Soon after the renovation was complete, the couple hastily moved out, raising the suspicions of their landlord, Ng Bee Juan.

He went to the house and, upon inspecting the kitchen, was surprised to see the floor had been recently cemented over. He called in contractors to break open the cement, and they were met with a foul stench and the gruesome sight of a child’s body.

It was the remains of the couple’s nine-year-old son, Loo Yong Shen, one of four children. The others were then aged 14, 10, and seven.

The couple were arrested and Loo was charged with murder, while his wife was charged with concealing evidence by burying their son’s remains.

Tan pleaded guilty on Nov 12, 2015 and was sentenced to two years in prison, while Loo’s case proceeded for trial at the High Court in Shah Alam.

An unexpected twist

The case was heard over two years, with 17 witnesses called to testify. In 2018, High Court judge Ghazali Cha acquitted Loo, ruling that the prosecution failed to prove its case.

He said the prosecution had failed to call material witnesses such as Tan and her other children, as well as the chemist who had conducted DNA tests to prove the couple’s relationship to the boy.

The court reduced the father’s murder charge to one of concealing evidence, similar to the charge against his wife. Loo pleaded guilty and was sentenced to five years’ jail from the date of his arrest, March 30, 2015.

What happened during the trial?

Loo’s lawyer, Mak Kah Keong, said the evidence presented during the trial had been insufficient to link his client to Yong Shen’s death.

According to Mak, there had been holes in the prosecution’s case, such as their claim that Loo had beaten the boy to death. “No evidence presented during the trial showed that the boy was beaten. In fact, his bone structure was intact.”

Mak said the mother, who by then had been released, was supposed to have been the key prosecution witness but had not been called to testify. The police also failed to locate Tan and her children.

Mak further said the prosecution had attempted to admit statements recorded from the couple’s other children, but the defence had objected on grounds that they did not satisfy legal requirements.

“Two of the children had had their statements recorded through a family friend, in which the man translated their statements from the local Sabah dialect to Malay,” Mak explained.

“Only the eldest child spoke in Malay to the police officer who recorded her statement.”

He said neither the family friend nor the police officer had been called to testify – a fatal flaw in the prosecution’s case. Another was the failure of the investigating officer to identify the dead boy, Yong Shen.

Mak said it is uncertain whether the prosecution had ever lodged an appeal against the High Court’s decision to acquit Loo of murder, or if they had failed to serve an appeal notice to Loo.

By convention, if an appeal notice is not served after several attempts, the higher courts will strike out the notice, thus maintaining the original court judgement.

Mak said he has no idea of Loo’s whereabouts, and has not spoken to him since he went to prison for concealing evidence.

Seven years after the boy’s body was discovered, and with the High Court ruling that there was no evidence linking the father to the son’s death, the question of what actually happened remains unanswered.

FMT reached out to the Attorney-General’s Chambers for comment but has yet to receive a response at press time.