Tuesday, 29 July 2008

Lawyer: 'Regrettable' but leaked report valid - Malaysiakini

From Malaysiakini

Beh Lih Yi Jul 29, 08 6:48pm

While the leak of sodomy complainant Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan’s medical report is ‘regrettable’, the report’s contents are admissible evidence in court regardless of how they were exposed, said a senior counsel today.

"The courts have always taken the position that evidence that is relevant is admissible even though it has been wrongly exposed," Sulaiman Abdullah, one of the lawyers representing PKR leader Anwar Ibrahim told reporters in Petaling Jaya.

"The situation now is that everybody knows about this medical report and while an invasion of doctor-patient confidentiality has occurred, it’s regrettable [...] but you cannot run away from the fact that it’s now very clear that there is no sodomy involved," he stressed.

"That is what the police are investigating and that is what the police should concentrate on," Sulaiman, who was present at a press conference called by Anwar today, added.

Copies of the two-page medical report, which had been circulated on the Internet, were distributed to the media at the press conference today with the medical terminology explained in layman’s terms.

The report outlined the results of a thorough medical examination on Saiful which found no indication he had been sodomised four hours before he lodged a police report against Anwar alleging the same on June 28.

Saiful was examined by Dr Mohamed Osman Abdul Hamid, the medical officer on duty at Hospital Pusrawi in Kuala Lumpur at the time.

An internal inquiry by the hospital is underway to determine how the medical report was leaked.

Twenty-three year old Saiful is claiming that his ex-boss Anwar had sodomised him two days before he went to the police. The police are investigating Anwar on this matter.

‘Do what is right and just’

Sulaiman saluted Dr Mohamed Osman Abdul Hamid whom he described as a ‘brave doctor’.

"We salute the brave doctor involved who has been put under tremendous pressure - according to reports - to falsify (the medical) document with fictitious facts.

"He has stood firmly by his professional ethics and religious obligations to speak the truth," said the lawyer.

Sulaiman reminded the authorities not to target the messenger, but to focus on the message.

"Look at the message that is implicit in that document no matter how it surfaced in the public domain and act according to that message," he said, adding that Anwar will also pursue his qazaf complaint filed with the syariah court earlier this month.

Qazaf is a request for a inquiry based on Islamic methodology into ‘false allegations’ pertaining to adultery or sexual misconduct.

At the press conference, Anwar also commended Mohamed Osman’s courage in standing firm as well as the whistle-blower who leaked the report.

"I will appeal to many others, doctors in particular, to do what is right and just," said Anwar.

Source: Malaysiakini

8 comments:

Victor Ching said...

I guess the fruits of the poisonous tree law doesn't apply in Malaysia...

nixon said...

RPK's latest revelation about the medical report is nothing but his own conclusion. He is actually exaggerating the intepretation of the doctor's writings. Check out this link http://stephendoss.blogspot.com/2008/07/is-rpk-spinning-out-of-control.html#links

elviza said...

Eh, Kak Ton, is that a full report from Malaysiakini? Ahem! :-)

maria a samad (kak ton) said...

Hello sis Elviza,

Can you read or not? Buat-buat tanya pula. Lol!

Read what it says at the top of the page - "Malaysiakini" followed by the reporter's byline below it.

Yeah, that is the report from Malaysiakini which I have reproduced in full (since I'm a subscriber, thanks to you) for the benefit of non-subscribers.

Jose Maria said...

Further problem now is that the medical report is seriously doubted by people in the medical fraternity. Pls read up on what Doctor Novandri Hasan Basri. We do need to take into accounts the professional opinions of all sides.

Jacqui said...

I've so far read 3 other different opinions from 3 different doctors who think that the way the examination conducted to the way the report is writen is neither conclusive nor credible. I don't take sides, I think the BN has got more problems than they know what to do with, but neither do I buy the conspiracy idea too easily. That the gov will do something so stupid to vindicate DSAI again just doesn't convince me. So please, you'd get 2nd opinion from doctors yourself, don't jump the gun too hastily. I'll quote one of those writings here.

Any girl maybe a virgin from the time she is born until she dies if she choses to do so.She gets a hymen tear when her vagina is penetrated.

All human beings anus gets reversely penetrated(passing motion) within a few days of birth and this act continues almost on a daily basis for the rest of their lives.

Most adults(male/female/trans) would have been reversely penetrated sometime(and some many times) in their lives with big hard feaces when they were constipated.

When you are constipated, your feaces is usually hard and dry ....... how many of us had tears?Some of us may have bled a little but the next time we went to pass motion, no more bleeding any more ......... leave alone blood after few days. For pus to form , you need a tear and infection to set which rarely occurs.

For all those who still doubt that someone can get sodomized without suffering any tear, bleed and pus formation need to know that anuses are being routinely penetrated in hospitals on a daily basis with metal proctoscopes which are 8-10inch long and about 1 inch in diameter, the obturator is removed once the proctoscopes is in and once deeper inside the anus - no tears, no bleeds.

ABOUT THE OUTPATIENT EXAMINATION

1)It was done either in outpatient and probably in an ER(A&E) room
2)It was done by a medical officer and not a specialist
3)The history taken was very minimal as rightly pointed out:

* when it occurred ie time, date, place
* how many times has it occurred
* who did it
* consensual forced or neither ie not agreeing but not resisting
* any constipation recently or in the past
* size, consistency , shape etc.


Physical examination PR means Per Rectal examination whereby the basic examination would be;

* spreading the cheeks of the buttocks in a semi prone position to look at the anus under good lighting
* putting a gloved forefinger through the anus to feel tone, swellings, irregular surfaces, prostate
* proctoscope examination whereby a speculum is inserted through the anus to look directly at the anal canal and also the anus while the proctosocpe is being withdraw out of the anal canal after completing the examination. This is the appropriate exam to look for tears.


Looking at the OPD exam, it looks like the doctor just performed only the visual exam because:

* all is reported as "seen/not seen"
* no mention made of findings of finger rectal exam ie stained with mucus/blood/feaces etc.
* no proctoscopy exam findings mentioned


It is surprising how casual the examination was in view of the fact that the patient complained of assault to his anus - doctor's job is to do a thorough exam irrelevant whether he/she believes the patient complaint(s)

Finally, the examination was not done by a specialist who in this case would have to be a colorectal surgeon and a forensic specialist. Even if the specialist finds no tears(old or new), blood or pus, it does not mean a person was not sodomized.

A disservice has been done to both the patient and also the alleged assaulter by the very poor history taking as well as physical examination of the patient. It is not rare for doctors to take such poor history and do such poor examination in patients with running nose or cough of few days but to do so in a potentially medico-legal case is grossly irresponsible.
The doctor's only service to this patient was that he felt that patient may have been sodomised [TRO Assault(Sodomise)]and thus needs to be properly examined by someone more qualified and experienced in such areas which rightly should have been a specialist from the same hospital.It is a well known fact that private hospitals have briefed their A&E MOs to refer any potentially medico-legal case which do not have life threatening problems to government hospitals to avoid any hassles later on.
As a medical doctor, i feel the slipshod OPD examination should be properly addressed and explained by the Malaysian Medical Association so that no party(accuser or the accused) can twist the facts any further.
Truth will ultimately prevail.

Anonymous said...

Thanks God Saiful is still vigin..

c a r m e n :] said...

Senang singgah diKelantan
Enaknya nasi daggang
Uncle Pet bukan Jantan
Suka main orang belakang