Wintess Protection Unit

Have you read the Malaysiakini piece on "Key witness: My life was threatened"

Yes. The SB and/or the police is at it again. Like what they did in the Anwar case.. giving promises, cajoling, threatening... just so the witness will break down and eventually submit to their psychological pressure and say things which are planted for them to say and not what is necessary the truth...

("Rohaniza told the court that she had given a different version of events to her earlier statement to the police because of pressure from the investigators. "I was under tremendous pressure. I said something but something else was recorded by investigators," she told Mohd Zaki.

"They wrote things I never said," added Rohaniza, who testified in her police uniform, with tears in her eyes. "While I was remanded, they tortured me," she said, referring to threats that she would be investigated for murder.)

Isnt there a life recording in the interrogation room? But then of course these bargers can switch it off anytime... but then if what Rohaniza said is true, then how can the prosecutor sought to impeach her?

If these prosecutors are professionals who are serious about their work of upholding justice and be seen to possess integrity they should instead initiate an investigation into the allegations raised by Rohaniza.

Who interrogated her? Is the camera and recording on during the whole interrogations? Rohaniza also said the following:

Rohaniza told the court that before her cautioned statement was taken, a police officer from the Serious Crime Unit offered to free her and Azilah from the charge of murdering Altantuya. - Isnt this an interference to the course of justice? And who is this police officer to have the power to absolve someone from a criminal charge - (that is if both of them are found guilty) He must've greater power that the Judge, the PM, the DPM and the whole lot sitting in the Parliament put together.

Shouldn't the Hon Judge and the sworn to uphold justice, truth and the law of the country Prosecutor be more interested to find out who this omnipotent police officer is?

She added that the officer who took her cautioned statement also promised to shorten her remand period. As such, she said, she agreed with whatever was stated in the cautioned statement made under Section 112 of the Criminal Procedure Code on Nov 16, 2006 - Isnt there a law governing how long a suspect could be remanded for investigation? By offering a suspect to shorten the remand period in return for a cautioned statement is like saying if you listen to me then I will consider doing this for you ... shouldnt this be a contention point to be highlighted? Can any right minded people with integrity believe that under such condition the cautioned statement make is make without duress and is true?

Rohaniza could not remember the name of the officer. She also said that the same promises were made to her by a number of officers from the Technical Assistance Unit while she was under the 14-day remand. "I was kept isolated in a hotel room... before giving the statement. I was under tremendous pressure. They pressured me, saying I could not go home and would be locked up again." - They pressured me --- man, this statement alone is enuf for the sworn to uphold justice, truth and the law of the country Prosecutor to initiate an investigation on what really happened during the interrogation!

Since Rphaniza has brought up all these irregularities happening in the police station as well as the threat on her life - I think the relevant authority should put her in a Witness Protection Unit and instead of putting her as the Key Prosecution Witness should be the Key Defending Witness or the Key Witness to the Truth .. whatever-la... and her statement must be taken in a transparent way with the observation from representative either from Suhakam, Gerak or TI-M.