Posted on by Kit

Police should also be charged with attempted murder

by Richard Teo

Malaysians in general and Indians in particular must be appalled at how the Attorney-General could charge 31 Hindraf protestors for the dubious crime of attempted murder.

Surely the charge can only be valid if the perpetrator of the crime can be identified. There is no justification to detain the 31 members if the crime was committed by a single individual. The prosecutor cannot expect the court to believe that the 31 perpetrators were responsible for throwing an object which specifically caused injury to the police officers.

How could the prosecutors cast a net so wide and hope per chance that it may catch the culprit from amongst the 31 protestors? Obviously not all of the 31 protestors were responsible for the single injury caused to the officer. Therefore will justice be served if the law punish the 31 Hindraf members just because one of them caused injury to the officer?

Can our justice be so vicious that 31 individual should pay the price for a crime committed by one individual? That in essence is what the Attorney-general is doing and in doing so he has made a mockery of our judicial system.

But in reality what was the crime committed by the 31 protestors?

By the same token, there were several protestors who suffered head injuries when the police fired tear gas canisters laterally at the crowd. Video clips taken on that day confirmed that quite a number of the protestors suffered injuries as a result. By the
same logic the police officers who fired the tear gas canisters can also be charged with attempted murder.

Further the clips also showed that in retaliation some of the protestors flung the canisters back at the police thus perhaps causing the injury to the police officers.

If such a scenario did occur, how could any one be charged with attempted murder? The act of throwing back the canisters in retaliation was merely a natural response to the action of the police in the first place. Is it acceptable for the police to fire
indiscriminately at the crowd with the possibilty of causing injury to them whilst it is against the law for the victims to retaliate in a similar fashion?

What is perhaps even more shocking is the refusal of the judge to grant bail to the 31 protestors.This literally means that the 31 Hindraf members whose guilt has not even being established will now have to start serving time before the actual trial
commence. Anyone familiar with our legal system will tell you that it will be light years before they will see justice in the court.

The act of charging the 31 protestors by the Attorney-General, Gani Patail is not only a travesty of justice but serves to confirm the lingering suspicions that the Attorney-General’s chambers and the judiciary are beholden to the executive.

86 Replies to “Police should also be charged with attempted murder”

  2. YB LKS:
    “Anyone familiar with our legal system will tell you that it will be light years before they will see justice in the court.”

    THen there were also cases where that Federal Court judge (who was promoted to the apex court) did not “bother” to write his judgments and those accused (‘victims’) had to languish in jail for some more light years!

    That would be the SECOND BIGGEST hoop-la for 2007!

    It will take light years before Malaysia begins to see some light.

  3. Should read: “THen there were also cases where that Federal Court judge (who was promoted to the apex court, notwithstanding his ‘laziness +++’) did not “bother” to write his judgments whilst he was in the lower court (? Basis of promotion? ‘Ampuism’ notwithstanding incompetence?) and those accused (’victims’) had to languish in jail for some more light years!

  5. http://www5.malaysiakini.com/news/75760:

    Hello IGP,

    “Musa said that the latest developments showed Hindraf leaders were fishing for support from India, Britain, the United States as well as the United Nations and European countries.

    “Hindraf is soliciting for external support by portraying a wrong picture on the actual position of Indians in this country to the foreign parties,” asserted Musa.

    Any evidence? Talk is cheap (or free). RPK (Malaysia Today) says IGP Musa is somehow related to criminal gangs; he says he has given some circumstantial bytes, why don’t you challenge him – sue him or prosecute him? As lawyers say, when it is not contradicted, challenged or denied….well, ahem…mmmm? And now, where are your circumstantial bytes in this Hindraf case?

    Hello AG,

    Any circumstantial bytes at least? Is it alright to deny accused their freedom based on hearsay? What Section of which law? There must never be any hint of political bias or umbrage in the execution or dispensing of justice, or are the rules different in Malaysia? Which begs the question: Does Malaysian justice system follow the Rule of Law or Rule by Executive?

    http://www5.malaysiakini.com/news/75760:

    “Attorney-General Abdul Gani Patail objected bail for the accused persons, a call which was allowed by the court. In the course of the bail hearing, Abdul Gani had also alleged that Hindraf had links with Tamil separatist movement Tamil Tigers from Sri Lanka.”

  6. “…//…How could the prosecutors cast a net so wide and hope per chance that it may catch the culprit from amongst the 31 protestors? Obviously not all of the 31 protestors were responsible for the single injury caused to the officer…//…” -Richard Teo

    AG/Prosecutor is not intending to find that 1 who threw that fatal rock and punish him for attempted murder but all 31 protesters engaged in comon enterprise of throwing rocks/stones.

    Now, throwing stones/rock is an act that reasonably could be foreseeable to inflict serious injury or death, as a natural consequence of which, the intention to do so is imputed.
    You’ve a guilty act and a guilty intention – the necessary compound to make an offence. Criminal lwayers call this guilty act actus reus and guilty intention mens rea.

    Although one does not know which of the 31 proven to have thrown rocks and stones together actually had thrown that particular one that resulted in injury or death, all 31 engaged in some offensive act of throwing rocks and stones with or in common intention with that particular one who could not be identified.

    This is the law on common intention. To layman it is a myth and fiction that’s why they call the law an ass but that’s how to catch and punish criminals as in say 3 burglers broke into house of whom one had a gun known to all that if necessary he would use it, and he did use it causing death to the startled ocupant of the house. Not only will be the 1 guilty of murder but the other 2 as well based on common intention.

  7. Tell SIL to shut up. He is an opportunist politician and not qualified to comment or handle such violatile situation. Let the Government, concern politicians and Police do their work. Things are getting out of hand. YB, please call and tell the small boy to shut up.

  8. From courtesy of Wikipedia on law on ‘common intention’ –

    “In English law, the doctrine derives from R v Swindall v Osborne (1846) 2 Car. & K. 230 where two cart drivers engaged in a race. One of them ran down and killed a pedestrian. It was not known which one had driven the fatal cart, but since both were equally encouraging the other in the race, it was irrelevant which of them had actually struck the man, and they were held jointly liable. Thus, the parties must share a common purpose and make it clear to each other by their actions that they are acting on their common intention so that each member of the group assumes responsibility for the actions of other members in that group. When this happens, all that flows from the execution of the plan will make them all liable. This is a question of causation in that oblique intention will be imputed for intermediate consequences that are a necessary precondition to achieving the ultimate purpose, and liability will follow where there are accidental and unforeseen departures from the plan so long as there is no novus actus interveniens to break the chain. In cases where there is violence beyond the level anticipated, the prosecution must prove:

    (a) an act done by D which in fact assisted the later commission of the offence,
    (b) that D did the act deliberately realising that it was capable of assisting the offence,
    (c) that D at the time of doing the act contemplated the commission of the offence by A i.e. he foresaw it as a real or substantial risk or real possibility, and
    (d) that D when doing the act intended to assist A in what he was doing.

    If there is doubt as to whether all the participants are contributing equally, those defendants whose contribution is less may be charged as accessories rather than as joint principals”.

  9. The situation in Malaysia is similar to what happened in Nazi Germany and Apartheid South Africa. Innocent citizens were racially profiled and were subjected to false charges and torture by the authorities. There is no way the situation can be rectified from within the country as the government is corrupt and undemocratic. We urge democratic nations of the world to take serious note of the situation in Malaysia where citizens belonging to the minority races and religions are being selectively mistreated and their rights abused for the benefit of a certain group under the guise of so-called “National Economic Policy” and “Official Religion”. These actions and policies of the UMNO government are tantamount to and are acts of racial and religious discrimination. We urge the international society for help and assistance to mount pressure on the UMNO based government for fair and free elections, eliminate rampant corruption and white collar crimes among government officials, to overhaul the corrupt and inefficient judiciary system, and to restore equal rights for all citizens regardless of race and religion.

  10. The Prosecution is not charging all 31 for attempted murder with the intention of finding out which one amongst them threw the fatal rock resulting in nearly death of the police officer. Prosecution is keen on getting conviction on all 31 for same offence of that 1. It is to deter such dangerous acts, just in case, in future demonstrations supposedly peaceful that are foreseeable to take place since they are becoming a fad….

  12. (Referring to the charge of “attempted murder”) Richard Teo says,

    “Surely the charge can only be valid if the perpetrator of the crime can be identified.”

    The issue is not one of validity but one of whether the suit is vexatious and frivolous. The issue of identification is one of evidence in support of the charge and is a matter that would be disposed off during trial and not before trial.

    “There is no justification to detain the 31 members if the crime was committed by a single individual”

    Conspiracy involves accomplices. If a single individual causes the injury, others who help are accomplices to the crime and would be just as liable.

    “The prosecutor cannot expect the court to believe that the 31 perpetrators were responsible…”

    The duty of the Prosecutor is to prosecute. He does not decide anything. In a non-jury trial the judge directs himself on the law applicable and then decides the guilt or otherwise of those who stood accused. In a jury trial the judge directs the jury on the law and the jury being a tribunal on the facts gets to decide, based on the totality of the evidence, whether those who stand accused are guilty or not guilty.

    “How could the prosecutors cast a net so wide and hope per chance that it may catch the culprit from amongst the 31 protestors?”

    The prosecutor will have to show prima facie evidence against those accused during the preliminary hearing. If the prosecutor fails to make a prima facie case against the accused, counsel for the defense would make his submission of no case to answer. The accused is then free to walk. Should evidence later surfaces, he can be re-arrested. No double jeopardy here.

    “Can our justice be so vicious that 31 individual should pay the price for a crime committed by one individual?”

    If it can be proved that they are accomplices, then it would not be proper to only charge the one throwing the stone that causes the injury when other stones were thrown by the others who were part of the group, but missed their target.

    Justice is never “vicious”. Justice is not about fairness. Justice is about finding those who stood accused of the crimes they were charged with pay for the consequences of their actions according to the law.

    “What is perhaps even more shocking is the refusal of the judge to grant bail to the 31 protestors.This literally means that the 31 Hindraf members whose guilt has not even being established will now have to start serving time before the actual trial
    commence.”

    When considering bail, the judge not only takes into consideration the nature of the crime, its seriousness, the evidence but also the flight risk. Time spent waiting for trial is considered during sentencing. Sometimes the accused is sentenced to time served. How convenient! To deny bail, the judge must have considered the evidence against each of the accused and find it compelling and the flight risk real.

    It is preposterous to suggest that agencies dealing with law enforcement could be charged for enforcing the law!

  13. I will be very impressed and my vote will be for BN if and only if Ghani Patail will lead team to prosecute the 18 biggie corruption cases highlighted by the papers not so long ago, otherwise Uncle Lim, you have my vote!!

  14. Evidently, UMNO has a sinister motive – to unite the Malays behind UMNO in the next general elections by creating fear among them that the Indians are out to destroy them and take away their rights.
    All that matters to UMNO is to continue to rule the country. The future of the country or its very survival seems to be irrelevant.
    They might win this battle but in the long run lose the war.
    This is 2007. The strategies of 1969 will not work now.
    From the PM downwards – the Cabinet, the media, the Police, the AG chambers all have one motive, so it seems – to provoke Indian anger further and prod them on to retaliate and create a illusory security threat climate. The hope it would succeed in consolidating UMNO’s political power and Malay Dominence.
    The government is “teaching the Indians a lesson”, without realizing that it is driving them further away from the regime.
    The vicious anti-Hindraf stance has gone overboard and it is deliberate. It is fanning the flame.
    There isn’t the slightest indication of the government wanting to cool the situation.

  19. UMNO is really making the country worst. Destroying all the gained prosperities throughout 50years and bringing the country towards an unharmonious land. All the black and white pertronas national unity addvertisements in the TV become ‘A Day in History’. Malaysia Truly Asia addvertisement to the world where Indian culture too blend in it is merely a show off to the world since the indian culture is more acceptable worldwide than Malaysian culture.
    Mahathir’s statement (although he is the main culprit) is true that “Melayu (UMNO) Bodoh” and they want to be in bodoh state forever by ignoring the true facts that being lighted by some inteligent bodies in Malaysia, inclusive HINDRAF. May be this dark curse to them by some good souls that had been affected by ‘marginalisation’. Even their own GOD cannot lift this curse. Doom is nearing. Who can save Malaysia Truly Asia?

  22. IGP: ‘Hindraf is linked to Sri Lanka Tamil Tiger…’ It is Not
    true! Where is the proof and Evidence??

    If it is true, then we will be very impressed and congra-
    tulate Malaysia Government of its self-inflicted additional
    cause of action to take charge of the terrorist violence
    and assassination..!!!

    Simply because the Gomen is asking for it!! It is fortunate
    enough for Malay-sia Gomen to face this music of Check-
    & Balance regulating system in political arena!! BRAVO and
    3 cheers for the introduction and implementation of such
    new politics regulating terrorist organization.

    Malay-sia Gomen is Not solving the current issues of Hindraf
    and Bersih protestors. Its denial of their issues has evolved
    and mutated to new breed of issues that the Gomen cannot
    hide and sweep all the issues under the carpet any longer..!!

    Long live the PEOPLEs’ POWER and The SPIRIT of Dr. Martin
    Luther King!!!

  23. So with ordinary people they can even virtually pluck criminal charges from the air and use AG to charge people indiscriminately. If this is not dictatorship, then I dont know what is. Are you Malaysians going to let this just slide by? The AG should be placed on the chopping block for this.

  24. 31 attempted murder? At most it was causing “grievous hurt” to the policeman. A blanket denial of bail is cruel indeed especially for the three accused who are sick and are not even spared by the Judge when she ruled the “defence also provided vague descriptions and insufficient evidence of the health conditions’
    AFP reported one of them with a “hole in the heart” was there praying at the temple. Another was ranting “his nephew – not joining Hindraf” was also roped in. In one sweep, the police have caught many innocent ones.
    For more details & pictures

    Go H E R E
    – the hysterical scene after the Judge announcement.

  25. While I suspect the AG is really trying to help the PM appear tough to his Malay right-winger, the problem is that it requires a lot of coordination to make sure this thing don’t get out of hand.

    Lets face it Hindraf demonstrator is guilty under Malaysian law but attempted murder is ridiculous. Is the AG just playing some game that will leave a judge to make up his mind what to do? Or are they planning to collude to find the Hindraf guilty of attempted murder but punished not severely?

    To me, this thing can get out of hand. Then who is to blame?

  26. MALAYSIA AS I SEE IT:

    Cry of desperation in a country where we are told to hold dear,
    A system infused to divide and rule and make us live in the shadow of fear,
    Shady dealings and wastages are already a norm and so what even if it’s crystal clear!

    Are we Malaysians born to suffer abject racial discrimination?
    Corruption is no more evil to them but a token of God’s contribution.
    Nothing will change even on their last day of reckoning and retribution,

  27. A request for permit to organize a peace march was denied. Then, when the march took place, the perpetrators from the government side started to fine water canon and shot tear gas which injured many people who were there for a peaceful gathering. In Batu Caves, devotees who were celebrating the religious festival called Kartikai were challenged in a very beastly manner and subjected to physical harassment. Now they are being charged with attempted murder. I agree with Richard Teo, the police too should be charged with attempted murder. Many people were injured and Al-Jazeera coverage can prove, how true that is. The AG is the most dumbest creature holding a high ranking position. Every one of his move is racially motivated. What the hell MIC is doing? MIC, where r u? MIC r u just a mike to amplify the voice? Where is your action MIC?

    If Pak Lah is a true muslim with all the honest characteristics which were once held with highest reverence by the Prophet Muhammad, he should knock his conscience and ask himself, whether the UMNO led coalition is doing the righteously Islamic policies in Malaysia, especially in this case. When Dato’ Anwar was sacked, there were similar demonstrations and policemen were injured too, but no one was charged for attempted murder. The Mat Rempits have injured the police personnels more that once, yet none of them were charged with attempted murder. Why? Pak Lah, are you telling us that the law is only for all the others but not for UMNO Malays? And to link HINDRAF with terrorist movement is the most vicious claim one can make. How can a person who highlighted various issues effecting the Indian communities in Malaysia be regarded as terrorist or terrorist group? Sheer stupidity.

  29. MIC is hiding under UMNO KKC… :-)
    DevaMoney laughing all his way to the bank…
    Semi Value still counting how much he can “sapu” b4 nx election…
    others just keep sucking MARGINALISED INDIANs blood…

  31. I really don’t understand why the police still wants to support the government? What good do they get? Salary increment? Pat in the back? Praises and compliments? Award of extreme loyalty? Even so it’s only a ONE TIME thing, if they support the people of Malaysia (which is the essence of this country – not the government), they’ll get POSITIVE changes for years, decades and centuries to come.

    Jadi kalau la ada orang polis yang tengah baca nih, pikir la sikit, engko ni nak jadi polis nak jaga rakyat malaysia dan keamanan malaysia ke, atau nak jaga kerajaan malaysia?

    Why can’t everybody see that the only way we can change this is everybody to unite. We the citizens, from all races and all walks of life, the government owned medias (why must they publish lies day in day out? You’re wasting money, paper and ink spreading lies. The citizens are not stupid to believe what the papers say), the police, etc.

    Is money really so freaking important that people are blinded by true choices of right and wrong? Think about your future generations and your children.

    Think. Imagine. Act.

  32. Instead of explaining why teargas cannisters were fired at the back of the crowd who showed no overt aggression in the video before they were fired at the front(novel way of dipersing crowds!), the IGP comes out with a diversionary allegation that the Hindraf was making contact with terrorist groups.

    If a teargas cannister lands, accidentally or otherwise someone’s head, its liable to kill. There’s no need for a ballistics expert to ascertain this.

  33. “I really don’t understand why the police still wants to support the government? What good do they get? Salary increment? ”

    The police is not underfed, underclothed and underpaid. This country run is not governed by a dictator – though there was at one time a Prime Minister who acted like a “tin-pot dictator” (a term used by an offiail of the U.S.Department of State) when referring to Mahathir. Malaysia’s style of government could be described as ‘benevolent authoritarianism’ rather than plain authoritarianism or plain autocratic. The military leadership is subservient to the civilian leadership. There is no martial law in force.

    Malaysia’s government is run by a Malay dominated natonal coalitition backed Malay dominated Armed Forces – well paid, well fed and well looked after. Certain ethnic minorities have suffered from the effects of de facto marginalization through racial discrimination but on the whole people are well fed, well clothed, employed and are able to enjoy a reasonable degree of freedom. Occassionally arbitrary detention is used to stifle political opposition through repressive legislation.

    Though the country is recently declared ‘an Islamic state’ non-Muslims and non-Malays are free to go to churches, temples and other houses of worship without being harassed – though the worshipping is not restricted, the building of such houses of worship is closely monitored and restricted.

    The answer to your question “Why is the Police supporting the government?” which when rephrased more accurately would read “Why is the Police so brutally loyal as to act with such ferocity and brutality in the enforcement of the letter of the law as opposed to its spirit, and against peace loving and law abiding citizens they are supposed to protect?” could be found in the above short naration of the facts about Malaysia.

    Do you have a quarrel with the facts?

  35. “If a teargas cannister lands, accidentally or otherwise someone’s head, its liable to kill. There’s no need for a ballistics expert to ascertain this.”

    If someone throws a mug at you and it lands on your head and you fall and die of cardiac arrest, if that is ‘murder’ then all lawyers both on the Bench and off the Bench need to go back to law school immediately.

  37. “IGP: Hindraf linked to terrorist groups”
    Well, well, well! What better ways to garner Malaysian public opinion against Hindraf and to reinforce legal action (no bails, ISA) against the 31 Hindraf protestors to make sure they will never see the light of days beyond jail walls.
    This will never bring the public closer to the gomen. Only those with self interest and the ignorant will buy that.
    I can imagine what’s coming next in the gomen accusations to justify its dubious agenda against those Hindraf.
    Let me dream tonight – chicken, chicken, chicken.

  41. undergrad2:
    “If someone throws a mug at you and it lands on your head and you fall and die of cardiac arrest, if that is ‘murder’ then all lawyers both on the Bench and off the Bench need to go back to law school immediately.”

    Are U sure U read correctly and is saying that a human skull(cranium) is always capable of withstanding a hit from a flying teargas cannister without fracturing? I haven’t mention murder. Some people have thinner skull, others thicker, literally.

  42. A first year law student studying tort law would know what the “thin skull” rule means. It means the tortfeasor takes the victim as you find him or her.

    If the cannister (or a brick) fired into the air were to land on the head of a demonstrator and kills him, the defence would be that the policeman firing the tear gas cannister is only acting in the course of his duty – which is enforcing the law.

    The defence cannot in law be “he has a thin skull” and his skull should not be that thin!

    But this is in the realm of criminal law. The mens rea for murder is nothing less than “an intent to kill”. Was there an intent to kill?

  43. If a demonstrator had died from a tear gas cannister fired into the air as a crowd control measure, the next of skin stands no chance of ever getting damages in a civil law suit involving unlawful death – even after applying the lower standard of proof which is “on the balance of probabilities”.

  46. “If a teargas cannister lands, accidentally or otherwise someone’s head, its liable to kill. There’s no need for a ballistics expert to ascertain this.”

    Unfortunately it has nothing to do with science – but everything to do with the principle in the law of torts known as the “thin skull” rule – in addition to issues on duty of care, negligence and breach and foreseability and remoteness or if there is in operation as Jeffrey QC has pointed out a ‘nova causa interveniens’

    In criminal law it has everything to do with intent – not just any intent but intent to kill.

  47. I hope UMNO will see themselves in the mirror to see whether there is a mirrored image of the Jews treating the Palestinian. They had fervently supported the Palestinians for their terror acts because they believed that the Palestinians had been unjustly persecuted and constantly demand the UN to find out the cause.
    This is totally hypocritical. They had been advocating so fiercely in “find out the cause” philosophy so much so that when thousands of innocent people of all races and religion are killed in the Sept 11 attack by Muslim terrorists in the US, their only consolation is “to find out the cause of the attacks.
    Back home, now that the scenario is reversed why aren’t they making any attempt to find out the cause but instead went one step ahead to persecute and instill fear into those justice seekers by bringing in the AG and refusing bail. For records purposes if you are an UMNO member, you can do whatever you like, closing one eye or even both the eyes and nothing will happen, you can be charged for murder and yet you can be freed on bail, (as in the Atlantuya’s case) and you can be convicted of murder but can be pardoned and set free (remember the ex-Minister of youth and sports)
    If all these are not an attempt to intimidate and put fear into those who are out only to seek justice for being racially discriminated for 50 years, than I really do not know what it is. Basically every department of authority is under the Executive; be it the police, The Attorney-General chambers, the judiciary are an extension of UMNO.
    MCA, MIC, Gerakan, PPP, etc which are supposed to share power with UMNO are actually concubines of UMNO, sharing only for the night when UMNO needs them
    Literally what hope do the non-UMNOs have, be it the Malays or non Malays (they are good in acting like helping the Malays (for they need them to sustain their voracious appetite of corruption) when in actual fact they are helping themselves. The only way out as I had said it before and will say it now is for the people to take it to the outside world for them to see what a government we have and if possible seek justice from the International court of justice.

  49. “You can be charged for murder and yet you can be freed on bail, (as in the Atlantuya’s case)..”

    I thought all three accused were in jail awaiting the conclusion of the trial??

    “.. and you can be convicted of murder but can be pardoned and set free (remember the ex-Minister of youth and sports)..” pwcheng

    He spent some years in jail – was it seven years? He should never have been released. His sentence could be commutted to life instead of death though since it would be legal for the Agong to do so based on the recommendations by the Pardons Board.

  50. Abdul Razak Baginda was released on a RM1mil court bond after he claimed trial to a charge of abetting in the murder of Mongolian beauty Altantuya Shaariibuu.The 46-year-old political analyst was allowed to go home yesterday after a High Court here allowed his release under the bond, which was without security, due to his poor health.

    His bail extension was rejected by Justice K.N. Segara who threw out his bail application on grounds that he had failed to submit an updated medical report on his ill health.

    I am not sure whether was also thrown out of hearing this case because of the rejection of the bail and instead put in a very junior Malay ustice o hear te case.

    Points to ponder. Can justice be easily tempered by those in power???

    After this they had to changed the Justice again

  53. This is precisely I feel so sad each time I read the blog here. Apparently some are just to keen to show their prowess in legal matters, forgetting that the whole episode was really using laws and the court system to selectively persecute and harass people who are fighting for a cause. No doubt the lawyers for HINDRAF demonstrators will now have to response in court to secure their freedom. But to me it is futile exercise. The remedy lies elsewhere, not in court. I am not asking all of you to agree with me. But we shall see how the outcome is likely to be. I think we should all be more discerning and circumspect when discussing issues here and not just writing anything based on what we know regardless of whether they are relevant or otherwise. Goodness me, can’t we see it is a political rally, and the government is responding “politically” through the court system? How the whole discussion has skewed towards a lecture of tort, common intent and thin skull really puzzled me.

  56. Come on limkamput, don’t be an irritant! If you don’t like what you see and read, just move on to the next thread or you may choose to ignore him/her and contribute what you have. Others love what they wrote. So let’s agree to disagree amicably.

    Remember there are many silent readers here who chooses not to contribute. I do that very often and to me everyday it’s a learning process. Relax, life is too short.

  58. “Goodness me, can’t we see it is a political rally, and the government is responding “politically” through the court system?”

    Of course we know that! Thanks for telling us what we already know.

    Some of us are curious as to the legality of some of the issues and actions in court – for example, how the prosecutor could have charged the accused with “attempted murder” and if there is prima facie evidence sufficient to support the charge, and take it to the trial proper. The topic of this thread is after all “Police should also be charged with murder”.

    Then there is the issue of a possible civil suit against the government which posters here raised.

    We would welcome opinion about the issues rather than your comment on the commentators who comment on the issues.

    How about giving us posters the benefit of your opinion on the issues – and spare us your caustic comments on the need to be “discerning” and “circumspect” without telling us what you mean?

  59. IGP is taking ‘revenge’ on those who oppose his extension on the job. He is in big big trouble now that he has made headlines in all local and international media linking Hindraf to “terrorism”. Has he solid proof?

    Looks like things is getting out of hand if not quickly stopped.

  66. To the one “who knows all, is smart, discerning and circumspect, writes English better than others, and is not stupid like others” freedom of speech does not include bashing others for not sharing your opinion which in this case we are not told anything about.

    Let’s hear your opinon on the ISSUES!

  67. Tsk..tsk..tsk!

    Limkampuiiiiiet is at his old game again! As if “stupid” “spineless” “moron” and “spineless” and “hollowed sophistication” are not enough he has added a couple of new words he learned recently – “circumspect” and “discerning”.

    I cannot be sure what he is discerning though!

  68. Richard Teo says,

    “Police should also be charged with murder”.

    You cannot “charge” anybody! The right to prosecute is the prerogative of the Attorney General. Only the Crown can prosecute. There are exceptions though but this is not one of those.

  70. Of course we know that! Thanks for telling us what we already know. Undergrad2
    It is just mere logics. It one knows that the whole prosecution and the legal process is a farce, what good is there to debate laboriously on the legal process. As I said earlier, the remedy is elsewhere, not in the court of law. You people can’t fault me on that. That is all I have to say.

    What remedies are there for us to explore outside the court system is for all of us to discuss about. I think that is the whole intention of Teo’s article. I did not claim to know all. I am here to learn and see what remedies and practical solutions we have got. I am sorry I saw none. Instead, what I have seen was voluminous lectures on torts, common intent, thin skull and thick skull. Please tell others honestly what “value add” have you got? The issue to me is how this country can minimize or eliminate selective prosecution and the arbitrariness of charges, strengthen the institution and the independence of the attorney general, (is he the officer of the land or of a political party or of the government of the day), as well as the independence of judiciary and police force. What we have in court today (the Hindraf case) has its origins that we have to fight for and redeem from the political process.

  71. Undergrad2, your comment on “Police should also be charged with murder” with this: “You cannot “charge” anybody! The right to prosecute is the prerogative of the Attorney General. Only the Crown can prosecute. There are exceptions though but this is not one of those”.

    I do not know your comment was in jest or you are serious. If you are serious, it shows again you miss the whole point. The point Teo was alluding to was the police are capable of committing wrongs just like anyone else. The prerogative of the attorney general is not absolute. If it is absolute, as shown in the HIndraf case, then we have the problem now in court. At least that is what we should be fighting for.

  72. To Jong, I just want to say this. I am not an irritant. I am here to read and also to contribute and comment if there is a need. I think I have the right to do that, so long as no vulgar words are used (I promise I will be civil and decent from now on out of respect for Sdr Kit. If others choose to continue with their vendetta, that is their problems not mine. If Sdr Kit still finds that the fault is still mine, then I am happy to leave the blog. It is not a problem for me at all). If one cannot accept comments from others then it is better for him/her not to say anything.

  73. Not only the case of ‘Abdul Razak Baginda…!’ The worst
    case is ‘MAY 13 Race riot and Massacre..!!’ Not even 1
    Idiot from Ketuanan Melayu, Sultan and Rulers come out
    to talk about FAIRNESS and The Ill-treatment faced by
    the Chinese…

    Now, the ruler condamns ‘The HINDRAF and The Indian
    street protestors and says it is illegal…! Is he being FAIR
    by passing that comment??

    When UMNOputras and thugs wielding parangs to kill other
    races, they just be silent and bisu… pretend they see no
    evils and hear no evils…!

    When The Hindraf come out to street walk to voice their
    Dilemma, the rulers say they are all DISLOYAL Indians!!
    They Must be JAILED..!! Where is the JUSTICE and
    FAIRNESS..??!!

    All Indians, Chinese are Disloyal people, All Ketuanan
    Melayu are Good and loyal MELAYU..?? No wonder such
    racial events surface for MORE CLASHES…??

    MAY 13 is a political PLOT by Razak, Mahathir, Shafiee
    and Harun to overthrow Tunku A. Rahman to gain Melayu
    /UMNOputras support…contents of book by Dr. Koh Ka
    Soon.

    Immediately they siezed power to rule, the next Plot is
    to implement NEP and APARTHEID Policy in Malay-sia…!!
    This is WHAT you see and experience TODAY…!!

    Without Fear and Justice – Justice Bao from CHINA

  74. Dear Limkamput,

    Fine, tq for your response and my apologies if I had sound offending. We are all different, it takes all kinds to make this world colorful, even our fingers are of different lengths yet they co-exist beautifully.
    Let’s move on.

  75. Jong,

    You don’t need to apologize to anybody for speaking out your mind. But we all know where this poster is coming from and where he’s going. But if he is showing signs that he is rehabilitated after the last thrashing and the snub he got from YB Kit, and that he now understands and wants to follow the universal code of civil behavior in a public forum such as this, we’ll just give him the benefit of the doubt and let him.

    Let’s take the ISSUES he raised – and then we’ll deal with his other comments not relating to any of the issues i.e. his ‘contribution’.

    1.”The point Teo was alluding to was the police are capable of committing wrongs just like anyone else. “ISSUE” or ‘contribution’?

    We all know the UMNO led government has been using the courts to fight their political battles. Readers are not stupid.. It has been going on for more years than we care to count. The entire judiciary has been politicized. Major judicial positions are filled on the basis of party loyalty and continue to be so filled. The case of Zaki Tun Azmi is a case in point. (The moderator has chosen to delete references to him which are personal though true and are public knowledge).

    Readers of course remember the trumped up charges against Anwar. Who doesn’t? It is not just in this blog but in all the other political blogs, readers are asking the same question – whether there is any legal basis for going ahead with the charges in the case of the HINDRAF 31. Even though they are using our courts to fight for them they cannot willy nilly charge them with any crime.

    They still have to operate within the confines of the law – not the law as UMNO sees it but law as written into our legislation. Some readers have raised the issues and are asking and rightly so, if they could be stopped from proceeding with what appears to be unfounded charges of attempted murder, sedition and terrorism. You cannot answer those questions without referring to the country’s Penal Code, the Criminal Procedure Code, the Internal Security Act, the Evidence Act and Criminal and Tort law among others. Hence the discussion here and as always my 2-cents on the prospect of winning a civil law suit against the government for negligence or reckless endangerment etc.

    2. “The prerogative of the attorney general is not absolute.”

    ISSUE or ‘contribution’? He seems to want to raise an issue.

    In what area is the AG’s prerogative not absolute? You do not make a statement like that without first laying the foundation.

    So Jong, after reminding myself to first take the “ISSUES he raised” and later deal with his ‘contribution’ I’m afraid I cannot see the issues he is purported to have raised – but only his ‘contribution’ which is to admonish readers for, according to he who is “discerning” and “circumspect” speaking out of context and for being stupid as not to see where Richard Teo is going with his statement. We know where Richard Teo is going with his statement. We are not stupid or examples of “hollowed sophistication”. Thank you very much! We are here also to debate on the legitimate issues raised here and in the media.

    I’m sure ‘he who is smart, others stupid and spineless and he who can write English better than we can’ is reading this – and so let me remind him:

    Readers here can do without your condescending attitude and snide remarks. Please restrict your comments to the issues raised and NOT make personal references or comment on the commentators who raise those issues. Stop trying to destabilize the discussion with your personal remarks.

  76. Listen up, limkamput!

    I see you’re back to your old self again! After a forced absence from this blog this is what you’ve got to say:

    “…. I feel so sad each time I read the blog here”

    “I am not asking all of you to agree with me.”

    “I think we should all be more discerning and circumspect …”

    What issue or issues are you raising here? The topic of this thread is ” Police should also be charged with attempted murder”

    The writer Richard Teo raised a host of issues both political and legal, for us to comment and discuss and all you got to say is you’re sad and indirectly casting aspersions on YB Kit.

    [deleted]

  78. “No doubt the lawyers for HINDRAF demonstrators will now have to response in court to secure their freedom. But to me it is futile exercise. The remedy lies elsewhere, not in court.” limkderapoot says.

    “have to response” – what??? You mean “have to respond”. OK.

    The 31 detained are detained without bail.

    So you’re suggesting that they hold another rally to free them since the court is not the place i.e. in your own words the “remedy is elsewhere and not in court” ? Lawyers acting for HINDRAF and for the accused do not think so. Go tell them, stupid!

  79. I can be where I want to be. No one can tell me where I should be. I was not forced out of this blog and I have the right to feel sad that some of the comments are totally irrelevant and are there just to show they know sometimes.
    Sdr Kit, is there a pack of wolves here jealously judging their turf or what. Since when was the right to free speech did not include the right of comment from others? I still maintain that the bulk of the earlier discussion on common intent, thin skull etc was irrelevant given the issue at hand.
    Yes, the attorney general power’s is not absolute. To believe so shows that the person does not know what good governance, fairness and transparency were all about.
    What I said earlier was the Hindraf lawyers now have to secure the freedom of those detained through the court system. But I think it will be an exercise in futility. Of course we shall all wait and see. But it is my view that they will not achieve much. That is why I said the remedies lies elsewhere. I did not suggest that another demonstration will help. But certainly one of you has thought about it. I think oppositions’ motions in Parliament as well as pressure from NGOs and international community may help too. I also believe that Pas should co-sponsor a motion in Parliament and explain to the people the issue involved. If Pas can do so, it is a mile stone in Malaysia politics. It is hard to come by but this would be more enduring than common intent, thin skull etc.
    I have no wish to go back and dig up all the words we used against each others. But I am man enough to stand by the words I used. But I have been accused, for example, of using the word like bastard which I didn’t. There was no remorse or apology from that person. In fact the word shows that person’s character.

  80. “Yes, the attorney general power’s is not absolute. To believe so shows that the person does not know what good governance, fairness and transparency were all about.” limkamput

    Here you’re again interested in the commentator rather than his comment. If you’re genuine about making a contribution to the blog stop being abrasive and personal in your comments. It is a distraction.

    You could have said and I paraphrase here for readers to read:

    “The Attorney General’s power should not be absolute because there cannot be good governance, fairness and transparency otherwise”

    But you must put down a commentator who according to you knows less than yourself! We understand that you cannot help it because you have an out-of-control ego. But at least try to control it.

    I wrote earlier:

    “The right to prosecute is the prerogative of the Attorney General. Only the Crown can prosecute. There are exceptions though but this is not one of those.”

    No mention in my statement about the power of the AG being absolute or not absolute! So I do not understand where you’re coming from with your statement – talk about a poster writing out of context!

    Why are you hiding behind this thread. This is an old one.

  81. Fine, I will say as you wish, the Attorney General’s power should not be absolute because there are considerations on good governance, fairness and transparency.

    If one said that it is the prerogative of the Attorney General and only the Crown can prosecute, taking into consideration its ordinary meaning, i think one can assume that the view expressed was that the Attorney General has absolute power. This is particularly so in the context we are discussing now i.e. how the demonstrators are now being prosecuted in court under dubious charges etc. However if you still want to maintain that that was not what you have in mind, then so be it.

    Why are you accusing for hiding behind this old thread? First I can go where I want to go. Second, may be you should take into account others may not be as free as those who have more time. Third, may be other threads do not interest me. Talking about being abrasive and personal in our postings.

  82. Breakin news.. more problems this sunday morning, police in KL have arrested 8 human rights activists in an unproved peaceful walk to mark Human Rights Day.

    YB Lim has a new thread, check it out.

  86. Kena hit by a gas canister is attempted murder? I didn’t know our policemen are really pondan. Maybe they need better training to endure such pain…hahaha!! If the whole world know how weak the policemen are…such shame to the country!!!

Leave a Reply