Statutory Declaration of Charles Morais
(Charles Morais, brother of the murdered deputy prosecutor’s Anthony Kevin Morais, delivered this sworn document on Nov. 26 to a press conference in Kuala Lumpur. The document is printed in full below. We present it as a service for our readers for additional information.)
58. I also found it strange that Dr. Nurliza was claiming to have performed the autopsy on Kevin’s body but when I had attended the mortuary to claim Kevin’s body on the 23rd September 2015, there were 2 Malay ladies and a Chinese man who claimed they had actually performed the autopsy themselves. Dr. Nurliza was not there.
59. My lawyer then asked Dato Abdul Razak of the Attorney General’s Chambers whether we could be supplied with a copy of the post mortem report before the next mention date of the charges brought against the accused in Court. Dato Abdul Razak informed us that he would discuss this with the Attorney General and revert to us.
60. My lawyer thereafter received a call from one Mabel Muttiah, the Special Officer to the Attorney General, inviting my lawyer and I to attend the Attorney General’s Office at 11.30 a.m. on the 17th November 2015 to sight the post mortem report only, which we did.
61. At this meeting Dato Abdul Razak informed us that if we wanted a second post mortem conducted on Kevin’s remains, it was a Standard Operating Procedure of the Attorney General’s Chambers that we were to make a formal application to Court for the relevant Order, but the that AGC would have no objections.
62. My lawyer thereafter prepared an Originating Summons and an affidavit-in-support which I duly affirmed and had attested on the 23rd November 2015. My lawyer filed the same in Court immediately.
Annexed hereto as TAB-7 is the sealed copy of the Originating Summons and Affidavit-in-Support filed on the 23.11.2015.
63. My lawyer had also been in touch with the Victorian Institute of Forensic Medicine in Melbourne, Australia and received confirmation that a Professor Stephen Cordner was prepared to fly to Kuala Lumpur to perform a second post mortem on Kevin’s remains.
64. However, I received information in the evening of the 23rd November 2015 that Richard had claimed Kevin’s body at 11.30 a.m. that very same day and had removed it from the HKL mortuary.
Annexed hereto as TAB-8 is a copy of a police report lodged by Richard and dated 23.11.2015
65. I have reason to believe that Richard has been instigated by certain personalities to claim and dispose of Kevin’s body before a second post mortem could be conducted. I have evidence in the form of an sms received by my brother David from an officer at the Attorney General’s Chambers which was sent to David on or about the 15th November 2015 and which reads as follows:
“Dearest darling Bro David. Just received message from Bro Richard. He wants to remove Kev’s remain and give a decent burial if time permits tomorrow. He asked me to find out from you if you would join him in getting the remains of Kev fr the mortuary. Thank you”.
66. The contents of the above sms appear to indicate that there was a conspiracy to dispose of Kevin’s remains without my knowledge as no mention of my name has been made in that message.
67. This is despite the numerous letters, meetings and requests made to all concerned parties that I was intent on having a second post mortem done. This was common knowledge at the AGC and an understanding between us had been reached, with the filing of an application to Court as agreed. It is therefore very surprising that an officer of that same department appears to be trying to circumvent this understanding by clandestine means.
68. I firmly believe that Richard has been approached by persons interested in covering up the murder of my brother Kevin. He has been offered incentives to claim Kevin’s remains and to cremate them post haste in order to destroy evidence which a second post mortem may have revealed.
69. Richard is a crook by nature and therefore I would not put it past him to accept a reward for doing this. He does not realize he has possibly committed an offence under section 201 of the Penal Code for causing the disappearance of evidence of an offence committed, to screen the actual offender (s), which is punishable upon conviction with a sentence of up to 7 years in jail and a fine.
70. I am convinced that Kevin knew something was going to happen to him. I could sense this from the conversations I had with him over the phone shortly before he was abducted.
71. This perhaps explains why he felt it necessary to travel to London on the 3rd August 2015 and whilst there, to see solicitors who drew up a Will for him dated 13th August 2015 in which he specifically bequeathed his apartment to a dear friend of his. Why do this when it had always been his intention to retire to London and live in that apartment?
72. I am in possession of a pen drive Kevin sent to me by courier before he died, as I mentioned above. It is in safe custody in the USA with someone who has instructions to release it publically should anything untoward happen to me for swearing this statutory declaration. The contents of this pen drive clearly and unequivocally reveal the investigations Kevin had been tasked with just before his untimely death which implicate certain personalities who currently walk the corridors of power in Malaysia.
73. I do not for one moment believe Kevin was killed because he was prosecuting a Government Pathologist for corruption. This accused doctor is intelligent enough to realize that getting rid of the DPP prosecuting his case will not emasculate the charge he is facing for the simple reason there are many other DPPs who would take over that prosecution.
74. Kevin was killed for other reasons and I believe these other motives were due to the fact that he knew too much about the criminal acts of those high up in the echelons of power in Malaysia and he needed to be silenced because of that.
75. I am very surprised that the authorities at the Hospital Kuala Lumpur and the police appear to have been complicit in allowing Kevin’s body to be removed from the mortuary by Richard when they were both fully aware that I wanted a second post mortem to be conducted. I believe this clearly demonstrates mala fides on their respective parts in their efforts to prevent this second post mortem taking place.
And I solemnly make this declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of the provisions of the Statutory Declarations Act 1960
Subscribed and solemnly declared by )
the abovenamed Charles Suresh Morais )
at Kuala Lumpur this day of 2015 )
(Commissioner for Oaths)