The idiotic racist spammer attacks again!
Whoever you are. This IP is just a number it might not put you in trouble. But here it is anyway: 60.53.185.224
DO ME A FAVOUR AND FUCKING GET YOUR OWN BLOG IF YOU'RE SO SICK OF MALAYSIA THEN GET THE HELL OUT OF HERE. WHOEVER YOU ARE YOU'RE A DISGRACE TO YOUR OWN NATION. AND YOUR OWN FAMILY. IF HIDING BEHIND ANONYMOUS NICKNAMES AND BASHING UP CERTAIN RACES IS WHAT GIVES YOU THE THRILL I SUGGEST YOU CHECK EITHER JUMP OFF A BUILDING, GO HANG YOURSELF, JUMP OFF A BOAT OR JUST GO AND DIE.
YOU ARE PATHETIC BECAUSE YOU DON'T EVEN DARE TO SHOW YOUR OWN FACE ONLINE.
ONLINE ANONYMOUS SPAMMERS WHO USE THIS MEDIUM TO VOICE THEIR DISSATISFACTION IN A CRUDE AND DISRESPECTFUL WAY DESERVE ALL THE FLACK THEY CLAIM TO SUFFER BECAUSE THEY CAN'T GET OUT OF THE THIN GLASS HOUSE THEY CALL THEIR OWN HOME AND CHOOSE TO BLAME THE REST OF THE WORLD FOR IT.
July 14th, 2007 at 9:01 am
Perhaps you should consider blocking this particular IP address using .htaccess. It’s not a long term solution but might as well serve as a warning for others as well.
July 14th, 2007 at 9:08 am
aiyor what happened lar..?
July 14th, 2007 at 1:38 pm
Poor Claire, always getting attacked by random spammers. I never understand why they choose to pick on you, of all people.
July 14th, 2007 at 3:46 pm
I think you’ve been spammed. I got it too on one of my older posts. Other fellow bloggers have also reported the same thing - the sudden surge of hateful and discriminatory comments that is sometimes irrelevant to the main topic.
July 15th, 2007 at 1:04 am
and i was thinking…wahlaueh 15 comments on a blogpost about getting a facebook account?!
July 15th, 2007 at 3:01 am
Here is the info for 60.53.185.224:
TELEKOM MALAYSIA BERHAD TM.NET.MY
WILAYAH PERSEKUTUAN region
KL city
TM could tell who is that IP assigned to.
July 22nd, 2007 at 12:03 am
a smart spammer would have used a proxy site, i’m not encouraging spammers though
July 26th, 2007 at 1:05 am
from malaysia-today.net
Judge Datuk V.T. Singham has ticked off the police and the deputy public prosecutor’s office in Ipoh for their shoddy investigation and prosecution and questionable standards that led to the acquittal of five men charged with murdering a 21-year-old engineering student. They were Azman Ismail, 26, known as Man Datuk, the son of former Ipoh mayor Datuk Ismail Shah Bodin, Mohd Shafiq Azren Mohd Salleh, 23, Mohd Hafiz Ibrahim, 23, Mohd Faizal Radzali, 26, and Mohamad Rizal Abu Hassan, 23. They, with another person still at large, were charged in 2004 with the murder of Mohd Hosni Fadzil Mohd Amin, 21, at Ikhwan Auto, Hala Rapat Baru 20, Kinta Light Industrial Area near here between 3am and 8am on Dec 22, 2003.
The Judge said the prosecution had “failed miserably” to prove a prima facie case against the accused. On 16th December 2006, we carried this story ‘Believe it or not’: high profile murders Malaysian-style. We listed the high profile murders of Mustakizah Jaafar (1988), Hasleza Ishak (2002), Norita Shamsudin (2003) and Altantuya Shaaribu (2006). Now there is this high profile murder of Mohd Hosni Fadzil Mohd Amin (2003).
We must not forget the high profile case where a Department of Environment Officer, who had uncovered massive corruption in his organisation, was obviously murdered and thrown off a building but which was instead ruled to have committed suicide.
In the case of Mustakizah, Norita and Mohd Hasni, the accused were all either acquitted or no one was even charged for the murder. In the case of Hasleza, the people who most obviously paid to have her killed were never brought to Court. Altantuya’s high profile murder will not be heard until 2008 but there is already much mystery surrounding the whole matter. These are all high profile cases because high profile people are involved in one way or another with these cases.
When a crime is committed, it is the duty of the Police to investigate. In high profile crimes where high profile individuals may be either implicated or involved and yet they are still able to walk scot-free, it may imply that the Police are dirty or compliant. If the Police are involved, then they certainly have the expertise and the opportunity to cover up or ‘kill’ the criminal investigation in many ways. For example, they can ‘fail’ to detect material evidence like the original murder weapon. Without a murder weapon, smart defence lawyers can get the murderer acquitted. Or they can investigate a case and say it was a suicide because ‘no evidence of foul play was detected’. The DOE officer was said to have committed suicide.
About twenty years ago, my law lecturer said that if criminals were willing to pay RM20,000 then someone can make their ‘Investigation files’ disappear. Once the file disappears, it would be very difficult for the Prosecutors to prosecute the criminal in court.
According to another practising lawyer, even in simple traffic accident cases, it can make a very big difference to insurance claims if the ‘Police Investigation File’ says broken glass was found on the left side instead of on the right side.
The crime scene can also be bungled up. In the Norita Shamsudin murder case, Norita’s friends testified in court that they first found her lying dead in her room but after two mysterious policemen handled the crime scene and left, she was found with her hands tied behind her back. Then her hand phone records were not even included as part of the trial evidence. The night she died she was believed to have made phone calls to VIPs on her hand phone. The Public Prosecutor never queried or questioned any of these issues. Just like Altantuya’s immigration records, Norita’s phone records may have been erased too.
The defence counsel in Norita’s case was therefore overjoyed because in the light of such gaping holes in the Prosecution’s case, the accused Hanif Basri was certain to be acquitted. Eventually this is what happened.
Court of Appeal judge Datuk Mokhtar Sidin rapped police investigators, noting “gaping holes” in the case. Mokhtar said for the prosecution to establish a prima facie case, it had to prove that death had occurred, that Hanif was responsible for Noritta’s death and that the act was done with the intention of causing her death. The Court of Appeal said the only fact proven was that Noritta was dead and nothing more.
The Police can also fail to detect key witnesses. This happened in the September 2005 Fu Xian Juang murder trial. High profile and very rich businessman Koh Kim Teck, Mohamed Najib Zulkifli and Resty Agpalo were acquitted without their defence being called. High Court judge Datuk Abdul Musa said there were clear unresolved doubts and unanswered questions in the prosecution’s case and criticised police for failing to trace a key witness — Razbean Md Tab. The Judge said, “Not even one of the 39 prosecution witnesses’ testimony in the 36-day trial gave any proof to implicate Koh in the murder.”
Also, Koh’s woman companion, a Chinese national who was a key witness who was initially detained along with Koh, was never charged or brought to Court. She then went ‘untraceable’. A Chinese newspaper however did trace her and photographed her – all the way to her hometown in China.
Now, in this high profile murder in Ipoh where the accused included the son of a former Mayor of Ipoh, the Police sent a youth with a Bachelor’s degree in Business Administration as the Investigating Officer. And the forensic team arrived at the murder scene a full six days after the event. Certainly the crime scene was not ‘preserved’ and evidence was destroyed. All this most definitely helped to ‘kill’ the case. Is this standard operating procedure for the police? Obviously not.
After the police investigate a crime, there is another big hurdle which is the Public Prosecutor’s office. The police present all the results of their investigations (or the lack thereof) to the Public Prosecutor otherwise known as the Attorney General’s Chambers. Now, if there is crookedness and dishonesty involved here, then there is another round of opportunity for crookedness at the AG’s Chambers. It is the Prosecutors who decide who to charge or who not to charge, and under what Law or Act someone should be charged. For example, in the high profile murder of Siti Hasleza in Perak, the accused who were finally charged in Court included fishermen and unemployed village morons who had absolutely no motive to kill Siti Hasleza. Quite obviously they were paid by someone to kill her yet the high profile person who was in the background was not even questioned in Court or charged along with the other accused. Why? Why did the Public Prosecutor allow the high profile person to walk scot-free?
Crooked Prosecutors can also charge the wrong person – just for the sake of appearances and to close the case faster. And to make the high profile criminals walk scot-free.
The arrest and trial of Hanif Basri in the Norita Shamsudin case points towards this. It was obvious from day one that Hanif was innocent. The Judge noted that Hanif and Norita were seen happy and laughing together just before she died. In fact, he and Norita were always happy and laughing whenever they were together. Based on this point the Judge said the Prosecution had not even proved Hanif’s motive for the murder.
But the fact is the Prosecutors are not stupid. They knew this way before hand.Yet they went ahead and charged Hanif (obviously the wrong guy) and let the real murderer walk. They knew exactly what they were doing.
The crooked Prosecutor can also fail to ask the right questions in Court or fail to present the correct evidence in the Court. In the Altantuya case, the Prosecutor may present evidence that C4 was used to blow up Altantuya. But was this the real murder weapon? And what if the Prosecutor does not present evidence to prove the source of the C4? Things like this will give rise to the ‘gaping holes’ and may just acquit the accused. The Prosecution may not examine and present facts which can prove that Altantuya had knowledge of the hundreds of million Ringgits bribe paid for the RM4.1 Billion Scorpene submarine deal which may have resulted in her murder.
In the case of Altantuya, the Prosecutor has already prematurely proclaimed in public that ‘no one else’ was involved in her death. But the case has not even been heard in Court yet. What the Prosecutor is actually saying is that in the event all the three accused are found innocent by the Court, they will not be reopening the case. The real murderers can remain scot-free. Come what may this case will be closed.
The Prosecution’s omissions and commissions can therefore ensure that high profile criminals remain scot-free. What can we conclude from all this? Malaysia is a really Third World country. There is no more decency and civilisation in this country. If you are high profile – say if you are rich, politically connected or serve the ruling elite, then you can literally get away with murder. This is the truth in this country.
But the Police and the AGs Chambers must bear something in mind very carefully. What if one day there is a change in Government or there is a change of heart in the Government? For example, what if the Norita murder is reopened someday and all the feigned complicity is made bare. Where then will you run and hide? Can you run and hide at all?