The Kuala Lumpur Hospital (HKL) had used the wrong methodology when conducting experiments to determine the cause of death of fireman Muhammad Adib Mohd Kassim, a United Kingdom-based senior forensic and pathology expert told the Coroner’s Court in Shah Alam today.
Prof Dr Shahrom Abd Wahid, the 29th witness, said the experiments conducted by HKL forensics specialist Dr Ahmad Hafizam Hasmi failed to determine the object(s) that caused Muhammad Ajib’s injuries.
“The person who ran these experiments is inexperienced because the wrong methodology was used.
“We can’t take things lightly when we are conducting these experiments…he must know the concept and in this case, must know which was the object that had the most contact with the deceased (and caused the victim’s chest injuries),” he testified in the inquest which entered its 38th day today.
Shahrom was responding to Adib’s family lawyer Syazlin Mansor on whether he agreed with the experiment conducted by Hafizam.
The demonstration was aimed at strengthening Hafizam’s theory that the broken ribs suffered by Adib were due to being hit by an EMRS van during the riots.
However, Shahrom insisted that his rough calculation, which took into account the mass and the acceleration of the van, showed that the force generated was not enough to break Adib’s ribs.
“In his (Hafizam’s) experiment, the whole force from the van was transferred to Adib. This is wrong.”
Shahrom was also of the opinion that a report on Adib’s cause of death submitted by Hafizam was incomplete.
Shahrom said the incident involving the late fireman was a complicated case, and the report on the experiments conducted should have been of excellent standards.
“If (reports) on a complicated case like this is incomplete, a complete investigation must be done…to me, the report was satisfactory but not excellent,” he said.
In his testimony today, Shahrom, who is also the former senior forensic and pathology expert at Hospital Canselor Tuanku Muhriz said he has visited the scene of the incident to obtain a clearer picture of what happened.
He went down (to the ground) after finding inconsistencies in the inquest’s testimonies and reports.
“I noticed that the reports and testimonies kept changing.”
“For instance, one testimony stated how the deceased fell on the road shoulder here (the first location where he was believed to have fallen and injured himself), and then suddenly there is testimony that he fell on another road shoulder.
“I was fortunate enough to conduct experiments in both spots. I reject 100 per cent (the conclusion) that the road shoulder was the cause (of his injuries)…it does not make sense,” he testified.
Sharom said he was confident Adib’s chest injuries were from a kick to the emergency medical rescue services (EMRS) van door.
“I observed that each vehicle was of the same height level, and (looked for) objects that were compatible with the injuries. Only the object on the EMRS van door seemed relevant to the injuries sustained by Adib.
“I am 80 to 90 per cent confident that his chest injuries were caused by a kick to the EMRS van door,” he said.
Shahrom also lashed out at Hafizam’s experiment which showed when a person’s body is pushed against the side of the door, it produced a long vertical mark from the chest to the abdomen.
“At a certain angle, you can sustain the injuries only when your chest tilts forward. In this case, that is what likely happened to the victim.”
Shahrom also refuted claims that the scratch marks on Adib’s back could have been produced when he alighted the vehicle.
“I asked firefighters if they had sustained such scratches when alighting fire vehicles? The answers were no.
“In my opinion, when the victim was dragged by force, that’s when the marks were produced.”
Adib who was a Subang Jaya Fire and Rescue EMRS personnel sustained serious injuries in a riot at the Sri Maha Mariamman temple site at USJ 25, Subang Jaya on Nov 27, 2018, and died on Dec 17 at the National Heart Institute.
The inquest was ordered after two conflicting versions of the cause of his death emerged.
One version claimed he was hit by a vehicle while the other said he was beaten by a mob.
Earlier reports:
May 18, Adib Inquest: Court to Seek Engineer’s Opinion on Force That Hit Adib
May 16, Adib Inquest: 1,001 Possibilities How Adib Could Have Fallen and Hit Curb
May 16, Adib Inquest: Expert Unable to Pinpoint Cause of Adib’s Injuries
May 15, Adib Inquest: Forensic Expert Demonstrates How Adib Could Have Been Hit by EMRS Van
May 10, Adib Inquest: Recalled Expert Witness Rebuts Theory Adib Was Pulled Out of Van
Apr 30, Adib Inquest: HKL Doctor to Testify Again
Apr 25, Adib Inquest: Specialist Denies Threatening Other Witnesses, Lodges Police Report
Apr 23, Adib Inquest: Forensic Experts Lodge Police Reports over Alleged Threats, Witness Tampering
Apr 22, Adib Inquest: Conducting Officer, Lawyer Clash on Recalling Forensics Expert to Testify
Apr 18, Adib Inquest: Dummy Test Shows Adib Could Have Been Hit by Van Door
Apr 10, Adib Inquest: Witness Says Possible to Drag Adib out of EMRS Van
Mar 30, Adib Inquest: Assumption Adib Assaulted Dismissed After Autopsy
Mar 29, Adib Inquest: Broken Ribs Only Discovered During Autopsy
Mar 28, Adib Inquest: Impossible for Adib to Have Been Dragged Out of Van