A 15-year-old boy accused of murdering a 16-year-old female student at a secondary school in Bandar Utama last year has apologised for what happened while giving his statement in court.
His lawyer, Kitson Foong, told reporters about the apology during a break in proceedings at the High Court before Judge Adlin Abdul Majid today.
Gave an unsworn statement from the dock
According to Kosmo!, Foong said the teenager chose to give an unsworn statement from the dock.
This meant that he was not subjected to cross examination by the prosecution.
Foong said the teenager read out a short statement in court and apologised over what had happened and the death that followed.
He also apologised for what had happened, which resulted in the victim’s death and so on.”
After the teenager finished giving his statement, the defence called its second witness, Hospital Bahagia Ulu Kinta consultant forensic psychiatrist Dr Ian Lloyd Anthony, to testify.
Defence to rely on Section 84
Foong also said the legal team will utilise Section 84 of the Penal Code in their defence, which relates to acts committed by a person of unsound mind.
Testimony from the forensic psychiatrist is expected to continue later in the day.
The court had earlier ordered the teenager to enter his defence after finding that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against him.
According to the charge, the boy was 14-years-old at the time of the incident, where he was accused of murdering Yap Shing Xuen inside the girls’ toilet between 9.20am and 9.35am on Oct 14, 2025.
The charge was framed under Section 302 of the Penal Code, which provides for the death penalty or imprisonment of between 30 and 40 years, as well as no fewer than 12 strokes of the cane upon conviction.
However, Section 97(1) of the Child Act 2001 states that the death penalty cannot be imposed on someone who was a child at the time the offence was committed.
Under Section 97(2), a child convicted of such an offence may instead be detained at the pleasure of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong if the offence was committed in the Federal Territories, or at the pleasure of the respective Ruler or Yang di-Pertua Negeri if it was committed in a state.
READ ALSO:
