Police went OVERBOARD - when they made statements that may prejudice a FAIR TRIAL, and may 'defame' suspects(now accused) and possibly also family/friends ....
The police just talked 'TOO MUCH' - and they must remember, that it is NOT the POLICE, NOT the Prosecutor but ONLY the JUDGE that will ultimately determine the GUILT or NON-GUILT of an accused person after a FAIR TRIAL...
So police must NOT talk about their personal opinions or beliefs - Remember the problem with TUNNEL VISION - the jumping to conclusion as to who did it, and what happened - and then proceeding to find evidence just to find evidence to support their theory - this type of behavior has led to a lot of miscarriage of justice in the past - worse the real perpetrators get away...
Tunnel vision in policing refers to a phenomenon where investigators become so narrowly focused on a particular suspect or theory that they fail to consider other potential leads, evidence, or alternative explanations for a crime. This can lead to wrongful convictions, missed opportunities to identify the actual perpetrator, and a flawed investigation
Selangor police chief Datuk Hussein Omar Khan said investigations revealed that the victim's housemate, who is also the suspect's girlfriend, had handed him the access card and keys to the condominium before the incident.
COMMENT :- What's the big deal, more so since this has happened in the past too - is it the police trying to convince public that the 'suspect' had the means to enter the premises on the said date?
"The police found that this case was more about the suspect taking advantage of the victim, who lived alone in the house. The suspect had bad intentions towards the victim.
COMMENT :- What bullshit? And where is the evidence? What evidence? What 'bad intentions' - I doubt the suspect told the police he had 'bad intentions'...and what bad intentions - sexual (but there was no evidence of sexual assault/rape etc), robbery (again questionable since suspect had access to the apartment before and as such, if it was robbery/theft - he, who had access at any time, could always come when the deceased was not at home, What other 'bad intention" - to murder or cause physical harm???
I see this as a mere OPINION of the police - how exactly does the police conclude that the suspect had bad intentions --- What evidence, Mr Policeman?
"He was at the property using the access card and keys provided by his girlfriend, who had returned to her hometown after examinations.
"In that situation, the suspect, who already had ill intentions, took the opportunity to hit the victim with a blunt object which caused her death, and robbed her.
COMMENT:- Again, what evidence that the suspect had any 'ill intention' - What was it? Was it to KILL or was it to ROB? From what our Mr Policeman is saying, the police believes that suspect did not MURDER, and also committed culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Then, did the police find the blunt object, and was there the suspect's fingerprint or DNA? Was there blood or DNA of the victim found on the Suspect/s?
Section 301 Penal Code - Culpable homicide by causing the death of a person other than the person whose death was intended
If a person, by doing anything which he intends or knows to be likely to cause death, commits culpable homicide by causing the death of any person whose death he neither intends nor knows himself to be likely to cause, the culpable homicide committed by the offender is of the description of which it would have been if he had caused the death of the person whose death he intended or knew himself to be likely to cause.
"Before that, he had stayed overnight at the unit with his girlfriend. On the night of the incident, while staying in the room, he had met the victim, leading to the fatal incident," he said during a press conference here today.
ALL in all, I am concerned that the police may be affected by TUNNEL VISION - and police/investigators when the report on crimes to the public, they must just stick to FACTS, not their suspicion or theories... Are the police even examining other suspects and other 'theories' of how the deceased was 'killed'?
I am still doubtful as to why the 2 police officers MURDERED Altantuya - for ROBBERY?
Why even mention the male suspect was unemployed - was it to present an observation that suspect was poor because he was unemployed - so, he possibly killed to commit THEFT ...???
Do not confuse the PUBLIC - and 'defame' the suspects wrongly... [If I was the lawyer of the suspect, i may advice him to consider filing a DEFAMATION Suit against the Selangor Police Chief...
Another WORSE case is the police act of "DEFAMING the DEAD" - most times, where there is a case of police shooting an 'alleged' suspect - we see the police coming out to paint a picture that the deceased are 'very bad persons' with so many criminal records. Whilst the police are expending an effort to justify the death, is there a REAL INVESTIGATION conducted to determine whether the police actions was noto t CRIMINAL - against the law. Remember, Malaysian law does not allow police to generally KILL people they wanted to arrest...
The Prime Minister and the Home Minister, and maybe even SUHAKAM (Malaysian Human Rights Commission) must look in these issue - What should police disclose to the Public? What should not be - to protect the rights of the suspect/accussed - noting that all are PRESUMED Innocent until the Court Convicts after a FAIR TRIAL ...
Will what the Police Chief of Selangor said, and was reported, affect a FAIR TRIAL?
More importantly - how it will affect the suspect(now accussed) image and treatment by the general public - Remember, it also affects the suspect's family members too...
A State police chief should have set the RIGHT EXAMPLE - one is that the police shall investigate all possibilities to find the TRUTH, and investigations shall not be affected by 'TUNNEL VISION', etc...and that the Malaysian police will not be so narrowly focused on a particular suspect or theory that they fail to consider other potential leads, evidence, or alternative explanations for a crime.
Cyberjaya murder: Main suspect had keys, access card to condo
SHAH ALAM: The main suspect in the murder of a private university student at a condominium in Cyberjaya is believed to have spent the night there several times with his girlfriend before the incident.
Selangor police chief Datuk Hussein Omar Khan said investigations revealed that the victim's housemate, who is also the suspect's girlfriend, had handed him the access card and keys to the condominium before the incident.
"The police found that this case was more about the suspect taking advantage of the victim, who lived alone in the house. The suspect had bad intentions towards the victim.
"He was at the property using the access card and keys provided by his girlfriend, who had returned to her hometown after examinations.
"In that situation, the suspect, who already had ill intentions, took the opportunity to hit the victim with a blunt object which caused her death, and robbed her.
"Before that, he had stayed overnight at the unit with his girlfriend. On the night of the incident, while staying in the room, he had met the victim, leading to the fatal incident," he said during a press conference here today.
Hussein said the main suspect was one of four people remanded within 48 hours of the incident.
He was detained along with three women, including his girlfriend.
"Investigations showed that the main suspect is 20-years-old and unemployed.
"(Of the three women detained), one is the victim's housemate, who is also the suspect's girlfriend. The other two lived on the upper floor of the condominium. All of them are assisting police investigations.
"Their remand orders will expire on July 3 and 4. This will be extended to facilitate further investigations," he said.
He added that police are expected to complete the investigation papers soon before submitting them to the deputy public prosecutor.
The victim, from Kuching, Sarawak, was found dead in her condominium unit in Cyberjaya last week.
She was a Bachelor of Physiotherapy student at a university in Cyberjaya and was discovered with injuries on her body by a friend at 10am.
Her friend immediately alerted the police.
Preliminary checks found no signs of forced entry into the residence. An autopsy confirmed the cause of death as blunt force trauma to the head. - NST, 1/7/2025
Teen, woman accomplice charged over murder of Cyberjaya university student
SEPANG, July 10 — A 19-year-old man and woman were charged in the Magistrate's Court here today over the murder of university student Maniishapriet Kaur Akhara in Cyberjaya last month.
The first accused, M. Sri Darvien, was charged murdering Maniishapriet at Block A, Mutiara Ville Cyberjaya, Persiaran Multimedia, on June 23.
He nodded to indicate he understood the charge after it was read before Magistrate Khairatul Animah Jelani.
If convicted, Sri Darvien faces the death sentence or imprisonment between 30 and 40 years along with whipping
In the same court, the second accused, D. Thineswary, was charged with abetting the murder at the same location and on the same date.
She was charged under Section 109 of the Penal Code, read together with Section 302.
If convicted, Thineswary also faces the death sentence or imprisonment between 30 and 40 years and is liable for whipping.No plea was recorded from either accused, as murder cases fall under the jurisdiction of the High Court.
Lawyers M Manoharan and Mohamed Baharudeen Mohamed Ariff appeared for Sri Darvien and Thineswary, respectively.
Lawyer Rajpal Singh held a watching brief for Maniishapriet's family.
The court then fixed September 11 for mention. - Malay Mail, 10/7/2025
No comments:
Post a Comment