Accused in Kovan murder kept in touch with boss after crime
The Kovan murder suspect Iskandar leaves the Subordinate Courts on July 15, 2013. TODAY file photo
SINGAPORE — A couple of hours after he stabbed to death a father and son pair, Iskandar Rahmat informed his superior in the police force that he could not report for duty that night, saying that he needed to meet a cousin to discuss a loan to settle his S$65,000 bank debt.
Although he left for Malaysia that night, the 36-year-old did not vanish. Instead, he kept up the front, contacting his superior two days later to say he would be declared a bankrupt and planned to move to Malaysia — suggesting he harboured hopes that the crime would not be traced back to him.
Hours later, the Malaysian police nabbed him at an eatery in Danga Bay, Johor Baru, after a 50-hour-plus manhunt.
The court today (Oct 27) heard the testimony of Iskandar’s superior, police Senior Station Inspector Nurussufyan Ali. The testimony gave a glimpse into Iskandar’s state of mind after he allegedly killed car workshop owner Tan Boon Sin, and then Tan’s son Chee Heong, on July 10, 2013.
Shortly after fleeing, Iskandar texted Mr Nurussufyan at about 6pm, asking to take time off work. The reason: He had to meet his cousin urgently. Things were not going well and he had to rectify them, he said. He was supposed to report for duty that night.
At that point, Iskandar was facing disciplinary action for financial embarrassment; he owed OCBC bank more than S$65,000. He told the police disciplinary board that a non-existent cousin would loan him the money, but in fact he had been plotting to rob and kill the elder Tan, the prosecution alleged.
Later that night, Iskandar was said to have told Mr Nurussufyan that he was still talking to his cousin, followed by the text two days later telling his superior that he planned to leave for Malaysia.
Despite facing disciplinary action and being barred from carrying arms, Iskandar, who served as an investigation officer for almost a decade before joining Mr Nurussufyan’s division, was “cheerful and effective in his work”. He even organised a team function by booking and paying for a chalet, and throughout the disciplinary proceedings, Iskandar remained confident that he could repay the debt.
Since the start of the trial last Tuesday, the defence has maintained that the elder Tan had pulled a knife on Iskandar, prompting the accused to kill in self-defence.
Taking the stand today, Dr Tan Peng Hui, who had been asked to examine Iskandar’s injured left hand and determine if there were bite marks, said that the injury pattern on Iskandar’s hand was not consistent with that of human bite marks.
“The reason is that in a human bite mark, you would see individual tooth marks ... but I saw none of this on the palm of the left hand,” said the visiting consultant forensic orthodontist at the Health Sciences Authority.
Another witness who took the stand today echoed a doctor’s opinion made earlier that the elder Tan would not have been able to attack someone quickly.
Orthopaedic doctor Brian Lee, who treated the elder Tan until 2011, said his patient had signs of osteoarthritis in both knees. His condition would have deteriorated between 2011 and his death in 2013, and it was “very likely” that he would have developed more significant disability over that time.
The trial continues tomorrow.
