by save justice, shoot a judge, donplaypuks® intrepid correspondent for rapine affairs
As in my blog post on 23/04/2015 (CLICK HERE) regarding DAP MP Teresa Kok being disgracefully fined $200,000 costs in a case where she was falsely arrested under the ISA, I do not care what the law says. Justice is beyond mere law, and where children are concerned, particularly under-aged ones, it is our duty to protect the innocent and defenceless, and to punish severely the evil and predatory sick and dirty adults who commit rape.
But, where judges do not even have the minimal intelligence to understand and enforce laws, then we should put these worthless men in robes behind bars and throw the keys away. Everyone knows that our judiciary has long been in crisis, that it has been infected and infested with corruption ever since Mahathir manipulated the sacking of Chief Justice Salleh Abas in 1998, as reinforced by the findings of the 2008 RCI into the fixing of the appointment of judges vis-a-vis 'Lingamgate'.
But, where judges do not even have the minimal intelligence to understand and enforce laws, then we should put these worthless men in robes behind bars and throw the keys away. Everyone knows that our judiciary has long been in crisis, that it has been infected and infested with corruption ever since Mahathir manipulated the sacking of Chief Justice Salleh Abas in 1998, as reinforced by the findings of the 2008 RCI into the fixing of the appointment of judges vis-a-vis 'Lingamgate'.
On 7 May 2015, the Court of Appeal set free child-rapist Bunya Jalong, 60, from Sibu, Sarawak. In October 2013, the Sibu High Court had found Bunya guilty on four counts of raping a 14-year old girl in 2011.
The High Court had imposed a 15-year jail sentence and five strokes of the rotan for the first rape charge, as well as nine years’ imprisonment and two strokes of the rotan each for the other three charges, which were to run concurrently. The court also ordered for RM40,000 in compensation to be paid to the girl. Bunya appealed to the High Court against the convictions, sentence as well as the order to pay compensation.
What is incredible about Court of Appeal's Judges Datuk Abdul Wahab Patail, Datuk Linton Albert and Datuk Seri Zakaria Sam verdict is that they set free Bunya despite:
1. Bunya having confessed to all 4 rape charges.
2. DNA evidence confirming that Bunya was the father of a child given birth to by the under-aged victim.
The CoA judges wrote that their doubts arose from:
1. Both the complainant and the accused’s names were not in the hotel register, giving rise to the presumption that they had not checked-in or occupied any room in the hotel.
2. Judge Augustine who said that the appellate judges found that the complainant’s testimony was not reliable, and that she was not a reliable or truthful witness:
“The complainant had related the four incidents in the same manner, thus not quite believable and considered not credible. If on the first incident she was forced into sex, why would she follow the accused to the hotel the next three times that followed?” asked Augustine.
3. A specialist obstetrician had testified that pregnancy could occur if freshly ejaculated semen laden with sperm is inserted with a finger into the vagina. In his evidence, the accused (Bunya) testified that he never had sexual intercourse with the complainant and that only once on June 6, 2011, the complainant had asked him to have sexual intercourse with him in a toilet of the YMCA. According to the accused, the complainant gave him a hand-job causing him to ejaculate and then his semen was smeared onto the complainant’s fingers and his own finger, which he later inserted into the complainant’s vagina.
Firstly, we all know that most cheap sex-hotels never register names of guests, and if they do, certainly not the names of both guests. This is mainly so that they can pocket the cash and not declare their earnings to the Income Tax Department. Often, the names of second guests are not recorded in the register of 5-star hotels. Our judges do not know that?
Secondly, how did the CoA judges who never heard any testimony, conclude the child lied? Normally, they would have relied on the opinion of the High Court judge's who witnessed proceedings. For God's sake, we are talking about a case where the accused had confessed, and a poor but brave 14-year old had to testify in open court in front of her rapist. They expected a mature Oscar-winning performance from the shaken and trembling girl-child?
The High Court had imposed a 15-year jail sentence and five strokes of the rotan for the first rape charge, as well as nine years’ imprisonment and two strokes of the rotan each for the other three charges, which were to run concurrently. The court also ordered for RM40,000 in compensation to be paid to the girl. Bunya appealed to the High Court against the convictions, sentence as well as the order to pay compensation.
What is incredible about Court of Appeal's Judges Datuk Abdul Wahab Patail, Datuk Linton Albert and Datuk Seri Zakaria Sam verdict is that they set free Bunya despite:
1. Bunya having confessed to all 4 rape charges.
2. DNA evidence confirming that Bunya was the father of a child given birth to by the under-aged victim.
The CoA judges wrote that their doubts arose from:
1. Both the complainant and the accused’s names were not in the hotel register, giving rise to the presumption that they had not checked-in or occupied any room in the hotel.
2. Judge Augustine who said that the appellate judges found that the complainant’s testimony was not reliable, and that she was not a reliable or truthful witness:
“The complainant had related the four incidents in the same manner, thus not quite believable and considered not credible. If on the first incident she was forced into sex, why would she follow the accused to the hotel the next three times that followed?” asked Augustine.
3. A specialist obstetrician had testified that pregnancy could occur if freshly ejaculated semen laden with sperm is inserted with a finger into the vagina. In his evidence, the accused (Bunya) testified that he never had sexual intercourse with the complainant and that only once on June 6, 2011, the complainant had asked him to have sexual intercourse with him in a toilet of the YMCA. According to the accused, the complainant gave him a hand-job causing him to ejaculate and then his semen was smeared onto the complainant’s fingers and his own finger, which he later inserted into the complainant’s vagina.
Firstly, we all know that most cheap sex-hotels never register names of guests, and if they do, certainly not the names of both guests. This is mainly so that they can pocket the cash and not declare their earnings to the Income Tax Department. Often, the names of second guests are not recorded in the register of 5-star hotels. Our judges do not know that?
Secondly, how did the CoA judges who never heard any testimony, conclude the child lied? Normally, they would have relied on the opinion of the High Court judge's who witnessed proceedings. For God's sake, we are talking about a case where the accused had confessed, and a poor but brave 14-year old had to testify in open court in front of her rapist. They expected a mature Oscar-winning performance from the shaken and trembling girl-child?
More than that, if we accept judge Augustine's opinion, then Anwar Ibrahim should be freed today. Saiful claimed that Anwar had sodomised him several times, including during overseas trips. Surely, by Augustine's logic, Saiful lied, since he would not have followed Anwar to the bedroom after the first occasion?
But here, we are not talking about an adult like Saiful, but a girl who was 14-year's old when she was raped. Our judges do not know how a 60-year old man can inveigle, entice, confuse and put utter fear in such a child, and coerce her into having illicit sex?
Lastly, as a layman, I have no idea if a female can be become pregnant via sperm deposited through finger-sex. A doctor had testified that it was possible, but I do not think it was probable. I have not heard or read about any other incidence such as this. I have grave doubts that this is really how the child got pregnant. Surely there was reasonable doubt about finger-sex? Everything points to rape.
Even if the judges were convinced that no penetration had taken place, surely, surely, this vile, despicable monster was at the very least guilty of Statutory Rape, where by definition, even if the under-aged girl had said 'Yes' (unlikely), legally, she could not possibly have given consent?
When I think of the trauma this girl/child must have suffered from, it brings tears to my eyes.
These errant judges should be whipped publicly.
For more detailed reports and reactions on this case:
Can we expect the Attorney General or the Chief Justice to intervene and take some measures to restore public confidence and trust in the rule of law? Not much hope there, I am afraid. They have done nothing to put right a previous incident of statutory rape where the accused was also freed on the flimsiest of pretexts. Religious bias appears to have played a major role in that travesty of justice. (CLICK HERE) and (HERE).
I rest my case.
I rest my case.
Donplaypuks® with children and rape, man!
4 comments:
Calm down, chill, cool.
This is how and why we tear ourselves up over these judgements. Lots of rakyat like you have voiced their misgivings and concerns and the AG is obliged to appeal the decision.
Otherwise, by the same principle, you are right in that Anwar and his team can also appeal for his conviction to be set aside.
8" long finger perhaps? If that is the case, should chop them all off lest he got other girls pregnant. Muakakaka.
It's been more than 3 years since the Afizal statutory rape case. The AG and CJ have not rectfied that blatant disregard for the laws by a bigoted judge. So, don't hold your breathe waiting for justice from them!
Let's all hurry then and push for the change in gomen.
Post a Comment