Quote
Frankly, if I were suddenly informed by a telephone call in the morning that my son would be taken to the police station for questioning with regards to an alleged molest report, and all the contact I have with him is a short telephone conversation that was cut off, I’d be out of my mind with worry, simply because at 14 years old, my “average-good-kid” son would still be very much an innocent boy, even if his size and mannerisms belie his immaturity. The idea of him at 14 years old, having to face strangers in authority without the comfort of a familiar adult nearby will undoubtedly cause him to be confused, lost, and frightened about the consequences of answering wrongly and finding himself in bigger trouble.
I suppose it is ironic that it’s the “good” kids that would fear the police more than the bravado of the “pai-kia”s, and therein lies the crux of the issue.
In Singapore, we have laws like the Children and Young Persons Act that protect our children and that work “in the best interests of the child”, so it is puzzling that accused minors under investigation do not require a neutral third party to be present when they are interviewed.
I fully understand the need for police investigation to search out the truth, and that the search will be challenging if the accused child’s non-neutral parents or guardians are present when the child is interrogated. However, wouldn’t the presence of a trusted adult like the child’s form teacher or even that of a child welfare officer allow the child to find some hope that someone would listen with understanding about what he has to say? Or that in his fear of being in such a terrifying situation, he might find that he is not absent of someone looking out for him?
Truly, the presence of such a person does not only protect the child, but the Investigating Officer (IO) as well; for as much as the IO may try to be neutral, the IO is conducting the investigation and therefore may not be as concerned about the child’s fears and well-being as he or she ought to be. The IO may fail to note signs of the child’s distress, especially since the IO isn’t familiar with the child and his personality, nor is the IO particularly looking out for these signs of distress in the child.
Just yesterday evening, the police posted a statement on their Facebook page that it would review and address the issue of whether to allow an appropriate adult to be present when a young person is interviewed. I sincerely hope that the protocol would change in favour of the welfare of minors, even if it may prove to be less efficient to complete an investigation than before. The ends don’t always justify the means when children are involved.
Unquote
That 's all I ask too .... and Benjamin can finally close his eyes knowing that children never have to walk alone.
