UnNews:Ex-Idol accused of sodomy

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
UnNews Logo Potato.png This article is part of UnNews, your source for up-to-the-picosecond misinformation.

5 February 2010


Not again...

“He was my idol”

~ Saiful on Anwar

KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia -– Those were the very words uttered from the mouth of the accuser, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan describig his relationship with Anwar Ibrahim, leader of Malaysia's opposition party, whom he accuses of sodomy. Previously, The Honorable Grandfather Radiant, title translated from the local language, Anwar Ibrahim was first accused of sodomy in 1999 and has since been exonerated of all charges.

The previous trial[edit | edit source]

However, he can't shake the feeling of déjà vu last year as disgraced aide Saiful, a university dropout, accused him of the same crime dismissed in 2004. When approached, the consensus amongst political analysts is that the trial is a farce:

US observers, however was more skeptical, given their experience with national leaders.

2010: Odyssey/ Sodomy Two[edit | edit source]

In the first week of trials, which would have been summarily dismissed in the US, the prosecutors submitted the testimony of the accuser, Saiful. Most of the exhibits were met with derision and laughter from the public.

Testimony of the accuser[edit | edit source]

Prosecution team ponders the venue for lunch

Firstly Saiful claimed that he put up with Anwar because he idolized him when Saiful was a child. The defense objected immediately to the veracity of the statement as the first Malaysian Idol was in 2004, when Saiful was already an adult, and that Anwar could not have qualified for the competition as he was too old at the time (57). Simon Cowell added:


Saiful also claimed that he has not passed motion for 2 days, which was immediately met with ridicule from medical community:


The prosecution evidence[edit | edit source]

Saiful also handed over two shirts, a pair of pants, two pair of underwear and a bottle of KY lube. The rest of the proceeding was deemed R-rated as the presence of underwear in Malaysia is considered an extremely disturbing sexual graphic.

That label cannot be branded

Critics immediately lambasted Saiful's claims that the shirts, of G2000 make, were branded, as Karl Lagerfeld has never designed such shirts. The G2000 brand was founded in Hong Kong in the year 1980, automatically disqualifying the label from “branded” shirts. Paris Hilton, whose fashion line relies on her reputation declared:

Clamors for further comments were cut short by her chihuahua.

The presentation of the pair of pants also drew barbs from Ermenegildo Zegna, self-declared but so-far-unchallenged world leader's in fine men's clothing. The moment the prosecutors declared the nature of the fabric, he stood up and said:

Prosecution lawyers quickly did a double-take and Saiful declared that those pants were a gift from the accused. No further questions were asked.

The courtroom went behind closed doors and checked everyone's identification before exhibiting the two pair of underwear. Once the are satisfied that everyone present are above the age of minority, the prosecution presented the two pair of male undergarments, all the while hiding from the glares of Calvin Klein. Defense lawyers were quick to point out inconsistencies in the accuser's statement:


It was at this moment that the opposition decided to switch tracks and declared to the court that they wish to present the location the where the said sodomy was done. The prosecution lawyers went forth and asked Saiful, ”Can you show us where the alleged act was perpetrated?” Under the watchful glare of Gianni Versace who rose from the grave to attend court, Saiful climbed the chair on the witness stand, pulled down his pants, pointed to his anus and said:


After much derision and hostility from the fashion designers present, the prosecuting team decided not to mention the KY lube and motion for the court to be adjourned.

End of the saga so far[edit | edit source]

Court was adjourned until 9.30am, Monday


Sources[edit | edit source]