If you can tell me that I will not think the way I think if the victim is someone close to me, then I can also tell you that you will not think the death penalty is a good idea if you are the one wrongly convicted and facing the death penalty.
-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
Man accused of murder freed after 6 years in jail
- Thread starter MarrickG
- Start date
If you can tell me that I will not think the way I think if the victim is someone close to me, then I can also tell you that you will not think the death penalty is a good idea if you are the one wrongly convicted and facing the death penalty.
Its sounds like you are speaking from personal experience in this matter....
Police respond to murder case criticism
04:45 AM Jul 09, 2011
SINGAPORE - Criticised by a court for its investigations into the brutal murder of Tham Weng Kuen, the police responded yesterday with a 600-word statement in which they "acknowledge that legal procedures in relation to the recording of any confession should be observed".
On Tuesday, Mr Ismil Kadar, 42, who had spent six years behind bars, walked out a free man after the Court of Appeal absolved him of any involvement in the murder of Tham, 69, on May 6, 2005.
The court upheld the finding that Mr Ismil's brother, Muhammad, was the sole culprit in the fatal stabbing of Tham during a robbery.
Mr Ismil had initially confessed to the police that he had stabbed Tham. The judges said there were serious doubts about the reliability of his police statements.
For example, the first time Mr Ismil purportedly confessed was in a police car. The officer, however, recorded his statement on a piece of paper instead of in his field diary. The statement was also not read back to him nor signed by him, as required.
Among other things, the judges also pointed out that there was "absolutely" no physical evidence of Mr Ismil having been in the flat.
The police said in its statement yesterday: "While the investigation team had put in much effort to collect all evidence, including forensic evidence, the court's comments that more effort should have been made to collect objective evidence are noted."
The Police Statement
In response to media queries over the comments of the Court of Appeal in the case of Muhammad bin Kadar and Ismil bin Kadar v Public Prosecutor, the police acknowledges that legal procedures in relation to the recording of any confession should be observed. In this regard, it has reminded its officers to ensure that they endeavour to always comply with such procedures under any circumstances.
Senior Station Inspector (SSI) Zainal Abidin bin Ismail was criticised in the judgment of the Court of Appeal. He was one of a team of officers deployed to investigate the murder of the deceased at Block 185, Boon Lay Avenue #05-156, which was discovered on May 6, 2005.
Ismil had been arrested earlier that day and held for an unrelated theft case at Boon Lay Shopping Centre. The next day, when he was being brought to Block 185, Boon Lay Avenue (Ismil lived one floor below the murdered victim) for investigations, he revealed to SSI Zainal while seated in a police car that he had attacked the deceased. SSI Zainal immediately informed his superior officers. At that juncture, SSI Zainal did not record Ismil's statement in his field diary, as he did not have it with him. Instead, he recorded it on a piece of paper, and later that day transferred it to his field diary. Ismil was immediately taken to a nearby neighbourhood police centre for further interviews and for the collection of forensic evidence by a forensics officer. This was the priority to avoid such evidence being lost or contaminated before a written statement was taken from the subject.
SSI Zainal testified that later that day, when he interviewed Ismil at the neighbourhood police centre, Ismil repeated the confession he had made earlier in the police car. Ismil was also interviewed subsequently by a senior police officer and he repeated his confession again which was recorded in a written statement, duly read over to him and signed by him.
SSI Zainal had acted in a manner which in his judgment he believed was reasonable under the dynamic circumstances which he faced. The High Court accepted SSI Zainal's explanation and admitted this evidence but the Court of Appeal has found that the statements made by Ismil to SSI Zainal should not have been admitted into evidence, because they were not properly recorded and this materially compromised their reliability.
The Court of Appeal also commented that more effort should have been made to collect objective evidence in this case. This case involved a particularly brutal murder. The police treat all such cases and the collection of evidence at such crime scenes with the utmost seriousness. Each scene is processed by a team of experts from the Forensic Management Branch of the Criminal Investigation Department.
In this instance, there was also a scientist from the Health Sciences Authority (HSA) activated to the scene to give advice on the collection of forensic evidence. The entire team at the crime scene looked for likely places where evidence such as DNA or fingerprints might have been left. The experts then collected evidence to be sent for analysis, which they hoped would yield leads to potential suspects. In this case, their painstaking efforts turned up a piece of critical evidence - the DNA of Muhammad Kadar on the purse of the victim.
While the investigation team had put in much effort to collect all evidence, including forensic evidence, the court's comments that more effort should have been made to collect objective evidence are noted. We will convey these comments to our officers to motivate them to work harder to collect such evidence at the scene of crime.
04:45 AM Jul 09, 2011
SINGAPORE - Criticised by a court for its investigations into the brutal murder of Tham Weng Kuen, the police responded yesterday with a 600-word statement in which they "acknowledge that legal procedures in relation to the recording of any confession should be observed".
On Tuesday, Mr Ismil Kadar, 42, who had spent six years behind bars, walked out a free man after the Court of Appeal absolved him of any involvement in the murder of Tham, 69, on May 6, 2005.
The court upheld the finding that Mr Ismil's brother, Muhammad, was the sole culprit in the fatal stabbing of Tham during a robbery.
Mr Ismil had initially confessed to the police that he had stabbed Tham. The judges said there were serious doubts about the reliability of his police statements.
For example, the first time Mr Ismil purportedly confessed was in a police car. The officer, however, recorded his statement on a piece of paper instead of in his field diary. The statement was also not read back to him nor signed by him, as required.
Among other things, the judges also pointed out that there was "absolutely" no physical evidence of Mr Ismil having been in the flat.
The police said in its statement yesterday: "While the investigation team had put in much effort to collect all evidence, including forensic evidence, the court's comments that more effort should have been made to collect objective evidence are noted."
The Police Statement
In response to media queries over the comments of the Court of Appeal in the case of Muhammad bin Kadar and Ismil bin Kadar v Public Prosecutor, the police acknowledges that legal procedures in relation to the recording of any confession should be observed. In this regard, it has reminded its officers to ensure that they endeavour to always comply with such procedures under any circumstances.
Senior Station Inspector (SSI) Zainal Abidin bin Ismail was criticised in the judgment of the Court of Appeal. He was one of a team of officers deployed to investigate the murder of the deceased at Block 185, Boon Lay Avenue #05-156, which was discovered on May 6, 2005.
Ismil had been arrested earlier that day and held for an unrelated theft case at Boon Lay Shopping Centre. The next day, when he was being brought to Block 185, Boon Lay Avenue (Ismil lived one floor below the murdered victim) for investigations, he revealed to SSI Zainal while seated in a police car that he had attacked the deceased. SSI Zainal immediately informed his superior officers. At that juncture, SSI Zainal did not record Ismil's statement in his field diary, as he did not have it with him. Instead, he recorded it on a piece of paper, and later that day transferred it to his field diary. Ismil was immediately taken to a nearby neighbourhood police centre for further interviews and for the collection of forensic evidence by a forensics officer. This was the priority to avoid such evidence being lost or contaminated before a written statement was taken from the subject.
SSI Zainal testified that later that day, when he interviewed Ismil at the neighbourhood police centre, Ismil repeated the confession he had made earlier in the police car. Ismil was also interviewed subsequently by a senior police officer and he repeated his confession again which was recorded in a written statement, duly read over to him and signed by him.
SSI Zainal had acted in a manner which in his judgment he believed was reasonable under the dynamic circumstances which he faced. The High Court accepted SSI Zainal's explanation and admitted this evidence but the Court of Appeal has found that the statements made by Ismil to SSI Zainal should not have been admitted into evidence, because they were not properly recorded and this materially compromised their reliability.
The Court of Appeal also commented that more effort should have been made to collect objective evidence in this case. This case involved a particularly brutal murder. The police treat all such cases and the collection of evidence at such crime scenes with the utmost seriousness. Each scene is processed by a team of experts from the Forensic Management Branch of the Criminal Investigation Department.
In this instance, there was also a scientist from the Health Sciences Authority (HSA) activated to the scene to give advice on the collection of forensic evidence. The entire team at the crime scene looked for likely places where evidence such as DNA or fingerprints might have been left. The experts then collected evidence to be sent for analysis, which they hoped would yield leads to potential suspects. In this case, their painstaking efforts turned up a piece of critical evidence - the DNA of Muhammad Kadar on the purse of the victim.
While the investigation team had put in much effort to collect all evidence, including forensic evidence, the court's comments that more effort should have been made to collect objective evidence are noted. We will convey these comments to our officers to motivate them to work harder to collect such evidence at the scene of crime.
While we discuss the brother who was acquitted, some may have forgotten that the other brother did indeed brutally murder the elderly lady.
It's not a case of this vicious man trying to rob the istana and was overpowered and detained by the guards.
If you consider LKY's family to be a 10 on a scale of people having wealth and security and the brothers' family to be a 1, the elderly victim's family is perhaps a 2, probably no more than a 3. Yet he chose to target her and her family.
If it means that this man's death will help to prevent other potential victims in the 2and 3 categories, so be it.
Killing someone is never right, but don't let it be an absolute either, a "be-all-and-end-all" so to speak. Once that happens, everything revolves around not taking the one human life, even if it means saving many others.
It's not a case of this vicious man trying to rob the istana and was overpowered and detained by the guards.
If you consider LKY's family to be a 10 on a scale of people having wealth and security and the brothers' family to be a 1, the elderly victim's family is perhaps a 2, probably no more than a 3. Yet he chose to target her and her family.
If it means that this man's death will help to prevent other potential victims in the 2and 3 categories, so be it.
Killing someone is never right, but don't let it be an absolute either, a "be-all-and-end-all" so to speak. Once that happens, everything revolves around not taking the one human life, even if it means saving many others.
I know you mean well but you are struggling with putting your arguments across. I will try and point out why some feel that the death penalty works.
- we all agree without exception that taking of a life is not easy and it has nothing to do with an eye for an eye as thought of in medieval periods and those who are culturally tied to it.
- you asked for statistics if deterrent works. Why do you think Singapore and those that practice the death penalty have lower rates of capital crime then those that don't. None of us asked you for stats for the contrary. Most human right activist never broach the subject of statistics on deterrent effect because it is a lost cause and undermines their agenda.
- there will always be occasions when someone is convicted wrongly. We therefore on that basis do not close down the system. We try and make it better. We build tollgates, safety valves and open lines of inquiry to scrutinise the process. Some years, they had 2 judges to sit for capital cases and I was pleased. I was deeply disappointed when they changed it back. We should be fighting to ensure the system works and society as a whole is protected.
- the vulnerable like kids, females and the elderly plus the disabled and the incapable rely on the adults and the more able to protect them. We can take the easy route and sleep nights by abolishing the death penalty. If the next kid is tortured and slaughtered by a recalcitrant, I know I can't handle it. We adults would have failed.
- many years ago, a young chap brutally raped an SIA stewardess after breaking into her apartment. As he was young, he went into RTC and subsequently became an SAF officer. They gave him a second chance. He went on to commit two more rapes in an even more brutal manner the extent was never disclosed in the press. The victims are basically lost to society - in simple terms, gong gong. Though not a capital crime, it came up for review of a case where the system failed society.
Common sense will tell you that if deterrence does not work and after all these years, who in his right mind wants it in the first place. Why carry the burden. Just throw them in the general prison population. Why do you think that many of the US states have reversed the earlier decision to abolish capital punishment.
- we all agree without exception that taking of a life is not easy and it has nothing to do with an eye for an eye as thought of in medieval periods and those who are culturally tied to it.
- you asked for statistics if deterrent works. Why do you think Singapore and those that practice the death penalty have lower rates of capital crime then those that don't. None of us asked you for stats for the contrary. Most human right activist never broach the subject of statistics on deterrent effect because it is a lost cause and undermines their agenda.
- there will always be occasions when someone is convicted wrongly. We therefore on that basis do not close down the system. We try and make it better. We build tollgates, safety valves and open lines of inquiry to scrutinise the process. Some years, they had 2 judges to sit for capital cases and I was pleased. I was deeply disappointed when they changed it back. We should be fighting to ensure the system works and society as a whole is protected.
- the vulnerable like kids, females and the elderly plus the disabled and the incapable rely on the adults and the more able to protect them. We can take the easy route and sleep nights by abolishing the death penalty. If the next kid is tortured and slaughtered by a recalcitrant, I know I can't handle it. We adults would have failed.
- many years ago, a young chap brutally raped an SIA stewardess after breaking into her apartment. As he was young, he went into RTC and subsequently became an SAF officer. They gave him a second chance. He went on to commit two more rapes in an even more brutal manner the extent was never disclosed in the press. The victims are basically lost to society - in simple terms, gong gong. Though not a capital crime, it came up for review of a case where the system failed society.
Common sense will tell you that if deterrence does not work and after all these years, who in his right mind wants it in the first place. Why carry the burden. Just throw them in the general prison population. Why do you think that many of the US states have reversed the earlier decision to abolish capital punishment.
Last edited:
This will be my final reply to you. You are thinking like normal people. That is not how criminals think. With the death penalty, why do you think there are still people who are willing to take the risk? These people are desperate and they don't think like you or me. So, whether you have the death penalty or a life sentence, to these people, it is the same. Now, the question is, if we replace the death penalty with a life sentence, would there be more such criminals? I will tell you straight that the number would be the same because only the desperate are driven to commit such crimes. Lower the number of desperate people and you lower the number of people willing to take the risk.
With your examples, I know you are talking rubbish. For those people who got a second chance to commit crimes again, it is obvious that they did not get the death penalty. I have never said that removing the death penalty means these guys are free to roam the earth again. You have a one-track mind in thinking that without the death penalty means these criminals will be let loose into society to commit crimes again. Let me repeat one more time, if you replace the death penalty with a sentence of 100 years without possibility of parole, what do you think are the chances of them going on to commit more crimes?
The only reasons why the death penalty is popular are because people do not want to pay taxes to keep them alive in prison or to see them alive while they have suffered a terrible loss (vengeance is always appealing). This is the cold hard truth. Don't bullshit about keeping society safe and so on. If the death penalty is really such a deterrent, the number of people on death row would be near zero, yet there are so still many people getting killed in the US and China every year.
Last edited:
Ever since President Nixon declared War On Drugs, it has been a total failure.
"Pinky interviews drug policy expert Clifford Thornton: "The War on Drugs has absolutely nothing to do with drugs - it's about power, it's about control, it's about coercion, it's about money."
<iframe width="425" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/pd_3HowvKlA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
"Pinky interviews drug policy expert Clifford Thornton: "The War on Drugs has absolutely nothing to do with drugs - it's about power, it's about control, it's about coercion, it's about money."
<iframe width="425" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/pd_3HowvKlA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Similar threads
