Saturday, June 20, 2009

Is there a foul play in A. Gnanapragasam’s death or for the matter the post mortem?- R.Shan (Human Being)

Sure we all know there is and will believe this as another cover up but what is more intriguing and interesting is how the police decided to use Dr Prashant S. Ambekar to conduct the post mortem.

Now that is a food for thought, you may actually believe everything is true in the post mortem report as it done by Dr Ambekar. That is one tough question, don't you think so?

The wife saw the husband on Friday, June 12, 2009 with bruised eyes. The deceased complained to the magistrate on the beating and torture by the police, yet the magistrate never summoned the police to conduct a medical test on him.

Then, on June 15, 2009 he is found dead in the toilet in the police station. When the wife and sympathizers visited his body at the mortuary, no cell phone and cameras were allowed.

On June 16, 2009, Bernama reports that Selangor police chief Khalid Abu Bakar said Monday night the cause of Gnanapragasam’s death was "toxaemia secondary to spontaneous peritonitis" or blood poisoning due to a bacteria infection in the intestines. He said the autopsy at Universiti Malaya Medical Centre (UMCC) at noon yesterday was done by pathologist Dr Prashant Ambekar. Meanwhile, Petaling Jaya police chief ACP Arjunaidi Mohammed said the autopsy did not trace any bruises or injuries on the body.

Relating back to Kugan’s case the same Dr Ambekar had disputed the finding of the Selayang fellow and Health Ministry Director-General Dr Mohd Ismail Merican implied that Dr Prashant S Ambekar relatively lack of experience had contributed to mistakes in his postmortem findings.

Doesn’t this sound all too fishy that the same doctor is now on top of the chart for the police to conduct the post mortem for a murder of a Malaysian Indian in custody. After all Dr Ambekar became infamous for his finding in Kugan’s murder, can anyone question him here on the finding of A. Gnanapragasam? Are we witnessing another conspiracy theory or is it my figmentation of imagination?

My figmentation of imagination is the police using the very same doctor who had captured the confidence of the people in Kugan’s case is now being coerced by the might of the government to state otherwise? Your guess is as good as my guess.

I don’t mean to insinuate anything here but I think you get my jive that the government tacked along with the mighty police force is actually getting smarter in their attempt to hoodwink the public in their so called governance without any impartiality.

For you and me, another episode in Bolehland Malaysia, but for humanity more so for a Malaysian Indian family just another sad tragedy that never will see the light of justice in the pretext of all is fair and equal in a pseudo Malaysia.

R. Shan (Human Being)


Police continues to harass Uthayakumar at his residence on June 13 & June 14, 2009. On June 13, 2009 at around 11.00pm, five (5) policemen for apparently no reason visited his present residence in his fiancées flat and started harassing her old and sickly parents.

They were questioned about his whereabouts in threatening and intimidating manners that shocked these elderly couple. Further they proceeded to take pictures of the flat both inside and outside of it.

Are we leaving in a police state? What right do the police have to enter into premises to question and take pictures. Is this a raid? Even so, is it not correct that a warrant should be produced for such unlawful invasion and trespass of private property?

The police has to get their act right that the public cannot be subjected to such arbitrary act for their whims and fancies without the due process of the law.

Uthaya Kumar was a prisoner of conscience and now a free man, not some thief in charade to hoodwink the police force. Is he hiding from you? Why does the police resort to tactics to intimidate and harass some old folks using the power that is granted to them by the public ie the voters and the tax payers unless the police force feels that it is above the law and it could do anything it wants, when it chooses, and their victims are their choice at the expense of the peace loving public.

HINDRAF condemns the act of the police on the intimidation acts that are carried out on Uthaya Kumar, nor condones to such behavior in a so called democracy state.

What is even more baffling is, there is a permanently parked van outside the flat that obviously watches his movement, please see attached photo, so HINDRAF fails to comprehend why then 5 policemen needs to enter his fiancées flat at 10.00pm and intimidate some old folks.

HINDRAF questions’ such actions and motives by the police force nor will it stand quietly to address such issues as at large, it is not about HINDRAF, or Uthaya Kumar but the erosion of human liberty in Malaysia to live peacefully without a misguided mechanism through government tools ie the police, judiciary, executive powers to trample over basic life, liberty and pursuit of happiness in a multicultural society to flourish in Malaysia.

HINDRAF does not want a police state in Malaysia, nor does the public desires for one, so an overtly act by the police force disregarding the process of law needs to be questioned before Malaysia actually becomes a police state.

Thank you.

P.Waytha Moorthy
HINDRAF – Chairman