KOTA KINABALU (Oct 4): A 24-year-old man on Monday lost his final appeal against a death sentence imposed by the High Court.
Federal Court Justices Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Court of Appeal President Tan Sri Rohana Yusuf and Federal Court Judge Dato’ Abdul Rahman Sebli held that there was no error in the High Court and the Court of Appeal’s decision against Mohd Faizul Abdul Jalil who was convicted and sentenced to death for murdering his former girlfriend in Kota Marudu five years ago.
The decision was reached after listening to the submission of the appellant’s counsel and the prosecution as respondent.
The hearing was held online with the bench and prosecution in Putrajaya and Mohd Faizul and his counsel, Hamid Ismail, in the Kota Kinabalu Court complex.
Mohd Faizul was found guilty by the High Court here on Oct 12, 2018, to killing Asrina Sahran, 15, in front of a house at Kampung Ranau at 9.10pm on Oct 11, 2016.
He was sentenced under Section 302 of the Penal Code which carries the death penalty upon conviction.
Mohd Faizul’s plea at the Court of Appeal was rejected on Nov 26, 2019.
Hamid has mentioned seven grounds of appeal which he grouped into two.
He explained that the trial judge had erred in law and in fact, to hold that the prosecution had established a prima facie case under Section 302 of the Penal Code when the prosecution’s evidence was insufficient to prove such offence; and the trial judge did not appreciate and understand the appellant’s defence.
In applying for the appeal to be allowed, Hamid submitted that consideration of all evidence would display that there was reasonable doubt whether Mohd Faizul had the intention to hurt the deceased.
He also said that since the evidence was not enough to prove that the offence of murder under Section 302 of the Penal Code, the conviction of Mohd Faizul was unsafe.
Hamid also said that the evidence was only enough to prove the offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304(a) of the Penal Code.
Meanwhile, Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) How May Ling submitted that the trial judge has held that the prosecution successfully fulfilled and proved the requirement of Section 300(c) of the Penal Code that Faizul had planned to cause the fatal injuries with the use of a knife on the deceased’s body.
DPP How submitted that the trial judge held correctly that the motive was not an essential element of the offence, motive would probably become relevant if the prosecution’s case essentially is dependent on circumstantial evidence, and that the weapon used was sufficient to show that the appellant had intention to murder the deceased.
The prosecution also said that the use of such a weapon was an indicator or intention possessed by the appellant.
DPP How also submitted that if it was true that the stabbing was accidental, there was no reason for the appellant to run away and should have assisted the deceased.