Sunday, January 27, 2019

Inconsistencies in Burmaa's testimony in Altantuyaa's case

My letter to Malaysiakini (submitted Thursday 24th but published today, as follows:

"Amy" Burmaa Oyunchimeg

New Malaysia promises, among many things, justice and fairness for all.

Thus, it is important that when so-called "evidence" is presented against or for anyone under legal charge in Malaysia, these must be ascertained, diligently scrutinised and verified.

In your news article titled 'Defence grills Altantuya's cousin if 'photo with Najib' exists', Burmaa Oyunchimeg, the cousin of the slain Mongolian national Altantuya Shaariibuu and a witness in the RM100 million civil suit brought by Altantuya's family over her death, testified under oath that she saw the photographs of Altantuya with two men - Abdul Razak Baginda and the "deputy prime minister" named Razak.

On her testimony, I would like to draw your attention to a Malaysiakini article on the Altantuyaa case published 12 years ago, specifically on June 29, 2007.

In 2007 in the Shah Alam High Court, when Burmaa was asked by deputy public prosecutor Manoj Kurup whether she had personal knowledge of Altantuyaa's disappearance, she answered she knew Altantuyaa came to see Razak who happened to be the only person she knew in Malaysia.

Note her "original" testimony - Altantuyaa came to see Razak, presumably Razak Baginda, the only person she knew in Malaysia.

Burmaa said: "I know why she wanted to see Razak Baginda - I have seen pictures of Altantuya with Razak and a government official."

Note again her "original" testimony - that besides Razak Baginda who was then the only person Altantuyaa knew in Malaysia, there was a "government official".

Following that, our late Karpal Singh, who was holding a watching brief for the deceased's family, sought permission from the court to pose a question on the photograph allegedly of Altantuyaa with Razak Baginda and the government official.

Very much against the protest of Manoj, Judge Mohammed Zaki Mohammed Yasin allowed Karpal to question Burmaa about the alleged picture. The veteran lawyer proceeded to ask Burmaa what was depicted in the photograph.

Burmaa said again, "She (Altantuya) was having a meal at a round table with Razak (Baginda), a Malaysian government official and other people."

Karpal then asked her on the identity of the government official, and she replied: "I remember the name Najib Razak, they had the same name, 'Razak'. I thought they were brothers. I asked her (Altantuya) if they were brothers."

Subsequent to a brouhaha which ensued, a lawyer for one of the accused policemen accused Karpal of "coaching" Burmaa.

Seeming insinuation

Let us recapitulate the report on Burmaa's testimony, namely:

(a) besides Razak Baginda, there was a "government official" and not her description today of the "deputy prime minister". The 2007 evidence could be surmised as an important piece of "untainted" evidence which she mentioned twice, initially to the DPP and then subsequently to Karpal Singh;

(b) Razak Baginda was the only person Altantuyaa knew in Malaysia;

(c) even when Burmaa subsequently named the other person besides Razak Baginda as Najib Razak, allegedly "coached" by Karpal as put forward by a lawyer for one of the accused policemen, she still did not mention the description "deputy prime minister"; and

(d) the so-called "photograph" alluded to by Burmaa did not and does not exist. The only photograph in this sorry tragedy was the one that had been photoshopped showing the trio at a dinner in Paris.

Given these inconsistencies, the 2007 testimony versus the 2019 testimony, I wonder at Deputy Law Minister Mohamed Hanipa Maidin's seeming insinuation at Najib as reported in the former's statement: "The difference is that (when) he [Razak Najib] accused the cousin of lying, it was done outside the court and not under oath."

What an interesting development!


  1. I think I want to write a book "DAP Politics of Allegation and Perception (Bringing Change To A New (Urban) Malaysia).

  2. There is no dispute that Altantuya was murdered. The current and past governments agree on that.

    What is in dispute is WHO were the murderers. Just the two Special Forces policemen currently on death row or some other person(s), was there a mastermind etc.

    So why are we even having this civil suit? Just pay the family compensation for their loss and suffering. If 100 million is too much then go through mediation and settle the amount out of court.

    If more evidence comes up (eg when Sirul in Sydney starts singing) then the criminal case can be re-opened. But until then just compensate the family. Altantuya was murdered and that is that. No amount of table banging in court is going to bring her back.

    1. why wait until Sirul comes back when there is alresdy an elephant in the room (Malaysian prison), namely, Sirul's boss, Chief Inspector Azilah Hadri. Why teh bullshit brouhaha pover Sirul when Azilah Hadri has been languishing in Malaysian priosn since he was convicted - it is because he refused to play ball and blame someone 3else?

    2. Looks like I twisted soneone’s underwear too tightly over Sirul. That was not the main point of my comment. My main point was in my first three paragraphs. Altantuta was murdered. Her family is suffering. Just compensate them. The guilty murderer is either already in jail now or will be in the future. That doesn’t matter.

  3. Wow...Najib defender earning his ....cold hard Aussie Dollar cash.

    1. shame on you Monsterball when journalist Soon Li Tsin was the MKINI reporter who recorded all Burmaa Oyunchimeg said in court, and which I reproduced faithfully as per the 2007 MKINI news article

      Soon Li Tsin was the former girlfriend of Nat Tan who was Anwar Ibrahim's PA. Thus there was no UMNO or BN cybertrooper nor reporter involved

      Au contraire, you're the gross dedak makan-er for your mindless remarks

    2. Sweetie Soon Ok Tsin did NOT write the above spin,

      Blogger and Najib propagandist Kteemoc did that.

    3. try hard to win your dedak eh?

      read this and then STFU


    Congratulations to Najib for the Cameron Highlands win.

    Najib's cyber-warfare team can expect a generous bonus payout after the victory.

    You (Eh..em..Ah Tee) have worked hard and deserve it....wakakakaka.

    1. childish, deceitful and slanderous, but those have been your weapons everytime you ran out of nsnstantial points

    2. typo * should be "substantial" points


    Former DAP veep Zulkifli Mohd Noor passes away.

    One of the last Malay leaders in DAP...(not counting the young cikus imported by LGE , TP and the Young Turks wakakakak)

    1. I am personally very much saddened by Zul's departtue. One of the few principled DAP leaders. Sadly marginalised by the Young Turks.

      al Fatihah & rest in peace Zul you have always been an ace to me

    2. Takziah kepada keluarga. Semoga rohnya dicucuri rahmat dan ditempatkan bersama roh-roh para salihin. Al-Fatihah..

  6. There are a few important issues which everyone seems not to take interest but instead are just playing according to what politicians only wanted since the day it became a political storm in Malaysian politics.

    Why is a Malaysian life worth less than a Mongolian national based on the court awards previously where public servants and the Govt. are found culpable for the death of the victims? Can anyone even recall any Malaysian life being awarded even more than RM 1 million in compensation?

    It is impossible that when a Deputy Prime Minister or Defence Minister is in any foreign county that their intelligent agencies do not have photographs, videos, audio tapes of who, when, where he/she meets, dines, stays etc. There is something not right when Malaysia do not even request those foreign agencies for such evidences or they are not leaked out when it involves a murder case.

    Is the Mongolian working for the French as another Matahari? Why is the Mongolian Govt. also keeping quiet about their national being murdered? Are the Australian Govt. helping the French Govt. or the ex-BN Govt. in preventing suspects from being deported under the guise of Australian anti-death penalty laws?

    Wouldn't it be a mockery of such a reasoning when drugs, arms, murderers facing death penalties in Malaysia also run and seek asylum in Australia? Would Australia also allow suicide bombers facing death penalties in their countries to also seek asylum?

    The public is more interested in when the criminal case is reopened and who ordered the murder and why? Who are more afraid of the facts being known whether it is finally acquitted or found guilty at this stage of the game when those in power caught up with this murder case are no longer a threat to any political party?

    It seems more and more likely that efforts to subvert the true facts and reasons are those collaborators and accessories to crime in the enforcement agencies, intelligence agencies, military and spy networks.