Mahathir was quoted in Utusan Malaysia explaining his choice of VK Lingam as his lawyer in the Anwar Ibrahim defamation matter:
‘‘Saya pernah membaca berita mengenai (VK)Lingam dalam satu kes lain. Saya baca tentangnya dalam akhbar semasa dia mengendalikan beberapa kes dan saya rasa dia boleh menjadi peguam yang sesuai,’’
Readers may recall that the "berita mengenai (VK)Lingam " included the now famous article by David Samuels , as well as numerous references to the Ayer Molk case, previously reported on this blog at link:http://malaysianjudges.blogspot.com/2007/08/azmel-maamor-of-federal-court-ayer.html.
Is it possible that in regards to the Ayer Molek case, Mahathir is not aware of the Court of Appeal's dicta in that case,"Something is rotten in the State of Denmark"?, despite the extensive coverage given the matter and that dicta?
On the other hand, did Mahathir choose Lingam for the job of defending himself against Anwar's claim in defamation precisely because Lingam had been reported to be the agent responsible for the rotting of the House of Denmark?
Mahathir must choose between being seen to be very stupid or very cunning.