It is harder to prove forced sodomy (Anwar is 63 years old, no physical match for Saiful), but the prosecution cannot give themselves an easier job by framing a charge which is not based on reality.
Let see what other people are saying about this issue.
Cala: Whether the sodomy was the result of consensus reached between two adults, and whether it was the first time that happened (I assume it was), Karpal Singh should ask Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan closely and in great detail.
Saiful, if he is honest, would remember every step of Anwar’s purported sexual advances. On the other hand, if Saiful is less than honest, he would contradict himself at every turn.
Md Imraz Ikhbal: The argument put forth by the prosecutor that it is the prosecution’s prerogative to prefer a lesser charge is frivolous and holds no water. You cannot possibly convict a person of a crime he did not commit even though, as the prosecution contends, he is guilty of a more serious crime.
If one was caught red-handed for daylight armed robbery and even if there were incriminating evidence in support thereof, can he, based on such evidence, be legally convicted for fraud or criminal breach of trust (CBT) even though it is less serious than armed robbery?
The glaring contradiction between the charge and the testimony of the prime witness certainly warrants impeachment. But then again, it is plain naive to place much faith in courts privatised to Umno and BN.
Kgen: “It is the prosecution’s prerogative to charge Anwar (under) consensual (sodomy, which) is a lesser offence and (entails lesser) punishment, rather than non-consensual (sodomy), Mohd Yusof argues.”
This is certainly a perversion of justice. The charge must be based on what really happened and nothing else. It is, of course, harder to prove forced sodomy (Anwar is 63 years old, no physical match for Saiful), but the prosecution cannot give themselves an easier job by framing a charge which is not based on reality.
Forced sodomy is untenable, as Anwar cannot possibly have forced himself on Saiful. Hence, the case will be thrown out. Saiful can change his testimony to say consensual sodomy, but he has already sworn in a mosque that it was against his will. He has trapped himself with his lies.
Multi Racial: When one has told the truth, it will be consistent and nothing can change that. But if one lies, then it is going to be difficult for to be consistent, no matter how thorough you are.
The way I look at it, it is impossible to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Anwar sodomised Saiful, but the government can still go ahead with it because politically, they may have gained some mileage over it. In that sense, it is grossly unfair to Anwar and his family.
As for Saiful, I have no pity for him since he allowed himself to be used in the first place.
Wira: If it was non-consensual, Saiful will have to prove that a well-built 25-year-old man was sodomised by a 60-plus-year-old man because he could not fend off the latter’s advances one-to-one. Any honest court would have impeached the witness and thrown out the case by now.
Keturunan Malaysia: I have on more occasions than I can well remember trying to hold on to men and women, for various reasons, from trying to restrain them for doing something stupid or trying to get away after doing something stupid. Try and you will know how difficult it is – even if you are of the same age, height and build as the next person.
I remember on two occasions in faraway foreign lands that I held onto the pick pockets that almost ran away with my friends’ money (to a tune of as much as US$10,000 cash). In the ensuing struggles, they were fearfully aggressive, as if it were a matter of life and death.
Now try picturing a gone-well-over-the-hill man like Anwar trying to pin down a tall and healthy young man like Saiful against the latter’s will, undressing him and get ‘rewarded’ with the right of way to burrow blissfully into the guy’s asshole without leaving any trace of entry… and then equally blissfully deposit semen.
Of course, it can be imagined. But to do so, one needs to have an extraordinarily weird and distorted mind that can stretch from the northern end of Peninsula Malaysia right up to the very edge where our great doctor (Dr Mahathir Mohamad) wanted to build the crooked bridge and Abdullah Ahmad Badaw had to pay the price for not playing ball.
Patriot: Judicial integrity since 1981 until today has been seen to be compromised in favour of those who hold the reins of power. The current sodomy trial is not expected to fare any better than the previous high-profile cases, unless the learned judge is willing to serve justice at all costs, and that is perhaps, an illusionary thought.
Even hardcore criminals have been known to be set free because the judge felt that there was is a shred of reasonable doubt to the evidence presented by the prosecution. Sadly, we may see some manipulation to strengthen the evidence. One does not have to be a lawyer to recognise the flaws and cover-ups.
Yobama: As as I see it, the BN will not rest until Anwar is sent to jail. They will amend the charge as they did in Sodomy I. In that trial, how many times did they amend the charge? I lost track – I only remember that they amended the dates several times when they realised that Tivoli Villa was not ready yet when the alleged crime was committed.
The case judge in Sodomy II should be more independent and just throw the case out the windows. Allah is great and will not allow injustices be perpetuated on His earth.
Ichigo: Why the need to postpone when the answer is so obvious? Saiful told the court, without referring to his police statement, that Anwar had asked for his consent politely if he could “f…” him (although the choice of word seems very unbecoming coming from Anwar).
Did he willingly oblige? If yes, then that’s consensual. Simple as that.
Exhaust Leaked: The solicitor-general II is making the whole lot of the prosecution look like a bunch of idiotic fools. The people will only accept reasonable and factual arguments which are in accordance with the law and in a court of law.