Contractor, ex-wife get 34 years for killing domestic helper

Borneo Post

6 hours ago

Mohammad Ambree
Etiqah
KOTA KINABALU (June 20): A contractor and his former engineer wife were jailed for 34 years by a High Court here for a joint charge of killing a domestic helper four years ago.
The jail term is counted from today.
In passing the sentence, Justice Datuk Dr Lim Hock Leng explained that although both defence counsel put in impassioned mitigation pleas, the court could not ignore the cruelty suffered by the deceased at the hands of the first and second accused, as highlighted by the prosecution.
'The court takes into account the nature of the injuries and the manner in which they were inflicted over a period of time,' said the judge.
Lim found the first accused, Mohammad Ambree Yunos @ Unos, and the latter's former wife Etiqah Siti Noorashikeen Mohd Sulong, who was the second accused, guilty of their charge under Section 302 of the Penal Code.
The indictment provides for the death sentence or a jail term of up to 40 years and whipping of not less than 12 times, upon conviction.
Mohammad Ambree was calmed after the court passed the sentence while Etiqah wept in the dock after the court found her guilty of the charge.
'In addition to the time that the first accused must serve in prison, he is to receive the minimum 12 strokes of whipping.
'The second accused is spared the otherwise mandatory punishment of whipping on account of her gender, pursuant to Section 289 of the Criminal Procedure Code,' the judge ruled.
Muhammad Ambree, 40, and Etiqah, 33, were convicted after a full trial on a charge of murdering Siti Afiah Daeng Damin, a 28-year-old Malaysian, at the third floor of a condominium in Penampang between December 8-11, 2021.
The court said that the imprisonment term is to run from the date of conviction, i.e June 20 instead of the date of their arrests, given that both the accused persons have been out on bail.
In his reserved decision, the judge held among others that, 'In particular, the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt the essential elements, namely; (i) the identity and death of the deceased; (ii) the deceased died as a result of injuries which were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death; (iii) the accused persons caused those injuries with the requisite intention within Section 300(c) of the Penal Code; and
(iv) they acted in furtherance of a common intention in causing those injuries.
'There were various issues and defences raised by both the accused persons against the prosecution's case and against each other, including but not limited to the admissibility of the phone and video evidence, similar fact/ bad character evidence, motive, alibi, the statements of the accused persons to the 15th prosecution witness, the investigating officer in relation to exhibits used to harm and cause injuries to the deceased, the conduct of the accused persons, the cause of death, absence of common intention, and so on,' said the judge.
The court further said that the second accused sought to lay the blame solely on her ex-husband, who is the first accused, who similarly sought to blame her.
'Specific to the first accused, he contended that the similar fact/bad character evidence is inadmissible against him, the second accused had, in addition, alluded to the death of the maid being caused by an intruder or that the injuries could have been self-inflicted; or that the cause of death is attributable to asthma but these defences were abandoned at the clarification hearing on March 3.
'In any event, these purported issues and defences are unmeritorious and do not stand up to scrutiny, in short, having considered all the evidence and submissions at the end of the trial, this court finds the first and second accused guilty of and convicts them on the charge of murder as preferred against them, there is no reasonable doubt raised by either the first or second accused,' the judge ruled.
The court said that in passing the sentence, the court had taken into account public interest, the gravity
of the offence and the need for a deterrent sentence, as well as the fact that both the accused persons are first offenders.
'The first accused has expressed remorse for what it is worth, the second accused has not expressed remorse to her counsel in the course of mitigation although reference was made to a case of Duis Akim where the accused, who had been convicted had expressed remorse,' said the judge.
Etiqah's counsel Dato' Seri Rakhbir Singh then said that 'I wish to express that the issue of remorse was not put forward but I will do so now respectfully addressing that issue for the purposes of mitigation for and on behalf of the second accused'.
This case was first brought to court on December 29, 2021.
The prosecution had called 15 witnesses to testify against Mohammad Ambree and Etiqah.
For their defence, Ambree and Etiqah were the only witnesses.
On April 26, 2022, Etiqah had succeeded in her appeal at the Court of Appeal here against a High Court's verdict which disallowed her be released on a bail.
The Court of Appeal granted her RM30,000 bail with one local surety.
Then on October 20, 2022 Mohammad Ambree, who was represented by counsel Datuk Ram Singh, was granted bail of RM30,000 with RM10,000 deposit with two local sureties by a High Court here.
Deputy public prosecutor Dacia Jane Romanus handled the trial. Previous Article Traditional healer freed from charges of raping student