Court acquits father, but tells mother to answer for Zayn Rayyan's death
Judge Dr Syahliza Warnoh made the decision after finding that the prosecution failed to prove a prima facie case against Zaim Ikhwan, 30, at the end of the prosecution case.
However, the court ordered Zayn Rayyan's mother, Ismanira Abdul Manaf, 30, to enter her defence on the same charge.
Zaim Ikhwan and Ismanira were charged with neglecting Zayn Rayyan in a manner likely to cause physical harm to the victim in the vicinity of Block R, Idaman Apartments, Damansara Damai up to the nearby river area between 12 noon on Dec 5 to 9.55 pm on Dec 6 2023.
Zaim Ikhwan Zahari, the father of deceased autistic six-year old Zayn Rayyan Abdul Matin, is pictured at the Petaling Jaya Session Court on July 21,2025. — Picture by Yusof Mat Isa
They were charged under Section 31(1)(a) of the Children Act 2001 read with Section 34 of the Penal Code which carries a maximum sentence of 20 years imprisonment or a fine of RM50,000 or both, if convicted.
Judge Syahliza in her summary judgment said that after examining the evidence of the prosecution witnesses in maximum assessment as well as the arguments of the prosecution and defence, the court found that the prosecution failed to prove a prima facie case against Zaim Ikhwan at the end of the prosecution case.
'Therefore, the first accused (Zaim Ikhwan) is discharged and acquitted while for the second accused (Ismanira), the court finds that the prosecution has succeeded in proving a prima facie case against the second accused and she is called to defend herself in accordance with Section 31(1)(a) of the Children's Act 2001,' said the judge.
Ismanira, who gave her defence statement today, chose to give her statement under oath from the witness stand. — Bernama
MORE TO COME
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
SMM sues MalaysiaNow for defamation, denies issuing mining licence to politically-linked firm
KOTA KINABALU, July 25 — Sabah Mineral Management Sdn Bhd (SMM) has initiated legal proceedings against news portal MalaysiaNow over allegedly false and defamatory reports concerning the politically-linked company Bumi Suria Sdn Bhd. In a statement, SMM accused MalaysiaNow of publishing 'numerous allegations which are false, misleading, and defamatory' regarding the purported awarding of a prospecting licence (PL) to Bumi Suria, a company linked to prominent businessman and former political aide Datuk Farhash Wafa Salvador Rizal Mubarak. 'At no point in time did MalaysiaNow seek SMM's clarification prior to the publication. The publications were biased, one-sided, and represent a calculated attempt by MalaysiaNow to defame SMM, its directors, and officers,' SMM stated, adding that it would pursue legal action against any other media outlet that republishes the claims. The lawsuit comes after a series of articles and videos by MalaysiaNow suggesting that SMM had improperly awarded a prospecting licence to Bumi Suria for a 70,000-hectare forest reserve area in Kalabakan and Gunung Rara. SMM rebutted this, reiterating that it has no legal power to issue prospecting or mining licences. It stressed that this authority lies solely with the Sabah Department of Lands and Surveys (JTU) under the Sabah Mining Ordinance 1960. JTU director Datuk Bernard Liew noted this yesterday when saying that no mineral-related licence had ever been issued to Bumi Suria. Instead, SMM clarified that it had only issued a 'Conditional Letter of Permission to Apply for a Prospecting Licence' to Bumi Suria following internal board deliberations, stressing that this document was not an approval or the issuance of any licence. 'However, Bumi Suria did not proceed to formally submit any of the required documents for an application. Consequently, on March 24, 2025, SMM issued an official letter of cancellation of permission to apply to Bumi Suria Sdn Bhd. 'These facts were maliciously omitted by MalaysiaNow,' SMM said. SMM also took issue with the use of a photo of its chief executive officer, Natasha Sim, and her name in connection with an audio recording that they claim does not feature her voice and is not associated with her. 'This deliberate act of misrepresentation is unacceptable and unethical,' it said. The issue has drawn public scrutiny, particularly as SMM has been embroiled in controversy since a series of leaked videos and audio recordings emerged, alleging corrupt practices in the awarding of licences and implicating several Sabahan politicians. Two state assemblymen, Datuk Yusof Yaacob (Sindumin) and Datuk Andy Suryady Bandy (Tanjung Batu), are currently facing corruption charges over the scandal. Farhash, a former aide to PKR president Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, has denied allegations that he owned Bumi Suria and that the company had been awarded a mineral prospecting or exploration licence. While confirming he is a director and shareholder, his lawyers have demanded the articles be removed.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
It's minimal force if no one dies, says Taiping Prison's assistant superintendent
Mohd Hairie Jumri, an assistant prison superintendent, claimed him hitting inmates in Taiping Prison in January this year was not serious as he had not killed anyone. Mohd Hairie, 39, who was transferred to Taiping Prison in November 2022, denied being aggressive and said he used minimal force when hitting the inmates. He was testifying before the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia's (Suhakam) public inquiry into alleged human rights violations at Taiping Prison on Jan 17. On Jan 25, Twentytwo13 reported that inmate Gan Chin Eng, 62, had died from abdominal injuries caused by blunt trauma in the Jan 17 incident. He was among 104 detainees transferred from the Batu Gajah Correctional Facility to Taiping Prison on Jan 16. Earlier, another witness, prison sergeant Dzulizwar Mohd Bakir, 44, admitted there was no justification for his aggressive actions towards inmates on Jan 17. When asked by Suhakam's assisting inquiry officer, Simon Karunagaram, to define what 'minimal force' meant to him, Mohd Hairie replied: 'If the inmate didn't die, it means it is minimal force'. Simon: So, if I punch you, you have bruises and your eyesight is blurry, is that minimal force? Mohd Hairie: Yes. Simon: Look at this image. Prisoners are bleeding. Is this minimal force? Mohd Hairie: Maybe they hit the fire hydrant on the way out of Hall B. He also demanded that Simon prove that he had used excessive force. But when questioned by Suhakam chairman, Datuk Seri Mohd Hishamudin Md Yunus, who is on the panel of inquiry with Dr Farah Nini Dusuki, Mohd Hairie replied that he was not in the right frame of mind when the beatings took place. Like the other witnesses this week, he claimed the inmates used harsh and abusive words against the guards and threatened to rape members of their families, causing him to act irrationally. When asked by lawyer T. Shashi Devan, who is representing some 99 Taiping Prison inmates, if he agreed that maximum force was used as it resulted in the death of Gan Chin Eng, Mohd Hairie replied: 'I disagree.' Earlier, Mohd Hairie, who is attached to the maintenance department, admitted that Taiping needs a new prison as the current one is too old. Taiping Prison is Malaysia's oldest prison, built in 1879, and is a heritage building. During questioning by Suhakam's assisting inquiry officer, Aida Suraya Haron, Mohd Hairie stated that Block B of the prison had been declared unsafe by the Public Works Department, as were the upper floors of Block E, and there were additional concerns regarding Block C. Mohd Hairie also admitted that: He did not record every activity in his pocket diary. He only recorded the incidents of Jan 17 a few days after giving his initial statement to Suhakam investigators on March 10. His superiors did not check his pocket diary once a month. The dereliction of duty by his superiors could be the reason many officers don't record their pocket diaries faithfully, even though it could be produced in court as evidence. He did not discuss with other witnesses who testified this week – Dzulizwar Mohd Bakir, prison inspector Ahmad Rizal Razali, sergeant Saiful Azman Mohamad Ibrahim, and prison inspector Muhamad Mustakhim Abdul Rahim – how to testify, even though the words used were almost the same. The inquiry will continue next month.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Five Taiping Prison officers given access to classified CCTV footage before testifying at Suhakam inquiry
A prison inspector at Taiping Prison admitted that he and four other witnesses had access to classified closed-circuit television (CCTV) footage ahead of the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia's (Suhakam) public inquiry into alleged human rights violations that occurred on Jan 17, 2025. Muhamad Mustakhim Abdul Rahim said he and the next four witnesses scheduled to testify at Suhakam's headquarters in Kuala Lumpur had requested to be shown the CCTV footage, which the Prison Department had earlier said was classified. Suhakam's assisting inquiry officer, Simon Karunagaram, was shocked to hear Muhamad Mustakhim admit that he had been given access to the CCTV footage. Simon: Did you watch the footage? Muhamad Mustakhim: Yes. Simon: Where did you watch it? Muhamad Mustakhim: At Taiping Prison. Simon: You asked to see it, or were you directed to watch it? Muhamad Mustakhim: I asked to see it. Simon: Why? Muhamad Mustakhim: Because it was six months ago, and I wanted to refresh my memory. Simon started this line of questioning after examining Muhamad Mustakhim's notes, which outlined details of the events on Jan 17, following a 'discussion' with witnesses who gave testimony at the second session earlier this month. Muhamad Mustakhim admitted he wrote the notes a few days ago – long after the incident, and after watching the CCTV footage. Simon then requested the panel's chairman, Datuk Seri Mohd Hishamudin Md Yunus, to direct the Prison Department to instruct Taiping Prison not to show the footage to the other witnesses. Mohd Hishamudin duly did so, but towards the end of the day, under questioning by T. Shashi Devan – who is representing some 99 detainees allegedly assaulted on Jan 17 – Muhamad Mustakhim admitted that all five witnesses scheduled to give testimony over the next three days had viewed the classified footage. Shashi: Did you submit a written or oral request to view the footage? Muhamad Mustakhim: Oral. Shashi: Who did you ask permission from? Muhamad Mustakhim: The prison's deputy director (Shahrul Izzat Hamid). He granted us permission to watch the footage. Shashi: How many of you watched the footage? Muhamad Mustakhim: Five of us. Shashi: Who are the five? Muhamad Mustakhim: The five called to give testimony this week. Mohd Hishamudin then asked why the five wanted to watch the footage, and Muhamad Mustakhim repeated his earlier answer – to refresh their memory, as it had been six months since the incident. On Jan 25, Twentytwo13 reported that Gan had died from abdominal injuries caused by blunt trauma during the Jan 17 incident. He was among 104 detainees who were transferred from the Batu Gajah Correctional Facility to the Taiping Prison on Jan 16. Looks like me, but maybe it isn't me Muhamad Mustakhim, who was caught on CCTV kicking inmates, hitting them with a slipper and a bath ladle, admitted to losing control and letting emotions get the better of him as he heard the inmates saying 'I kill you' and 'I will rape your wife and children'. However, he had trouble identifying himself when shown footage of more serious acts of aggression when questioned by Suhakam's assisting inquiry officer, Mohd Faiz Abdul Rahman. His standard reply was 'I can't be certain', 'the images are blurry', or 'the images are unclear.' He repeated these answers more than 10 times. Mohd Hishamudin had to step in several times to remind Muhamad Mustakhim that he needed to tell the truth. He was also warned he could face a three-year jail term and a fine for providing false testimony. Later, Simon showed Muhamad Mustakhim a screenshot of a close-up and asked if that was him. Simon: This is quite a bright and clear image. Can you identify the person? Muhamad Mustakhim: It's unclear. Simon: If I were to say it's you, would you agree? Muhamad Mustakhim: No. Simon: Are you being honest when you say it's not you? Muhamad Mustakhim: My answer is that it's not me. Mohd Hishamudin: Why do you say it is not you? It has your features. Muhamad Mustakhim: It may look like me, but it is not clear. Simon then asked the representatives from the Prison Department if the image matched the witness, and they replied that it was a match. Simon: Can I ask the lawyer for the inmates' families if the image looks like the witness? Shashi: Yes, it looks like the witness. Simon: Mr Chairman, I'm also of the opinion that the image is of the witness, and suggest it is him. When asked if he agreed that he wasn't telling the truth – as other witnesses had placed him at the scene and those in the inquiry room had identified him as the person in the footage and screenshot – Muhamad Mustakhim replied: 'Not from my eyes. I see differently from other people's eyes. I have taken an oath to tell the truth. I deny being dishonest. It doesn't look like me.' Simon: Do you wear spectacles? Muhamad Mustakhim: No. Simon: Do you wear contact lenses? Muhamad Mustakhim: No. Simon: Are you colour-blind? Muhamad Mustakhim: No, but sometimes I have problems with glare. So while the person may have my features, I can't say for certain it's me. Showing another footage, Simon asked: Look at the uniform, the beret and the watch. Isn't that you? Muhamad Mustakhim: It isn't me. There is a ring. Simon: Just now, you said the footage and pictures are not clear, but suddenly you notice a ring? I put it to you that you are choosing to answer questions that help your interests. I suggest the images are of (Muhamad) Mustakhim unless he can prove otherwise. Suhakam's assisting inquiry officer, Mohd Faiz Abdul Rahman then resumed the questioning and once again asked Muhamad Mustakhim about him kicking and beating the inmates. He repeated the allegation that the prisoners were passive-aggressive, a phrase he said he recently learnt from Google. 'You can't hear it as there is no sound on the CCTV, but they were cursing, insulting and threatening us,' he said. 'That's how I lost control.' When asked by Mohd Hishamudin how trained officers could fail to control their emotions, Muhamad Mustakhim replied: 'Different people have different triggers. Sometimes it's words; other times, it's physical. I remember the words.' The inquiry at Suhakam's headquarters in Kuala Lumpur resumes tomorrow. Main image: Datuk Seri Mohd Hishamudin Md Yunus (right) and fellow inquiry panel member Dr Farah Nini Dusuki.
