If you still remember, this is regarding the death of Teoh Beng Hock, political secretary to Selangor Executive councillor, Ean Yong Hian Wah, had been summoned to the Selangor Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) offices to be questioned over irregularities in the disbursement of state funds on July 15th. Next day, he was found dead on the fifth floor service corridor of the building.
So, satu Malaya excited dok kata ini musti kes bunuh coz this guy terlibat dgn pendedahan kes salah guna duit kerajaan negeri.
And then, pihak2 yg bertanggungjawab running the autopsy on this guy announce satu Malaya kata, haish! kami confirm ini kes bunuh diri.
Satu Malaya kata, ada ka kes bunuh diri mcm ni??? Gagah p bunuh diri kat bangunan pusat siasatan rasuah tu. Tak sempat2 nk balik dulu ka? Yenna dey??
Finally,
The Sun news Oct 22, 2009 - A Thai pathology expert told the Teoh Beng Hock inquest yesterday that there was an 80% possibility that Teoh's death was a homicide and there is only a 20% likelihood that his death was a suicide. The expert, Dr Pornthip Rojanasunand, the director-general of the Thai Ministry of Justice's Central Institute of Forensic Science has testified that there were several injuries found on Teoh which were inconsistent with a fall from a height. They were :
1. the anal injuries, which were of a penetrating nature;
2. evidence of handle bruises which indicate physical strangulation on Teoh's neck; and
3. the fracture found on Teoh's skull was more consistent with that of a blunt force impact than transverse force from the fall.
OK.
I am no expert, and we all watch CSIs, although the 'experts' say they all mengarut, but based on the 3 arguments presented by one of the experts themselves, they appear to be very basic.
I mean, yeah, these are the things that should be checked during the autopsy, right? Any abnormalities on the body. I don't know how they dismissed the injury no1, maybe they rule that out as this guy involved in some kind of sexual activities? I mean, what makes them rule out the possibility of penetrating the guy's ass with a broomstick?
And then the injury no 2. that is so friggin obvious. How could they rule out homicide when such injury of strangulation on the neck is evident. How?? Takkan dia bunuh diri style mencekik leher sendiri sambil terjun?
And then based on the first 2 injuries, i might conclude, injury no 3 is too complicated for the Malaysian 'crime scene investigators' to see.
Or, as I mentioned earlier, are they corrupted? or just not good at their job?
The homicide evidence is 80% not 50% to be dismissed.
For muslims, yes, we believe in Qada' and Qadar. But this is not a matter of tak boleh terima someone died. Kalau asal mati saja dok mendabik dada bg alasan percaya Qada' and Qadar, anyone can plan a plain 'perfect murder'. Coz well,
"I find something fishy here."
"Hey, don't say like that. We must percaya Qada' and Qadar".
Then are you saying, "do not investigate on everything fishys?" Does an act of investigation something fishy is against our rukun iman? Logic ka? Lain la kalau mcm kes, aku tak percaya anak aku dah mati walaupun based on the genetical 'investigation' itu mmg anak hang yg mati, aku masih tetap tak percaya aku nk p cari bomoh kampung, bomoh siam, bomoh exorcist semua. Yang tu buleh tak nk suruh dia mengucap and remind her on rukun iman percaya Qada's and Qadar.
I think, just like how we have misinterpreted the words, "Insya Allah", it is the same way some extremist misinterpreted the "percaya Qada' and Qadar".
While we should promise with, "Insya Allah," and believe in Ketentuan Tuhan melalui Qada' and Qadar, God says, "I will not change a person's fate if he/she does not work on changing it".
No comments:
Post a Comment