Thursday, December 20, 2012

PI Bala SD I : Do you Believe in Santa Clause?

This actually happened quite a few years ago.

A week before Christmas, in a desperate bid to address depressing sales, a cabal of major toy stores in the US, somehow manage to convince Santa Clause and announce in major newspapers, that Santa would no longer be delivering presents. The announcement, so the cabal thought, was to have an effect of parents rushing to toy stores all over the country, thereby creating a huge spike in toy sales.

What the cabal did not reckon with, however, were the kids.

Children all over the US could not believe that Santa would do such a dastardly deed. So it was, a group of resourceful kids somehow managed to get hold of Santa Clause to announce the very next day, also in major newspapers, that he was duped into making the previous announcement.

Shamed, Santa Clause exiled himself to the North Pole but duly continued his usual Christmas deliveries and all the children got their presents.

The dastardly deed of the cabal had failed.

End.

The way it was announced so dramatically, would have an effect, that the statutory declaration of PI Bala - SD I, was a major disclosure with serious implications, at the time.

Many, yours truly included, found the disclosure and the SD itself, to be highly incredulous and suspicious, what with and in the presence of Anwar Ibrahim.

PI Bala SD I, for all intents and purposes, is choronological. (http://anwaribrahimblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/bala_pi_stat_dec-1.pdf)

Here is some of PI Bala's flights of fancy and his testimony under oath in open court.

For this, I have included his testimony as reported within the appropriate section of the SD, with relevant emphasis.

"Private eye: Razak hired me"
SD I:

5. I was however re-employed by Abdul Razak Baginda on the 05-10-2006 as he had apparently received a harassing phone call from a Chinese man calling himself ASP Tan who had threatened him to pay his debts. I later found out this gentleman was in fact a private investigator called Ang who was employed by a Mongolian woman called Altantuya Shaaribuu.

Testimony:

Earlier, Balasubramaniam, a former police corporal, said Abdul Razak met him on Oct 6 or Oct 7 last year.
This testimony in June 2007, 8 and a half months after Altantuya was murdered but PI Bala is not sure of the date he met Razak Baginda. Yet, 2 years later he is precise on the date he was employed.

‘Razak did not ask me to kill her’
SD I:

Item (16) mentioning date "On the 11.10.2006.." up to (26) "On the 19.10.2006.."

Testimony:

Abdul Razak had mentioned the first three reasons in the presence of his family lawyer Dhiren Rene Norendra during a meeting with the private eye at Nagas restaurant in Brickfields on Oct 16.
There is no mention of this in Bala's SD.

‘Cops took woman away’
SD I:

28. Whist I was talking to Aminah, she informed me of the following :-

29. After talking to Aminah for about 15 minutes, a red proton aeroback arrived with a woman and two men. I now know the woman to be Lance Corporal Rohaniza and the men, Azilah Hadri and Sirul Azahar. They were all in plain clothes. Azilah walked towards me while the other two stayed in the car.

30. Azilah asked me whether the woman was Aminah and I said ‘Yes’

Testimony:

Elaborating on his encounter with Altantuya, Balasubramaniam said she started telling him “her sad story” until a policeman came in a red Proton Wira with two passengers - male and female.

The policeman came up to him and asked if he was “Bala” and if (referring to Altantuya) “this was the woman”.

33. After the 19.10.2006, I continued to work for Abdul Razak Baginda at his house in Damansara Heights from 7.00 p.m. to 8.00 a.m. the next morning, as he had been receiving threatening text messages from a woman called ‘Amy’ who was apparently ‘Aminah’s’ cousin in Mongolia.

Testimony:

On Oct 20, around 2pm to 3pm, the private investigator went to meet the analyst at his office in Jalan Ampang to collect his payment.

“After that, he settled the payment, wished me Happy Deepavali (which fell on Oct 21 last year) and asked me to continue my stakeout at his house every night until Oct 26,” he said.

Asked if he knew whether Abdul Razak had made a police report, Balasubramaniam replied that he did not know.

Subsequently, the private investigator testified that on either Oct 21 or Oct 22, Abdul Razak had asked to meet him in Pusat Bandar Damansara to make a police report.

He did not say why he wanted to lodge the report,” he said.

Earlier, Balasubramaniam identified Gal Orchir Uuriintuya and Namiraa Gerelmaa as the two other Mongolian women seen with Altantuya.

Gal Orchir is believed to be Altantuya's cousin while Namiraa was her friend.

The private investigator said the following day, Abdul Razak asked him to come over to his house because the two women and Altantuya’s private investigator named Ang were causing a commotion.
This would make it 22 or 23 October. Strangely, Bala cannot remember whether it was on Deepavali or the next day after Deepavali, when Razak Baginda asked to meet for the purpose of making a police report.
SD I:

34. On the night of the 20.10.2006, both of Aminah’s girl friends turned up at Abdul Razak Baginda’s house enquiring where Aminah was. I informed them she had been arrested the night before.

35. A couple of nights later, these two Mongolian girls, Mr. Ang and another Mongolian girl called ‘Amy’ turned up at Abdul Razak Baginda’s house looking for Aminah as they appeared to be convinced she was being held in the house.
That would make it 22 October which Bala was not sure when he testified.
SD I:

36. A commotion began so I called the police who arrived shortly thereafter in a patrol car. Another patrol car arrived a short while later in which was the investigating officer from the Dang Wangi Police Station who was in charge of the missing persons report lodged by one of the Mongolians girls, I believe was Amy.

37. I called Abdul Razak Baginda who was at home to inform him of the events taking place at his front gate. He then called DSP Musa Safri and called me back informing me that Musa Safri would be calling handphone and I was to pass the phone to the Inspector from Dang Wangi Police Station.

38. I then received a call on my handphone from Musa Safri and duly handed the phone to the Dang Wangi Inspector. The conversation lasted 3 – 4 minutes after which he told the girls to disperse and to go to see him the next day.

39. On or about the 24.10.2006, Abdul Razak Baginda instructed me to accompany him to the Brickfields police station as he had been advised to lodge a police report about the harassment he was receiving from these Mongolian girls.

40. Before this, Amy had sent me an SMS informing me she was going to Thailand to lodge a report with the Mongolian consulate there regarding Aminah’s disappearance. Apparently she had sent the same SMS to Abdul Razak Baginda. This is why he told me he had been advised to lodge a police report.
According to SD (39), it was "On or about the 24.10.2006, Abdul Razak Baginda instructed me to accompany him to the Brickfields police station as he had been advised to lodge a police report" after events from SD (35) to (38). Bala's testimony is that it was either 21 or 22 October that Razak Baginda wanted to make a police report.

Bala's testimony in court is therefore false because the police report Razak Baginda intended to make (on either 21 or 22 October) cannot be on account of "the night of the 20.10.2006, (when) both of Aminah’s girl friends turned up" at Razak Baginda's house, SD (34). This is because Bala's SD makes no mention of Razak Baginda intending to make a police report, between (34) and (35), only later in (39).

Bala also testified “He did not say why he wanted to lodge the report,” but in Bala's SD (39) and (40) above, he specifically gives the reason why.

‘Razak did not ask me to kill her’
SD I:

54.4 Emphasize the fact that having been a member of the Royal Malaysian Police Force for 17 years I am absolutely certain no police officer would shoot someone in the head and blow up their body without receiving specific instructions from their superiors first.

Testimony:

“I would have lodged a police report if anyone asked me to kill someone else,” he said.
So, PI Bala, a member of the Royal Malaysian Police Force for 17 years, is absolutely certain that "no police officer would shoot someone in the head and blow up their body without receiving specific instructions from their superiors first". But in the same breath says he "would have lodged a police report if anyone asked me to kill someone else".

So, here is a person who would make a police report if anyone asks him to kill someone, yet said nothing despite being absolutly certain, police officers were shooting people in the head and blowing them up, in all his 17 years in the police force.

The most telling testimony in court, that demolishes and leaves no doubt that PI Bala's SD is a figment of some other person or persons pervert imagination, is the following.

"PI tells of Altantuya’s fury"
SD I:

20. On the 14.10.2006, Aminah turned up at Abdul Razak Baginda’s house in Damansara Heights when I was not there. Abdul Razak Baginda called me on my handphone to inform me of this so I rushed back to his house. As I arrived, I noticed Aminah outside the front gates shouting “Razak, bastard, come out from the house”. I tried to calm her down but couldn’t so I called the police who arrived in 2 patrol cars. I explained the situation to the police, who took her away to the Brickfields police station.

21. I followed the patrol cars to Brickfields police station in a taxi. I called Abdul Razak Baginda and his lawyer Dirren to lodge a police report but they refused.

22. When I was at the Brickfields police station, Aminah’s own Private Investigator, one Mr. Ang arrived and we had a discussion. I was told to deliver a demand to Abdul Razak Baginda for USD$500,000.00 and 3 tickets to Mongolia, apparently as commission owed to Aminah from a deal in Paris.

23. As Aminah had calmed down at this stage, a policewoman at the Brickfields police station advised me to leave and settle the matter amicably.

24. I duly informed Abdul Razak Baginda of the demands Aminah had made and told him I was disappointed that no one wanted to back me up in lodging a police report. We had a long discussion about the situation when I expressed a desire to pull out of this assignment.

25. During this discussion and in an attempt to persuade me to continue my employment with him, Abdul Razak Baginda informed me that :-

Testimony:

On the night of Oct 17, he said, Altantuya went alone to Abdul Razak’s house and the political analyst called him to say that the woman was making a lot of noise outside.

“At that time, I was on my way back to Abdul Razak’s house from Hotel Malaya where Altantuya stayed.

“I was at the hotel to pay my workers their wages for helping to observe Altantuya’s movement,” he said.

He said upon reaching the house, he saw Altantuya causing a commotion there.

“She shouted, ‘Razak bastard, you come out! I want to speak to you’,” he said, adding that the woman was furious when she uttered the words.
This is where Bala's SD falls, like a house of cards, in all it's despicable and dirty purpose. He testified events as it happened on 17 October. Testimony that cannot be challenged or denied as it is corrobrated by another testimony.

"Altantuya demanded money, air tickets, says witness"
Testimony:

Ang said that Abdul Razak’s private eye, P. Balasubramaniam, had told him to stop Altantuya from lodging a police report after she was taken to the Brickfields police station from outside the analyst’s house on Oct 17.
Since SD (20) could not have taken place on 14 October, it is a fictitious and fabricated date. It is proof positive and by extension that everything else in SD(20) to SD (25.5) are also fictitious and fabrications, intended for a specific effect.

"Altantuya demanded money, air tickets, says witness"
Testimony:

Altantuya Shaariibuu had demanded US$500,000 (about RM1.85mil) and three air tickets to Mongolia from political analyst Abdul Razak Baginda as a condition not to lodge a police report against him.

Private investigator P.Subramaniam said Altantuya made the demands outside the enquiry room at the Brickfields police station on Oct 17 last year, after she was taken there following a ruckus she had made outside Abdul Razak's house earlier that evening.
PI Bala never mentions "apparently as commission" even if "apparently".

This in turn confirms PI Bala's SD I as shams of the highest order.
SD I:

28.3 That she was promised a sum of USD$500,000.00 as commission for assisting in a Submarine deal in Paris.

50. I have given evidence in the trial of Azilah, Sirul and Abdul Razak Baginda at the Shah Alam High Court. The prosecutor did not ask me any questions in respect of Aminah’s relationship with Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak or of the phone call I received from DSP Musa Safri, whom I believe was the ADC for Datuk Seri Najib Razak and/or his wife.
See how devious in that PI Bala only complains "The prosecutor did not ask me any questions in respect of Aminah’s relationship with Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak", which has been established to be a fabrication.

Be that as it may, Altantuya had revealed to Bala on the 19 October, that she was specifically "promised a sum of USD$500,000.00 as commission for assisting in a Submarine deal in Paris".

Bala complains that the prosecutor did not ask him about a "relationship" but surely when giving evedence in court, he could have revealed this disclosure by Altantuya about being "promised a sum of USD$500,000.00 as commission for assisting in a Submarine deal in Paris", which is no "sad story" and have the same devastating impact. Further proof that Bala's SD is nothing more than a fabricated instrument, in a most injurious fashion, to inflict maximum humiliation and damage for a specific effect.

Believing PI Bala's SD I is as good as believing in Santa Clause.

It also then follows that, immediately upon release of PI Bala's fake SD I, only a resourceful kiddie like Deepak Jaikishan would want to reverse what is obviously counterfeit, to enjoy some goodness or goodies.

As a favour, so it seems.

Deepak Jaikishan is also another Santa Clause.

If you ask me, Raja Petra Kamarudin knows more than what Deepak Jaikishan cares or dares to mention.

As I said, the script has changed, again and again, but the song remains the same.

On another note, if you had ever wondered why Altantuya went to Razak Baginda's house alone, read "PI on why Altantuya went to Razak’s house alone" and see if it makes any sense.

Or you can ask RPK.

2 comments:

joehancl/PRAY, it works said...

Was Altantuya murdered? Was there a court case for the death? What was the two policemen's motive? PLEASE explain.

Freddie Kevin said...

joehancl/PRAY,
Yes, Altantuya was murdered. Yes, there was a court case. No, according to the judgement, was there a need for motive. Their appeal will explain.

Thank you
Freddie