Well, the court have heard submissions from both parties at the end of the Prosecution's case - Decision on whether Lena has to enter her Defence will be 10/3/2016..
For, those who what is happening at this stage - well section 180 of the Criminal Procedure Code will give you an idea of what is happening now...
180 Procedure after conclusion of case for prosecution.(1) When the case for the prosecution is concluded, the Court shall consider whether the prosecution has made out a prima facie case against the accused.
(2) If the Court finds that the prosecution has not made out a prima facie case against the accused, the Court shall record an order of acquittal.
(3) If the Court finds that a prima facie case has been made out against the accused on the offence charged the Court shall call upon the accused to enter on his defence.
(4) For the purpose of this section, a prima facie case is made out against the accused where the prosecution has adduced credible evidence proving each ingredient of the offence which if unrebutted or unexplained would warrant a conviction.
So, on 10/3/2016, we will all know whether Lena Hendry will ACQUITTED or will the call on her to enter her defence - that means, Lena will have to call her witnesses, etc ..
Wednesday, 24 February 2016 | MYT 6:31 PM
Court sets Mar 10 to hear defence in Lena Hendry case
KUALA
LUMPUR: The court has set Mar 10 for activist Lena Hendry to enter a
defence against a charge of screening “No Fire Zone”, a documentary that
had not been approved by the Censorship Board.
Magistrate Mohd Rehan Mohd Aris said on Wednesday he would deliver a
verdict after going through the submissions by the prosecution and
defence.
Lawyer New Sin Yew, who acted for Hendry, said the activist was
entitled to an acquittal, as the ingredients of the charge were not
proved.
Deputy Public Prosecutor Muhammad Farith Muhammad Faizal said that
Hendry was present during a raid at the Kuala Lumpur Selangor Chinese
Assembly Hall and she was the one who handed over a DVD of the film to
the police.
In his submission, New, however, said there was no evidence to show
that Hendry was the one who screened the film as there is also a
possibility that the film was screened by others present.
He added that the two main witnesses also could not confirm if Hendry was inside the screening hall or not.
“Hendry should not be charged just simply because her name is in the
application form to use the hall,” New said, adding that there was no
proven direct conduct but only circumstantial evidence.
He said Hendry was a representative from Komas at the event and there
is no clear evidence on who distributed the DVD and who controlled the
laptop for the screening.
Hendry, the programme coordinator for a human rights group Pusat
Komas, claimed trial in a magistrate’s court on Sept 19, last year to
illegally screening “No Fire Zone”.
Under Section 6(1)(b) of Film Censorship Act, 2002, Hendry faces up
to three years’ jail or a fine not exceeding RM30,000, if convicted.
Hendry filed the application at the High Court registry to quash the charge on Nov 25, 2014.
On July 3, 2013, three Pusat Komas activists – Anna Har, Arul
Prakkash and Hendry – were arrested in a raid by the Home Ministry, when
they attempted to screen the controversial documentary.
The film, “No Fire Zone”, directed by British national Callum Macrae,
explores the alleged oppression by the Sri Lankan government of Tamils
in the island nation. - Star, 24/2/2016
For Star Video http://www.thestar.com.my/videos/2016/02/24/lena-hendry-case-final-verdict-postponed/
See earlier posts: -
No comments:
Post a Comment