Altantuya... Another SD after Another SD
Twenty-four hours after releasing his SD with a lawyer in attendance, private investigator P. Subramaniam showed up at a hotel -- with a new lawyer -- and a new statutory declaration.
The PI said he wished "to retract the entire contents of my statutory declaration dated July 1 2008. I was compelled to affirm the said statutory declaration under duress".
Interestingly, his new lawyer said his client – the PI who was hired by Razak in October 2006 to help him deal with Altantuya – was summoned by the police a few hours after he released the first statutory declaration.
Big Question: Did the police intervention have any influence on his retraction?
Which of the two SDs filed by the PI will be used by the Police to investigate for now, and for truth to prevail? Blogger-lawyer Malik Imtiaz Sarwar tells you why Balasubramaniam's first declaration is still significant.
Do we have the institution of trust in this country?
Comments
Which of the two SDs?
BOTH OF THEM.
Police will investigate BOTH stat decs, even though yesterday's has been restracted
Posted by: scottthong
|
July 4, 2008 03:16 PM
Sivarasa, DSAi, Sankara Nair, Amerik, and other people cannot be so naive to solely rely on an ex SB officer's SD to nail Najib. Now, this further reminds me of how Munawar pleaded guilty with the help of his "lawyer" 10 years ago.
But when you were last seen going into police station and to emerge 20 hours later in a hotel with a new SD...wonder what happened there? heard about turning over by SB but SB kena turned over or bertaubat?
Ahh.. this is more interesting then some of the most exciting chess end games.
Posted by: LittleBird
|
July 4, 2008 03:23 PM
under duress on the 1st or 2nd SD? can Anwar etc force him? what he can sodomee also ka? come on la, this is a joke. after police visit, he changed his mind. does the police have a file on him?
There is very little trust in the Msian authorities right now.
Posted by: rocky
|
July 4, 2008 04:14 PM
All,
Retract or not is not improtant. Validate the facts in previous SD, did anyone see No 2 with Atan during diamond exhibition in Singapore ? please speak up.
Did any French friends seen No 2 with Atan at France ? They need to eat and sleep, check resrtaurants and hotels for records and the truth will prevail ....
Posted by: Orang Kampung
|
July 4, 2008 04:37 PM
Also validate with Abdul Razak Baginda on SD made by Bala, this is last chance for ARB, unless he want to give away his life and name.
Posted by: Orang Kampung
|
July 4, 2008 04:46 PM
truth is writen in water here. however, 1 thing that I don't hear alot of people talking about, the anal sex mention in the original SD. mere coincidence?
Posted by: Salt Cellar
|
July 4, 2008 04:47 PM
Jeff,
If Najib did come to S'pore, he couldn't have slipped in incognito. I'm sure he had an entourage with him. If Razak was here, he wouldn't have come alone either. If your Polis want to really get to the bottom, it's not difficult -- check their passports. The Mongolian girl's presence in S'pore can also be verified with the S'pore authorities. Credit card bills, hotel stays, etc, all these can be traced. If all three were in S'pore at the same time, it will prove something. And what about the SMSes that Bala claimed to have been exchanged? A lawyer could obtain a subpoena of sorts to get the info. No way can Najib & gang cover such extensive tracks.
Btw, I heard rumours that Bala has been [ DELETED -- defamatory ] to pull back his 1st SD. If you wish to publish this,please remove the last sentence to avoid trouble to yourself, but you might want to tip off your kakis regarding the part about Bala being paid off.
Posted by: kaypojudge
|
July 4, 2008 07:42 PM
there's an interesting poll conducted at malaysia.msn.com
Do you think the Altantuya Shaariibuu murder case has been handled properly by investigators and prosecutors?
As at now, 1637 respondents. 92% says NO!!!
Posted by: Freddy
|
July 4, 2008 08:45 PM
Why do people believe in rumours? Probably because we propogate them ourselves, more so with some bloggers. Instead of giving an analysis of the situation, we raise questions which touches on the integrity of investigation. While we all have our own allegiance, to assume that one party is right, is wrong.
Perhaps one should question, why was the PI allowed to go to the police station alone? Why wasn't he accorded the same protection as the whistleblower in the VK Lingam tape? Why did the 1st SD contain hearsay statement? Why was the part about Altantuya being susceptible to anal sex significant? Why was it added? Was the PI used to further a personal cause?
The police should investigate both SDs. And until they complete the investigation, I think we should stop the speculations. There are no saints in this episode.
Cheers.
Posted by: JJ
|
July 5, 2008 09:25 PM