DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANG KUASA ...
DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANG KUASA ...
DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA (BIDANG KUASA ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
18<br />
[34] The appellant also testified that at the place of arrest before he<br />
was taken to the IPD Kuala Pilah, he was not examined physically by any<br />
police officer. And this was confirmed by SP15 under cross-examination.<br />
[35] S M Mohd Haizat bin Abdul Jalil (SD2) testified for the defence.<br />
SD2 testified that on 9.10.2007, he was present at the briefing room of the<br />
Kuala Pilah district police headquarters. And that when he entered the<br />
briefing room, he saw the appellant was seated and was blindfolded. SD2<br />
did not know who had blindfolded the appellant. From there, the appellant<br />
was taken to the garage where the GEN-2 motorcar was parked. There, the<br />
appellant was not blindfolded and at a distance he saw some police<br />
personnel examined the said motorcar. Under cross-examination, SD2<br />
admitted:<br />
(a) that sometimes while interrogating a suspect, the suspect will be<br />
blindfolded; and<br />
(b) that the purpose of the blindfold is to prevent the suspect from<br />
seeing his interrogator.<br />
[36] Under cross-examination, SD2 testified that, “Bila mata<br />
seseorang itu tidak nampak ia tidak boleh berfikir. Jika boleh melihat<br />
ia boleh dan membuat cerita” (When a person is blindfolded, that person<br />
cannot think. If that person can see that person will create a story). SD2<br />
agreed that the appellant could recognise his voice and that the appellant