Home > Breaking News > Singapore > Story
Oct 3, 2008
Offender fights for acquittal
By Khushwant Singh
Said Mr Fernandez: 'If I pleaded guilty, I would be fined $130 and get six demerit points but I was not the one speeding so why should I admit it.' -- KELVIN CHNG/THE STRAITS TIMES
FRIENDS told security supervisor Paul Antony Fernandez that he was pushing his luck by appealing after he was granted a discharge not amounting to an acquittal for a speeding offence by a district court in July.
Yet, the 43-year-old remained determined to fight for an acquittal as he was confident of proving his innocence in a trial.
On Friday, the Attorney-General's Chambers did not oppose his appeal to the High Court for a discharge amounting to an acquittal.
For Mr Fernandez, it has been a long and expensive fight, lasting more than a year and costing over $12,000 in legal fees.
Said Mr Fernandez: 'If I pleaded guilty, I would be fined $130 and get six demerit points but I was not the one speeding so why should I admit it.'
His saga began after a vehicle belonging to his employer, Evtec Management Services, was spotted by a camera going 80kmh at 7.17am on Feb 11 last year, along Yishun Avenue 2, which has a 60kmh speed limit.
Evtec told Traffic Police that Mr Fernandez was the driver and he was charged.
He wrote to his management and the police denying that he was the offender. He also included records of his company's fuel card that showed that he had using another vehicle that day.
Traffic Police told him that as they were proceeding with the charge based on information provided by Evtec, it was something he had to straighten out with his management.
His efforts proved futile as the firm insisted he was the driver.
He claimed trial in September last year but that too proved not to be a speedy solution.
He said: 'The prosecution keep stalling for time.'
'At every pre-trial conference, the deputy public prosecutor asked for a four-week adjournment for further investigations.'
When the trial date finally came, the prosecution asked District Judge Salina Ishak to grant a discharge not amounting to an acquittal as it wanted to conduct further investigations.
Arguing that a full acquittal was in order, Mr Fernandez's lawyer, Mr N. Kanagavijayan said that the police had ample time to investigate such a trivial offence.
The judge disagreed but instructed the prosecution to revert in Jan next year about the outcome of their investigations.
Fed-up with one delay after another, Mr Fernandez decided it was time to take the case to the High Court.
'My client did not want this accusation hanging over his head any longer so we decided to appeal and now the prosecution has realised that they have been coming after the wrong man all this time,' said Mr Kanagavijayan.
Oustide the courtroom, Mr Fenandez told The Straits Times: 'I will be examining my options about suing Evtec for the legal fees I have incurred.'
He quit Evtec in August this year, after about two years with the company.
Oct 3, 2008
Offender fights for acquittal
By Khushwant Singh
Said Mr Fernandez: 'If I pleaded guilty, I would be fined $130 and get six demerit points but I was not the one speeding so why should I admit it.' -- KELVIN CHNG/THE STRAITS TIMES
FRIENDS told security supervisor Paul Antony Fernandez that he was pushing his luck by appealing after he was granted a discharge not amounting to an acquittal for a speeding offence by a district court in July.
Yet, the 43-year-old remained determined to fight for an acquittal as he was confident of proving his innocence in a trial.
On Friday, the Attorney-General's Chambers did not oppose his appeal to the High Court for a discharge amounting to an acquittal.
For Mr Fernandez, it has been a long and expensive fight, lasting more than a year and costing over $12,000 in legal fees.
Said Mr Fernandez: 'If I pleaded guilty, I would be fined $130 and get six demerit points but I was not the one speeding so why should I admit it.'
His saga began after a vehicle belonging to his employer, Evtec Management Services, was spotted by a camera going 80kmh at 7.17am on Feb 11 last year, along Yishun Avenue 2, which has a 60kmh speed limit.
Evtec told Traffic Police that Mr Fernandez was the driver and he was charged.
He wrote to his management and the police denying that he was the offender. He also included records of his company's fuel card that showed that he had using another vehicle that day.
Traffic Police told him that as they were proceeding with the charge based on information provided by Evtec, it was something he had to straighten out with his management.
His efforts proved futile as the firm insisted he was the driver.
He claimed trial in September last year but that too proved not to be a speedy solution.
He said: 'The prosecution keep stalling for time.'
'At every pre-trial conference, the deputy public prosecutor asked for a four-week adjournment for further investigations.'
When the trial date finally came, the prosecution asked District Judge Salina Ishak to grant a discharge not amounting to an acquittal as it wanted to conduct further investigations.
Arguing that a full acquittal was in order, Mr Fernandez's lawyer, Mr N. Kanagavijayan said that the police had ample time to investigate such a trivial offence.
The judge disagreed but instructed the prosecution to revert in Jan next year about the outcome of their investigations.
Fed-up with one delay after another, Mr Fernandez decided it was time to take the case to the High Court.
'My client did not want this accusation hanging over his head any longer so we decided to appeal and now the prosecution has realised that they have been coming after the wrong man all this time,' said Mr Kanagavijayan.
Oustide the courtroom, Mr Fenandez told The Straits Times: 'I will be examining my options about suing Evtec for the legal fees I have incurred.'
He quit Evtec in August this year, after about two years with the company.
