I WAS surprised by the statement by Inspector-General of Police Abdul Hamid Bador on the progress of the probe into the sex videos.

The revelation of the motive, plot and exoneration of a minister are all so simply put in a nutshell.

Apparently the police have no qualms about revealing privileged information that only becomes available at the investigative stage of any criminal inquiry.

The contents of his statement have fuelled more speculation rather than putting the rumours to rest.

Have the police jumped the gun?

Normally such statements are needed, only when there is too much speculation on the ground that needs clarification. It is opined that the IGP’s revelations were premature.

It would be prudent for the police at this stage to minimise such statements until the investigation is completed and the evidence is discussed with the Attorney-General’s Chambers.

Admissions, confessions and investigative conclusions must be kept close to the investigators’ chest at this early stage of the probe.

Such revelations can jeopardise the prosecution’s case when or if, it is brought to court. Even during proceedings, it takes a great scrutiny by the presiding judge in deciding which part is exculpatory or inculpatory.

It raises the question as to whether those privy to such sensitive evidence are experienced enough to know the requirements of court proceedings and how evidence is adduced.

What may seem clear now may not be admissible evidence in court during proceedings.

Needless to say that gathering such evidence at this stage is the earliest part of how the criminal justice system works.

It is still subject to scrutiny and veracity by court proceedings, subject to cross-examination by both the defence and the prosecution depending on whether the prosecution makes a prima facie case against the accused.

Investigators normally refrain from commenting on any admissions, confessions or motives at this stage.

The right time to say anything at the earliest, if at all, are when charges are framed. Even then words said must be chosen carefully.

The focus from the start of such a high profile investigation should be to swiftly identify those who have broken the law, prosecute them and to secure a conviction.

Action must speak louder than words by letting the law take its course. All the talking by both the investigators and prosecutors should be done in court, during proceedings. – July 20, 2019.

* G. Selva reads The Malaysian Insight.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.