Third day of questioning for dithering chemist

The cross-examination of chemist Dr Seah Lay Hong continues today with questions from defence counsel Sankara Nair, taking over from Ram Karpal Singh who spent the whole of yesterday questioning her.

Yesterday, she refused to be drawn into a speculation as to why the seminal stain on Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan's underwear is on the front and not at the back.

The witness was also asked why she did not record at least two 'high' allele readings from the DNA analysis equipment, which suggests that two 'mystery' DNA profiles were found on Saiful's black trousers and low rectal swab.

Following today's cross-examination, Seah will then be re-examined by DPP Noorin Badaruddin to help fill the holes in the prosecution's case.

LIVE REPORTS

8.28am: Anwar Ibrahim arrives with Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail.

8.44am: Hearing begins with Justice Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah entering the courtroom.

8.48am: Sankara is cross-examining. Seah says she is competent and diligent in her work, because of her qualifications.

"Whatever findings will have an effect on the accused as this is forensic science," she says.

8.52am: Seah says her chemistry lab has the ISO 17025 certification.

"This is to set the standards of testing to ensure they are carried out correctly, reliably and are of internationally acceptable standards."

Plenty of seats still available in the public gallery.

9.02am: Seah ( left ) testifies that the Chemistry Department has a guideline on quality assurance for semen samples.

9.06am: She says she does not know whether the police or hospital have quality controls in collecting samples.

Sankara argues that Seah should know all this as it is part of quality control by her department.

"How can you assure the quality of the findings if the (sample) collection process is in question?" he asks.

9.10am: Seah says the chemistry department often issues guidelines to the police on how to preserve and document samples.

"If not it will be rejected."

9.19am: Seah says she has examined the packages for this case and all of it, including its seal, are in order.

9.23am: She says the department also has a pro-forma form in accepting the exhibits. The form is electronically documented and cannot not be printed.

Sankara presses Seah as to why this is so. The witness replies that printing can only be performed by the "link administrator" attached to the Chemistry Department, whom she cannot instruct.

However, Seah says, she can retrieve them, but cannot guarantee whether this can be produced today.

9.33am: Seah is then asked whether it is good practice to photograph exhibits or samples upon receiving them from the police, as a measure to detect possible tampering.

Hesitating, Seah says: "Not necessarily so."

Posed the same question again, she refuses to reply. Sankara asks the question a third time. No reply.

Judge Zabidin asks Seah whether she agrees or disagrees with the defence counsel, to which she replies ambivalently: "It could be good practice."

The judge takes this as a "yes".

9.41am: Sankara shows an apparent discrepancy on the labelling of the cotton swabs B4 and B5 in a recepticle.

The B5 swab, taken from Saiful's peri-annal area states "26/6/08". But witness acknowledges the '6' to note the month of June looks like an '8'.

Furthermore, the sample was actually taken on June 28, 2008.

Shown another recepticle, marked B6, Seah reads read the date as "28/6/08".

Sankara asks the witness if she realises that something is amiss, to which she replies: "Normally, we do not act on this."

9.47am: Sankara asks about Seah's duty and protocol, to which she replies: "We are not bound to reject (the sample)."

An argument ensues between the prosecution and Sankara.

Sankara says based on international practice, such samples would have been rejected if such discrepancies were detected.

But Seah disagrees.

Anwar, from the dock, is heard uttering, " ini doktor MCA ".

9.53am: Seah claims she had noted this discrepancy.

"The labelling was not done by me. I disagree that I only know it in court today."

An argument ensues between Solicitor-General II Mohd Yusof Zainal Abiden and Sankara ( right ), with Yusof saying Sankara should not be making statements from the bar.

10.08am: Seah claims the plastic recepticle used to contain the swabs is "tamper proof".

When shown by Sankara that the label can be taken off, Seah agrees that it was not (tamper proof).

Sankara asks whether it will be good practice if the red wax seal is placed on both sides of the recepticle opening, Seah agrees.

10.50am: Lead defence counsel Karpal Singh quizzes Seah on the multiple DNA profiles found on Saiful's anus.

Karpal suggests the conclusion that can be drawn is that Saiful is a "passive homosexual".

Seah says she is unable to answer this.

Karpal says this is the only logical conclusion, since more than one DNA profile was found.

Seah says she neither agrees or disagrees.

10.55am: Karpal ( right ) asks about the HKL pro-forma form which states that there was "attempted sodomy", but Yusof objects to this.

11.02am: Yusof says the question posed to the chemist is not proper as she is not the maker of the pro-forma form and that she did not examine Saiful.

"The law does not allow this," Yusof said.

Karpal says he has the right to refer Seah to this document as it is an exhibit.

"It is a document stating attempted sodomy, as we have a document to back it up. If it is 'attempted', how can there be DNA in Saiful's anus. That is my question," the senior lawyer says.

Yusof replies the three doctors never concluded that there was 'attempted sodomy'.

11.09am: Court adjourns to allow the judge to rule on the prosecution's objection.

11.40am: Justice Zabidin allows the question from Karpal.

Karpal asks whether, in a case of attempted sodomy, will there  not be other people's DNA inside the anus of the victim?

Seah says it will not be possible.

11.43am: Defence completes cross-examination. Karpal applies to leave court.

DPP Noorin Badaruddin (right) picks up with the re-examination. She asks what Seah understands by 'attempted sodomy'.

Seah replies 'failed sexual assault'.

11.48am: Seah says calibration checks are done periodically to ensure that the DNA machine is performing correctly.

11.57am: In reply to a question from the prosecution, Seah says the machines used were functioning properly.

12.01pm: Seah maintains B7, B8 and B9 only have the DNA of "Male Y" and of Saiful.

12.10pm: Seah says further that permutation cannot be termed as a conclusion, as it is a hypothetical situation on determining a DNA profile.

“Permutation is just a mathematical exercise, but it is not a conclusion," she adds.

The defence suggests that based on the combination of DNA readings, there could be more than three contributors to the semen stain found on Saiful's anus and peri-anal area.

12.32pm: Prosecution applies to continue re-examination in the afternoon. DPP Noorin says there is a lot more to ask.

Justice Zabidin says the sitting will resume at 2.30pm.

2.36pm: Court resumes with DPP Noorin Badaruddin’s re-examination of Seah.

2.47pm: Seah describes how the 12th and 13th alleles belong to Saiful. 

2.56pm: Seah waves off the 2006 publication 'Recommendation on the Independent study on Mixture' by the International Society of Forensic Genetics raised earlier by lawyer Ram Karpal Singh.

"Science is a dynamic field as it always changes. The procedure has changed," says Seah.

On a question by DPP Noorin the witness agreed that procedures recommended by the journal could be adopted on a case to case basis. 

3.10pm: Seah said she did not adopt the threshold value test or "T-value" as this is a theoretical approach.

3.23pm: Seah said the contributors in the swab marked as exhibit B5 share similar alleles (number of repeat units).

Showing the example, she said Saiful's allele in a loci showed a reading of 29 and 32, while ‘male Y’ is represented by the allele of 29 and 30.

"The similar allele ‘29' is a result of an occurrence of masking," she said.

3.41pm: Seah denies the semen stain on the lower part of Saiful's black trousers could contain other DNA other than that of male Y and Saiful.

"There is no other DNA of any other person other than ‘male Y’," she tells the court.

3.46pm: Seah says Saiful as well as male Y are the DNA contributors in B8 (high rectal swab).

She said in B9 (low rectal swab) male Y is identified in the semen extract.

"The main contributor is male Y. Saiful's allele is on the non-sperm extract," she said.

3.50pm: On the source of sperm extract in the swab B9, Seah attributed the donor of the semen and sperm to "Male Y".

4.20pm: DPP Noorin asks about the seminal stain on Saiful's anus, whether it could flow to the back or front of the trousers and underpants.

Seah replies the seminal stain is found on the front and central region.

DPP Noorin asks if is possible that the semen may have flowed to the central region.

Ram Karpal is objecting to the question citing that it is speculative.

4.25pm: The judge disallows the question because it is speculative.

4.29pm: Court adjourns till tomorrow with Seah's re-examination.