The High Court judge here fixed Friday to deliver his verdict in the trial of former Selangor Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Dr Mohd Khir Toyo.
In the trial Monday, the defence submitted that that there was no evidence showing Dr Khir had given special treatment to Ditamas Sdn Bhd director Shamsuddin Hayroni.
Defence counsel Kamarul Hisham Kamaruddin said that as such, there was no unlawful interference by the accused with any of businessman Shamsuddin's projects.
"If the second prosecution witness (Shamsuddin) is expecting some kind of untoward advantage in the form of a special treatment, that cannot amount to any duress of any kind because that is motivated by greed.
"There must be clear coercion...is there a jot of evidence to even suggest the accused said anything untoward? There's nothing in the past, present or future," he said in his submission at the end of the defence's case.
Dr Khir was called to enter his defence on a charge of obtaining for himself and his wife, Datin Seri Zahrah Kechik, two lots of land and a house at No 8 & 10, Jalan Suasa 7/1L, from Shamsuddin at RM3.5mil which was a much lower price than the RM6.5mil Ditamas paid for it in 2004.
He allegedly entered into the transaction with the knowledge that Shamsuddin had dealings with him in his official capacity as Selangor mentri besar at the time.
The Sungai Panjang assemblyman allegedly committed the offence at the Selangor mentri besar's official residence at Jalan Permata 7/1, Section 7, here on May 29, 2007.
Asserting that the prosecution's charge against Dr Khir hinged on Shamsuddin's testimony, Kamarul Hisham said the latter had failed to show proof that he had been ordered by the former menteri besar to purchase the bungalow and two plots of land in 2004.
The lawyer pointed out that Shamsuddin was charged with abetting Dr Khir and was later acquitted and discharged by the High Court on June 6 after the charge against him was withdrawn.
He said Shamsuddin had since turned into a witness for the prosecution.
"In this case, Shamsuddin stands a witness, earlier a fellow accused and now a witness for the prosecution by virtue of the charge being withdrawn against him.
"The common law has always viewed the testimony of such a witness with utmost suspicion," he added.
Source : The Star
Related News : Value on Khir’s property was unreasonable, witness tells court
No comments:
Post a Comment