atans1

Posts Tagged ‘Police’

2 must reads: NUS voyeurism balls-up

In Public Administration on 25/04/2019 at 11:13 am

Or is it cock-up?

Sorry. Can’t help the flippancy. What happened is really black comedy at it’s blackest. After the police, AGC and NUS washed their hands (OK sort of) over a voyeur (Maybe taking the attitude “From poor family; must pang chance.”?), the unhappy victim got the voyeur crucified on the day the Christ was crucified or thereabouts.

If the system fails her, she cannot be expected to behave like a meek and mild lamb, can she? Power to her for having the balls to demand publicly that she gets her retribution. Note I said “retribution”, not “justice”.

Here’s a link to a very good commentary on the perspective that the police, AGC and NUS missed: a damning indictment of their failure to understand how gals feel.

Commentary: Here’s what zero tolerance towards sexual misconduct looks like

The NUS voyeurism incident offers lessons for all education institutions, says AWARE Executive Director Corinna Lim.

Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/commentary/nus-sexual-misconduct-zero-tolerance-toilet-filming-monica-baey-11472002

Even better is this comment from someone who seems to know how prosecutorial discretion works in practice. What he says bring back memories of the days when the then head of Crime section in the AGC and I chatted about the role of his team. Where he is wrong, is the person making the decision is supervised and the head of the crime division has to sign-off.

Heng Choy Yuen

I agree with the contents of your article. But the OVER-dependence on protocols and routine thinking may become too dogmatic. Here’s why I say so …. the RESULT of any interview by counsellors, investigations led by the SPF depends on whose desk the case file lands inside the AGC. He/she at AGC is the one who decides whether the legal process stops at his/her desk or be sent for arraignment. Due to the peculiar nature of sex-related and sexual crimes (stealing underwear, peeping tom, filming videos, physical outrgae of modesty, rape), sometimes a less-experienced AGC legal officer may make an error of judgement, not due to lack of factual evidence but simply because the analysis of cases involving sexual crimes require a deeper and thorough understanding beyond what is written in the Penal Code and statutes. Yes, there are more than sufficient precedents to guide towards a judgement (from 2015-2018 there were reportedly 20 cases of sexual misconduct handled by NUS alone) but I think in MIss Baey’s case, the person at AGC charged with deciding the punishment of MIss Baey’s offender perhaps made an error of judgement – by showing leniency (protecting the offender’s future) by itself is not ‘wrong’ when weighed against the evidence and facts gathered – but the ‘high probability of being remorseful” is an ASSESSMENT, not a fact. THe AGC officer in this case should have also considered a more potent FACT backed up by global research on the mental health of sex crimes victims – the FACT that Miss Baey, along with countless victims of similar sex crimes, will live with her mental trauma, fears and anguish. In all probability for the rest of her life. No amount of remorse, a single letter of apology can erase the mental scarring that has already occurred. Therefore while it is commendable to show leniency for ‘remorseful first-time offenders’, the LIFE-LONG irreversible mental damage on the victims of sexual misconduct MUST be prioritised – the victim had no say but … the perpetrator (unless mentally ill) made a wilful, perhaps even premeditated, decision. He was also reportedly under the influence of alcohol but how drunk he was we do not know …. so how does a drunk man summon enough soberness to go from cubicle to cubicle (captured on CCTV) ostensibly to film a naked woman bathing? Obviously his vision was not impaired by alcohol in making his directorial debut …. Isn’t it ironical that the efforts by the law enforcement authorities and NUS to show leniency just so the offender’s future is not destroyed, is producing the very opposite aftermath? Did they anticipate that their ‘merciful’ punishments would generate such public uproar and media attention? A few days ago, Great Eastern put the perp (who was working there) on suspension, but he chose to resign. But while he may recover some semblance of normalcy say after 4-5 years, the mental trauma he caused to MIss Baey is etched in her memory perhaps forever. THAT is a LESSON no victim would ever want.
(Emphasis mine)
Advertisements

Symbolism of Hali’s pix with PM, CJ

In Political governance on 18/09/2017 at 12:56 pm

Shamugam was talking cock on FB.

Image may contain: 6 people, people smiling

Look at the two uniformed Chinese men behind the Chinese PM, Malay (even if her i/c says “Indian”) president and Indian CJ.

Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun

Mao

Without the elected president and if there is a freak result, within two or three years, the army would have to come in and stop it.

Lee Kuan Yew (2006)

Coming back to the minister, I couldn’t help but be reminded of what LKY once said

I have said this on many a previous occasion: that had the mix in Singapore been different, had it been 75% Indians, 15% Malays and the rest Chinese, it would not have worked. Because they believe in the politics of contention, of opposition. But because the culture was such that the populace sought a practical way out of their difficulties, therefore it has worked.

Lee Kuan Yew (1985)

What Home Team’s recent cock-ups tell us

In Political governance, Public Administration on 30/01/2014 at 4:51 am

S’pore Notes was analysing the response DPM Teo gave to the apparent* tardiness in responding to the Little India ripple, and the little old lady in a red car entering S’pore illegally,  evading capture, and then entering undetected a secured area**

One of his readers gave the most insightful analysis I have seen of what these incidents portend: This incident has sparked off comments like yours and your commentators. The seriousness of the situation in its proper context is more than such observations, in my opinion. It exposes the mindset of those in charge of the security of the nation. They talk themselves into believing that everything is under control and that they are prepared for any eventual situation. The recent billion dollar decision to upgrade of the warplanes and expected purchase of the latest military toys give them this illusion. The quality of our uniformed personnel is not what they tell you. The result will be disastrous given the leaders’ penchant for annoying our neighbours.

Should we be afraid, very afraid that S’pore’s home security services appear to be paper tigers. leading to our neighbours thinking that our SAF is also a paper tiger? The performance of two ex-SAF chiefs in SMRT and NOL. PM, DPM Teo, BG Yeo and the three newbie ministers (two SAF generals ansd one admiral), would do nothing to dispel the perception.

My Facebook Avatar isn’t so sure that there is a serious, systematic problem: In the case of her entering S’pore illegally, failure to being detained in the police compound and her entry into a secured area, who else is at fault other than line officers involved? If there were systematical flaws, well we’d have heard of a lot more incidents, including possibly a few bombings. Sometimes, the front lines officersto blame.

Maybe the sytemic flaw is the training the officers receive?

I’ve got mixed views.

To quote DPM Teo, “What do you think?”

Related posts:

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2012/08/14/scholar-ex-saf-chief-temasek-md-fails-to-turnaround-nol/

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2013/12/11/sporeans-are-over-reacting-to-the-riot/

*All the problems at Home Team over recent yrs (corruption, Ang Moh tua kee attitude, PR status for possible criminals etc etc) show that it was badly run when Wong Kan Seng was the Home minister. There should be a claw-back of the millions he earned as a minister.

—-

*I’m undecided on whether the riot squad was activated tardily. I agree with DPM Teo that the riot squad should not suka suka be activated. The time taken to decide (about 15 minutes) sounds reasonable to me. On getting there, well it takes time. You can’t have a convoy of heavy vehicles full of people speeding at 90km to the scene. Use helicopters?

My beef is the behaviour of the police officers on the spot. I hope the inquiry tells us why they didn’t fire warning shots when their vehicles were in danger of being damaged. And if they were wrong not to fire warning shots in such a situation. An old timer NS riot squad guy tells me that in his time the police would defend their cars on the ground that it is a symbol of their authority like their badges and guns.

**Secured area? What security?