Asia Sentinel
Already subscribed? Login here
| Did Malaysia's Anwar Say too Much? |
|
|
| Written by John Berthelsen | ||
| Tuesday, 23 August 2011 | ||
He says accuser acknowledged readying himself for sex Deep into Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim’s hour-long attack Monday on the Malaysian court that is trying him for sodomy, a sentence appeared that seems extremely awkward for both prosecution and defense. *Correction: We orinally said Anwar was pardoned on the original sodomy charge. A higher court overturned the charges. **Clafirication: Originally we used the pronoun "he" instead of Saiful. Some readers thought the pronoun referred to Anwar. Comments (30)
  written by Lillian Shu, August 23, 2011
 written by Ho HS, August 24, 2011
......"He served six years before he was pardoned on the sexual perversion charges"
The above sentence is a misrepresentation of fact which implied that Anwar was indeed guilty of Sodomy I and was jailed and then pardoned. The actual fact is that the conviction was overturned by the Federal Court which found that the conviction was faulty and the allerged crime untrue and the high court judge Paul Augustine was censored for his part in finding Anwar guilty and passing the sentence.
 written by TheRenovater, August 24, 2011
With all the political twist & turn, it would have made a great movie drama. However, the way the investigation is conducted (at the moment, questions about DNA quality of the semen) plus doctors getting out of the country, many signs that point to a conspiracy.
Then again, there is the court of public opinion which has probably made up their mind vs the real court findings in the days to come.
 written by Noob, August 24, 2011
Most Malaysian's are sick of being sodomised by this government. I dont care if the PM is gay black white yellow purple, as long as he's ethical and gives half a S$%# about the country.
 written by Marie Buma, August 24, 2011
With all these happening in this country I can't wait for the next GE. We will wipe out Najis & FLOM happy face
 written by La, August 24, 2011
" It is not so hard to believe they would have sent him back to the condo with instructions to get Anwar to do something that would be actionable in court. Did they?"
If a person informs a top police officer like Musa or Rodwan that he had been buggered previously and would be buggered soon, any half-past six police officers would have arranged for a trap. The police officers knew that Sifyul is going to the condo to meet Anwar. No trap was laid because Siful has never been buggered or will be buggered. Otherwise you would have all the buggery action either in video or audio recording. Just an audio recording which sounded like Siful in a state of ecstasy or pleading to Anwar not to be buggered would be enough corroborative evidence and would have nailed Anwar to Sungei Buluh prison wall for good.
 written by T Mohan, August 24, 2011
Remember in mongolian case where PI Bala said that Najib enjoys banging her back. Actually this is what happened in Arsefool's case... When initially Arsefool went to see Najib for scholarship, Najib's gay assistant told him to offer his arse as a kickback to get a scholarship. Najib took the kickback but he refused to give scholarship because Arsefool was so stupid, dumb fool. Arsefool was so angry and went to Rosmah to complain about Najib's actitivity on his back. Rosmah was so angry and chased Najib with a broom. She smacked him good. Najib protest that he did so for fat mama's good. He did that so he could blame Anwar and retain in power so you fat mama could loot Malaysians hard-earned money and do shopping in Paris, New York and London. Fat mama loved what Najib had to say. So she passed Arsefool to Najib's gay assistant. He took advantage of the situation by filling Arsefool's arse with further semen. So here we are... Arsefool arse full with Najib and his gay assistant's semen but poor Anwar is getting the blame for it.
 written by Nano, August 24, 2011
Excerpt from DSAI's statement:
"Under cross-examination, the following significant evidence was elicited from the complainant. He admitted that he had brought along lubricant and had himself voluntarily and without hesitation applied it. He claimed that carnal intercourse took place and that it was painful and coarse. However, this was clearly not borne out in the medical evidence in the prosecution case suggesting fissures or tears. After the alleged act, he testified that he had a drink and engaged in a friendly conversation with me. Startlingly, no attempt was made by the complainant to seek immediate medical attention. Instead, he attended a PKR function the following day. In the evening, he joined a meeting of the Anwar Ibrahim Club at my house without showing any sign of either emotional or physical discomfort let alone trauma. On the contrary, he was going about matters in a calm and confident manner. His conduct therefore is totally inconsistent with having been violated. In any event, he neither made a police report nor sought medical attention, notwithstanding that two days prior to the alleged act, he had met with Najib and Rosmah as well having talked on the phone with Musa Hassan and met with Rodhwan at a hotel". Tell me Asia Sentinel, how in God's name did you arrive at the conclusion that the above was attributed to DSAI??
written by Nano, August 24, 2011
I think you better get John Berthelsen to retract this article or amend it.
 written by OneMalaysian, August 24, 2011
If Anwar indeed "walked into it", I am surprised that Saiful too so long to submit the sperm specimen. It is much more likely that the sexual act never happened.
 written by hishamrazak, August 24, 2011 mR.John Berthelsen, aRE YOU DUMB OR WHAT? this is Anwar's statement : Under cross-examination, the following significant evidence was elicited from the complainant. He admitted that he had brought along lubricant and had himself voluntarily and without hesitation applied it. He claimed that carnal intercourse took place and that it was painful and coarse. However, this was clearly not borne out in the medical evidence in the prosecution case suggesting fissures or tears" THAT WAS WHAT SAIFUL CLAIMED UNDER INTENSE INTERROGATION FROM THE LAWYERS. ANWAR STATED THAT PARTICULAR INCIDENT TO SHOW HOW FAR THIS CON MAN WOULD LIE IN ORDER TO SAVE HIMSELF. THAT WAS NOT AN ADMISSION FROM ANWAR THAT HE WAS A WILLING PARTNER. HOW COULD YOU ARE NOT ABLE TO UNDERSTAND SOMETHING AS SIMPLE AS THAT? READ HIS ENTIRE STATEMENT CAREFULLY BEFORE YOU GO ABOUT AS A TALEBEARER!!! SHAME ON YOU!!!
 written by Don, August 24, 2011
This is surely one of the most ignorant of arguments that I have ever read. And coming from a publication like Asia Sentinel, I am indeed surprised.
What Anwar meant was that Saiful said that he brought the lubricant along, which indicates that it is not rape and Saiful brought it along so that he can implicate Anwar later, because Saiful's intention was all along to frame up Anwar anyway. He was obviously coached by Rodwan, Musa Aman, etc. and possibly even Najib and Rosmah themselves. That does not mean that the act took place. Look at the evidence against the prosecution, their methods at obtaining DNA, the manner that it was stored, ignoring evidence that is so very obvious, like the ability or inability of a 60 year old man, with a back injury committing rape on a youthful 6 footer. As one PKR leader has said, sodomy is different from rape, in that all the person being sodomised has to do is, close his anus. and penetration can't take place. You mean a 60 year old man's penis can be that erect to penetrate a closed anus? Just try doing it yourself, on your own, and you will know what I mean. or as the PKR man said, ask a transvestite, and he will willingly tell you. If it's a simple "open and close" case, why is the prosecution not being co-operative? Why do they have to depend on 'filmsy evidence' to convict Anwar? Look at "all the evidence in totality" not "bits and pieces", and then apply your mind to it, and you will come to only one conclusion, it's a set up. Or tell you what, take the same set of facts and present it to another judge in a country like India, Britain, Australia, NZ, Canada, and see what the judge there says. He/she will, I am sure, throw it out. Only in Malaysia can such things happen. Or, if it's so straight forward, then Najib, Rosmah, Musa, Rodwan, etc. should all come to court and subject themselves to the intense scrutiny if the defence. They obviously will not, because they cannot answer for the inconsistencies that exists and the lies that have been fabricated. Sheesh, you mean the courts should find Anwar gulity, because the Singapore intelligence and Lee Kuan Yew says it's probably true? And that is the basis for finding Anwar gulity? Ask the Singapore intelligence and Lee Kuan Yew, for the evidence they have on Najib, on Rosmah, on Razak Baginda, on Althantuya, on Muhiyuddin when he was MB of Johore, on Ghani the present MB of Johore, indeed on all of the Malaysian politicians, and if one were to use that as a guide to find people guilty, all our politicians will be in jail. That is the amount of info that the Singapore intelligence has on Malaysian politicians. And the Malaysian politicians know it. Asia Sentinel has lost its credibility on this one article.
written by LMa, August 24, 2011
John Berthelsen,
i think you have not fully digested what Anwar really said. He was just summarising what Siful said in his testimony and at the end of is summing up, this is what he said: " It is obvious, from the evidence above, that the complainant was lying through his teeth although Y.A., despite the compelling evidence to the contrary, found him a truthful witness at the close of the prosecution case. This defies logic, let alone the law".
 written by Sarawak Voice, August 24, 2011
This is the very classic example of the saying above. When someone start to lies and the balls of lies start rolling. Everybody involved will have to lie at some point. it does not matter if you are a driver or the PM of the country or The PM wife if you are involved chances are you already lies. Thats how bad a lie is. This is a significant event that we will have to tell the story to our children as a lesson they must learn about telling lies.
May I suggest the title "Kisah Bohong Si Saifool" May be we can teach this at school parts of moral subjects.
 written by bgees, August 24, 2011
All this are done by so called Muslim's , what so proud and respect need to be given to all these animals. If this are their culture and religion. tnx god.
 written by Eekmal, August 24, 2011
Dear John,
you wrote: Anwar said in his prepared statement that after Saiful went to Anwar’s condo in an exclusive area of Kuala Lumpur, he admitted that “he had brought along lubricant and had himself voluntarily and without hesitation applied it” to get ready to go ahead with the sexual act. That sentence would tend to invalidate any assumption that the then-60-year-old Anwar suddenly forced himself on the 24-year-old aide. If, as Anwar says, Saiful brought the lubricant with him, it would certainly indicate that Saiful knew what he was getting into when he went to Anwar’s condo that night. This in turn is hardly helpful for Anwar, who is on trial for his political life in the High Court in Kuala Lumpur over the allegations, because Saiful’s statement has the ring of truth to it. If you are going to make up a story about being forced into a sex act, you would hardly acknowledge that you voluntarily lubricated your own anus. but what Anwar really said that morning was this: Under cross-examination, the following significant evidence was elicited from the complainant. He admitted that he had brought along lubricant and had himself voluntarily and without hesitation applied it. He claimed that carnal intercourse took place and that it was painful and coarse. However, this was clearly not borne out in the medical evidence in the prosecution case suggesting fissures or tears. After the alleged act, he testified that he had a drink and engaged in a friendly conversation with me. Startlingly, no attempt was made by the complainant to seek immediate medical attention. Instead, he attended a PKR function the following day. In the evening, he joined a meeting of the Anwar Ibrahim Club at my house without showing any sign of either emotional or physical discomfort let alone trauma. On the contrary, he was going about matters in a calm and confident manner. His conduct therefore is totally inconsistent with having been violated. In any event, he neither made a police report nor sought medical attention, notwithstanding that two days prior to the alleged act, he had met with Najib and Rosmah as well having talked on the phone with Musa Hassan and met with Rodhwan at a hotel. It is obvious, from the evidence above, that the complainant was lying through his teeth although Y.A., despite the compelling evidence to the contrary, found him a truthful witness at the close of the prosecution case. This defies logic, let alone the law. I am fully agreed with LMa on this. Anwar just summarised saiful's testimony and refuted it as a blatant lie and defy logic. With all due respect please correct your story
written by Ramesh, August 24, 2011
This post has been removed because it is libelous.
 written by harry manisit, August 24, 2011
You use John as you name which I thought should be changed as Johari Baruah. You are nothing but a prostitute.
 written by awangkassim, August 24, 2011
To bring down a malay, you need to use the religion, race and royalty card
-UMNO School of Psychology
 written by Wahai Kawan, August 24, 2011
Dear Author,
You should do a comparision betwen the text written in your article compared to the one in Malaysian Today! Yours says: Anwar said in his prepared statement that after Saiful went to Anwar’s condo in an exclusive area of Kuala Lumpur, Saiful** admitted that “he had brought along lubricant and had himself voluntarily and without hesitation applied it” to get ready to go ahead with the sexual act. MT says: Anwar said in his prepared statement that after Saiful went to Anwar’s condo in an exclusive area of Kuala Lumpur, he admitted that “he had brought along lubricant and had himself voluntarily and without hesitation applied it” to get ready to go ahead with the sexual act. So who is "he" ? It's very confusing you know !
written by Wahai Kawan, August 24, 2011
Thanks to this article that I initially read in Malaysian Today, I really thought Raja Petra had some grudges with DSAI. But after reading the comments thereafter, I realised I am not the only one before commenting earlier.
Now my only worry is that how many other blogs have carried the word "he". This will reflect a bad picture on DSAI and of course Asia Sentinel.... if you care? The world has zoomed in on FBC. Asia Sentinel should do the same. Perhaps with a public apology from the author in the name of professionalism. And perhaps to start an internal investigations on this issue before it goes out of hand. So, who says Asians don't master English as their second language? Wahai Kawan
 written by Lok1, August 24, 2011
Dear John,
How much were you paid,whatever the amount,I don't think it was enough,should have ask more n throw in the snakeskin Berkin too,perhaps for your mistress,how do I know about that Chinese girl,well,I have my own deepthroat too(not like Linda Lovelace),well, mine couldn't take in that deep,anyway,combining all of these buggers brain,Najib,Rosmah,That mamak girl,Rodwan n especially Musa,that's the best trap that they can think off,really idiots with no imagination at all,they have been watching too many Malay/South Indians Dramas,same script but different actors,Bolo punya olang.
 written by Nik Nazmi, August 25, 2011
I am responding to the Asia Sentinel report ‘Why Did Malaysia’s Anwar
Say Too Much’ There are several glaring mistakes in the report. John Berthelsen the author has made some amendments to the original report but I believe it is important to note that there other glaring mistakes including the underlying insinuation of the report. In the first version of the report, the author wrote: "He served six years before he was pardoned on the sexual perversion charges." [para. 2] It has since been amended to: “He served six years before the sexual perversion charges were overturned.” The fact is that Anwar Ibrahim’s sodomy conviction was overturned by the Federal Court on 2 September 2004. The more contentious part of the report was this paragraph, where the author originally wrote: “Anwar said in his prepared statement that after Saiful went to Anwar’s condo in an exclusive area of Kuala Lumpur, he admitted that “he had brought along lubricant and had himself voluntarily and without hesitation applied it” to get ready to go ahead with the sexual act. “That sentence would tend to invalidate any assumption that the then-60-year-old Anwar suddenly forced himself on the 24-year-old aide. If, as Anwar says, Saiful brought the lubricant with him, it would certainly indicate that Saiful knew what he was getting into when he went to Anwar’s condo that night. “This in turn is hardly helpful for Anwar, who is on trial for his political life in the High Court in Kuala Lumpur over the allegations, because Saiful’s statement has the ring of truth to it. If you are going to make up a story about being forced into a sex act, you would hardly acknowledge that you voluntarily lubricated your own anus.” [paras. 3-5] The first ‘he’ in para. 3 has been amended to Saiful as it was not apparent on whether the pronoun was referring to Anwar or Saiful in the first version. But there are other glaring mistakes in the report that have not been amended. In para. 4 it was mentioned that Saiful went to the condo at night when Saiful went to the condo at about 2.30 pm. The insinuation by the author was also that Anwar was alone, waiting for Saiful. Anwar was in a meeting with a group of economists for a briefing. None of them were called upon by the prosecution as they would confirm Anwar was with them for the briefing. The defence are calling them as witnesses. The defence also has repeatedly reaffirmed that Saiful was not in the particular condo unit. What the prosecution has done has to prove that Saiful was in the elevator and stopped at the same floor as the condo unit. But none of those with Anwar saw Saiful coming in and the prosecution has also not produced any evidence on the contrary. The curious report, which includes the Lee Kuan Yew statement leaked by Wikileaks that Anwar walked into a trap seems to have the objective of confirming the former Singapore PM’s statement. Unfortunately it is littered with glaring mistakes obvious to anyone who has been following the trial closely and objectively. Anyone who has read Anwar’s defence statement will see that every notion of a fair trial has been ignored in this obvious case of political persecution. NIK NAZMI NIK AHMAD COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR PARTI KEADILAN RAKYAT
written by Nano, August 25, 2011
Dear John,
You wrote, "This in turn is hardly helpful for Anwar, who is on trial for his political life in the High Court in Kuala Lumpur over the allegations, because Saiful’s statement has the ring of truth to it. If you are going to make up a story about being forced into a sex act, you would hardly acknowledge that you voluntarily lubricated your own anus". Did you for once ever considered that Saifoll was Lying thru and thru Come on, if you really are a professional journalist, you wouldn't have wrote that para.
 written by James101, August 25, 2011
Why the writer had seen fit to grind a sentence completely out of context from a whole paragraph and primed this whole article on it can only meant two things:
1. The author had suffered some sort of brain damage; or 2. The author has malicious intend, either voluntary or induced.
 written by man on da street, August 26, 2011
Mr.
written by Ho HS, August 24, 2011 ......"He served six years before he was pardoned on the sexual perversion charges" The above sentence is a misrepresentation of fact which implied that Anwar was indeed guilty of Sodomy I and was jailed and then pardoned. The actual fact is that the conviction was overturned by the Federal Court which found that the conviction was faulty and the allerged crime untrue and the high court judge Paul Augustine was censored for his part in finding Anwar guilty and passing the sentence." Yo bro, upon the three judges, who sat on the bench , two of them found that he actually did that sin, i.e fuck that bloody hole , but due to technicality he is freed! Don't spin ok? What about the China doll? He is a pious person is it? And to the tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth, this case, his case has the most number of "tangguh". If he's innocent and believe in his stable of lawyers, lawan tetap lawan, why the "tangguh" one ma? So many times at that. You n me can do that like that meh? No need to run to the turkey embassy, still alive , what? What about that press conference attended by his faithful wife n daughter and the rests of Peekayrrr office bearers swearing that at that time he is with hem? Why not subpoenaed those people in the videos appeared in U tube. They would be more credible witness for him , on record,n the world could testify what they say in that video? Amacam? Let us spin.
 written by Asian, August 27, 2011
@man on da street
You ramble, ramble, and i read it and reread and dun know what the f%k you are saying. This kind of nonsensical gibberish thought must be from some kind of umno level standard brain. Fact is, the three judges found the case is not proven to be entirely correct, without solid proof to substantiate it. They refrain from saying he is innocent (to save their ass, in case of political fallout from umno hooligans), but could not prove he is guilty. Hence he is released.
 written by klang, October 02, 2011
Its a trap just like u see in bribe cases set up by BPR, the DNA is used as evidence.
When Anwar ran to the Turkey ambessy just show how panic he was, running away from party meeting he held... didn prove he is guilty but this coward act didnt prove he is innocent either...
Write comment
|
||
Subscribe to this comment's feed
LATEST BLOGS
The Start-up Scene in Hong Kong
2013-03-26
The Austrian Wine Experience - Singapore
2013-05-19
International Sauvignon Blanc Day, May 17 - The Wandering Palate's favourite Savvy's
2013-05-17
As Burma Opens, Critical NGOs look inWilliam Boot, The Irrawaddy
•
Some international organizations urge foreign...Full Story |
| Other Articles |
Mockingindian
Donate to Asia Sentinel
The following issues prevail in Malaysia.
Anti Corruption Director, Datuk Samsiah Abu Bakar, has confirmed , as reported in the Star dated 28th May 2011, that “enforcement officers are receiving bribes that are as high as RM 1 million Ringgit, and, that 422 persons were placed in custody between April 2010 and March 2011. Why is the Government not enforcing a demand that all embezzled funds be repaid prior to a release from custody (as they do so from bankrupted persons)?
White collar crime is rampant in Malaysia – even the Islamic authority; Tabong Haji Malaysia has not been spared. There are cases of frauds involving multi millions, but these fraudsters receive a minimal fine and a minimal sentence of a few years, and, are then released automatically.
The Inspector General of Police was quoted in The Sun that “the cases for last year (2010) involved losses amounting to RM 917,928,978". Why is there no effort by the Government to demand that all embezzled funds be repaid prior to a release from jail (as they do so from bankrupted persons).
It has been reported that student borrowers owe billions, yes billions, to the Government for the scholastic funding. Some are genuinely unable to pay their dues. Most abscond despite being employed in high paying jobs. As individual loans can come up to a few hundreds of thousand each, are they not genuine fraudsters who deprive other deserving ones of a chance to success. Why are they not being bankrupted? Is there a political motive here?
The Sun also reported on its 10th June edition that a bankrupt freelance landscaper received more than RM 6 million (from corrupt funds) to renovate a former Chief Minister's Balinese-style bungalow. A bankrupted person is denied by law to receive direct fees or payments. Persons who fail on this issue can be arrested and jailed. Why was this rule not enforced? Many people had their homes raided, and even RM 50 lamp shades put up for auction.
Why then are financial causalities in Malaysia being singled out for vicious suppression?
Honourable Prime Minister Datuk Najib Razak, please visit http://www.roguesmalaysia.blogspot.com/
Faith - Prime Justice
Please note that prime justice is a private secretariat, to promote causes that aid humanity.
It has absolutely no link of any kind to any political agenda of any political party or NGO.
I THINK WE ALL SHOULD HELP.
THIS CAN HAPPEN TO ANYONE OF US, OR IT HAS HAPPEN TO SOME OF US.
HELP THOSE SUFFERING MISFORTUNE, and THE SAME WILL BE DONE UNTO YOU, WHEN YOUR TURN COMES.
GOOD LUCK IS NOT FOREVER, BUT BAD LUCK CAN STAY A LONG TIME>
I HOPE ANWAR'S BAD LUCK IS COMING TO END< AND THAT NAJIB AND ROSMAH LEARN FROM THE BAD TIMES THAT SEEM TO BE WAITING FOR THEM