Scrutinising The Anus

So many people have been blogging about the Anwar saga—about what has now become the very famous anus story in Malaysia. I have the impression that most people are inclined to believe that Anwar did not do it; that it was an "assassination" orchestrated by the his political enemies.

The one million dollar question: Did Anwar do it?

It is difficult to tell. For one thing, the police have not revealed their case in full so far. The police report lodged by the so-called victim has been kept secret up to now. However, before the victim lodged the report, he went to see a private doctor who examined his anus. Although it has been said that the medical check was not a sodomy-related investigation, the fact remains that the doctor did examine his anus. What's more, the doctor stands by his report! [The Star]

The said report has somehow found its way to the Malaysia Today blog. The doctor gave quite a detailed account of that fateful medical examination. The report gives us two important information.

Firstly, that the doctor could use some improvement in his English command. That line, "Then I advised patient to keep a deep breathe and relax" looks awful to me.

Secondly, that:

"On my observation the anus was normal, no bleeding, there was no sign of piles and no abscess and no pus, no injury, no tear and no discharge. Anus was clean and dry and looked normal. No abnormalities seen."

In fact it looks like the police are faced with an uphill task, aren't they? With the surfacing of the good doctor's report, it seems the case against Anwar is bound to come to a dead end. The medical report also seem to support Anwar's case.

I think the popular opinion among Malaysians is something like this:

Anwar's enemies are getting worried that Anwar is trying to make a comeback into politics. And he seems to be succeeding too! Therefore his enemies decided to cook something up to end his political ambitions once and for all. They made up this whole story about the sodomy; got this college drop-out dumbo onto their side somehow; and voila Anwar is in trouble again!

However, to convict this pest, they need to have solid evidence. But I think they have very little, if any. It is very inconvenient that! So for the time being, they had no choice but to suppress the police report lodged by the lad. Perhaps it would be good to get a DNA sample from Anwar. They can then use a small portion of that sample and say that they found it in Saiful's anus. Yes, that would be very damaging for Anwar.

Unfortunately, Anwar is a very smart man. He's not giving his DNA just like that. He wants to see the police report first; what did the police find in the victim's anus?

Well, if the above is indeed the conclusion of the majority, then I must say that I range myself in the minority! I have long ago decided that Anwar Ibrahim is a very, very clever man. This whole thing against him now is just too good to be true. The facts of the case, so far, are nicely cut and dried. The solution is very straightforward and seems to fit in the tangible sense. But the psychology of the matter does not ring true to reality. It's just too convenient!

If indeed his enemies wanted to set him up, I am sure there are many other avenues to do so. If there is no truth in the accusation, I am sure his enemies themselves knew that the majority of Malaysians would have the "popular view" above. Psychologically speaking, therefore, his enemies chose this particular avenue because it is the truth! The only question now is how to prove it?

As I said earlier, Anwar Ibrahim is a very clever man. When he was in prison, he was wheelchair-bound. He seemed like a gone case. Upon his release from prison, he went for a surgery abroad. And within months, he was dancing on stage. Perhaps he really had some problems with his back, but I did not for a moment entertain the notion of what he tried to portray then. All those charade with the neck braces and waist straps did not fool me one bit. If he is going to indulge in something like this anal sex thing, he will see to it that there is no room for DNA evidence to come back to haunt him later on. He might have even used a condom, for example. Perhaps some lubricants can help too. And this is where I feel the majority of Malaysians have overlooked an important point. Just because there is no tear in Saiful's anus, that does not mean that the anal sex did not take place. The doctor's report can help a bit, but still not conclusive!

Having said that, it's hard to imagine Anwar, a 61-year old man, spending the time and effort to put a condom on, and then applying the lubricant on Saiful, the unwilling victim. The young man could have easily overpowered Anwar. Somehow it does not fit. Therefore I am forced to the conclusion that Saiful was a willing partner. And here, we come to another interesting question: If he was willing at first, why does he turn on Anwar now?

My guess is as good as anyone's guess. But two possible solutions come to mind. First, that the college drop-out had initiated the act, for the purpose of blackmailing him later. To detour from this subject for a bit, I still remember the time when I tried to learn a bit about criminal law. Mia was preparing for her criminal law papers, and I spent some time to read her thick book. But I abandoned it after a while. It was just awful. Almost on every page, I could find the terms, mens rea and actus reus. Apparently, for a person to be criminally liable, the prosecution must prove both those elements are present. I don't know about mens rea, but apparently Anwar has been said to have an attraction to men's rear. Anyway, it's possible that Saiful tried to blackmail Anwar later on, and having failed to get anything, decided to go public, just to get even.

The second possibility is also quite interesting; that Anwar's enemies knew his weakness for men's rear. They threw in this college drop-out as a bait. Perhaps they didn't have high hopes at first. Although Anwar is a very clever man, we all know that when it comes to sex, sometimes it is very difficult to control oneself. And so, he fell for the trap, although being the clever chap that he is, he must have taken precautions to cover his track.

NOW the question is how to prove it? We are forgetting that just because there is no evidence, that doesn't mean that Saiful is lying. It is possible that it really did happen; just that Saiful initiated it, and the pervert couldn't control himself. It was in this sense that I suggested in another thread that Saiful be punished too.

These are all of course my views on the matter, and I concede that I might be proven totally wrong in the end.

What if you are the police and you know somehow that this guy is guilty. But you don't have evidence to prove his wrongdoing. In the eyes of the law, you can't touch him. In fact, this man seems destined to become the prime minister of this country (at which time I shall consider buying one of those chastity belts—for myself). If you are the police, what would you do?