It’s so nice to be able to gloat

I felt good. They tried to screw me and now they got screwed instead. They thought they would punish me for walking away by charging me under Section 501 instead of 203. And now they realise it was a big mistake and that they set a trap for me which ended up trapping themselves instead.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER | 

Raja Petra Kamarudin

It’s a nice feeling when you are able to look the Malaysian Police to their face, laugh at them, and tell them that they fucked up big time. It’s equally satisfying when they admit it by not admitting it but by trying to put the blame of this super-blunder on someone else.

This was last night. I was already sleeping when my phone rang. My wife answered the phone and told me that the police were waiting for me downstairs. I called Haris Ibrahim who told me to wait in my room. “I will come over and we will go downstairs together,” he said.

My wife said she was also coming and the three of us went to meet the three police officers. They no longer needed me to go to the Malaysian embassy for my official statement to be recorded, they told me. This was a social visit. They merely wanted to have a ‘friendly chat’.

We adjourned to the lobby bar for a drink and a ‘friendly chat’. Basically, this whole ‘friendly chat’ was about my TV3 interview in Perth. There are some ‘gaps’ not covered by the interview, which they needed my help to fill in.

Understandably, the TV3 interviewer is not a police officer, so he did not ask certain questions that the police would have asked. After all, it was an interview and not a crime investigation.

I asked them whether they had seen the full length TV3 interview. They confirmed that they had. I then asked them how long was the interview. How many minutes? One police officer said it was 17 minutes.

I turned and glared at this police officer. “I said the full length interview. The full length is not 17 minutes. It is more than one hour, maybe one hour 40 minutes or so.”

ACP Aziz, his boss, replied he had seen the full-length version. “One hour plus?” I asked him. He confirmed it was one hour plus.

He then asked me a few things that were not mentioned in the interview, the gaps that I was talking about.

I then took this long-awaited opportunity to laugh in their faces. I had waited three years to finally look ACP Aziz in his face and laugh at him and imply that he is an idiot. And I did not mince my words to make him feel small. (Of course, he kept deflecting by saying that that was the decision of the Attorney-General, not his decision).

Anyway, before I ramble on and get myself into another of my cheong hei articles, let me cut to the chase. 

When I signed my statutory declaration, the police (the police blame the AG, of course) did not want to charge me under Section 203 -- that is, a crime for signing a false SD. If they did then they would have had to prove it and I, in turn, would be allowed to challenge the charge by bringing my witnesses and evidence to court.

By charging me under Section 501 they can bypass all this because the truth of the matter is not material to the charge. Therefore, the court is not interested in the truth because even if what I signed in my SD is true I still go to jail.

And that was why I refused to respond to the charge and shouted at the judge that the charge is both defective and mala fide. But the court ignored me and instead took that as a plea of not guilty.

Clever right? Not quite, because over the next three years they spun the story that I had made an allegation against Rosmah Mansor, Col Norhayati Hassan and Col Aziz Buyong. In fact, the two colonels even sued me for RM1 million.

For three years I had to live under this dark cloud, the man who made that stupid allegation against Rosmah. And they played up this issue to the hilt.

And now this issue is hurting them bad and they want to untangle themselves from this web of deceit that they themselves spun. They realise that the issue of me making an allegation against Rosmah will not go away, as they had hoped, and Najib Tun Razak’s enemies in Umno are trying to use this issue to bring him down -- just like how they brought Abdullah Ahmad Badawi down two years ago.

But how are they going to get themselves out of this sticky situation? It was they who charged me under Section 501 instead of section 203. It was they who spun the story that I made an allegation against Rosmah. Now they want that story corrected.

And that was how they came up with his hare-brained idea of the TV3 interview.

And this was their second blunder.

Their agenda was to make it clear that I never made any allegation against Rosmah -- not then, not now. Somedunggu in TV3, however, decided to spin it another way. Instead of coming out with the story of me NEVER alleging that Rosmah was at the scene of the crime (and that the allegation was in fact made by someone else but reported by me), they spun it that I have now made a U-turn.

Maybe they thought they could kill two birds with one stone. Clear Rosmah and discredit me at the same time.

Clever right?

Not so clever. By spinning this ‘Raja Petra did a U-turn’ story, they just got themselves into a Bala SD1 and SD2 situation (a.k.a. ‘Bala U-turn’). Maybe they thought they could kill me. Instead, they failed to get the people to focus on what they wanted the people to focus on.

Last night I asked ACP Aziz why he tried to screw me with the wrong charge. He said that it was not he but the AG who did this. He then blamed me for it. “Why did you not clarify this when we called you for interrogation?” he asked me. (I in fact walked off when he tried to interrogate me and this was probably why he wanted to fix me up with the wrong charge).

“Can’t you read simple English?” I asked him. “My English is so simple even Malay-medium students can understand what I write. Pasal tu lah, suruh pergi sekolah tak mahu belajar.”

“It was not me, the decision on the charge was the AG,” he repeated.

“If you had told us what you said in your TV3 interview then we would not all be in this mess. But since you refused to give your statement we did not know the real story and charged you for the wrong crime.”

I felt good. They tried to screw me and now they got screwed instead. They thought they would punish me for walking away by charging me under Section 501 instead of 203. And now they realise it was a big mistake and that they set a trap for me which ended up trapping themselves instead.

First they screwed up on the charge. Then they screwed up on the TV3 interview when they spun it the wrong way. And now they need to crawl back to me, smile sweetly the entire night, buy me a drink, and try to get me on their side. Then they had to continue smiling while I whacked them and called them stupid, much to the delight of Haris who was smirking as the police cringed.

So there you have it. They tried to fix me up in 2008 and it backfired because of the wrong charge. Then they tried to do damage control by interviewing me on TV3 and again it backfired when they spun the U-turn story (and chose the Sarawak elections to air the interview). And now, with their tails between their legs, they need to come and see me on my terms.

Revenge is sweet and is best served cold. I am one satisfied man. 

MT | 25April2011

Drama in Bangkok

It seems Utusan Malaysia carried a news report on my TV3 interview and a police report had been made by someone relating to this Utusan Malaysiareport. So it was not about my June 2008 SD. It was also not about my TV3 interview. It was about the Utusan Malaysia news report.

NO HOLDS BARRED | 

Raja Petra Kamarudin 

- 

Sunday, 24 April 2011

 

Just before the start of the Malaysian Civil Liberties Movement (MCLM) talk in Thailand at 6.00pm yesterday, a police officer attached to the Malaysian embassy in Thailand approached me and requested that I follow him to the embassy for my statement to be recorded. He informed me that a police officer from Kuala Lumpur, ACP Aziz, is in town waiting to see me.

I asked him what the statement was in relation to and he informed me that it was about my Statutory Declaration (meaning, I assume, the one I signed in June 2008 -- since that was the only one I have signed).

I told him I was prepared to go but only after the talk ends at 8.00pm. I also told him I was going to announce this and he agreed. I then informed Haris Ibrahim and Amarjit Sidhu about the matter and they went into panic mode. I only found out later that the Deputy IGP had also made a statement on the matter and that it was carried in the online mainstream media networks.

During the two-hour talk and Q&A, my wife received many phone calls from other lawyers from various parts of the world as well as from friends and family who told my wife to not let me go into the Malaysian embassy. My phone was switched off, naturally, as I did not want any interruptions during my talk and this added to the panic when no one could reach me.

When the talk ended my wife immediately confronted me and was almost in a state of hysteria. She was adamant that I am not going into the embassy and that there is no compromise on the matter. Haris and Amarjit told me that if I persist and refuse to listen to their legal advice then they are cutting off all links with me and will no longer have anything to do with me. 

I told Haris and Amarjit to discuss this matter with the embassy official, which they did, and they told him that if the police want to take my statement they could always come to the hotel to do it. It need not be done in the embassy.

The embassy officer left and came back to the hotel a while later with two police officers. A heated discussion, which turned into a shouting match, ensued and it appeared like it was about to become something very physical. Both sides, the lawyers as well as the police officers, did not want to back down.

My lawyers demanded to know what the whole thing is about. ACP Aziz appeared evasive and said that it is about my statement. “Which statement?” my lawyers asked, and they were told it is about the Utusan Malaysiareport.

It seems Utusan Malaysia carried a news report on my TV3 interview and a police report had been made by someone relating to this Utusan Malaysia report. So it was not about my June 2008 SD. It was also not about my TV3 interview. It was about the Utusan Malaysia news report.

My lawyers then asked under which section of the law they are taking my statement. The police said it is under Section 203.

Amarjit then told ACP Aziz that back in 2008 they had already taken my statement under Section 203. And my statement was taken under Section 112, which means I was being interrogated as a mere witness. However, they finally charged me under Section 501, which is for criminal defamation, and not Section 203, which is for making a false statement.

ACP Aziz said that this was not his decision but the Attorney General’s decision.

Amarjit then asked to see a copy of this 14 April 2011 police report and ACP Aziz did not have it with him. He asked us to follow him to the embassy to see it and Amarjit and Haris said they are prepared to go to the embassy but that I am to stay in the hotel. The police wanted all of us to go to the embassy but Amarjit and Haris disagreed.

Amarjit and Haris finally followed the police to the embassy while I waited at the hotel. They came back way past midnight and told me that they had to wait an hour for the police report to be faxed from Kuala Lumpur. It seems ACP Aziz did not have a copy with him. And the police report clearly stated that Utusan Malaysia had carried a report about my TV3 interview and that I should be investigated for it.

The impression my lawyers got is that the investigation is against me and that it is focusing on the possibility that I lied in that TV3 interview. That is why the investigation centres on this police report and on Section 203.

And that was exactly what happened back in 2008, which resulted in me being charged for criminal defamation. So we were seeing history being repeated here.

After discussing the matter further, I told Haris and Amarjit that I will consent to my statement being recorded in spite of this utter confusion. They disagreed but finally relented on condition that I do not walk into the Malaysian embassy. This decision was relayed to ACP Aziz who lost his temper and said that he no longer wishes to take my statement.

I then phoned ACP Aziz to inform him that I volunteer to make my statement but he told me the same thing he told Haris, that he is no longer interested to take my statement.

And that was how the Bangkok drama ended at 2.00am this morning.

For the record, I am prepared to give my statement. My lawyers, however, disagree because the police are vague as to the reason my statement is required but will compromise on his matter as long as it is not at the Malaysian embassy. The police are adamant that it must be at the embassy.

So where do we go from here?

Spot the spin contest.

Today, Malaysia Today is running a spot the spin contest. See if you can spot the spin from what I actually said in my interview in Australia with regards to the Statutory Declaration that I signed in 2008 and what I told the police during my interrogation. Hint: look for the key words.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER  |   Raja Petra Kamarudin

OR SEE VIDEO HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBslOyX8J4Q

First the spin by Umno website Malaysia Instinct:

RPK...and the lying continues....

By:  Fareed Dawood

We’ve heard how heroes went to jail or even died for what they believe in. 

Mahatma Ghandi, Nelson Mandela, Suu Kyi to name a few heroes who stand faithfully firm and unmoved despite the consequences.  For true heroes, die they would, if their death could mark a statement of their fight.  Run, is certainly not an option. 

Never before a hero flee when called to face the music.  In fact, even an ordinary man without heroic attributes wouldn’t run away when given a chance to prove his words in the court of law should he believes that he is right.  

Claiming that the court will not be fair or that you will be put under ISA should you not flee, are mere excuses used by cowards and the guilty ones.

MT :  Thursday, 14 April 2011 | read full post 

 

MACC stumped and does not know what to do

Until today there is still no response from Abdul Rahman or the MACC and it appears like they are stumped and do not know what to do. To respond would mean that the MACC would have to meet Bala and take his statement, which is clearly something they would not like to do.

NO HOLDS BARRED 

Raja Petra Kamarudin On 3 December 2009, Shamsul Iskandar Mohd Akin, the Parti Keadilan Rakyat Youth Leader, lodged a report at the MACC headquarters in Putrajaya asking them to investigate private investigator P. Balasubramaniam’s latest revelation implicating Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak’s family in covering up the murder of Mongolian national Altantuya Shaariibuu. In response to this report, the MACC asked Shamsul to help locate Bala and to make him available for questioning.

On 4 December 2009, Bala’s lawyer, Americk Sidhu, sent Abdul Rahman Bachok, the investigating officer from the MACC, an e-mail informing him that he is prepared to assist the MACC in securing Bala's attendance at any interview the MACC would like to have with him, but under certain conditions.

On 8 December 2009, lawyer Americk received a phone call from Abdul Rahman Bachok on his mobile phone enquiring whether it was really him who sent that e-mail on 4 December 2009. Americk confirmed that he did and reiterated the contents of the e-mail and suggested that Abdul Rahman respond to it immediately.

However, there was no response from Abdul Rahman, so on 10 December 2009 Americk sent him another email confirming their telephone conversation of 8 December 2009 plus reiterating what he had said in his first e-mail and, again, requested an immediate response.

Until today there is still no response from Abdul Rahman or the MACC and it appears like they are stumped and do not know what to do. To respond would mean that the MACC would have to meet Bala and take his statement, which is clearly something they would not like to do.

The MACC was hoping that Shamsul would not be able to contact Bala and this would mean they could conveniently close the file and declare that they can’t proceed any further since Bala can’t be contacted. But now, since Bala’s lawyer Americk has already communicated with them and has offered to arrange a meeting so that they can take Bala’s statement, they are not able to close the file and stamp it NFA (no further action).

But what do they do? They can’t close the file on the excuse that Bala can’t be contacted since his lawyer has already got in touch with the MACC. Yet they do not dare meet Bala to take his statement as this will not augur well for the Prime Minister. So now they are running around like headless chickens and are praying hard that the matter will die a natural death and Malaysians will soon enough forget about the whole matter.

But the matter will not go away. The MACC has no choice but to respond to Americk’s e-mails. It is just that they are still deciding on how to respond without hurting the future of Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak.

Dammed if you do, dammed if you don’t -- either way the MACC is dammed. And this would mean the damnation of their boss the Prime Minister as well.

Ooo, I just love the way this is turning out.

*************************************************

E-MAIL DATED 4th DECEMBER 2009

Dear En. Abdul Rahman,

Re: Report lodged by Shamsul Iskandar Mohd. Akin in relation to the recent disclosure by Balasubramaniam

With reference to the above matter, I wish to inform you that I am counsel representing Mr. Balasubramaniam a/l Perumal.

I have been made to understand that you are desirous of interviewing Mr. Balasubramaniam in connection with the report lodged with your commission by En. Shamsul Iskandar Mohd. Akin on the 3rd December 2009.

In this respect I have been instructed to inform you that Mr. Balasubramaniam is prepared to assist you in your investigations and is further prepared to be interviewed by your goodself, with conditions as follows:

1.   That the interview be conducted in either Singapore or London.

2.   That the time and date of the interview be mutually agreed upon to suit all parties involved.

3.   That all necessary air fares be borne by the MACC including those of counsel involved.

4.   That all hotel expenses, subsistence, transportation and meals in respect of my client, myself and other counsel necessarily present, be borne by the MACC.

 5.  That any statement recorded from my client be in the English language and a copy thereof be given to my client.

 6.  That audio visual recordings of this interview be made by ourselves.

We regret any inconvenience this may cause you but we are sure you are appreciative of the fact that our client is understandably concerned about his safety and welfare if this interview were to be conducted in Malaysia and will not entertain any assurances given by your goodselves or any other party in consideration of doing so.

Please could you respond to me at this email address to enable me to contact my client for instructions in respect of any proposals you may have.

Thank you.

Yours sincerely,

Americk Sidhu

*************************************************

E-MAIL DATED 10th DECEMBER 2009

Dear En. Abdul Rahman,

Further to my email of the 4 December 2009, and to the subsequent telephone conversation between us on the 8 December 2009, I would be most obliged to receive a response to my offer of assistance in arranging an interview with my client Mr.P. Balasubramaniam.

As you obviously have my mobile number, please feel free to contact me at any time to make the necessary arrangements.

Yours sincerely,

Americk Sidhu