The afternoon session of the Teoh Beng Hock inquest today narrowed in on the deceased's broken belt, which the Chemistry Department report said was touched by at least two individuals.

The belt, which was broken at the overlapping strap over the belt buckle, was among 20 exhibits examined by DNA expert Dr Seah Lay Hong, who took the stand as the ninth witness today.

Seah testified that she had found DNA belonging to at least two unknown males on the ripped portion of the belt, and on the back area of the blazer worn by Teoh.

However, of the 157 DNA samples tested, none matched the two unknown males.

Those tested were 14 hospital staff, 49 police officers, 81 Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission staff, two cleaners employed by MACC, eight building maintenance and security staff and three other witnesses.

NONE Asked by counsel Gobind Singh Deo, for Teoh's family, on whether it was possible that that the deceased was held by the belt before it snapped, Seah said, after some initial hesitation, that it was "one of the many possibilities".

Seah later agreed to a suggestion by Gobind that there may have been several people holding Teoh on the waist area before he, purportedly, plunged to his death.

Seah was also repeatedly grilled by Gobind over her investigation procedures, particularly on how she chose possible "contact points" to take swabs for DNA tests.

Gobind wanted to know if Seah was briefed on the circumstances of Teoh's death, and whether the scientist had sighted pictures of the deceased.

Photographs

Seah agreed that she could have asked for the photographs to help her in her work, but didn't because she assumed that the documents "might have been confidential at the time".

"If the (police) had given more information (such as photographs), I would have used it to assist me in making my hypothesis," she said.

Upon further questioning, Seah revealed that she did not take swabs from other pieces of clothing near the waist region.

"If it is good enough for the belt, then why not the trousers?" demanded Gobind, to which Seah explained that the top of trousers was covered in blood, and thus would not be suitable to test for contact points.

At one point, Gobind suggested that Seah "didn't know where to look" for the contact points, to which a defensive Seah retorted by saying it was a "biased question", drawing laughter from the gallery.

Seah further frustrated Gobind when she tried to side step a series of questions.

Gobind: The literature suggests that the DNA expert has to know the circumstances of the case to look for contact points.

Seah: The original question was whether I saw the photographs, which I was not supplied with.

Gobind: (repeating an earlier question) Did you ask the investigating officer for the photographs?

Seah: No. Not at that stage.

Gobind: At any stage?

Seah: At the later stages, the pictures were available on the Internet (laughter from gallery) .

Gobind: Did you ask (the investigating officer) for the photographs?

Seah: I asked for the circumstances (of Teoh's death).

Gobind: (Repeats question) Did you ask the investigating officer for the photographs?

Seah: No.

Site visit

According to Seah, the investigating officer told her that Teoh had fallen to his death and it could have been "an accident or not an accident".

NONE Questions by counsel Rajpal Singh, who is holding a watching brief for the Bar Council, also led Seah to reveal that she did not take swabs from the tears on Teoh's trousers or a button that had dislodged from the trousers.

The inquest continues tomorrow with a site visit by coroner Azmil Muntapha Abas.

Two lawyers from each party will accompany Azmil. The lawyers have been instructed not to tell the press about the time of the visit.

On Monday, government pathologists are scheduled to take the stand.