http://uncleyap-news.blogspot.com/2010/09/no-case-and-dismisal-application-for.html
<!-- Begin .post -->
No case and dismisal application for TBT on National Day 2008
http://uncleyap-news.blogspot.com/2010/08/2nd-toa-payoh-central-tak-boleh-tahan.html">Related Blog Post on evidence
http://uncleyap-news.blogspot.com/2008/08/familee-leegime-panic-as-tak-boleh.html">Event's Blog News 1
http://uncleyap-news.blogspot.com/2008/08/national-days-tak-boleh-tahan-campaign.html">Event' Blog News 2 (admitted by prosecution as evidence but absolutely help my defense, Thank You LEEgime!)
Today in court 6 the prosecution case closed for the Tak Boleh Tahan event at Toa Payoh Central KFC held on 9th Aug 2008 National Day.
Most of the defendants had opted not to enter any No Case Submission, while Dr. CSJ made few of them changed their minds from making their own no-case submission to making none. I had given an oral submission for no case to answer, and after hearing that the judge directed to enter further submission on aspects of Participation & Assemblies, as there is dispute and arguments that prosecution and defense (myself) is not on the same page on these aspects.
I had prepared the following written submissions for tomorrow's hearing.
Pse pay attention to the attached application to dismiss the case, and BIG Thank You to Superintendent Deep Singh for his great contributions to make this possible!
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Ke74GFuXRms/TH5_X9GmeaI/AAAAAAAAC-w/lAfGcdiUyWQ/s1600/deep_singh.hub.jpg">
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Ke74GFuXRms/TH5_X9GmeaI/AAAAAAAAC-w/lAfGcdiUyWQ/s400/deep_singh.hub.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5511983043464034722" border="0" />
Supplement to No Case Submissions Tak Boleh Tahan Case National Day 2008
On Aspect of Assembly:
Date: National Day, Saturday
Time: 12 noon – 3pm
Place: Toa Payoh Central, Blk 190 (outside the KFC restaurant)
Activity: Distributing flyers and walkabout
Dress: Tak Boleh Tahan! T-shirt
On the aspect of Participation:
<!-- End .post -->
<!-- Begin .post -->
No case and dismisal application for TBT on National Day 2008
http://uncleyap-news.blogspot.com/2010/08/2nd-toa-payoh-central-tak-boleh-tahan.html">Related Blog Post on evidence
http://uncleyap-news.blogspot.com/2008/08/familee-leegime-panic-as-tak-boleh.html">Event's Blog News 1
http://uncleyap-news.blogspot.com/2008/08/national-days-tak-boleh-tahan-campaign.html">Event' Blog News 2 (admitted by prosecution as evidence but absolutely help my defense, Thank You LEEgime!)
Today in court 6 the prosecution case closed for the Tak Boleh Tahan event at Toa Payoh Central KFC held on 9th Aug 2008 National Day.
Most of the defendants had opted not to enter any No Case Submission, while Dr. CSJ made few of them changed their minds from making their own no-case submission to making none. I had given an oral submission for no case to answer, and after hearing that the judge directed to enter further submission on aspects of Participation & Assemblies, as there is dispute and arguments that prosecution and defense (myself) is not on the same page on these aspects.
I had prepared the following written submissions for tomorrow's hearing.
Pse pay attention to the attached application to dismiss the case, and BIG Thank You to Superintendent Deep Singh for his great contributions to make this possible!
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Ke74GFuXRms/TH5_X9GmeaI/AAAAAAAAC-w/lAfGcdiUyWQ/s1600/deep_singh.hub.jpg">
Supplement to No Case Submissions Tak Boleh Tahan Case National Day 2008
On Aspect of Assembly:
- The Definition of the alleged Activity in evidence:
- The charge stated the “Tak Boleh Tahan” campaign organized by the Singapore Democratic Party.
- Exhibit P30-3 which is Singapore Democratic Party's web page noticing public about the event had defined just above that location map:
Date: National Day, Saturday
Time: 12 noon – 3pm
Place: Toa Payoh Central, Blk 190 (outside the KFC restaurant)
Activity: Distributing flyers and walkabout
Dress: Tak Boleh Tahan! T-shirt
- It is therefore abundantly clear that the participants are limited to those persons who fulfilled the given 3 conditions consisting of PLACE & ACTIVITY & DRESS. Those not fulfilling these 3 conditions given by Singapore Democratic Party which is the alleged organizer stated in the charge, are thus NOT a participant.
- Accused Yap Keng Ho was on the Stair Case over-looking the Walkway which is about 2 meters above the walkway outside KFC restaurant at the time of 2:33 pm stated in the amended charge, as various evidence showed. The charge stated “at the walkway in front of Blk 190 Toa Payoh Lorong 6” it did NOT include the staircase at all. The staircase is not in anyway a part of the walkway below it. That means Yap Keng Ho have got a proven alibi.
- Accused Yap Keng Hos' where about at the time of 2:33 pm stated in the amended charge also did not fit the alleged organizer's definition of PLACE for the activity, so he could not have participated.
- The Activity given by the alleged organizer was Distributing flyers and walkabout, so anyone not involved in distributing flyers and walkabout are not the participants. Accused Yap Keng Ho is not in any way proven to be distributing flyers nor in the walkabout activity. So he has no case to answer because he is not proven to be in any assembly which alleged organizers defined to be distributing flyers and walkabout.
- The alleged organizer also provided definition of dress code for the activity to be Tak Boleh Tahan! T-shirt for it's participants. Accused Yap Keng Ho is not in any way proven to be wearing any such attire, so he has no case to answer because his dress code did not fit the organizer's definition.
- The Group Photo Taking is not a part of the alleged activity:
- The alleged organizer did not define Group Photo Taking with a banner as part of their intended activity.
- Any group of citizens should be allowed to take a group photo in a place of public without any infringement of any law.
- Group photos are commonly taken with banners for example, YOG banner; school banner; tour group banner; church banner etc, a Tak Boleh Tahan banner should not incriminate anyone to be taking photos with it.
- HI Superintendent had testified that he will not consider that photo taking to be an offense of assembly without a permit under my cross examination.
- By the time the group photo was being taken, the activity defined by the alleged organizer of distributing flyers and walkabout had already ceased upon DSP Rani's advice, photo taking is another different activity.
- The 1<sup>st</sup> May 2008 Tak Boleh Tahan activity did not include a group photo taking either, it indicates that the alleged organizer have no intention to include it as part of the activity they organized.
- No one doing anything during and after the group photo taking should be deemed as a participant of alleged Tak Boleh Tahan activity, be that standing there for the photo or taking the photo. As long as the is no one distributing flyers or doing walkabout, the Tak Boleh Tahan activity should be deem as ended. And taking a group photo in a place of public is no offense.
- The utterance of Tak Boleh Tahan is not part of the alleged activity:
- The alleged organizer did not provide definition of the activity to be one of uttering Tak Boleh Tahan or anything else. Therefore any such utterance is not intended by the alleged organizer as part of their intended activity, and anyone just only by uttering that is not regarded as a participant of that activity.
- There is not 5 or more person uttering Tak Boleh Tahan, less than 5 person constituted no offense under the MOA.
- There is not more than one person uttering Tak Boleh Tahan simultaneously, if 5 or more persons uttered that together at the same place and time, it may suggest an assembly, but the evidence showed this is not the case.
- There is no evidence of any coherence or planed action or synchronous action to utter Tak Boleh Tahan, any individual exclamations of the very common phrase at the same place & time does not amount to participating in any assembly.
- The members of the assembly:
- The charge defined a definitive group of accused persons making the alleged assembly. Charge had not indicated any uncertainty to members alleged to be involved.
- When one of the person specified in the charge has an alibi then the entire assembly defined cannot stand because the charge is wrong.
- Court had asked the prosecution weather they wanted to amend the charge after they rested their case, but the decision of prosecution is that their charge is unchanged, therefore the charges cannot stand.
- There are clear evidences in many ways showing that the charge is wrong by omission beside wrong inclusion in members of the assembly, up to 8 persons including those who can be identified are not included in the definition of the assembly. These persons fitted the definitions provided by the alleged organizer of the event.
- Case Law 1: PS1344-1348/2008 (MA317-321/2009) PP vs Chong Kai Siong & others Court 19 DJ John Ng.
- Case Law 2: PS1522/2008 (MA068 of 2010 & CM15/2010) PP vs Yap Keng Ho Court 19 DJ Toh Yung Cheong
- In both the above cases, charges had included a Charles Tan Teck Wee to whom summons could not be served and who had not been in Singapore for years, but evidence showed him wearing same slogan T-shirt with some of the co-accused.
- The definition of members of alleged assembly in the above case highlights the error of this current charge by excluding persons of established identity in the definition of the assembly.
- The charge must correctly define the alleged assembly for the charge to be correct weather or not some of the persons is not in court to face charge. It was clearly the position of the prosecution that there are many more persons in the assembly which they had intended to charge the accused persons, however the prosecution had failed to define the assembly by omission & not specifying uncertainty in their definition in the charge. Thus the charge is wrong and not truly reflect the facts alleged, and the case is not correctly made out. The case made out by prosecution's own evidence does not fit the charge written and read to the accused persons, no amendment of charge is made to correct this error in law, so the accused need not be called to enter any defense, and should be discharged amounting to acquittal or had the charges dismissed.
On the aspect of Participation:
- Prosecution's submission on “Support & Encouragement” by uttering Tak Boleh Tahan cannot constitute to participation.
- In criminal law it is the act and role that counts, it is clearly distinguished by Penal Code Cap 224 Sec 107 (Abatement), Sec 108 (Abetter), Sec 108A, Sec 108B, Sec 109, Sec 110, Sec 111, Sec 112, Sec 113, Sec 114, Sec 115, Sec 116 & Sec 117.
- The penal codes showed that a person providing abetting an offense is NOT equally the liable for same offense of the person committing the act, in that the role of abetting an offense is provided by law to be differentiated apart from the role of committing the act itself. Sec 114 provided to distinguish weather abettor is present at scene or not.
- English words, Participate; Support; Encourage; Sympathize; Consent all carried respective meanings different from one another. Encouragement at most will amount to abatement of an offense, where support depends weather it be moral support or financial support or political support or physical facilitation.
- Merely by just uttering a common phrase of Tak Boleh Tahan alone, does not even amount to abatement, it is at the very most carrying a factor of sympathy or moral recognition. Unless the prosecution's case could prove the motive and purpose and effects of these utterances, the utterance cannot even connect with the activity which was meant to be distributing flyer and walkabout and which took place at a distance on a walkway below the staircase from the person making these utterances.
- There is no evidence of any effects of the utterances to indicate it had supported & encouraged anyone to distribute flyer or carry out walkabout, as the group of people dispersed immediately after these utterances. There was no prolonged stay or further activities caused by the alleged support or encouragement.
- Evidence showed that no utterances of Tak Boleh Tahan was made by anyone as flyers were being distributed and walkabout taking place, or during sales of any items.
- Strictly defined by the alleged organizer on P30-3 that national day event was organized to distribute flyers & walkabout wearing Tak Boleh Tahan T-shirts. Taking photos or video and uttering anything isn't intended to be nor designated to be part of the event being organized, and thus by taking photos or video or uttering anything did not amount to any participation of the intended activity.
- Participation in unlawful assembly is comparable to participation in rioting. Committing the rioting act constitutes to participating in a rioting offense, however an act of just uttering something at the scene cannot constitute to participating in rioting.
- Example of theft, one cannot be charged nor convicted for participating in theft of cash by simply just uttering the word “cash”. Unless there is proven effect of prompting another person to steal the cash, or proven motive of doing so, there is no crime of abatement disclosed.
<!-- End .post -->