Coroner rules no need to recall forensic experts.
Dr Ahmad Hafizam Hasmi (centre) and Dr Mohd Shah Mahmood (left).
Police have confirmed receiving police reports on Saturday from two specialist doctors of Hospital Kuala Lumpur (HKL) who were witnesses in the inquest into the death of fireman Muhammad Adib Mohd Kassim.
Selangor CID chief SAC Fadzil Ahmat said the reports were made at Subang Jaya police station at 9.28 pm on that day.
Apparently, the police reports were related to threats as well as attempts to influence the findings of the two forensic experts by another witness in the case.
“We are investigating the case under Section 189 of the Penal Code for threat of injury to a public servant,” Fadzil said on Tuesday (April 23).
He said no further statements would be made as the inquest is still going on.
Both experts from HKL have argued that Adib had, on his own volition, come out of the Fire Department’s Emergency Medical Rescue Services (EMRS) van through the front left passenger side, was hit from the back by the reversing vehicle’s open front left passenger door, which sent him hurtling forward and landed on his chest on a roadside curb.
Another expert, however, had pointed out several contradictions in their report.
Earlier, some quarters had alleged that he was beaten by a protesting mob.
On Monday, the issue of recalling one of the HKL experts to testify in the inquest became a bone of contention during the proceedings.
Inquest conducting officer Faten Hadni Khairuddin, in her argument, urged the court to consider an application to recall the 24th witness, HKL forensic expert Dr Ahmad Hafizam Hasmi, 40, who carried out a post-mortem on Adib.
However, lawyer Syazlin Mansor, who is representing the Housing and Local Government Ministry, the Fire Department and family members of the victim, objected to the request, arguing that all witnesses had been given fair and equal opportunity to testify.
Meanwhile coroner Rofiah Mohamad today delivered the ruling over the issue.
She said there was no need to recall Ahmad and Dr Mohd Shah Mahmood.
She said they had stood by their initial findings, and that there were no new developments to be raised.
Rofiah said she was satisfied with the evidence submitted in the inquest proceedings.
She also said there had been no request by the Coroner’s Court for a new experiment to be carried out, as one was already conducted by Ahmad on April 12.
“If the court allows the 24th witness (Ahmad) to provide a rebuttal against witnesses, namely the 29th witness (Prof Dr Shahrom Abd Wahid), then Shahrom has to be recalled as a witness as well.
“Shahrom may end up performing a new experiment to prove his theory. Then, the inquest will continue with no end in sight,” she said.
Shahrom previously argued that Adib had died as a result of having been beaten up.
Rofiah also said interested parties have a duty to ensure that a resolution is reached in the inquest.
“I am satisfied that the evidence submitted is sufficient for me to reach a verdict,” she said in rejecting the application.
Conducting officer Hamdan Hamzah then told the court that a revision would be filed over Rofiah’s decision.
He applied for a stay of proceedings pending the appeal to the High Court, which was granted by Rofiah.
Rofiah subsequently fixed May 10 for mention.