Prosecution: Samirah,two teenagers responsible for Cradle Fund CEO’s death

- Advertisement - [resads_adspot id="2"]

The Court of Appeal was today told that Samirah Muzaffar and two teenagers were responsible for the death of Cradle Fund chief executive officer (CEO) Nazrin Hassan.

Deputy public prosecutor Datuk Yusaini Amer Abdul Karim submitted that since the three respondents were the last persons seen with the deceased (Nazrin), it was reasonable to infer that they had the opportunity to kill him.

“In this case, there is no denying that none of the witnesses saw the killing of the deceased. However, the three respondents were the last people seen with the deceased before the deceased was found in the burning room,” he said, adding that Samirah entered the deceased’s room three hours before the fire.

Yusaini was giving his submission in the prosecution’s appeal against the decision of the Shah Alam High Court to acquitting Samirah, 48, who is also Nazrin’s widow, and the two teenagers, who are now aged 20 and 17, of murdering Nazrin.

Hari Anggara

The court acquitted and discharged the three accused after finding that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case against them.

The three of them and an Indonesian woman, Eka Wahyu Lestari, who is still at large, were charged with killing Nazrin, 45, at his house in Mutiara Damansara between 11.30pm on June 13, 2018, and 4am the following day.

Yusaini Amer also submitted that the High Court judge had erred in not finding out who was with the deceased between 11.30pm on June 13, 2018, and 12.46pm the following day.

“Referring to the testimony by 28th prosecution witness (SP28) Muhammad Nabil Faqih Abdul Rahim, who was the deceased’s driver, SP28 stated that he sent the deceased home at 11.30pm on June 13, 2018.

“At that time, certainly all the respondents and Eka were at home and there was no dispute by the defence about this. The next day, the deceased was found dead in the house where all the respondents and Eka Wahyu were,” he added.

Yusaini Amer said Nazrin’s death was due to “blunt injuries” or “double blunt impact to the head” caused by a blunt weapon such as a hammer.

The testimony by investigating officers Abdul Halim Zulkefeli (SP15), from the Selangor Fire and Rescue Department, and ASP Nizam Daud showed that there was no evidence of a break-in into the deceased’s room.

The investigation also found that the deceased’s Blackberry S2 phone did not explode and that the fire in the room was done deliberately.

Meanwhile, counsel Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, representing the respondents, submitted that there was no low burn or seeping of petrol in the areas that were said to have petrol.

“It was clear from the photos that the areas behind the bed frame and floorboard showed that there were no traces of petrol,” he said.

He also submitted that the learned High Court judge had erred in holding that the fire was intentional and not accidental and that the cause of death was due to blunt impact and not complications of blast and blunt penetrating injuries.

A three-judge panel led by Datuk Vazeer Alam Mydin Meera, sitting together with Datuk Ahmad Zaidi Ibrahim and Datuk Azhahari Kamal Ramli, set tomorrow to continue hearing the submission.

On June 23 this year, the Attorney General’s Chambers filed a notice of appeal against the High Court’s decision in acquitting Samirah and the teenagers on the murder charge.

A week later (June 30), Samirah and the teenagers filed an appeal to challenge certain findings of facts by the High Court, including the findings that the fire that broke out in Nazrin’s room was “done deliberately”.


It was also revealed in court today that Nazrin allegedly intended to divorce his wife Samirah Muzaffar before the incident.

Yusaini said that Nazrin’s close friend, Eliza Elias, was informed about the marital issues between the couple and the CEO’s intentions.

He said Nazrin had confided in Eliza, who is also the 29th prosecution witness (SP29), about the divorce issue discussed with Samirah.

“Furthermore, SP29 and SP47 (Nazrin’s personal assistant, Nurul Anisah Abdullah) informed the court that Nazrin’s performance at work began to deteriorate after he married the first respondent (Samirah).

“The CEO was facing financial problems, and there were disputes between the couple.

“Although all the respondents (Samirah and the two teenagers) tried to show the court that their marriage was a happy one, the reality was that Nazrin wanted to divorce the first respondent,” he said.