SHAH ALAM, Aug 13 — A 15-year-old boy, on trial for the murder of a female student at a secondary school in Bandar Utama, Petaling Jaya last year, expressed remorse over the incident while testifying in the High Court today.
The accused, who was ordered to enter his defence after the prosecution established a prima facie case, chose to give an unsworn statement from the dock.
"He said he was sorry for what happened that caused the death and so on," defence lawyer Kitson Foong told the media after the hearing before Judge Adlin Abdul Majid.
Earlier, he informed the court that the defence would rely on the expert testimony of a psychiatrist to support a claim of unsoundness of mind under Section 84 of the Penal Code.
Hospital Bahagia Ulu Kinta's Dr Ian Lloyd Anthony was called as an expert witness under Section 45 of the Evidence Act 1950, to testify on the teenager's mental state, including the referral process, treatment, and clinical findings.
Foong added that the defence had questioned the expert on psychiatric terms, such as psychosis and schizophrenia, in addition to the written report already filed.
The final witness for today, Dr Ian testified that the teenager had suffered from delusions and mental illness for about five years.
Foong said that the expert believed a long treatment gap could worsen mental illness, especially when it begins in childhood.
His testimony resumes this afternoon, including possible cross-examination, before the defence closes its case and presents submissions.
The teenager is charged with murdering a 16-year-old girl in a school toilet in Bandar Utama between 9.20am and 9.35am on October 14, 2025.
The charge under Section 302 of the Penal Code carries the death penalty. However, under Section 97(1) of the Child Act 2001, the death penalty cannot be imposed on offenders under 18 if convicted.
Instead, under Section 97(2) of the same Act, the court may order the offender to be detained for a period determined by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, the Sultan, or the Yang di-Pertua Negeri.
After the afternoon proceedings, Foong told the media the court had heard that the teenager’s schoolmates knew him as "the boy who always wears the mask", a post-COVID habit and a key point in the defence's mental health argument.
He noted that according to Dr Ian's testimony, the accused was normal before the pandemic but showed drastic behavioural changes afterwards.
Some classmates had never seen his face until the day of the incident, and at home, he reportedly covered his face with his shirt when speaking to family.
Dr Ian’s interviews with teachers and classmates confirmed the boy was normal pre-pandemic, with changes emerging only after that period.
"The psychiatrist said the symptoms appeared post-COVID. Mask-wearing was necessary during COVID, but he kept it on even after, right up until the incident," Foong said.
He said that the defence views the teenager's actions and reactions before, during and after the incident, including his arrest and the course of the investigation, as strong supporting evidence of mental disturbance.
However, the specific type of mental illness afflicting the teenager cannot yet be disclosed, as the court has yet to rule on the admissibility of the expert's testimony.
Foong said his client is still receiving treatment and taking medication to control his emotions and delusions, and has been told he will need to continue the medication for life.
The cross-examination of Dr Ian will resume on August 26, followed by re-examination and the close of the defence case on the same day.
