Kes bunuh rakan sekolah: Remaja pernah serang ibu, rakan sekelas

A high court in Shah Alam heard evidence that a teenager accused of murdering a schoolmate last year had previously attacked his mother and two schoolmates. Dr Ian Lloyd Anthony, a forensic psychiatric expert, testified that these incidents occurred while the teenager, known as L, was undergoing counseling at school, which Anthony deemed unsuccessful.

Anthony stated that L resisted his mother, fell and hit his head when she attempted to check his schoolbag. "He also attacked two schoolmates because he assumed they intended to harm him," Anthony said. The court hearing explained why L was acquitted and released on the grounds of not being guilty by reason of insanity. Based on the facts presented during the trial, L testified against a female classmate in a schoolyard, but she fought back and escaped, only to be dragged back and attack her.

The victims' cries were heard by several teachers who immediately tried to save them. The relevant psychiatric report was not challenged by the prosecution. Judge Adlin Abdul Majid accepted Anthony's assessment of L's mental state and mindset during the incidents. Anthony diagnosed L as having schizophrenia with psychopathic and sadistic traits, saying his evaluation involved continuous observation of the patient in a ward for almost three months, followed by a series of psychiatric examinations over the same period.

In his judgment, Adlin said Anthony's assessment was cross-examined by multiple independent sources, including court documents, nurse observations, interviews with the defendant's family, school visits, psychology tests, EEG tests, and CT scans. "In my view, the report is not merely a hollow statement," Adlin said. He also noted that Anthony's report was not challenged by the prosecution, relying on the fact that it remained intact.

Adlin pointed out that the report directly did not face challenge from the prosecution, witnessing the intact expert opinion. Adlin stated that it is appropriate to consider that the prosecution has already accepted Anthony's report since January and had sufficient time to obtain and present psychiatric expert testimony as rebuttal.

"When the expert opinion like Anthony's report is contested, the appropriate action for the opposing party is to obtain expert testimony to rebut it. However, no such expert was called," he said. "Cross-examination of witnesses, in my opinion, is not enough to be considered as rebuttal."