Hirunews Logo
HiruNews
HiruNews
HiruNews
First+shot+fired+by+Bharatha+Lakshman%E2%80%99s+bodyguard+Gamini+critically+injuring+Duminda+Silva+precipitated+all+other+events+thereafter+-+Presidents+Counsel+tells+Supreme+Court
Friday, 20 July 2018 - 17:39
First shot fired by Bharatha Lakshman’s bodyguard Gamini critically injuring Duminda Silva precipitated all other events thereafter - Presidents Counsel tells Supreme Court
485

Shares
58,297

Views
Presidents Counsel Anil Silva impressed upon the court that if Bharatha Lakshman’s bodyguard had not fired the first shot at Duminda Silva’s head causing grievous hurt, all other resultant and subsequent events would not have happened.
 
The appeal by former MP Duminda Silva seeking the Supreme Court to acquit him was again taken up by the five bench Supreme Court judges chaired by Chief Justice Priyasath Dep.
 
Presidents Counsel  Anil Silva responding in reply to Attorney General Department’s verbal submission earlier summarized several facts and placed before the court, points on which all parties including the attorney general’s department agreed upon, which includes;
 
 
 * No firearm handled by Duminda Silva at any time during the day under review

 * Former MP Duminda Silva did NOT fire a single shot at any given time

 * The meeting of the two parties was accidental

 * The First shot was fired at Duminda Silva causing grievous hurt to his head, who fell unconscious to the ground instantly

 * Duminda Silva was immediately evacuated from the scene of the incident and rushed to the Hospital
 
 
In addition, the President’s Counsel reiterated that Bharatha Premachandra’s bodyguard “Gamini” fired the first shot injuring Duminda Silva, as emphasized by the attorney generals Department, which in fact precipitated and ignited all subsequent events.
 
He also said that Duminda Silva who received grievous penetrating gunshot injuries to his head, fell unconscious and was immediately removed to the hospital, and as such cannot be held responsible for any events that took place thereafter.
 
He posed the question, how under these circumstances Duminda Silva, who was unconscious and evacuated immediately from the scene, could be made guilty of a Murder Charge.
 
He emphasized that the evidence given by a single witness “interested” due to his close association with Bharatha Lakshman whose statements to the CID was belated, could be considered while disregarding all other versions of all other prosecution witnesses especially those made by trained government security officers.
 
Further, the President’s Counsel stated that the narration of this single interested witness cannot be reconciled, when considering forensic evidence of experts and judicial medical officers.
 
He echoed that irrespective of all these important facts which were analytically placed before the Trial at Bar, none of these had been considered at the time of delivering the majority trial at bar verdict, probably as they were clouded by the desire to convict the 11th accused.
 
The Counsel pointed out that Duminda Silva was deprived of a fair trial even though the judgement itself says that none of the witnesses can be relied upon 100%.
 
 
Extracting points from the High Court Judgement itself, Anil Silva placed before the Supreme Court instances where the investigators have threatened and intimidated witnesses to fall in line with the false evidences fabricated by them and making those who did not compromise listed as accused.
 
Here again, all instances of falsification had been placed before the Trial at Bar judges, but completely ignored in arriving at the majority judgement.
 
 
Presidents Counsel   Anil Silva pointed out that the Attorney Generals department had admitted in their written submissions to the trial at bar “If only the Himbutana shooting incident occurred the accused could not have been charged in the manner they have now being charged”.
 
Presidents Counsel concluded saying under these circumstances the investigators worked backwards and fabricated events to implicate and charge Former MP Duminda Silva.
 
Further, Presidents Counsel  Anil Silva pointed out that the verdict delivered finding Duminda Silva guilty was presented by one learned judge and since the other supporting learned Judge had not given his reasoning, the judgement by its self does not stand acceptable in its true sense.
 
The 3rd Learned Judge who had delivered the dissenting judgement at the trial at bar had acquitted all accused including Duminda Silva from all charges. 


Make a Comment
Make a Comment

DOWNLOAD HIRUNEWS APP ON ANDROID & APPLE
You may also like :
HiruNews
Thursday, 16 August 2018 - 16:24
Mangroves play a critical role in maintaining the ecological balance in Sri Lanka's coastal areas.However, some money-hungry people do not understand this.Our... Read More
HiruNews
News Image
Hiru News Programme Segments
HiruNews
HiruNews
HiruNews
HiruNews
HiruNews
HiruNews
HiruNews
HiruNews
HiruNews
1,515 Views
HiruNews
HiruNews
HiruNews
640 Views
HiruNews
HiruNews
HiruNews
6,583 Views
HiruNews
HiruNews
HiruNews
16,397 Views
HiruNews
HiruNews
HiruNews
231 Views
HiruNews
HiruNews
HiruNews
44,731 Views
Top