Prosecution: Can Saiful's rectum be the crime scene?

The Anwar Ibrahim sodomy trial will today see defence witness Dr Brian McDonald cross-examined by the prosecution, which is assisted by chemist Dr Seah Lay Hong.

Seah and another chemist, Nor Aidora Saedon, received flak following McDonald's contention yesterday that they did not fulfill or follow established standards and standards in examining DNA samples submitted to them by the police.

McDonald (right) had also questioned their methods in arriving at their conclusions, and queried their failure to include certain procedures - such as ensuring the DNA samples were clean and without contamination.

Among the unanswered questions, he noted, were the lack of evidence to indicate where the actual DNA samples came from, as well as how samples retrieved from Anwar's accuser - Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan - could be in “pristine condition” when they were submitted more than 100 hours after the alleged sodomy act.

The Australian expert also said he could not dismiss the possibility of Saiful's own sperm being present in his anus, based on the findings.

It also remains to be seen whether Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak and his wife Rosmah Mansor will take the stand this week as anticipated.

LIVE REPORTS

8.58am: PKR's Sungai Petani MP Johari Abdul is in court.

Also in court are witness Dr Brian McDonald, lawyers Sankara Nair and CV Prabhakaran and the team of prosecutors led by solicitor-general II Mohd Yusof Zainal Abiden.

9.10am: Anwar arrives with PKR president Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail and several supporters. He shakes hands with Johari and sits beside him.

9.18am: Court starts with High Court judge Justice Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah presiding. McDonald takes the stand. Defence counsel Ram Karpal informs the court that he has one more question to ask McDonald about an Australian case.

McDonald's report dated April 24, 2011 is marked as evidence.

9.21am: Cross-examination being done by solicitor-general II Mohd Yusof Zainal Abiden.

Yusof goes on with the 2007 Australian case where the appellate court had rejected the appeal.

Yusof says he will show McDonald is not an expert despite earlier saying he was impressed with the Australian credentials.

9.27am: Yusof says the world of DNA has advanced so much. Yusof claims some of the credentials obtained by McDonald are obsolete.

9.30am: Yusof (right) asks whether in 2002 McDonald was required to attend any examination programmes.

McDonald replies there is no formal research certification in the examination.

9.31am: McDonald says he is a certified NATA evaluator of forensic labs for the ISO 17025 certification.

9.36am: Yusof continues to attack McDonald's credentials as contained in his curriculum vitae.

Yusof asserts that McDonald's qualification obtained in 1992 is obsolete due to the developments in the field since.

9.41am: McDonald says he has not attended any forensic DNA testing course.

Yusof: Have you been trained formally? To interpret, to analyse?

McDonald: I am trained formally as a scientist.

Yusof: Do you train people?

McDonald: Yes, in all areas including interpretation.

9.45am: Lembah Pantai MP Nurul Izzah Anwar arrives.

Yusof asks how McDonald had acquired his expertise, to which the Australian replies he worked in the field, did testing and did analyses.

Yusof: When was the last time you conducted DNA testing?

McDonald: “I conducted some of them in 2004. These are done by robots now. I am a senior scientist, and those things are done by junior people and robots."

9.52am: Yusof says that in ISO 17025, they would visit and get to know the scientists and whether they have the necessary qualifications.

"The scientist, as part of the accreditation, the scientist Seah Lay Hong and Nor Aidora , must consistently be tested," says Yusof.

McDonald replies in the negative.

He says only senior scientists are only allowed to interpret results.

"They have to have the necessary qualification."

10.03am: McDonald says he does not know whether the lab accreditation is conducted every two years.

10.05am: McDonald says he did not conduct the tests in his 2004 lab in Australia, as it was done by robots.

"I only interpret the results."

10.07am: PKR Youth chief Shamsul Iskandar Mohd Akin walks in.

Yusof now refers to a Brunei case where McDonald was hired. Yusof says the court had not accepted the foreign expert's (McDonald) evidence, although the judge was impressed with the government chemist.

"I don't know I am not here in a popularity contest," McDonald quips.

10.14am: McDonald says he disagrees that the Brunei case did not accept his evidence.

10.15am: Yusof asserts that McDonald gave evidence on DNA in the Brunei case, and that the Australian was not able to persuade the Brunei court.

McDonald says he does not know about that.

10.21am: Yusof now refers to an Australian case where he said the court thought McDonald lacked neutrality.

McDonald says that was the judge's opinion, but was not established as fact.

10.27am: Yusof refers McDonald to another case where a retrial was ordered and the judge had reservations about McDonald's testimony.

"The court has issues of his credibility in this case."

Justice Zabidin allows McDonald to explain further.

10.34am: McDonald explains that on appeal, the judges accepted his evidence.

10.41am: McDonald reads from a paragraph of the same case where it was said that he was a truthful witness and the jury should accept the evidence.

10.46am: Yusof reads from another case which describes McDonald as not an expert witness.

Former Bukit Bintang MP-turned opposition member Dr Lee Chong Meng walks in court.

10.59am: Yusof continues attacking McDonald's credibility and expertise by showing cases where the court rejected or questioned his evidence.

11.03am: Yusof reads out from an article that said McDonald does not have the necessary experience and qualifications in molecular genetics or general knowledge of DNA, and that he relied on journals to gain knowledge.

11.08am: McDonald says these are statistical matters. He admits that he does not have an expertise in sub-population.

11.11am: McDonald says some of the views expressed by the judges was the court's opinion.

11.16am: Yusof indicates that the prosecution has finished questioning on McDonald's qualifications.

He wants to go into the next subject of semen.

Yusof asks for a half-hour break. Justice Zabidin allows.

12.04pm: Trial resumes with Yusof cross-examining McDonald. He goes on to cite several cases. McDonald says he has testified in 150 cases, and he cannot remember all details.

12.08pm: Yusof says McDonald was hired by the defence. He asks McDonald to give short answers to his questions.

Yusof: Is this your area of expertise?

McDonald: Yes.

Yusof: You must be fair?

McDonald: Yes.

Yusof: You must not make a prediction?

McDonald: I do not fully understand it.

12.12pm: Yusof asks McDonald whether he is an expert to determine matters about semen found on samples taken after 56 hours and given to chemist 48 hours later.

McDonald replies he is an expert.

12.17pm: Yusof refers McDonald to a 1982 journal which refers to the long time after which sperm was still found.

"This is our reference, the one that is reported. Even in genitalia, it (sperm) can last for 120 hours," Yusof states.

12.24pm: Yusof shows McDonald a Thai-language journal, but the Australian expert refuses to answer questions on the matter since he cannot understand what is written.

Yusof: On assumption that this article is true...

"No," McDonald replies emphatically.

CV Prabhakaran: I object. We cannot ask based on assumptions.

12.30pm: McDonald says there is no base value.

Yusof says the journal says semen can lasts in a vagina for 19 days.

McDonald: I can't agree because I cannot understand the (language) base (it is written in Thai).

12.36pm: Yusof asserts that based on the journal, it is not unusual that one can find semen on swab after it was retrieved after 113 hours.

The judge asks for break. The proceeding will continue at 2.30pm.

2.40pm: Court resumes.

2.45pm: McDonald says that it is not surprising, but odd that sperm in this case was found after 56 hours.

Yusof now refers to another article - containing the name of Dr David Wells  - that said sperm can be recovered after 72 hours. Wells is the Australian forensic pathologist hired by Anwar.

He had testified that semen or sperm retrieved after 36 hours would not be pretty.

2.48pm: Yusof: You said it would be difficult to find sperm after 56 hours?

McDonald: It is unusual. One in 3,000 is unusual.

Yusof: After 56 hours and another 48 hours handed to the chemist, the method of preservation in room temperature and the swab should be frozen?

McDonald: I would agree and that the slide to be air dried and frozen. The samples should also be air-dried or frozen. I would place it in the freezer.

2.52pm: Yusof shows DNA a practical guide book to McDonald, and points to page 56.

Yusof: Based on this literature, and what Dr Siew Sheue Feng said, is to place it in air tight containers ... It is kept air-tight and put it in room temperature.

Can Saiful's rectum be the crime scene?

McDonald: It would be where the crime took place.

3.02pm: Yusof: When Dr Mohd Razali Ibrahim examined the rectum, there was no fluid and there was moisture in the peri-anal area.

McDonald: The literature says exactly what I had said.

3.05pm: Yusof asks how long it takes for swabs to dry.

McDonald: It depends on one swab than the other. It depends on the moisture. I cannot say how long it takes to air-dry a swab. You do not put it directly in the container as it (would) have to be air dried.

Yusof: If it is wet?

McDonald: What do you mean?

3.15pm: Yusof refers McDonald to Wiley Encyclopedia of Forensic Science. He says semen stains can be retrieved after laundering. You can retrieve spermatozoa.

McDonald says he agrees: "You can retrieve it."

3.23pm: Yusof says if one goes by the literature, you can maintain samples at room temperature.

McDonald disagrees, sayd it would depend on the temperature and whether it is kept in a bacterial environment.

3.26pm: McDonald says freezing will stop bacterial growth, which will affect the DNA.

3.27pm: Yusof says McDonald asserts that slides (on a plastic receptacle) should have been done.

McDonald this is based on the international literature.

Yusof: Is it the medical doctor or forensic scientist (sic)?

McDonald: It should be the doctor. But the important thing is that you have the slide to look at. What you get is to look at when the sample was taken.

3.36pm: McDonald explains that what is needed is a slide to know at that time what the conditions of the cell were.

3.40pm: Yusof asks how many sperm cell you need to develop a profile.

McDonald says you need 50 out of 100 million (following ejaculation).

3.42pm: Yusof says that in this particular case, Seah conducted the AP test, and McDonald says it is not consistent with the literature?

McDonald: Yes, it is not consistent as there must be semen in abundance.

Yusof: I read the notes of proceeding page 868. For swabs of B1 to B9, two tests were used: the PSA and immuno acid test to test the presence of semen.

Seah said she only conducted the AP test on the clothing. How could you tell (the court) that Seah said should not (have conducted the) AP test. Where is your honesty?

McDonald: I am not sure. Honesty is not an issue.

(Laughter by prosecution).

3.49pm: Yusof asserts that McDonald is trying to mislead the court.

McDonald says he was making the comment as to how much semen (was there).

3.52pm: Yusof asks for the trial to continue tomorrow.

3.55pm: Court is adjourned and will resume tomorrow at 9am.

Source :http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/176299