The former Malayalam teacher of Kottayam BCM College, who on September 17 had told the CBI special court juicy bits about the alleged perversions of the priests accused in the Sister Abhaya murder, was subjected to some intense scrutiny by defence lawyers on Tuesday.
The lawyers attempted to expose Thresiamma as a constant trouble-maker, pointed out inconsistencies in her statements, and sought to establish that it was her rumour-mongering that caused suspicion to fall upon the priests and a nun.
Thresiamma, on her part, was combative. She seemed so charged up that many a time she was off the blocks before the lawyer could finish shooting his question, causing both irritation and amusement in the defence team. Almost always she had a look of disapproval on her face, as though she was being unnecessarily needled.
Trouble for family and profession
Defence lawyer Raman Pillai began by asking about the cases she had filed against her brother. She said she had filed a case after she was beaten up by her brother in a property dispute. “He was angry that I had decided to leave my assets to the Missionaries of Charity. He wanted it for himself,” Thresiamma said. In retaliation for filing the case, she said her brother's daughters came into her house and beat her up once again. So she filed yet another complaint.
“Did you not kick your mother out of your house,” Raman Pillai asked. “My mother fell ill and I had to go to college. So she shifted to my brother's house that was just a kilometre away. His wife was not working and, therefore, could look after her,” Thresiamma said. When Raman Pillai wanted to know when her mother left her house, the CBI court special judge K Sanilkumar objected strongly. “I can't allow you to go an asking irrelevant questions,” the judge said.
The defence seemed to suggest that Thresiamma was nuisance not just for her family but also in her profession.
“Is it not true that action was taken against you in 1996 for sitting on the Malayalam answersheets of first year pre-degree students,” Raman Pillai asked. “I did not delay the valuation,” she said. “In fact I was the first teacher to complete the valuation. But when I took the answersheets to the chief examiner at Kottayam CMS College, he refused to accept it unless it was handed over to him at his house. I refused and promptly informed authorities. But it was only 45 days later that they came for the answersheets,” Thresiamma said.
Later, Thresiamma had filed a defamation case against the then chief examiner. The defence also made it a point to emphasise that all the three cases she had filed - two against her family and the one against the chief examiner - were thrown out by the court.
Missing wound
Raman Pillai then turned to the statement Thresiamma made before the court on September 17. “You said you had seen a small wound on the cheek of Abhaya's body, right above the upper lip and to the side of the nose,” Raman Pillai asked. “Yes I had,” she said.
“Have you told this to the CBI,” he asked. She said no. (The CBI had questioned her on December 16, 2008.) But she said she had told this in front of the magistrate a week later on December 23. “But it looks like you have not said this to the magistrate,” Pillai said looking at her magistrate statement.
Thresiamma looked surprised. “But I had told them,” she said.
Devil or angel
It turned out that some of the serious charges she had made before the CBI special court this September was not in the statement she had filed before the magistrate in 2008. Thresiamma had, for instance, said that female students had complained about accused Fr Thomas Kottoor's deeply unnerving habit of staring intently at their feet. This was not in the statement she had given to the magistrate in 2008.
Some contradictions were also highlighted. She told the court on Tuesday that she had lost respect for the accused priests long before Abhaya's death. But Raman Pillai pointed out that she had, on the contrary, told the magistrate that they were respectable people before the death. Thresiamma but insisted that she would never have told such a thing.
She was also asked whether she was familiar with Abhaya. “I was,” Thresiamma said. “I had taught her for two years,” she said. But Raman Pillai said in the statement before the magistrate it is said that she was not familiar with Abhaya. Thresiamma looked confused and angry.
Where did the rumours begin?
It was then the turn of the other defence lawyer, J Jose, to cross-examine Thresiamma. “When did the teachers in your department start to speak about the rumours about the involvement of the priests in Abhaya's death,” Jose asked. “Abhaya died on March 27 and she was cremated on March 30. From the next day on, from April 1, people started talking about their involvement,” Thresiamma said. “Madam, I just want to know when was the first time such things were spoken about in your department,” Jose asked. “From June 2,” she said.
“You had mentioned about Fr Kottoor's bad character but has he ever behaved indecently with you,” Jose asked. “He has not,” she said. “You have said that Abhaya was killed when she saw the priests in the act of sexual misconduct with a nun. Has any one ever told you that they had seen the priests in such an immoral situation before,” Jose asked. “Will anyone invite someone to such an act. They had never called me to witness it,” Thresiamma shot back. “Has anyone told you about such a thing before,” Jose insisted. “No,” she said defiantly.
“Is 'vayadi' the right Malayalam word for a talkative person,” Jose asked Thresiamma, a former Malayalam professor. She stood silent for a moment, as if trying to avoid a trap, and then hesitantly said “yes”. “Now what if I tell that it were the stories spread by 'vayadis' like you that put the accused in trouble,” he asked. “It was not me who made up these stories,” Thresiamma said.
Fill in the blanks
Jose then pulled up a complaint she had filed against the chief examiner in the answersheet issue. Thresiamma had received an open letter from the chief examiner. It was a spiteful letter with two to three unfilled 'fill in the blanks'-like dashes. “Can you call yourself a teacher you dash dash dash.”
Thresiamma considered this highly insulting. She filed a complaint in the court saying that the 'dashes' were used to mean harlot (abhisarika) and prostitute (thevidissy). “So you told the court that on seeing the letter people suddenly thought bad about you,” Jose said. “Yes,” she said. “It is so sad,” Jose said, and with this loaded lament he rested his case.
