Copyright Notice

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the author, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other non-commercial uses permitted by copyright law. For permission requests, write to the author, at the address below.

Sakmongkol ak 47

Wednesday 14 December 2022

Implied interference of the court.

1. I am flabbergasted when Anwar says you are innocent until found guilty.

2. I believed that's a sacrosanct principle in the legal systems of the world.

3. But not all follow the antiquated principle. In France, Italy, Russia and Iran, you are guilty until proven innocent.

4. It doesn't mean the principle of innocent until proven guilty is superior to the other rule.

5. One is chosen over the other is because you want to straighten a wet thread.

6. In this case, Anwar wanted to justify Zahid's inclusion in the cabinet

7. If the highest profile criminal case of Zahid's can be cavalierly justified using an antiquated rule, the same thinking gives Anwar a carte blanche to include the whole gang bang of kleptocratic minded goons.

8. Why doesn't Anwar want to use the rule, guilty until proven innocent? I put it to him, that's because his personal interests override the public's.

9. He wants to stay on as PM at all costs-by any means necessary, even to the extent of using a silver tongued argument.
Anwar is good at that; he can even induce a bird in the sky to come eat from his hands.

10. With the rampant and marauding corruption taking place in Malaysia, perhaps it's good if the rule guilty until proven innocent, is adopted.

11. Will the braggadocios Azalina dare reform this rule? Or she is just talking cock?

12. Acquittal seems to be the legal holy grail. It's pursued energetically by shifty lawyers and is an intentional slip of the tongue by grade 'C' judges.

13. When Zahid was acquitted in his earlier case, I can almost hear his lawyer asking

14. Now that you are acquitted, tell me truthfully, did you steal the money? To which Zahid answered:- after listening to your brilliant arguments, I am beginning to think I didn't.

15. What alarms me, are the 2 other childish arguments used by Anwar.

16. That(a) Zahid is the president of UMNO and (b) Zahid is chairman of BN.

17. If the number 1 man thinks this way, it's probable the pliant AG will also think likewise.

18. Then the charges against Zahid will be dropped. Zahid's case will never see the light of day.

19. I hope the AG will treat these considerations as irrelevant. Imagine if the supreme court judges in Najib's case were to consider, here is a man who is a former pm, umno president and BN chairman. Horrors!

20. Pak sheikh, we are sleeping using the same pillow, but we dream different dreams. You may think Zahid is innocent, but the people think he is guilty as hell!

21. Your line of thinking is tantamount to attempted interference with the court.


  © Blogger templates Newspaper III by 2008

Back to TOP