JOHOR: The father and elder brother of the alleged assailant on a police post in Johor’s Ulu Tiram which left two officers dead were each sentenced to 30 years’ imprisonment by the Kuala Lumpur High Court on Monday (Apr 27) after pleading guilty to charges linked to violent ideology.
Judge Nurulhuda Nur’aini Mohamad Nor handed down the jail sentence to Radin Imran Radin Mohd Yassin, 64, and his eldest son, Radin Romyullah, 36.
The High Court sentenced Radin Imran to 30 years on each of three charges – spreading violent ideological beliefs, providing support to terrorist acts and possessing firearms for terrorism-related activities. He also received a three-year sentence for possessing a book linked to a terrorist group, local news agency Bernama reported.
Radin Romyullah, was sentenced to 30 years for one charge of providing support to terrorist acts and three years for possessing Islamic State (IS)-related materials.
The court ordered all sentences to run concurrently from the date of their arrest on May 17, 2024.
The court on Monday also sentenced Radin Imran’s wife, Rosna Jantan, 61, to four years’ imprisonment after she pleaded guilty to one charge of failing to provide information related to violent ideology. Her sentence will also run from the date of arrest on May 17, 2024.
Meanwhile, Radin Imran’s two daughters, Farhah Sobrina, 25, and Mariah, 21, who faced the same charge as their mother were discharged and acquitted.
Judge Nurulhuda said that the prosecution were withdrawing the charges against them following the guilty plea of their parents and older brother, local media New Straits Times reported.
Before sentencing the three accused, Nurulhuda said that the offences committed were extremely serious, as they led to the killings at the Ulu Tiram police station.
“Although the accused persons’ guilty pleas may be seen as saving the court’s time, that is not a form of discount for serious offences,” she was quoted as saying by Bernama.
The judge also said that based on the mitigation arguments submitted by the defence, no proper or reasonable justification had been presented to explain why the wrongful acts were committed.
