PUTRAJAYA (Bernama) – The defence in Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s appeal yesterday questioned whether there was penetration in the alleged sodomy case as Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan’s testimony was inconsistent over the existence of a lubricant in the act.
Lawyer Datuk Seri Gopal Sri Ram, a former Federal Court judge, argued that according to the evidence from the complainant Mohd Saiful at the High Court, the act was vigorous and fast and he suffered pain in his anus and stomach.
Submitting before a five-member panel of the Federal Court chaired by Chief Justice Tun Arifin Zakaria, Sri Ram said if that was correct, then a lubricant called KY Jelly could not have been used because it was to facilitate penetration and avoid pain.
He pointed out that the medical evidence had confirmed that no trauma or injury was found in Mohd Saiful’s anus.
Sri Ram further said the lubricant was not mentioned in the list of exhibits recovered by the prosecution from Mohd Saiful, who was the prosecution’s first witness in the sodomy trial.
“The absence of lubricant from the list casts serious doubt on the credibility of Mohd Saiful, and lack of credibility in the prosecution’s case and the entire investigation,” he said, adding that Mohd Saiful had also not mentioned in his police report on the usage of KY Jelly.
At this juncture, Justice Arifin asked Sri Ram why he said lack of credibility, to which he replied if the gel was used Mohd Saiful would not have suffered pain.
Sri Ram submitted that the learned trial judge did not address his mind to this part of the case at all despite strenuous cross-examination on the point (KY Jelly) by lawyer Karpal Singh.
Sri Ram said Mohd Saiful in his testimony said that the semen stayed in his anus for several days but in his evidence when cross-examined by Karpal, said he did not take a bath after the incident and only rinsed his body and he had taken a bath in the morning prior to the incident.
“It shows inconsistency in Mohd Saiful’s testimony,” he said.
Sri Ram said the KY gel was an important exhibit but had only appeared during the examination-in-chief by the prosecution on Mohd Saiful and furthermore Mohd Saiful had told the court he himself bought the gel before proceeding to the condominium.
Sri Ram said when asked by Karpal the first time whether the KY Jelly was an afterthought, Mohd Saiful agreed, however, he disagreed after he asked Karpal to repeat the question.
At yesterday’s proceeding, KY Jelly was being focused by the defence but when the appeal was heard in the Court of Appeal on March 6 and 7, this year, it had been not been emphasised on.