The right of reply

Enough is enough. People who proclaim to fight for freedom of expression and free media but censors other's legitimate reply based on their whims and fancy, must realise that on the internet, they cannot suppress peoples' legitimate right to reply and express contrarian views. This blog welcomes all views. ~ Ellese

The bala and Deepak SD issue

2 Comments

Since this has been repeating countless of times I thought of putting a stand so that I can cut and paste this stand whenever I comment after this.

First principle. I always object to trial by SD. I don’t understand the penchant of Malaysians to believe everything in SD. Even hearsay SD is regarded as a truth. Truth has many perspectives and it’s our duty to hear all and decide what is right. And invariably those who sensationalize SD to me don’t have proper motive of telling the whole truth. The object of publicity is for some interest or another should make one to be circumspect.

Let me illustrate where Malaysians got it totally wrong. RPK issued a hearsay SD that someone told him X matter. Later on the person who told him denied the statement and so RPK had no choice but to withdraw it. But Malaysians being gullible believe in X matter. no body cared to veracity of X. Hearsay is apparently sufficient.

2) bala and Deepak are of disreputable characters. They do anything for money. And they admittedly one way or another have commited or are willing to commit a wrong for money. Man, I stay away from whatever they say. The next thing you know, they’ll be saying the opposite simply because they were paid by someone. Currently who knows they’re being paid by those who wants to bring down BN.

3) Let’s put the facts of what transpired so that we decipher how sick a person can be in playing this despicable charade. Now 1st SD set out by Bala an X matter. 2nd SD set out saying that the 1st SD was under duress and deny the X matter.
So is there perjury? Will not be. Why? coz the 1st was made under duress and thus not counted (in layman’s terms. It’s like obtaining a forced confession).
So what we should have done was to establish whether the first was under duress or not.

But can’t the 2nd SD be set aside later by Bala by saying its under duress also?. Possible but entirely improbable. Why? Because bala received the money. There is no way that you can say its involuntary when you accept some huge money.
So why am I telling this?

It’s to show how sick haris Ibrahim is. (see http://harismibrahim.wordpress.com/2012/12/19/dear-bar-council-the-name-of-the-tan-sri-lawyer-is/) He knows all this but purposely make an issue out of nothing due to hatred. He is trying to assassinate a character ie the tan Sri lawyer. He imputed there’s a gross misconduct. In the first place we don’t even know whether tan Sri is bala’s lawyer or otherwise. If not then there’s no duty to bala. If there is in a worse case scenario there cannot be perjury (since the first was under duress) and thus no misconduct for failing to advice as alleged by haris.

What haris should demand of bar council was an investigation as to whether the first SD was actually under duress. Then there’s a valid issue of misconduct. But the problem is it requires bala n Deepak to testify and we know how credible they are.

Haris is sick to assassinate tan Sri’s character knowing full well that a case against him is not probable. He just wants to bring disrepute because of ABU. Gila betul perangai some people.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “The bala and Deepak SD issue

  1. Perangai orang yang percaya dengan ABU memang tak boleh diubah. All they have to do is to create the wrong perceptions on their enemies and even if later they have to retract their false allegations, the bad perceptions already stick as a stigma which will do the intended destruction.

    The only logical counter-attack by the victims is to explain to the public – keeping quiet and ignoring the allegations in dignified silence is more damaging or else sue them if the allegations are directly made.

  2. Haris, bala and Deepak? Bunch of criminals I accuse them.

    I remember some time back about an article written by RPK in Malaysia Today. In it he claimed that our Prime Minister’s wife tracked the hill through thick jungle and viewed poor Altantuya blowned apart.

    I wrote a commentary to Malaysia Today disputing that event (which was not published) raising a question on why would a Deputy Prime Minister’s wife would want to go through such an hassle in committing a murder. being a person in authority, if at all she wanted to get it done, she just needs to give orders.

    Many years laters, RPK (probably remembering my comment made earlier) sounded the same rhyme by not only retracting his earlier accusation, but also claiming such an event did not take place.

    Ellese, please visit Unscientific Malaysia, where you will find an article written by My Love Bird Marina mahathir on Common Sense. Most Malaysians seems to be suffering from the lack of this gene.

    Haris, what credibility he has? He signs The Universal Declaration on Human Rights. I did that too. If my memory serves me right, Article 14 protects them from this kind of Super Hipocrates. On one side he declares he is a human rights advocates, and on the other hand he despises them being in malaysia.

    On one side he claims to be a lawyer, but his approach reveals his stupidity on very basic knowledge of law and the way it operates. He should be grateful that this Tan Sri Lawyer has not sued him to hell. he must be not only thankful to this Tan Sri, but also grateful he left Haris rice bowl intact.

    Malaysia Sejati-Dulu Kini Selamanya.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s