Why?

• 10 October 2017
• 0 comments

During the ongoing trial of two women accused of murdering the half brother of the N. Korean dictator. a witness stated that he had returned the clothing items belonging to the victim to N. Korea.

Asked why he did that he replied that it was at the request of the Investigating Officer. He did not name this individual but it was clearly a police officer belonging to the PDRM.

It is thus the duty of the new IGP to explain why items that might have formed evidence in the trial now ongoing were sent to where they could not be retrieved and, in any case, with the chain of evidence broken.

There was never any doubt that the death of Mr. Kim involved criminal activity and all items belonging to the victim should have been retained by the police pending their possible use either in the investigation and or any subsequent trial.

Perhaps the new IGP can throw light on why his subordinate asked that these items be sent to N. Korea. Who told him to order that? And why? Unless and until an entirely satisfactory explanation is forthcoming the suspicion of foul play will continue to exist.