Comment: A suicide note from Teoh Beng Hock after death for 2 months!

It's interesting to know that AG who made a confession that the suicide note purportedly from TBH who was dead for 2 months could "write" suicide note!!!

AG admitted that sling bag of TBH was initial searched and the note was not found. This was a proof that the "suicide note" was not originally there by the own admission of AG.

What happened 2 months later could be easily planted by any unknown person, most probably from the work of high profile cover-up as officials from MACC are blamed to be responsible for the death of the key witness.

Now the IO should be investigated for his poor work and must be fired for non-disclosure of the "personal note" to TBH's family. If it was genuine, it was a personal note and no one can conceal it from his family.

If it was a fake note, most probably so based on the weight of evidence that "According to the Investigation Officer it was not found when he first searched the deceased's sling bag after the incident." which is a proof that the suicide note does not exist after the death of TBH but being planted 2 months later.

Just review the nature of injuries of Teoh Beng Hock. Are these photos of a person who committed suicide?

Clues:
1) The shoe's base shows severe abrasion possibly caused from dragging
2) The trouser's buttock was torn possibly from hitting the aluminium windowsill
3) The underwear was not torn as bad as the trouser proving that the pull was likely on the trouser to lift TBH from the floor to the window







Quote

Good Lord, a suicide note from Teoh Beng Hock!
Posted by Took almost a year to get it out to the open ! on August 10, 2010 at 06:36:01:

Good Lord, a suicide note from Teoh Beng Hock!
Share

Richard Loh
Tuesday, 10 August 2010 11:24

teoh-beng-hock-summary-of-2009 OPINION Why waste public funds and the hundreds of man-hours spent on the inquest of Teoh Beng Hock's death?

The AG is such a powerful man he can order the case shut by just stamping 'NFA' on the file. Or does the AG want to show Malaysians and the world how our justice system can be toyed with by the powerful as and when they like – even to the extent of their capability to cover up murders?

I must admit that there is no time limit for evidences to surface even if a case is closed and should it warrant, the case can be re-opened. Likewise for the murder of Altantuya, even though the murderers have been found guilty and sentenced to death, should new evidence surface to show another person or the mastermind who was behind the murder, that person can still be charged.

In Teoh Beng Hock's case, it looks suspicious when a new piece of evidence, widely believed to be a suicide note was found inside the deceased's sling bag. The press statement from the AG's Chamber regarding this new found evidence does nothing more than to show how sloppy the investigation was carried out right from the initial stage. There is heavy suspicion of fabricated evidence being planted.

You can read the full press statement here.

Let us take a look at what the AG statement claimed: In italic is the AG statement and my rebuttal in normal font.

"The Attorney-General Chambers was informed of the discovery of the note by the Investigating Officer, ASP Ahmad Nazri bin Zainal on 7.10.09 some two over months after Teoh Beng Hock's death. According to the Investigation Officer it was not found when he first searched the deceased's sling bag after the incident."

Can you see how desperate they are to fabricate evidence by saying something that stupid to try and convince you "it was not found when he first searched the deceased's sling bag after the incident". They did search the sling bag after the incident but the 'supposed' suicide note was not there. Yet after two months, they managed to discover it.

From a layman's understanding, after the police, MACC, AG, the forensic and hospital had fully completed their investigation, all personal belongings of the deceased should have been itemised, tagged and recorded after a thorough search. Those items that required to be produced as evidence will be retained under locked and key while the rest should be returned to the family members.

The questions are:

Why was the sling bag not returned to the family members?

If it was not returned, how was it to be used and considered as evidence in the inquest/trial?

If they really needed to make a search again, why were all parties not informed?

To me, the only reason is to plant fabricated evidence.

"The note was immediately translated and there was sufficient cause to send it to be analysed by a Document Examiner of the Chemistry Department. The said note was sent on 9.10.09 and subsequently on 20.10.09."

Should not all parties be informed unless they are trying to fabricate evidence.

"The Document Examiner prepared his reports and they were considered by the Attorney-General himself where the Attorney-General, Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail was not convinced of the authenticity of the note due to insufficient samples to verify the handwritings in particular the Chinese characters.

In addition, the note was said to be discovered some two over months after the death and that this would raise suspicion over its authenticity and discovery.

Having considered these factors, Tan Sri Abdul Gani was of the view that the note should not be tendered until and unless the Investigation Officer could provide satisfactory explanation as to its discovery."

These are just frivolous statement, a camouflage for appeasing those who are stupid.

"As regards the note, the Attorney-General's Chambers was earlier briefed by the Investigation Officer that he conducted a thorough search after being advised by the psychiatric that ordinarily there would be a note left in a suicide case.

However, recently the Investigation Officer owned up by admitting that he did in fact find the note when he searched the sling bag on 17.7.10 but did not realise the significance of it as there were other documents found and that they were written in both Chinese and Roman characters."

This is indeed a masterpiece, base on psychiatric advice, they went hunting for a suicide note and wallah! a suicide note was discovered. How convenient, they found nothing in the first search, but after talking to the psychiatric they suddenly managed to find one suicide note.

Can you see how sloppy they are? Even when wanting to plant fabricated evidence.

— Malaysia for All

Unquote

Windows XP: The mouse and keyboard are not working; there is IRQ Resource Conflict

I have spend over 2 days looking for the solution to the mouse and keyboard not working for Windows XP after the manual system restore.

PROBLEMS:
1) After you restore the system restore from the Recovery Console for Windows XP, you may find that the mouse and keyboard (both serial ports) are not working.
There is yellow exclamation mark at the Device Manager for the keyboard and it shows Resources Conflict between the mouse and keyboard.

You can use USB Mouse to plug into the PC which will be able to work despite of the Resources Conflict for PS/2 mouse.

2) Your PS/2 mouse and keyboard are not detected by Windows XP after installing of software

3) Keyboard is not working for Windows XP due to Code 39 error message at Device Manager


Possible Root Cause of the problems: Registry File has corrupted entry for "Kbdclass" data which altered to format like "tphclhs kbdclass"

Solution: Find the corrupted data entry in the Registry and edit them back to "Kbdclass"



STEPS BY STEPS GUIDES

1)Start> Run> type regedit or go to Regedit32.exe located at the system32 folder at C:\Windows\System32\Regedit32.exe.

As you cannot type, you can copy and paste from the saved file that you opened before starting to edit the registry.


2) Click on Edit -> Find, Type in 'Upperfilters' and look at "Keys", "Values" and "data" but
uncheck "Match whole strings only"

3) Search for as many 'Upperfilters' as you can find. First start from the path as stated below and
look for data with entry "kbdclass" and other like 'tphclhs kbdclass'.

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Class\

NOTES: There are several drivers associated with Upperfilters eg PartMgr, kbdclass, mouclass which must NOT
be deleted otherwise Code 10 error message will appear to say that driver cannot be loaded

4) Double click the 'Upperfilters' and only edit the corrupted data eg.'tphclhs kbdclass' to 'kbdclass'

5) Search for all instances of this and change only corrupted data to 'kbdclass' at HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE Registry

6) Go to Device Manager and uninstall your keyboard - then 'scan for hardware changes'. The keyboard driver
should be able to load and ask you to restart the PC


7) You will need to restart the PC in order to complete the installation of keyboard driver


DONE!

RM15 million ringgit pledge to Chinese schools is a bait for votes

I suggest to vote against BN so that by next GE or State Election, you can expect 100 times increase in allocation to SIBU in order to win back the hearts of SIBU PEOPLE. From RM18 mil to RM1.80 billion for SIBU is achievable if SIBU Chinese voters vote for DAP. If the voters bow down to Money this time, you will get no pledge next time. The trick is to with-hold the vote from BN this time and you can get more next time around!

PEOPLE's power is the real political game. PEOPLE are wise to control money and not let money be the masters over us. So voters can take the Money and vote wisely.

This comment from Kim Quek is down-to-earth and worth reading.

Quote

These are the headlines splashed on a Chinese newspaper on May 13 reporting on the Sibu parliamentary by-election campaigns:

“RM10 million for Chinese primary schools”

“RM5 million for Chinese independent secondary schools”

“RM3 million for Christian missionary schools”

The newspaper was reporting on a grand ceremony where Prime Minister Najib Razak handed over cheques for the above amounts to the respective representatives of these schools.

Najib said Barisan Nasional was the only “true friend” that Chinese educationists can count on. He further said:

“Please, I help you, you help me.”

“It won’t cost you anything to give us what we want. We will do what we should to give you what you want. And you know what I want.”

In their moment of jubilation over this once-in-a-lifetime titanic windfall of cash for the Chinese and Christian schools, the local community should perhaps ponder these questions:

· If there was no by-election, would these schools have received any of the above cash?

· Does anyone have the slightest doubt of what Najib wants from you as a trade off?

· Was it not absolutely clear to you that Najib was asking for your votes when he gave you the money?

After pondering over the above events for a few moments, it should not be too difficult for the average person to establish the following:

1. Najib was trying to solicit for your votes with the above cash hand-out.

2. The money does not belong to Najib or Barisan Nasional, but to the citizens of the country.

3. Such impromptu hand-out of cash with the ulterior motive to bribe for votes is an abuse of power in addition to committing corruption.

Now, what should we do with the prime minister who has just committed election bribery as well as abuse of power?

We can report his offence to the Election Commission (EC) and the police for them to take action against him.

Or we can take legal action like what Pakatan Rakyat leader Datuk Zaid Ibrahim is doing over similar offence in the recent Hulu Selangor by-election.

The first option did not seem to work, as the EC and police have always played deaf and blind to election offences committed by BN leaders.

The second option did not seem to have made an impression on Najib and his cohorts, otherwise Najib would not have so openly committed the same offence.

Fortunately, we have the third option which is also the most powerful and the most effective. And that is to cast your votes against those who try to bribe you.

The Chinese community in Hulu Selangor has just done it. Najib had offered to give RM3 million cash to the Rasa Chinese Primary School on condition that they voted for BN. Despite that tempting offer, over 80 per cent of the Chinese in Rasa voted against BN. They would rather sacrifice the much needed cash than to give up their principle.

And that principle is: Votes are not for sale. It is better to forego short-term benefits than to destroy our long term interests of struggling for a good government to replace the rotten one, a sample of which has been more than clearly illustrated by the conduct of the prime minister himself.

Granting a victory to BN in Sibu is to endorse the perverted principle that it is legally and morally acceptable to use money and other inducement to buy votes. And that would be the last nail to the coffin that has already virtually buried democracy in this country.

And so the people of Sibu have the wonderful opportunity of putting a stop to this nonsense and save our democratic way of life from extinction by casting their votes wisely.

Will Sibuans prove as valiant and as wise as their compatriots in Hulu Selangor?

* Kim Quek is an observer of Malaysian politics.

Unquote

Do you condone bribery or condemn it to the fullest by your vote against it?