Sosilawati trial : Defence lawyers moves to use police report to show witness' contradiction

KUALA LUMPUR (Jan 27, 2012) : Defence lawyer, Gurbachan Singh, who represents a murder accused in the murder trial of Datuk Sosilawati Lawiya and three others, applied to use a police report to show contradiction in a witness's evidence.

High Court judge Datuk Akhtar Tahir heard the submissions from lawyer Gurbachan, who represents R. Thilaiyalagan.

Gurbachan wanted to cross examine Chief Inspector N.Govindan on police reports lodged by him.

He cited section 145 of the Evidence Act 1950 which states cross examination as to previous statement in writings. He said previous statement includes police statement.

He said police reports amounts to a statement and a police report may be used to show inconsistency of the witness in the court.

In reply, DPP Saiful Edris said impeachement proceedings against a witness cannot be made based on the police report. While DPP Ishak Yusof said there is a difference between First Informatiom Report (FIR) and police report.

"In most cases, FIR is used under section 145 and not the police report. Police report is is inadmissible," said Ishak.

To this, Gurbachan replied: "We are not seeking to admit police report, only to cross examine the witness."

At the end of the submission by all the lawyers, Akhtar posed a question on whether an inadmissible statement can be used to show contradiction of a witness under oath in the court.

He will hear further submission, if any, on Monday.

Later, a witness, Dr. Cheah Phee Keng said on Sept 14, 2010 he was working as emergency medical expert (pakar perubatan kecemasan) at Hospital Kuala
Lumpur and that blood samples from four people were taken by doctors for DNA profiling.

The four are Satinah Mokhtar, 51, Zainab Ahmad, 73, Radiyah Abd Karim, 27, and Erni Erinawati Sofia Buhari, 21. (Family members of the four murder victims).

The hearing continues on Monday.