But in Bolehland, where anything 'can', it seems that you could shaft it up somebody's rear and hopefully be done with him.
And if that does not do it the first time, repeat the process.
Anwar's final conviction by the apex court for allegedly sodomising his one time aide brings back bad memories of the first circus.
Most of us Bolehlanders may not be legal eagles, but we are not dense either.
In any sexual offence case, the evidence of penetration is crucial. Thus, the evidence of the doctor who first examines an alleged victim counts a lot.
That was glaringly lacking in both instances that Anwar was charged for sodomy.
In fact, in both cases, the doctors who first examined the alleged victims essentially said to go fly kite.
But in Bolehland, it seems that that is only a minor detail that you could swat away like an annoying fly.
You could always seek for DNA evidence, never mind how that got into the wrong or is it the right? orifice in the first place.
All you need to do is to scoop it out.
We all know that in the law statues that our great Bolehland boasts of, illegally obtained evidence is admissible evidence so long as it is relevant evidence.
(For the less legally minded, 'illegally obtained evidence' includes evidence obtained by trickery, subterfuge and whatnot).
It does not matter that the DNA you are searching for is found among an incriminating pool of a dozen or so other unidentified DNA.
Or whether the DNA tendered to prove culpability really proves its authenticity. DNA degradation, as far as we are seemingly concerned, is a question of relative faith.
I don't have to take it because you say that there was degradation. Time is also a relative factor.
(I think Enstein wasn't thinking of DNA and degradation when he was postulating his Theory of Relativity. I wished he had been)
I could believe what the alleged victim says and that's all to it, never mind the surrounding milieu attendant that could point more convincingly to other things having
Of course, I could be wrong? Who couldn't?