• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Is public assault civil or criminal? by seah chiang nee

winnipegjets

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Joined
Jul 19, 2011
Messages
27,854
Points
113
Insight Down South

Published: Saturday April 5, 2014 MYT 12:00:00 AM
Updated: Saturday April 5, 2014 MYT 6:47:23 AM

Police in Singapore are ready to arrest peaceful protesters – but not someone who beat up a member of the public.

SOME eight years ago, a young doctor who was having supper at a Geylang hawker stall was set upon by six to eight thugs.

Accusing him of staring, they assaulted him in the face and abdomen, inflicting multiple facial fractures and damaging a facial nerve.

In a three-hour operation, doctors inserted two metal plates around one of his eyes. For his sister, the bigger shock was to come.

When police arrived they declined to arrest the assailants, even though she provided them with two of the motorcycle numbers her brother had taken down. She was told it was a civil case and she had to report to the Magistrates’ Court and let it decide if any action was to be taken.

It was only 10 days later, after a public furore erupted, that they agreed to reclassify the case and go after the assailants.

Since this high profile 2006 case, there have been a series of others in which police regarded public beatings by a stranger as a civil case, unless:

> The victim is a political leader, an MP, or a civil servant, or

> The attacker uses a dangerous weapon or the victim is grievously injured.

Many Singaporeans were shocked and angry, questioning the role of the Men in Blue in protecting citizens.

Commentator Alice Cheong wrote “What is the world coming to? You mean we can get away with assaulting a stranger in Singapore? I thought Singapore is a safe place that one can walk the street after night fall.”

That – and fewer patrolling policemen – led some Singaporeans to believe that the police are too short-handed to deal with the expanded population.

Another indication came in 2007 when a law was passed that allows the military to conduct civilian security operations. This includes the power to search, detain and use force against suspects.

Last week the Commissioner of Police Ng Joo Hee admitted what people had long suspected.

His message at the official inquiry into the Little India riot was that security-conscious Singapore is seriously short of policemen because of the rise in population.

In 1994, there were 222 officers for every 100,000 residents here. Now there are 163. He wanted 1,000 more officers.

“Cities of comparable sizes like Hong Kong, Tokyo, New York, London, operate with two or three times more officers than Singapore does per resident,” he said.

This is the latest complaint of shortage due to rapid immigration –next to public housing and transport, healthcare and university places.


The police have not connected the shortage to making a victim of a non-grievous assault lodge a Magistrate’s complaint.

“It’s to discourage indiscriminate use of process for mischievous or malicious complaints, which would otherwise result in harassment of the defendant, wasting public time and resources,” said a spokesman.

This shortage – like insufficient public housing, healthcare and others – has serious consequences. It deals with internal security, something Singapore is serious about.

The huge immigration – although recently reduced – is leading to a rise in friction between groups of foreigners and between Singaporeans and migrant workers. At the same time, the economy is trying hard to attract foreign wealth and talent.

All this requires a greater presence of police officers on the ground.

A major concern is that if investors lose faith in their ability to crack down on violence and lawlessness, they may go elsewhere.

This is particularly the case if they feel their families are now inadequately protected when trouble breaks out.

The riot in Little India, the biggest in 40 years, has already raised speculation whether more may be in store. Last month a dormitory of 50 Indian and Bangladeshi clashed with sticks over a live TV cricket match between Bangladesh and West Indies (Indian-supported).

During the Inquiry, the Police Commissioner warned that his bigger worry is Geylang where thousands of foreign prostitutes ply their service.

“Geylang is a potential powder keg ... There is an overt hostility and antagonism towards the police,” he said.

The reluctance to record some categories of violent crimes has prompted cynics to ask whether it has kept crime figures lower than in real life.

There is an added controversy when police are ready to arrest four public peaceful protesters – but not someone who beat up a member of the public.

“Do they regard violent crime as less important than political activism,” asked an opposition member.

This may embolden thugs to become more active, knowing as long as they don’t inflict serious injuries on someone, the police will not act. It may also encourage the setting up of civilian vigilante groups for defence.

To Singaporeans, the danger of police shortage is less worrisome than police inaction against public attackers, where injuries are not serious.

“Asking a victim to sue his attacker in a civil court is the height of folly,” said a law student.

Several years ago a migrant from Hong Kong, who had served 18 years as a police officer and two years as a lawyer in the former British colony, wrote: “I enjoy the quality of life here, which includes excellent law and order. But I am amazed by the state of law in this area.”

“In Hong Kong the slightest injury as a result of personal violence is Common Assault and is actionable either by civil or criminal procedures,” he added.

The vice and gambling dens of Geylang will make way for a new city of up-market condos – but in 20 years’ time.
 
Sinkees need not fear ...if they humtum foreigners, the most they will face is civil suit.

Bet that if there is a rise in such attacks, the PAP will change the law to protect the foreigners.

But that will be a good thing as it will show up the PAP credential as party for foreigners.
 
Sinkie Police are the most dumb fuck and ball-less idiots that exist on this earth. Can't even understand simple English, like this extract from the Penal Code and that's only focusing on the word "assault" and not the injuries caused with intent:

Criminal force
350. Whoever intentionally uses force to any person, without that person’s consent, in order to cause the committing of any offence, or intending by the use of such force illegally to cause, or knowing it to be likely that by the use of such force he will illegally cause injury, fear or annoyance to the person to whom the force is used, is said to use criminal force to that other.

Assault
351. Whoever makes any gesture or any preparation, intending or knowing it to be likely that such gesture or preparation will cause any person present to apprehend that he who makes that gesture or preparation is about to use criminal force to that person, is said to commit an assault.
Explanation—Mere words do not amount to an «assault. But the words which a person uses may give to his gestures or preparations such a meaning as may make those gestures or preparations amount to an assault.

Punishment for using criminal force otherwise than on grave and sudden provocation
352. Whoever assaults or uses criminal force to any person otherwise than on grave and sudden provocation given by that person, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 3 months, or with fine which may extend to $1,500, or with both.
 
Last edited:
超級白 always taichi away their responsibilities. Fuck them come 2016.
 
Sinkees need not fear ...if they humtum foreigners, the most they will face is civil suit.

Bet that if there is a rise in such attacks, the PAP will change the law to protect the foreigners.

But that will be a good thing as it will show up the PAP credential as party for foreigners.

I would be retarded if I follow this suggestion.
 
I not sure if Seah got this one right. The CP might be laughing all the way to the Bank if at the end of the little Indian COI, if the SPF gets more resources and toys but be let off the hook with some harsh words.

They had the manpower and the means but did not know how to react. The initial reaction was too soft and the Indians became bolder. Even the local Indian shopkeepers made those comments at the COI. The SOC was available and not at the base by within the city on routine patrol. The activation command was slow, the route taken was wrong. Nothing to do with resources.

Lodging a magistrate complaint has been the practice for decades. And a Police ASP has the right to make a Police case based on the severity of the assault. But they either lazy or forgot that they can intervene. Nobody wants common assault among drinking buddies, family members and neighbours turned into Police case because it will make matters worse down the road. What the public is seeking is that Police intervene when the assault is serious, totally unprovoked and between complete strangers and assault in public places where failure to act gives the licence for bullies to carry on.
 

A policeman's lot is not a happy one but no worries
Sinkie Polis bery lucky, got Scroobal to come to their defence
With some powderful Engrish and a lot of Shit Times mind tricks
Since the whole town is gossiping about self-glorifying musicals
Why not let me introduce you to some arty farty mocking songs

When a felon's not engaged in his employment,
Or maturing his felonious little plans,
His capacity for innocent enjoyment
Is just as great as any honest man's.
Our feelings we with difficulty smother
When constabulary duty's to be done:
Ah, take one consideration with another,
A policeman's lot is not a happy one!


[video=youtube;N81Js_SkXak]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N81Js_SkXak[/video]
 
Sinkie poodles have done even more retarded things: for example, handcuffing a SPH reporter for taking photos of a flood.


http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2010/07/photographer-handcuffed-by-police-for-taking-flood-pictures/

wu320240.jpg


Look at that nerdy weasel in a police uniform. He's like a clone of Lui Tuck Yew. :rolleyes:
 
Mp is considered civil servant. Bus driver even is considered public service. If either kena hantam can arrest. Everyone else without any legal protection cannot, unless police witness fight. Of course supervisor can ask to investigate case.
 
What about an assault on colleague in the office or outside the office? Is this a seizable offence?
 
Last edited:
Police see arrest. No see no arrest. Obviously got video can arrest lah
 
Their obvious course is now to hide ...

[video=youtube;gzSTTTCOHr4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzSTTTCOHr4[/video]
 
Police see arrest. No see no arrest. Obviously got video can arrest lah

Penal Code in SG based on old British colonial laws. Out of tune in modern world. Kena hantum and injured should be good enough for police to prosecute. American system better. You hantum someone, you get charged. No need for policeman to see the hantum. In SG, it is like jungle laws. You hantum, you run, no prosecution. Civil case only.
 
Not civil lah. Judge or police decide . But it is stupid to make such a big circus. Essentially wasting the victims time
 
Who can/should we complain to when the police does not act in a public assault case?

Is that a negligence of duty?
 
yes good question
how can we 'force' the police to take action if they refused to do so

can complain to MP ..MHA ?
 
What about an assault on colleague in the office or outside the office? Is this a seizable offence?

Depends on injuries suffered. But police can always make an arest with a more serious classification pending medical report.
 
I not sure if Seah got this one right. The CP might be laughing all the way to the Bank if at the end of the little Indian COI, if the SPF gets more resources and toys but be let off the hook with some harsh words.

They had the manpower and the means but did not know how to react. The initial reaction was too soft and the Indians became bolder. Even the local Indian shopkeepers made those comments at the COI. The SOC was available and not at the base by within the city on routine patrol. The activation command was slow, the route taken was wrong. Nothing to do with resources.

Lodging a magistrate complaint has been the practice for decades. And a Police ASP has the right to make a Police case based on the severity of the assault. But they either lazy or forgot that they can intervene. Nobody wants common assault among drinking buddies, family members and neighbours turned into Police case because it will make matters worse down the road. What the public is seeking is that Police intervene when the assault is serious, totally unprovoked and between complete strangers and assault in public places where failure to act gives the licence for bullies to carry on.

The CP may have shown that SG needs more police if compared with other cities but it does not mean SG did not have the means to control a localized riot. The police need a one to one ratio or superior numbers to quell a mob ? Grotesque failure of these highly paid passengers on the gravy train.
 
yes good question
how can we 'force' the police to take action if they refused to do so

can complain to MP ..MHA ?

carry a knuckleduster with you at all times. you can say old fart told you so. :p
 
Back
Top