Tuesday, April 7, 2009

And so, what the hell happened to Kugan?

I just don't understand. I believe I am not thick. But try as I might, I just can't understand. What the hell happened to Kugan?

He was a burly young guy. Arrested and remanded by the police on suspicion of being a part of an international car theft syndicate. Five days later, he was brought to a hospital. And he died! The first post mortem report said that there was fluid in his lung. And he died because of that.

The family was of course not amused. They took picture of his body. He was full of bruises and cuts. His legs were swollen. His back was full of fresh lacerations, as if he was cut with some really blunt knives. His mouth was frothing. The family demanded another post mortem. The authorities initially said "nothing doing". Later they relented.

Meanwhile the family, including a Deputy Minister was questioned by the police for invading the mortuary. The second post mortem report essentially said Kugan was beaten to death.

kugan

The above is a summary of the injuries which I obtained from the net.

11 policemen were investigated. Nothing happened till now. A 10 man committee was formed to evaluate the two post mortem reports before any action is taken. Stop here for a while.

This is really amazing. Anwar Ibrahim was charged for sodomy based on one man's admission and a police report. The first medical report essentially said there was no sodomy. The doctor performing that medical check up followed it up with a Statutory Declaration no less. A second report apparently said there was sodomy. Anwar was promptly charged.

The question is this. Why wasn't there a 10 man committee to evaluate the agonising details of the two medical reports which were clearly in opposite of each other before Anwar was charged? What is the difference between Anwar's case and Kugan's case which requires minute scrutiny of every nuance of the two medical report in the latter case?

Anyway. Now the 10 man committee has come out with a report of their own. Malaysia Today quoted a Star report here.

If I understand correctly, the following is the finding of the committee:

  1. there is no evidence of thermal injury. Meaning, there is no evidence of injury caused by burning.
  2. the injuries on the back were caused by repeated trauma by a blunt, but flexible, object, like a folded rubber hose.
  3. Kugan had an underlying acute myocarditis (inflamation of heart muscle).
  4. the blunt force trauma caused renal failure (kidney failure).
  5. the kidney failure aggravated the acute myocarditis and caused acute pulmonary oedema or lung congestion.
  6. the cause of death is the pulmonary oedema.

In addition, the committee found that "there was no evidence that the deceased had been ‘branded’ or given repeated application of heat with an instrument or object."

But the committee's conclusion takes the cake. It concluded that "all body injuries noted on the deceased were insufficient, either individually or collectively to cause death directly,” Excuse me? Have I failed my English?

From their own report, they said that Kugan was being repeatedly beaten by a blunt, albeit flexible, object. This object could be a folded rubber hose. The injuries caused by this beating caused trauma and this trauma caused kidney failure. This kidney failure in turn caused the acute myocarditis, which the committee concluded had always been suffered by Kugan, to worsen. That caused the oedema and he died. How could then the committee conclude that all the injuries were insufficient, individually or collectively, to cause the death?

Is it not the case that, by the committee's own report, it is clear as daylight that the injuries had caused the death? In fact they directly caused the death. Assuming that Kugan had always had acute myocarditis, as the committee insisted, would he have died without the beatings? The answer would surely be in the negative. Without the beatings, Kugan could have watched the twilight race at Sepang last weekend (although the race was not completed)! He died because somewhere, someone, or some people repeatedly whacked him so hard with a blunt, but flexible, object which made his acute myocarditis morph into an oedema, a condition which he died from. In law therefore, the beatings are a direct cause of the death. It is but a part of a chain of causation for his death. How could it be concluded otherwise?

In any event, a search at Wikipedia shows that "myocarditis refers to an underlying process that causes inflammation and injury of the heart. It does not refer to inflammation of the heart as a consequence of some other insult (sic). Many secondary causes, such as a heart attack, can lead to inflammation of the myocardium and therefore the diagnosis of myocarditis can not be made by evidence of inflammation of the myocardium alone." I understand this to mean that although myocarditis is an underlying condition, such inflamation could also be caused by other causes, such as a heart attack. Was this angle investigated by the committee?

I wonder what actually happened to Kugan.

No comments: