I refer to the Malaysiakini report Abdul Razak: Najib not involved .

The whole picture of the Altantuya saga would be more complete if Najib Abdul Razak, the deputy prime minister, should now come out and state irrevocably that Abdul Razak Baginda was not at all involved in the murder of the Mongolian model.

Yes, then it would be a classic case of ‘You scratch my back and I scratch yours’. Razak must be naive to think that people are going to believe his self-confessed version of events when so many issues remained unresolved.

Hello, what happened to the statutory declaration (SD) of private Investigator, P Balasubramanian who in his first SD, made an unequivocal statement that Najib was acquainted with the murdered model and that their relationship was more than platonic.

Not only was it more than platonic, their alleged sexual tryst was luridly described in detail. And just as quickly as the first SD appeared, a second SD was hastily authored by the private investigator to dismiss the first SD on the grounds that it was made under duress. It was never made clear where that ‘duress’ originated from.

And after having made the second SD to deny the authenticity of the first SD, he made a disappearing act worthy of David Copperfield .

And till today, this David Copperfield protege has simply vanished without a trace and the police are acting with indifference over the two contradictory SDs which have thrown the whole Altantuya case wide open.

And what about blogger Raja Petra Kamarrudin's statutory declaration alleging the wife of Najib was present at the murder scene?

These three SDs could have been compelling evidence to implicate the personalities mentioned in the SDs and yet for some mysterious reasons, they were never exhaustively investigated by the police or pursued by the public prosecutor.

And the most shocking turn of events was the acquittal of Abdul Razak Baginda, the central figure in this murder case, without his defence being called. Now, the two remaining accused are asked to make their defence although they are without any motive or connection whatsoever.

And as expected, the prosecutor did not even attempt to appeal Razak’s acquittal with the lame excuse that the judge made a finding of fact that according to them was indisputable.

Without further investigation of the role of the DPM and the subsequent acquittal of Razak Baginda in the Altantuya murder case, the whole case crumbles for want of a motive by the two body guards of the DPM who had no rhyme or reason to execute this Mongolian beauty.

An even in the unlikely event that both the bodyguards were to be convicted for the murder of the Mongolian woman, there is every likelihood that both will not serve any prison term. Has any one ever wondered why the faces of these two police personnel have been zealously shielded to the extent that there is no media publication of photos of these two?

And is it not possible that even after conviction, these two men could be surreptiously released without the knowledge of any one other than those who had planned to protect the identity of these two men?

The Altantuya murder case becomes even more perplexing when two men who are strangers to the murder victim are being charged with a violent crime that was designed to totally obliterate any evidence and trace of the Mongolian woman.

And why would any one attempt to eradicate immigration records of the Mongolian’s entry into the country? All these purported acts to manipulate evidence lend further credence that unseen hands and unseen actors behind this murder of the Mongolian beauty.

It is a farcical attempt for the court to try and convict two men who at best would be scapegoats for the real perpetrators.