The High Court was told that Form Five student Muhammad Zaharif Affendi Muhd Zamrie, 17, was not run over by a vehicle driven by senior police officer Deputy Superintendent Mohd Nazri Abdul Razak, contrary to claims made by several witnesses.
Defence lawyer M Athimulan argued that the theory the teenager was deliberately run over was inconsistent with objective forensic and medical evidence presented in court.
He said a forensic pathologist had confirmed that the injuries suffered by the student were not consistent with someone being run over by a vehicle, as there were no crushed bones, severely damaged organs or tyre marks found on the victim’s body or clothing.
Athimulan argued that medical evidence should be given greater weight because it was based on scientific and objective findings rather than human perception, particularly when witnesses had observed a traumatic incident.
He said the defence’s position was that any witness testimony contradicting the medical experts’ findings should be treated with caution and could not be considered reliable.
Mohd Nazri, 46, is facing a murder charge over the death of Muhammad Zaharif Affendi near Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Jati in Ipoh between 11.55am and 12.32pm on December 15, 2023.
The charge was brought under Section 302 of the Penal Code, which carries the death penalty or imprisonment of between 30 and 40 years. If the death penalty is not imposed, the offender is also liable to receive at least 12 strokes of whipping.
During his submission at the close of the prosecution’s case before High Court judge Datuk Bhupindar Singh Gucharan Singh Preet, Athimulan said the absence of tyre marks on the student’s body and clothing supported the defence’s argument that the incident was a tragic accident.
According to the defence, the teenager was thrown from his motorcycle following a collision rather than intentionally run over. The injuries sustained were also said to be consistent with a person falling onto the road surface.
Athimulan further argued that the medical findings effectively challenged the direct accounts given by witnesses who claimed to have seen the incident. He urged the court to reject those accounts, saying the witnesses’ perceptions could have been affected by the trauma of the incident as well as the influence of social media.
The lawyer also highlighted what he described as a significant gap in the prosecution’s case — the failure to produce the so-called black box data from the Perodua Ativa involved in the incident.
He argued that the vehicle data was important in reconstructing what happened and determining whether the accused had the necessary criminal intent, or mens rea, required under Section 300 of the Penal Code.
Without the data, Athimulan said the prosecution could not establish whether Mohd Nazri had attempted to brake, swerve or avoid the collision, nor whether the vehicle’s speed was consistent with a loss of control rather than deliberate action.
He maintained that the missing information was not a minor weakness but went to the heart of the prosecution’s theory that the accused had intentionally used the vehicle to cause the student’s death.
Athimulan, assisted by lawyers Datuk Mior Datuk Mior Faridalathrash Wahid and Aiman Hakim Kamaruzzaman, will continue presenting the defence’s submissions tomorrow.
The prosecution is led by Deputy Public Prosecutor Afzainizam Abdul Aziz, assisted by Nasrul Hadi Abdul Ghani and Monisha Pandey.
