Mohd Ibrar
KOTA KINABALU: The culpable homicide trial of Pakistani trader Amir Ali Khan Nawaty, 40, yesterday heard that a witness was standing about 10 meters from the spot where a girl fell off a moving lorry.
However, the 36th prosecution witness, Mohd Ibrar, 22, of Pakistan, told judge Duncan Sikodol that he did not see the lorry driver’s face nor the victim’s face.
Amir is charged with causing the death of Norikah Saliwa, 16, from a moving lorry at Jalan Km 2.8 Langkon, Kota Marudu between 11am and 12.30pm on November 25, 2012.
He faces up to a maximum 10 years behind bars, or with a fine, or both, if found guilty under Section 304 (b) of the Penal Code.
“I was near the road and saw there were no cars to my left but when I looked right I saw a person ‘fly’ out of a lorry,” he said during examination-in-chief by deputy public prosecutor Raja Zaizul Faridah Raja Zaharuddin.
At that time he had stopped his car and called a friend Mohd Gani, who was at home to come to the scene, adding that he noticed the lorry had a white body with a dark back.
He also noticed that a Perodua Viva was behind the lorry and Gani had asked the Viva driver (Turagis Lamum, 33rd prosecution witness) if Turagis saw the lorry’s plate number but he replied in the negative.
After the encounter, he left the scene to run his errands because he noticed that it was going to rain.
To a question by the prosecution, he said the lorry never stopped after the victim fell and he estimated that it was travelling about 30 kilometers an hour.
Ibrar testified that he never left his vehicle that had stopped behind a bus stop shack at the area when he witnessed the victim fall.
He did not visit the police station to provide a statement until two to three days after the incident.
Earlier, forensic officer DSP Ravi Chandran, 52, testified that he did not collect any hair samples or nail clippings from both the accused and victim for examination.
He said he and his investigation team could not find any trace of hair inside the alleged lorry that was involved in the incident.
Ravi added that the collection of nail clippings does not come under his evidence-taking duties but is under the investigating officer.
“This will be done usually in the hospital where the investigating officer will request for the nail clippings for the purpose of analysis,” he said.
During cross-examination by defense counsel Rakhbir Singh, he also said despite collecting fingerprint samples at the passenger mirror and rear mirror of the lorry, he did not find any prints on the door handle at the passenger’s side.
He agreed with counsel Rakhbir that he would not know if the door at the passenger’s side was opened by the victim or some other person.
Ravi said all evidences collected by the forensics team would be handed to the investigating officer of the case to be sent for further laboratory analysis.
He further said the findings of all the collected evidences were of no concern to him because it does not fall under his duties as a forensic officer.
“Our duty in forensics is only to collect evidence and we will give it (evidences collected) to the investigating officer concerned for his further action,” he said.