'I am 110 percent not mad'

Lawyer VK Lingam's younger brother V Thirunama Karasu today vehemently denied that he was of unsound mind, as claimed by the embattled lawyer.

During his testimony today, Thirunama was asked pointedly by commission member Mahadev Shankar if the claims made by Lingam were true.

Mahadev: Are you mad?

Thirunama: I am 110 percent sure I am not mad. That was not true. That was a serious allegation against me.

He also said that he was asked by eminent psychiatrist M Mahadevan to personally write a statement about his ‘mental' conditions so as to justify a referral to the psychiatric ward.

"Mahadevan told me to write the letter so he can get me admitted in the psychiatric ward.

"He told me to write bad about myself because he was briefed by my sister (VK Lashimi) so this will help in my psychiatric (warding)," Thirunama said.

Thirunama also admitted to feigning mental illness after being coerced by his brother and sister - believed to be Lingam and Lashimi - and three lawyers.

Lingam's lawyer Thayalan: Were you admitted to a psychiatric ward at Universiti Hospital?

Thirunama: Yes. I was told to go put up an act there.

Thayalan: After being discharged, you went back again to the emergency room to seek further treatment?

Thirunama: After given home leave ... my sister got angry and asked me why I was discharged so fast. I told her the doctor was getting suspicious (that I was not really mentally ill). So I put up another act and went to the emergency room saying that I was suicidal. They gave me a jab to calm me down and I was transferred to GH (Kuala Lumpur General Hospital).

Thayalan: Now you are telling the commission that you put up an act and was able to convince at least two consultant psychiatrists that you were mentally ill?

Thirunama: I was forced day and night and was under tremendous pressure. So I had to do this. I was under threat ... they confused me. They promised me money.

Thayalan: I am suggesting to you now that you are putting up an act. Do you agree?

Thirunama: Certainly not true. I have been consistent in my statement. I have no revenge or grudge. I am doing this without fear or favour.

Thirunama said that he was forced to put up an act after he gave a statement to the ACA who was investigating allegations of Lingam's involvement in judicial corruption.

‘I'm not taking revenge'

Former chief justice Eusoff Chin's counsel Hazman Ahmad then highlighted seven references in the statement about Thirunama wanting to "teach Lingam a lesson".

Thirunama however dispelled attributions of revenge, reiterating that he was instructed to write the statement.

Thirunama vehemently denied blackmailing Lingam following his dismissal from employment at Lingam's law firm in 1996.

When asked by Thayalan, Thirunama said that he had worked for Lingam unofficially from January 1995 and then officially from January to June 1996 running errands and performing odd jobs around Lingam's house.

According to Thirunama, he was sacked after he protested Lingam's treatment of their younger sister Chinmaya Devi where Lingam allegedly threw a pen and verbally abused Chinmaya.

Thirunama also denied making demands from Lingam for a bungalow, a Mercedes Benz, a large sum of money and for Lingam to pay for his children's education.

"That's not true. Big lie," he said.

Thirunama also dispelled Thayalan's suggestion that his two police reports made in March 16 and 19, 2007 were attempts to "get back" at Lingam for their fall out.

‘I’m the witness’

The inquiry also heard that Thirunama had received an allowance from his older brother Sivaparanjothi Velupillai but Thirunama said it was not an inconsistent payment. Thirunama added that he was able to support himself and his family.

Thirunama also stood by his previous testimony that he had taken Eusoff ( photo ) and his wife to view a house in Kampung Tunku which Lingam and business tycoon Vincent Tan had intended as a gift to the former chief justice.

Thirunama also maintained that he had delivered handbags to Eusoff, bought a handphone for Eusoff on Lingam's instruction and had driven Lingam to Eusoff's house for discussion.

When questioned by Eusoff's counsel Mohd Fauzi Mat Zain, Thirunama said that he could not remember the precise date and times of those events.

Fauzi then pressed Thirunama, saying, "I'm suggesting to you that you cannot remember because it did not happen. Do you have witnesses to substantiate your allegations?"

Thirunama's answer drew laughter from the audience, "No. I don't have any witnesses. I am the witness."

New witnesses

Before today’s proceedings ended, Malaysian Bar representative Christopher Leong furnished a statutory declaration from solicitor Rajendra Navaratnam relating to the evidence given by former chief justice Ahmad Fairuz last week.

Leong who declined to make public the contents of the submission informed the commission that the statement relates to Ahmad Fairuz’s dealings with Lingam.

Commission chairperson Haidar Mohamed Noor then warned all counsel not to release any material to the press which the panel has yet to rule on.

Ahmad Fairuz is the judge believed to be the person speaking to Lingam as featured in the infamous video clip.

The commission has been extended to Wednesday with the possibility of two new witnesses lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah ( photo ) and VK Lashimi.