
Q: Was it handed over to you?
A: Yes.
Q: With regard to the examination of SP1, were you with Dr. Razali and Dr. Khairul prepared the report?
A: Yes.
Q: Mohon rujuk P22(laporan). Can you tell the court the finding of your examination on SP1?
A: No significant injury on the body and the peri anal area.
Q: Refer page 3, tell the court what are the specimen taken at number 6, 8, 9 and 10.
A: Item 6 – peri anal swab for seminal analysis, Item 8 – high rectal swab for seminal analysis, Item 9 – high rectal swab for seminal analysis and Item 10 – low rectal swab for seminal analysis.
Q: What are the other specimen taken for seminal analysis as stated in number 1 and number 2?
A: Number 1 – swab from left peritonsilar recess for seminal analysis, and number 2 – swab from the below of tongue for seminal analysis.
Q: On the same page 3, para 3, stated the report of the chemistry investigation were received by the Department of Forensic Medicine. Have you personally read the Chemist Report?
A: Yes.
Q: Refer page 3, tell the court what are the specimen taken at number 6, 8, 9 and 10.
A: Item 6 – peri anal swab for seminal analysis, Item 8 – high rectal swab for seminal analysis, Item 9 – high rectal swab for seminal analysis and Item 10 – low rectal swab for seminal analysis.
Q: May the witness being shown ID24. Having identified the sampling and the presence of semen from the high rectal swab what is your conclusion?
A: There’s evidence of penetration, sexual penetration.
Q: Can you conclude there was anal penetration?
A: Yes.
Q: Having identified the presence of semen and the history taken from SP1, is it consistent with penile penetration?
A: Yes.
Q: Can you explain this statement?
A: There is no conclusive clinical finding suggestive of penetration to the anus/rectum and no significant defensive wound on the body of the patient.
Q: Can penetration happen without any sign of injuries?
A: Yes.
Q: Under what circumstances can it happen?
A: It include the delay attended by doctors, use of lubricant, when doing the act there is no undue force, no undue resistance; all this were result to no clinical finding of injury
Pemeriksaan balas Dr Siew oleh Nordin Hassan, pada 22 Februari 2011
Q: You confirmed again in cross-examination that only from swab B5, P6F you discovered 3 DNA contributors. One of it being concordant with the blood donor of specimens B10, P6K . There’s a male Y as well as an unknown contributor. Will you be able to confirm again that the DNA obtained from this 3 contributors from swab B5 only were non-sperm extract?
A: The third contributor which is other than male Y and the donor of blood sample B10 would probably be a non-sperm contributor. That can be deduced by examining the DNA profile of the other swabs that were taken from that region which is B7, B8 and B9. And B7, B8 and B9 had not indicated the presence of any other male contributor other than male Y and the donor of specimens B10.
Q: B5 as stated in your STR result are only non-sperm extract?
A: Yes.
Q: You said in evidence your cross examination you came to the conclusion of who is the contributor of the DNA from the entire DNA profile. Your conclusion is not just based on single single loci but on the entire profile. What is the entire profile?
A: Assessment, evaluation of a DNA profile cannot be made singly, it cannot be made on a single locus. It has to be made from the entire profile in order to condition on who the contributors are.
Q: At B9 again, would you be able to confirm again that source of Male Y is sperm extract?
A: Yes.
Q: Which is more dominant?
A: If you look at B9 (f), that of non-sperm extract and B9(m) is the sperm extract. They could be equal contributors here, but the approach that being used, that could be applied to DNA profile from semen stain, and where differential extraction is carried out, has allow the subtraction of the non-sperm DNA profile from the sperm extract, to further conclude the donor of the sperm extract .
For B9 (m) the contributor will be Male Y. Even though the presence of Saiful is on B9 (m), but his DNA only present in non-sperm extract would support that his allele in the sperm extract which was on the remaining cells, which were (as my learned friend suggested, he used the word carried over, he was carried over into the sperm extract, even though we don’t used the term here) because B9(f) has a very high level of DNA and the standard extraction for standard DNA differential extraction would not be able to digest all the non- sperm cells, which is in B9, resulting in some of the non sperm extract being seen in sperm extract.
Q: So again, listening to all of your explanation, would you be able to confirm, on swab B9 which contributor is more dominant?
A: The source of the sperm extract here would be Male Y, logically, by looking at B9 (f) and B9 (m). I wouldn’t use the word of more dominant here, I would use the term that B9 (f) the presence of Saiful which was carried over from the non-sperm extract, which means that the real donor of the semens of B9 is Male Y.
Q: So you can confirm that apart from B5, Male Y DNA also found in sample B7(P38), B8(P39), B9(P40) as well as A6B – P40.
A: That’s correct.
No comments:
Post a Comment