A bullet casing found in Cpl Sirul Azhar
Umar’s jeep was from a HK-MP5 submachine gun and not from any other types
of firearm, the High Court here was told today.
Cpl Sirul Azhar outside the High Court. The bullet casing which was presented to the court was found in his jeep.
|
Firearms and Tool Marks Unit head in the Criminalistic Section of the
Chemistry Department’s Forensic Division in Petaling Jaya, Shaari Desa, 40,
said he made the conclusion after seeing marks on casing.
“Even without inspecting the firing pin of the weapon, I found
characteristics on the bullet shell which were produced from the ejector,
extractor and breech face of the same type of firearm,” he said in
re-examination by Deputy Public Prosecutor Noorin Badaruddin.
Sirul, 36, is the second accused in the trial for the murder of
Mongolian Altantuya Shaariibuu. He and C/Insp Azilah Hadri, 31, are alleged
to have killed the 28-year-old woman in a jungle in Bukit Raja near here in
October last year.
Political analyst Abdul Razak Abdullah Baginda, 47, is charged with
abetting the two policemen from the Special Action Unit.
Shaari is the 40th prosecution witness in the trial which entered its
55th day today.
Asked why he did not conduct tests on the firing pin and cap, he said:
“Each bullet shell has a firing cap and pin whose hardness differs.
Therefore, when the firing pin knocks on the primer cap, the depth of
impact will depend on the type of material used or the hardness of the
primer cap.
“If the primer cap was made of a soft material or metal, the face of
impact will be deeper and wider compared to a primer cap made of a hard
material.
“Secondly, a firing pin fixed without its knocker will revolve and
change its position slightly each time a shot is fired. That was why I did
not use the firing pin as part of my examinations,” he said.
Earlier, he was asked by Sirul’s lawyer, Ahmad Zaidi Zainal, to measure
the size of the firing pin using a mathematical formula but he could not do
it because he was not well-versed in the formula.
Shaari said his analysis was based on what he saw through a microscope
and not just by mathematical calculations.
Zaidi also asked him to carefully look at the bullet casing found in
Sirul’s jeep and compare it with another shell. He initially refused
because in his analysis he had used a microscope but agreed to make a
comparison after he was given a magnifying glass.
After looking at the casings through the magnifying glass, he said he
did not see any difference.
He said bullets made of the same material discharged by the same
firearm would leave similar permanent characteristics on the bullets and
their casings. “The marks can clearly be seen through a microscope and not
by naked eyes,” he said.
When Noorin asked why he said the test on the casing was more
conclusive than on bullet head, Shaari replied: “Firstly, firearms nowadays
have polygonal barrel without clear land and grooves. Therefore, the
characteristics on the bullet head are not clear and difficult to be
analysed.
“Secondly, the bullet head will be damaged when it hits its target.
“Thirdly, the face of a bullet head can easily become rusty when it
hits an object with blood such as human and the rust will wipe out
characteristics on the bullet head.
“Fourthly, the face of a bullet head is uneven and not smooth.
Therefore, not all characteristics of the barrel will be seen on the
bullet,” he said.
Shaari also said that he did not study the content of a detonator
because it was impossible to find any residue from it. The content would
disappear and could not be traced because to test it, it had to be
detonated first, he said.
Meanwhile, the prosecution today also called Cybersecurity Malaysia’s
forensic digital analyst Mohd Zabri Aidil Talib, 28, and two policemen —
Cpl Mohamad Mohamad Dali and L/Cpl Khairul Anuar Othman — to the witness
stand.
The trial before Justice Datuk Mohd Zaki Md Yasin continues on November 7.
