Special Branch murder: Police corporal told to enter defence

PUTRAJAYA: The Court of Appeal here today ordered a corporal from the Bukit Aman Special Branch to enter his defence to the charge of murdering a colleague, who was found shot in the head, four years ago.
Justice Datuk Wira Mohtarudin Baki, who led a three-man bench, set aside the Kuala Lumpur High Court order of acquitting Corporal Wan Masrul Faiezie Wan Mustapha, 37, from a charge of killing Lance Corporal T. Thivakar.
Mohtarudin made the decision after allowing the prosecution's appeal against the High Court decision to release and acquit Wan Masrul Faiezie at the end of the prosecution's case without calling him to enter defence.
Mohtarudin, who sat with justices Datuk Kamardin Hashim and Datuk Abdul Karim Abdul Jalil, also ordered the respondent to be remanded until the case was settled.
"The prosecution's appeal has merit. The appeal is allowed, the High Court Judge's order has been set aside and replaced with an order for the accused to enter his defence," he said, adding that March 20 was set for the next mention.
Mohtarudin said the panel agreed that the High Court Judge could not set aside the statements of the eighth and 20th prosecution witnesses, a chemist and ballistic analyst respectively, just like that.
On March 30, 2017, the High Court acquitted Wan Masrul Faiezie from a charge of murdering Thivakar at the roadside of Jalan Negri Sembilan, Bukit Persekutuan in Kuala Lumpur between 4.11pm and 4.50pm on Feb 4, 2014.
Wan Masrul Faiezie, who is now self-employed after being suspended from work, was charged under Section 302 of the Penal Code which carries the mandatory death sentence, if convicted.
Earlier, deputy public prosecutor Samihah Rhazali had submitted that the High Court judge erred in his findings to reject the statements of the chemist and ballistic analyst, who had made the comparison of bullet shells in the case.
She said the accused was the individual who caused the death of the victim, who was found dead with two gunshot wounds to the head, as the pistol being used was under his (respondent's) care.
Samihah also argued that although the bullets were not found, two bullet shells near the dead body matched the gun owned by the respondent and was used to shoot the deceased.
"The bullet shells were found near the deceased. The bullets that killed the deceased came from the respondent's gun," she said.
Samihah submitted that a pathologist confirmed the deceased's death was caused by the gunshot wounds to head.
She also said the accused was the last person to be with the deceased, and a debt repayment letter between the accused and Thivakar was also found in the deceased's backpack at the scene.
Lawyer Mohd Ruzaini Zulkfili representing Wan Masrul Faiezie argued that his client had paid the debt to the deceased, hence there was no motive for him to kill Thivakar.
He also submitted there was no evidence suggesting that the bullets that killed the deceased came from his client's pistol and that the accused had shot Thivakar as the bullets were not found. — Bernama