Remember Ladies! If You Have To Fend Off Your Attacker Or Agressor, Do Not BITE!!

And Here is Why...

Batu MP Tian Chua was today jailed six months and fined RM3,000 after he was found guilty by the magistrate's court of biting a police constable and preventing the officer from discharging his duty in December 2007.

Chua, 46, whose full name is Chua Tian Chang, committed the offence against PC Rosyaidi Anuar, 21, in front of Parliament House in the incident on Dec 11, 2007.

Chua, the PKR strategic director, was charged under Section 332 of the Penal Code and could have been jailed up to three years.

He faces the possibility of losing his parliamentary seat as the fine exceeds RM2,000. Chua was granted a stay of execution pending appeal.

Chua committed the offence during a Bersih gathering to protest against constitutional amendments extending the retirement age of Election Commission members from 65 to 66.

Earlier, magistrate Mohd Faizi Che Abu said he found Chua not to be a credible witness as his defence was a mere denial.

In an immediate response, Chua said the judgment was not fair as the judge and prosecution had relied on the evidence of the constable and based it on circumstantial evidence.

"It did not prove the biting took place," the MP said.

So the judge is saying that the constable is credible. Where is the constable witness? Just based on his complaint is enough?

How about this about-turn by witness in another unrelated case?

Jamaluddin Mohd Radzi, a former state executive councillor accused of corruption, did not take any bribes for the purpose of approving a proposed housing development project in Pusat Bandar Seri Iskandar last year, a witness testified yesterday.

In fact, Jamaluddin (now an independent assemblyman after leaving Pakatan Rakyat early this year) had never asked for money at any point regarding the project, said the prosecution's star witness, Mohd Imran Abdullah.

In his MACC report dated Aug 14 last year, the same day he had met the former exco member, Imran stated that Jamaluddin had discussed the proposed housing development project, had asked for RM5,000 from him, and had taken RM5,000 from him.

During cross-examination by counsel Mohd Roni Abdul Rahman yesterday, Imran admitted that neither his testimony during examination-in-chief nor the video recording of his meeting with Jamaluddin at the latter's office was consistent with his written MACC report. Read More Here

That says a lot about our kangaroo judicial system. If these 2 cases are not political motivated, my grandma is a virgin.

So ladies, blind them or castrate them if you need to but just remember not to BITE!

Meanwhile, stay tune for 1Budget coming up tomorrow..