CSI Malaysia and misinformation

14 Aug 2009 35 Comments

by Dr Hsu in Malaysia

There is now a suggestion that TBH could have committed suicide, according to a Malaysiakini report on the inquest.

This is from Malaysiakini:

Pathologist Dr Khairul Azman Ibrahim, testifying at the Teoh Beng Hock inquest, said he did not see any strong evidence that indicated the political aides’ death was a homicide.

He said his finding was based on four factors. They are:

  1. There were no signs of struggle based on injuries suffered by Teoh and based on the evidence gathered at the 14th floor of Plaza Malasam, from where Teoh is believed to have fallen to his death,
  2. Checks on Teoh’s body revealed no DNA marks from Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission officers and other witnesses,
  3. A pen (from MACC) was intact in Teoh’s pocket. If there was a struggle, the pen would have been thrown out in the melee, and
  4. Injuries suffered by Teoh was caused by a fall from a high place.

Since this case is still on, I refrain from commenting whether such views could hold water,since the case is still on, and the coroner has not made any judgement yet,   and I urge the readers to do the same..This is despite we know that there is no motive for him to commit suicide..

There is an intereting write up about TBH, and I would like the readers to read in Hartal MSM. The link is :  http://hartalmsm.wordpress.com/2009/08/13/teoh-boon-hock-independent-csi-findings/

……………………………………………………………………

The Malaysian Insider reported this:

KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 14 — RTM reporter Eliana Mazlan admitted that she does not know which party Karpal Singh belongs to during his sedition trial in the High Court today.

She also does not know who Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim is and only described him as the president of Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR).

Eliana, the prosecution’s second witness, was subjected to a rigorous cross-examination by defence counsel Jagdeep Singh, and appeared rattled by the lawyer’s questions on the third day of Karpal‘s sedition trial.

She could not identify the component parties of Pakatan Rakyat and was taught a history lesson by Jagdeep on what transpired in the 2008 general election.

Eliana was also unable to show a clear understanding of Jagdeep’s questions on the transcript of the tape recording during Karpal’s press conference on Feb 6 this year.

The 26-year-old reporter had only been on the job for two months on the day of the press conference and her testimony is crucial to the introduction of an RTM video recording of Karpal’s statement to the press.

I can understand that a lot of young people are not interested in politics, and they do not read newspapers or follow news programs on TV.

BUt for a reporter reporting for a major news organisation like RTM who does not know what component parties are there in Pakatan, or who is Anwar Ibrahim and Karpal Singh, how is she going to report to her news agency? It is therefore no surprise that she was unable to show a clear understanding on the transcript of the tape recording during Karpal’s press conference.

This is again a case of expert having no expertise and a clear case of loss of excellence..

Just the other day, another reporter from a MSM misunderstood the meaning of   ‘ultra vires’. When a reporter misunderstand the speech of a certain person, it can lead to dangerous consequences .

Imagine , the reportings of these people are followed by thousands of people, all of whom will be misinformed…

Someone once said: If you read MSM, you are misinformed; if you dont read them, you are not informed.

I wonder what is the standard of hiring?