Prosecution witnesses cross-examined: Daniel Pearl case
HYDERABAD- Three more prosecution witnesses, including Judicial Magistrate, Karachi South, Erum Jehangir were cross- examined by the defence on Monday.
During cross-examination, the lady magistrate told the court that the confession obtained by police was genuine, and the accused was not pressurized for attaining the said statement. She said that the statements recorded by the accused were ‘voluntary’.
Advocate General Sindh, Raja Qureshi informed the court that the prosecution is ready to make arrangements for witnessing the video cassette, filming the assassination of US journalist Daniel Pearl. He also said that the defence is also welcome to witness the videotape. The court is set to view the film on Tuesday.
Defence Counsel Rai Basheer pointed out that the writing expert failed to provide reasons as to what prompted him to arrive at a conclusion that there was a similarity in both the writings and the specimens. He objected that in order to fill the lacuna of prosecution, this application could not be allowed.
The court, however, fixed the application for Tuesday with notices to the defence counsels.
The Anti Terrorism Court (ATC) Judge, Syed Ali Ashraf Shah, asked Deputy Superintendent Police (DSP) Investigation, Karachi, Qazi Chand, who was in civvies, to go out of the court when defence counsel objected to his presence.
Rai Basheer argued that the DSP would gather every detail from cross-examination and subsequently pass it on to other prosecution witnesses, which would adversely affect the defence’s case. However, later talking to journalists, Defence Counsel Rai Basheer quoted Erum Jehangir as telling the court that the “confessional statements of the accused were under duress and not independent”.
Raja Qureshi told sources that the magistrate, in fact, had informed the court that it seemed the confessional statements of the accused were not “voluntarily”. He, however, hastened to add that the same magistrate in the certificate of confessional statements had noted that the statements were voluntarily as per provisions of the law.
The magistrate recalled that the accused, Fahad Naseem, told her during the recording of his statement that “he wanted to be remanded to judicial custody because he wanted to save himself”.
She said that Omer Sheikh had a bullet mark on his right shoulder, and added that she had obtained specimen handwriting and sent it to the experts for verification. She claimed that in the certified copy of the court order, the name of one Junaid was incorrect and was due to a typing error.
Another prosecution witness, handwriting expert Ghulam Akbar Jafferi, submitted reports of handwriting specimens of accused – Adil Sheikh and Omer Sheikh. He said that he had found the specimen and the original to be the same.
According to prosecution, the drafts seized from Omer Sheikh and Adil Sheikh at the time of their arrests, and three specimen written by both these accused before the magistrate, were found to be same. Omer Sheikh had written the specimen in English, whereas Adil Sheikh in Urdu.
These press release demands pertained to release of Pakistani prisoners detained at a US naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba; and thereafter their trial in Pakistan; restoration of Mullah Abdul Salam Zaeef as Afghanistan’s ambassador to Pakistan; release of Pakistani money given to USA for the purchase of F-16, the prosecution claimed.
The writing expert said he had received a letter from Senior Superintendent Police (SSP) Crime Investigation Agency (CIA), Karachi, and wanted to bring the letter on record of the court.
Defence counsels maintained that it could not be produced because it was not from the judicial file. The expert, however, admitted that in his report of determination he did not mention the ground in support of his opinion that the writings were same.
Head Constable of CIA Investigation, Muhammad Iqbal deposed before the court that Saqib was arrested from Asifabad, Shah Faisal Colony, Karachi, on Feb 11 and then he (Saqib) led the police party to the house of Sheikh Adil, who was arrested from his bungalow in (316/173) North Karachi.
He said Sheikh Adil had told the police that Omer Sheikh was scheduled to meet him on Feb 13. The police party then went to airport and at 11 pm arrested Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, the constable said.
He said that he had disclosed his name as Muzaffar Farooque, then as Rafiq and subsequently as Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh.
During search, policeman stated, a wallet containing two visiting cards, two receipts, two National Identity Cards (NICs) and Rs 300 were recovered.
One of the NIC was in the name of Rauf, and the other which was a photocopy was in the name of Bashir. He said that one bag was also seized which contained photocopies of e-mails. He rejected defence claim that Omer Sheikh was falsely shown to have been nabbed on Feb 13.
In his cross-examination by Rai Basheer, advocate, he denied that Salman Saqib and Sheikh Adil were arrested on Feb 4.
OMER SHEIKH: Defence counsel Rai Basheer quoted prime accused in the Daniel Pearl’s case as saying that he did not believe in “criminal justice system because it was unIslamic”. Quoting Omer Sheikh, Rai Basheer said that his client had told the court of his observation when Advocate General Raja Qureshi objected on the presence of Sheikh Saeed, Omer’s father, with the defence counsel.
Omer Sheikh told the court that it was because of his father that he was pursuing his case under the present “criminal justice system”, otherwise he did not believe in it because it was unIslamic.
Source: Dawn
Date:5/14/2002
” 
” 
” 
” 
