Malaysiakini correspondent (Jimadie Shah Osman) reported this piece on Jun 30th –

(Quote) “ PKR de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim had been forewarned and was asked to be careful when taking in 23-year-old Saiful Bukhari Azlan as a staff, according to a party source. However, Anwar ignored the warning …He (Anwar) was told to be careful of the individual due to his suspicious background when he joined the office administration,” said the source. The same ‘warnings’ had been given to other party leaders after Saiful had became close to Anwar and the staff at his office following the March 8 general elections.

“I have also given addresses of several blogs discussing the boy (Saiful). I’m not sure if he (Anwar) read them or not,” said the source.

According to the source, Anwar did not reply to the particular email detailing the blogs.

Malaysiakini has been made to understand that two-weeks ago, Anwar had asked another aide to persuade the source concerned to retract a posting cynical of Saiful on his blog”.

(Unquote)

That is correct. By standards of legal criteria, if the then Judiciary had been independent, Anwar ought to have been found, in law, not guilty of sodomy (instead of otherwise).

As undergrad2 said in the other thread, the question of whether he was really someone inclined “that way” or not is irrelevant – and I certaintly won’t want to prejudge or comment on that – but as a matter of law, he should have been and was entitled to be acquitted . There is also no doubt whatsoever that it was a clear case of political persecution by TDM under a judicial system that was not independent (Lingam Enquiry refers). (And Anwar was the only one against whom such a crime of unatural sex under Penal code was, in recent memory invoked).

Yes a person (1) completely heterosexual can be falsely convicted as guilty by a Kangaroo court when there is political persecution in way no different than (2) one who could be also actually (say) a homosexual or bisexual as alleged by prosecution.

When due process of law is not followed, when judges are obviously partial, when evidence is slipshod and contaminated, confessions extracted from coercion, dates of alleged offence are mixed up, prosecution witnesess gave unreliable testimonies either because they’re lying or plain confused by accused’s ‘dream team of clever lawyers, then who ever charged by the state for the offence of sodomy – whether he belongs to category (1) or (2) above – is entitled to a complete acquittal because the standard of beyond reasonable doubt necessary for “legal guilt” has not been established. To do otherwise is travesty of justice.

Necessarily the fact that no “legal guilt” should be found in above set of circumstances cannot prejudge the separate issue whether a person is actually heterosexual, homosexual or just in between ie bi-sexual at all times or siometimes etc. Only close associates will know better.

Don’t forget if prosecution were conducted in a manner botched as stated above and there is aparent travesty of justice, even if a person had really committed sodomy, no reasonable man looking from the outside at the bias way the judicial system works, will believe it!

Don’t get me wrong : I am not commenting one way or another on Anwar’s predilection on matters of private sex.

It is not my business and frankly I don’t have any personal knowledge and I don’t care to speculate, though I think to be fair to him he is entitled to be presumed to be like the rest of majority of us ie. a person of heterosexual inclination.

But just so that it is clear – even if he were (hypothetically) otherwise [ie (say) a closet “bi” and hypocritical about it, I (speaking for myself only with no expectation that others follow suit) can find no great fault about that – given, a society where the majority always think negatively of and marginalise persons of different or (to them) deviant sexual behaviour.

I know many gay friends of both sexes, and other than their different sexual preferences, are otherwise very normal people, and we should not draw a connection to link their sexual predilection with their other morals as a person much less capability as a leader.

The caveat is that I am not particularly religious because if I were otherwise, then I may not take such a view.

Undergrad2,

Well sometimes it is an ‘acquired taste’. I have not had the opportunity in formative years to attend and savour boarding life in a certain eminent educational institution with pseudo Greco-Roman architecture in front of a rugby field that has supposedly produced many political and corporate earth shakers, where, according to “reliable” anecdotal evidence (some of it hearsay but some recounting of personal experience) after a rugby match, some of these naughty boys thought it was ‘British tradition’ (I wonder wherever they got this idea?) for the winning side to demand from the opposite losing side a ‘trophy’ and the losing side ‘sacrificed’ the one who then happened to look a trifle effeminate, albeit gawky with thin lanky legs for the sacrifice! What started as experimentation in such innocuous ways by some curious young boys was discarded by most in their later maturer years, whilst a very few others never quite got rid of what they learned. :)

On 30th June Peace Hill police forensic team of 15 visited Unit 1151 of Kondominium Desa Damansara in Kuala Lumpur (a luxury condominium in Damansara said to be worth RM2.2 million) at about 12.15pm, spent more than five hours sweeping through the unit.
A separate team of investigators were also at the condominium guard house, inspecting the log books, interviewing security guards and going through hours of CCTV footages.

No one alleges nor was it ever reported that the luxurious Condominium Unit 1151 of Kondominium Desa Damansara worth RM2.2 million and its rental rates range between RM7, 500 to RM15, 000 belonged to complainant Mohd Saiful. It could be used without belonging to him.
The forensic team swooped in there because the alleged incidence of sodomy was supposed to have taken place there. Of course they would also check who the owner is and whether he/it is related to any principal parties involved in the on-going investigations to avail use of the apartment.

The United States said today it would oppose any politically motivated investigation or prosecution of Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim facing fresh sex misconduct charges – Malaysiakini’s report Jul 1, 08.

Tom Casey, spokesman for the US State Department said, “certainly, we would be concerned that anything that is done be done in a way that is appropriate, that is a legitimate investigation of charges that might exist under Malaysian law, and would not be anything that was a politically-motivated investigation or prosecution.”

The country’s international image is down the pits in the wake of international news (CNN & the like) of the Altantuya Shaaribuu murder case – and now this “potentially” another repeat sodomy case all having some association with Malaysian politics.

What do you think the world would think of us? From Third to Fourth World!

To ensure impartiality of investigations, the government should solicit assistance of the FBI and/or Scotland Yard to assist in forensics.

It is good for all parties. Any other way will not be convincing before the Court of Public Opinion, a large segment of which has already lost confidence in administration of criminal justice (whether or not such an opinion holds in all cases).