Posted in Uncategorized by drsivalaw on November 1, 2008

The acquittal of Abdul Razak Baginda yesterday raises fresh questions about the prosecution’s strategy in this case. My view is that there are at least 3 possible scenarios:

1. X told some “friends” of his that he wanted Altantuya taken care of. She was blackmailing him and he wanted her to stop. The “friends” tried to warn her, things got out of hand and they end up killing her to cover up.

2. X ordered the “friends” to kill her – this was the premise the prosecution was working on in the case.

3. X’s “friends” took it upon themselves to deal with Altantuya. Killed her.

X is only guilty of abetting murder in scenario 2. Innocent in scenario 3 but what is X’s liability in scenario 1, which in my mind is the likely scenario.

The prosecution should have examined scenario 1. Think about it.



2 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. mantra said, on November 4, 2008 at 9:45 pm

    I supposed in Malaysia, finally we will have to accuse God for murdering Altantuya! This only happens in Malaysia since a clear cut case can be easily denied.

  2. VJ said, on January 13, 2009 at 3:15 pm

    The truth has a funny way of showing itself when least expected and justice delayed is never always justice denied. I am confident in time the criminals will brought to justice. “GOD MAY MOMENTARILY DOZE OFF BUT NEVER TAKES LONG NAPS”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: