SINGAPORE — Dismissing the enchantment of two convicted Pakistani murderers, the apex court docket on Thursday (Sept 28) shot down the arguments of their defence attorneys, noting that they’d not gone additional in disputing the prosecution’s case.
Every of the accused had tried to pin the blame on the opposite, however the Court docket of Enchantment dominated that the precise position they every performed within the crime was immaterial, since they’d the widespread intention to kill Muhammad Noor, 59.
On June 11, 2014, Rasheed Muhammad and Ramzan Rizwan murdered Muhammad at a lodging home alongside Rowell Street in Little India.
Motivated by cash, they suffocated the person with a shirt and strangled him with a string from a pair of Punjabi trousers. Additionally they stole S$6,000 from him.
The duo removed the physique by dismembering it, and stashing the torso and legs into two suitcases. That they had deliberate to eliminate the suitcases at a Muslim cemetery in Kampong Glam, however when the wheels of 1 suitcase broke, they determined to depart it at Syed Alwi Street, additionally in Little India.
It was found hours later by an 81-year-old man.
Regardless of their makes an attempt responsible one another for the homicide, the Excessive Court docket sentenced each Rasheed, 46, and Ramzan, 28, to demise in February.
Video footage and pictures had confirmed the duo “appearing as a staff” by going to Mustafa Centre collectively to purchase a noticed and two suitcases for the grisly disposal of the physique.
Through the enchantment heard by Judges of Enchantment Andrew Phang, Tay Yong Kwang and Steven Chong on Thursday, Ramzan’s lawyer Wong Seow Pin argued that his consumer didn’t commit the act and had the truth is withdrawn from its participation.
That prompted Justice Phang to ask why Ramzan helped with the disposal of the physique, if that was certainly the case. “Ramzan is uneducated. He’s unsophisticated … he’s a easy particular person,” stated Mr Wong, implying that his consumer had been serving to Rasheed out.
Waving the argument apart, the decide stated that Ramzan’s actions had been according to the plan to do away with proof.
Mr Wong additionally argued that his consumer had been depressed throughout the recording of his police statements, and that had affected his proof.
Justice Phang stated: “When individuals are responsible, it’s attainable that they could additionally change into depressed.”
Mr Wong Siew Hong, representing Rasheed, additionally tried to deflect blame from his consumer by stating that the latter had no motive for the homicide, and was merely “on the unsuitable place on the unsuitable time”, as he had shared a room with the sufferer.
However Rasheed had admitted to collaborating within the homicide in his police assertion, stated Justice Phang.
“For those who put your self in his footwear, what would you’ve gotten executed? Would you’ve gotten stated, ‘(Ramzan), you can not do this however I’ll help you anyway,’” stated the decide.
In dismissing the enchantment, Justice Phang stated that the precise position performed by every man was immaterial.
“(The homicide) was clearly executed by two individuals, given the whole absence of any defensive accidents on the deceased,” he added.
