YOURSAY | ‘If Najib ever serves his 12-year jail term, it would be the miracle of the century.’
IndigoKite6964: What will your response be if someone is asked what happened and their response begins with a long story? Or if asked why they were late for work and it takes 30 minutes to have it articulated?
Here, there are 94 points why the High Court and subsequently the Court of Appeal got it wrong. It appears that former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak is fighting for his life, doing his best to wiggle out, the last kick, so to say.
So, he needs a counsel from our colonial masters to argue the 94 points and hopefully, one point works and the whole case against him is discharged not amounting to an acquittal? Just fishing for a technicality?
I call that fishing in a pail of water. Besides, what a shame that Najib’s lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah needs the help of a Queen Counsel to join Najib in this fishing expedition. Shafee is plainly declaring there is a knot in his fishing line and it is stuck.
To say that the one-man High Court judge is wrong, that’s one thing. To say a three-member panel voting unanimously to uphold the High Court’s judgment is wrong? That’s quite another thing.
Ah well, he has the money, which could well be ours, to defend himself to the hilt. I confess, I read three lines of his defence and felt I have better use of my time. I wonder if the Federal Court judges would feel the same.
Hrrmph: Ninety-four grounds? The more grounds in an appeal means the more valid the appeal is?
Indeed, it is highly improbable the judges made so many mistakes. Hence the lengthy appeal suggests that most of the grounds are unnecessary verbosity or cooked-up frivolities.
In all manner of science, the shortest and most efficient way to a destination or objective is lauded and preferred. Is it that, in law, bombast and dressing up of the facts and truth is the way to go?
Hang Babeuf: When an appeal rests upon and cites 94 grounds of appeal, you can be sure that none of those grounds is very strong or plausible – and that the appellant’s lawyers know it!
Najib can add a further 95th ground of appeal: his nasi lemak breakfast last week was not very good – and it’s all the court’s fault too!
Betul Malu Bukan Maluapa: The trial of former Goldman Sachs manager Roger Ng in New York, US took only eight weeks to conclude in which Ng was found guilty on all three counts of money-laundering and criminal charges relating to the 1MDB global financial scandal.
But the court case of this convicted felon, Najib, continues after four years.