Man who murdered student at Asia City loses appeal
A man who was sentenced to death during Ramadan last year for murdering a college student three years ago had his appeal against the sentence dismissed by the Court of Appeal here yesterday.
Mohd Azmin Lidin, 30, a former part-time security officer or a bouncer with an entertainment outlet at Asia City here, looked calm but sometimes seen taking deep breaths soon after the threemember panel chaired by Justice Datuk Vernon Ong Lam Kiat delivered their unanimous decision.
Vernon, who sat together with Justices Datuk Yaacob Haji Md Sam and Datuk Yew Jen Kie, affirmed the High Court's decision meted out on the appellant.
The court held that they had considered the totality of the evidence and issues raised by counsel P.J Perira, who represented the appellant.
“We thank the counsel for the submissions. We are not satisfied that there is any appealable error in the findings of the trial judge. As such the appeal is dismissed,” the court ruled.
Mohd Azmin, when escorted out by a prison personnel from the dock, managed to give a wide smile to the people who sat at the back rows of the public gallery, believed to be his family and friends.
Earlier, the appellant's counsel addressed the court that he had two points of law to be argued for this appeal namely, the trial judge had failed at the end of the defence case to ask herself whether this was a case of culpable homicide not amounting to murder and the trial judge also failed to criticise the prosecution for allegedly not offering one Amiruddin Bacho as a defence witness.
“On the first issue, it is contended that despite the rejection of the defence, it was still incumbent that the trial judge ought to have addressed her mind on this possible defence available to the appellant bearing in mind the following factors as elicited from the prosecution's evidence.
“Factor number one is that there was no preparation hence not a case of premeditated, and factor number two is the absence of motive and that both the appellant and the deceased did not know each other,“the counsel said in arguing his points.
The lawyer further submitted that these two factors were compelling reasons for the trial judge to seriously consider a lesser offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder, to manslaughter.
Perira also argued on the failure of the prosecution to offer one Amiruddin, who was not traceable, for whom a warrant of arrest had been issued..
“Without this Amiruddin being offered it will prejudice the appellant as Amiruddin was an important witness to the defence.
“Amiruddin had been remanded for two weeks for this case; Amiruddin was offered as a witness for the defence but then the prosecution said a warrant of arrest was to be issued against Amiruddin,” explained the counsel.
In reply, deputy public prosecutor Mohd Zain Ibrahim rebutted that the prosecution did not recall Amiruddin because the investigating officer of the case had tendered evidence three days before Amiruddin left for his hometown.
“Investigation also showed that Amiruddin did not see the incident and the persons who saw the incident were the other four prosecution witnesses,” explained Mohd Zain.
Mohd Zain also submitted that on the motive of the appellant it was stated in the facts of the case that the appellant had intended to slash the deceased because he had brought a samurai sword with him after he escorted his boss to the car.
On May 17, 2018, the appellant was convicted under Section 302 of the Penal Code for murdering Yaacob Nasran, 18, not far from the bar at Asia City between 4am and 4.30am on December 15, 2016.
The indictment carries the mandatory death sentence upon conviction.