14-year-old jumps to his death after unaccompanied police interrogation for Molest

[k-knight]

Originally Posted by sadfa

Haha.

If they do that, it'll be the biggest load of bs garbage propaganda since they make those movie n musical portraying old man as handsome garang well loved guy married to Sharon au. But we all know ....

They might as well get that piece of shit bootlicker jack neo as special director so they can smear Benjamin to the max n show io getting Benjamin hot milo n Benjamin breaking Down, crying n confessing n io hugging Benjamin n consoling him n promising to take care of him.

Wow bro, I almost spill out my beer n peanuts when i read this.. compare to many countries, crime watch is truly a freaking disgrace. Its all propaganda, the police are like ants, they go out in groups, they can use 5 cops to catch a kid, 8 to 10 police to catch wl working in spas and 20 over policemen to catch ah long runners. N in sg, 90% of the victims surrender peacefully unlike those in crimewatch showing 1 v 1 n showing the culprits trying to struggle off..

When you need 5 cops to nab a kid, 10 police for a spa, 20 policemen for ah long runners and 30 to 40 plainclothes to nab a drug addict, read this drug addict, not drug trafficker. It shows how this country is abusing the taxpayers money

[kuasimi]

http://themiddleground.sg/2016/02/04...-benjamin-lim/


by Bertha Henson

PEOPLE are upset. A 14-year old has died. And people are making a link between the police interrogation/interview Benjamin went through and his suicide a few hours later. His parents are upset. They are convinced that the heavy-handed treatment meted out to their son by the police was unnecessary. Five policemen to pick up a boy at his school? A telephone call to his mother that was cut short? And what happened during the interview when he was asked about accusations that he had molested an 11-year old girl?

Police haven’t said very much about whether they thought he was guilty or not. The Police statement said that he was released on bail, which means that he was arrested and questioned and had given the assurance that he would return to the station or attend Court when told to do so. The open letter from his family said that Benjamin had “admitted to the police” that he committed the crime even though he told his family that he did not do it.

There is a CCTV recording of the interview, but there’s also a coroner’s inquiry pending. Saying too much would be in contempt of court. Benjamin’s words to his mother “They say I’m guilty, then I’m guilty lor’‘ might hint at some form of bullying, but it doesn’t really prove anything at all. He might have molested the girl; He might not have. Some people may say suicide is proof of guilt; But most think he was just traumatised by what had happened. And his father has penned an eloquent letter that he said recorded what had happened that January 26 when his son was led away by police with one hand holding a cold bun and a drink in the other.

He made it clear that he found the behaviour and attitude of Northview Secondary School and the police to his son unacceptable.

“As Benjamin’s father, it is now my duty to seek justice for my son. We do not know if he has indeed committed the alleged offence of “outrage of modesty” of the 11-year-old girl. Until the coroner hearing, we do not want to speculate whether the offence has indeed taken place.

“That said, as parents we cannot forget and we cannot forgive the way my son was treated, from the school to the time he was in police custody. I have this to say to the school authorities. We as parents we entrusted our children to you. You have a duty to ensure that our children are appropriately taken care of, reasonably protected and have their interest in your priority.

“To the police, I have to tell you that by sending 5 plainclothes officers to one secondary school in 2 unmarked police vehicles are never discreet. You are there to look for one secondary 3 student. You are not there to apprehend an adult suspect with full ability to escape or capable in single combat.”

There are plenty of issues here but the key issue which has emerged is whether an underage youth who is all of 14 should have had an adult present with him during police questioning. There is no legal requirement for this although other jurisdictions have some guidelines. For example, in the UK, when police detain or interview a child or young person (aged 10 to 17), they “must inform an appropriate adult as soon as is practicable and ask them to attend.” The BBC says that the system was “introduced in the 1980s following miscarriages of justice involving vulnerable people,” but it is underutilised.

In the state of New South Wales, Australia, any statement or information given to police by a child is inadmissible as evidence unless a lawyer representing the child or an adult responsible for the child is present during such testimony.

In many other jurisdictions, including the USA, all persons have the right to seek legal counsel immediately after being arrested. Singapore allows access to a lawyer within a “reasonable time” after an arrest.

There is plenty of sympathy for Benjamin’s parents because Benjamin could have been their son too, as our writer Brenda Tan wrote earlier. He was such an average, normal teenager. He was young and wouldn’t know his rights. He would have been easily intimidated by the police into saying he was guilty. He was no Amos Yee or some pai kia.

But so what if he was?

In a statement on February 1, the police made it clear that it wasn’t as if Benjamin was put in a small room and given the third degree by a battery of investigators. He was interviewed by one Investigation Officer at his workstation in an open plan office with other workstations.

“The Police have been asked whether it should review the procedure to allow an appropriate adult to be present when a young person is interviewed. The Police will review and address this issue.”

This is an opaque statement, given that police did not say what the process is – or whether there is a process in the first place. Anyone reading the statement would also be wondering at the term “appropriate adult” – unless they know of the Appropriate Adult Scheme administered by the Movement for the Intellectually Disabled of Singapore which started this year. The scheme requires that an adult, who may or may not be a parent, be present when persons with intellectual or mental disability are required to give a statement to the Police during investigations.

But what are the implications of extending this scheme to minors? In fact, how many minors are taken in for questioning every day or every week? How many have had police picking them up from school and brought straight to a police station? It’s probably been happening for years and to hundreds of minors.

Going by statistics, 1,369 juveniles (7 years old or above and below 16 years old) were arrested in 2014. In the same year, 322 juveniles were admitted into Ministry of Social and Family Development’s (MSF) Boys’ and Girls’ Homes.

Some quarters have wondered if treating minors with “kid gloves” would mean compromising law and order efforts. Having to wait for an “appropriate adult” to be present, for example, would mean that more time would have to be expended on investigations which might actually be quite straightforward – for example, minors apprehended in the course of a gang fight. Or you might have protective parents insisting that they would be the most appropriate adult for any matter concerning their child.

But if you go by the principle that minors are a vulnerable group, then that “appropriate adult” must be found and more time must be taken to handle investigations involving minors. It is longer, even messier, but it is the right thing to do.

In the United Kingdom, for example, there are trained networks of “appropriate adults” who can be called upon when a minor has to be questioned.

According to the Youth Justice Board, their responsibilities include:
•to support, advise and assist the child or young person while detained or interviewed by police
•to be present when police request consent for, or carry out, various procedures such as fingerprinting, photographing, intimate and strip searches
•to ensure that the child or young person understands their rights and that you have a role in protecting their rights
•to observe whether the police are acting properly, fairly and with respect for the rights of the child or young person and to tell them if they are not.

Other countries which are more populous than Singapore have done it, although with varying degrees of success. On this tiny island of households with just one child or two, would it not be possible to build a similar network of trained volunteers?

In Singapore, some steps have been taken in recent years which recognise that children need special protection. For example, the Family Justice Courts were set up in 2014 with a special focus on shielding children in divorce cases, such as appointing child representatives from a panel of seasoned family lawyers to be the child’s independent voice in court. The MSF will also have more agencies providing a supervised visitation programme by the end of this year.

Of course, in these cases, the children are “victims” rather than the “accused”.

The similarity: They are children.



Featured image by Natayssa Diana.

If you like this article, Like The Middle Ground‘s Facebook Page as well!

For breaking news, you can talk to us via email.

[tryying]

All those officers, their top etc, one day will be treated badly by own children! The boy dies and the eyes wouldn't close, really feeling bad for him. Karma is there, just wait and see!

[sadfa]

Originally Posted by tryying

All those officers, their top etc, one day will be treated badly by own children! The boy dies and the eyes wouldn't close, really feeling bad for him. Karma is there, just wait and see!

don't have karma la.

Marcos, suharto, the grandfather n father from north Korea n you know who never stood trial for wad they did n some got commit genocide, assassinate kill people like drink water, ruin peoples life.

They die naturally in deathbeds even if They were ill before dying

[kuasimi]

Shanmugam, Minister of Law, and Home Affairs - your deafening silence on Benjamin Lim's death..???


http://forums.$$$$$$$$$$$$.com.sg/ea...h-5297060.html



Student said plainclothes officers at school, wore T-shirts with ‘Police’ at its back


http://forums.$$$$$$$$$$$$.com.sg/ea...k-5296744.html



If 14 yr old Benjamin was from American Sch, Tanglin Trust or United World College, would the police


http://forums.$$$$$$$$$$$$.com.sg/ea...e-5297059.html

[kuasimi]

Father with dementia, forced to confess to a offence by police

By onlinecitizen on February 5, 2016 Social Justice

http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2016...nce-by-police/


The following experience was submitted to TOC by a member of the public, and as the mentioned case is still under investigation, a couple of details have been omitted for privacy reasons.

L recounts the story of her father who was investigated by the police for an offence he clearly did not commit

The story of 14-year old Benjamin Lim who jumped to his death after unaccompanied police interrogation is the by-product of a relentless abuse of power by the Singapore Police Force that has gone unchecked over the years.

My father has had dementia for the past four years, and he lost his ability to make any sound decisions or engage in any meaningful conversation two years ago. Last August, a huge team of 6 to 7 police officers came down to my house to apprehend my father for a spate of theft cases that have been happening in my neighborhood for the past month.

My family immediately advised the investigating officer that it was not possible for my father to be involved in this crime because of his illness, and he would definitely be unable to answer any of the officer’s questions due to his inability to comprehend any conversation.

However, without explaining the nature of the crime, nor accounting to the family members, the investigating officer brought my dad back to the police station, ignoring our protests and insistence that he was unfit to be kept in detention.

A week after my dad was released, we were still struggling to figure out what was going on. The investigating officer had made no attempt to communicate with the family, despite repeated reminders to the officer that my father had no capacity to be in interrogation and that the officer should be talking to my dad’s immediate family members.

The investigating officer said: “This is all part of protocol.” We later discovered that “protocol” meant that mentally ill patients could be freely interrogated by a group of police officers from 2 pm to 4am, with the police officer repeatedly telling him: “Sign this document, and everything will be alright”.

My father was FORCED to sign a statement confessing to the crime before he was allowed to be released on bail. He told us that he spent the entire night shouting “I am innocent” through the bars of the jail cell.

Three months later, a separate investigation led to a thief being apprehended in the neighborhood, and the thief was linked back to my father’s case. A police officer visited us and asked my father, “Why did you confess to a crime which you did not commit?”. My father didn’t respond. He had no idea what the police officer was even saying.

If the real thief had not been apprehended, my father would just be yet another victim of this intolerable abuse of power.

Why is the Singapore Police Force allowed to run unchecked when investigating minors and disadvantaged citizens in this society? If this is “protocol”, then perhaps it is time to revisit this “protocol”.

How many more “Benjamin Lim” incidents do we need before the Singapore Police Force realizes the need for a change in protocol?

[kuasimi]

SDP: Ministers’ silence on Benjamin Lim’s suicide troubling


http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2016...ide-troubling/


By onlinecitizen on February 5, 2016 Politics


The Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), in its latest statement, calls upon the Singapore Government to fully account to members of the public over the incident involving the death of 14-year-old, Benjamin Lim.

On 26 January, Benjamin was visited by five plain-clothes police officers at school during school hours over an alleged case of molestation. He was then brought to the police station to be interviewed for over 3 hours without the accompaniment of his parents. Soon after reaching home, he locked himself in his room and jumped to his death from the 14th floor of his flat. (read more)

The party statement, penned by Dr. Wong Souk Yee, SDP Chairperson said it would have been common sense for authorities to proceed with caution while dealing with minors and the priority of the school authorities should have been the protection of students’ welfare.

SDP also voiced its concern over the silence of the ministers from the Ministry of Education and Ministry of Home Affairs and said that the ministers should address the situation and see how the matter can be resolved and future incidents prevented.

The statement by SDP in full

The SDP expresses our deepest sympathies to the family of Benjamin Lim. His suicide is a tragedy that could have been avoided.

There is a reason why the law and society treat minors differently from adults: They are presumed to not possess the full maturity in thought and deed as adults.

Common sense would have indicated to the authorities to proceed with caution when dealing with minors. Yet, five police officers were dispatched to arrest the boy.

Even if the police were concerned that Benjamin would not be co-operative and could overpower the officers and escape, how far could he have run? And even if he did make a getaway, did the police not have his family, school and classmates that they could contact?

Also of concern is whether the number of officers sent to arrest Benjamin signaled an aggressive police mindset that was carried over into the interrogation room.

School officials must be aware that their duty is, first and foremost, to protect students’ welfare as well as their families’ interests.

Doing this would not impede law enforcement officers from carrying out their duty. It would, on the other hand, help to prevent tragedies like Benjamin’s suicide from taking place.

But there is something else that is equally disconcerting. The Ministers for Law, Education, and Home Affairs have kept silent on the matter.

Given that a teenager has committed suicide resulting from a series of actions involving the police and the school, it behooves the Ministers to, at the minimum, address the situation and see how the matter can be resolved and future incidents prevented.

Instead of looking into the matter, Todayonline runs a headline saying: “MPs, experts laud police review of interview process involving minors”.

Why are MPs and the media not speaking up on investigating the circumstances that led to a 14-year-old committing suicide after police interrogation? Instead, they are lauding the review of a procedure that should not have been in practice in the first place.

In any developed country, the standard operating procedures (SOPs) would require minors to be accompanied by a parent, guardian or lawyer during interrogation. Its SOPs would also require video recordings of all police interrogations.

Without these protections of minors’ rights, indeed the rights of all persons under interrogation, we will never know the treatment meted out to Benjamin during the three hours or so in police custody.

The public is upset over this incident and deserves full accounting from the Government.

[kuasimi]

Student said plainclothes officers at school, wore T-shirts with ‘Police’ at its back

http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2016...e-at-its-back/


http://forums.$$$$$$$$$$$$.com.sg/ea...k-5296744.html


By Terry Xu on February 5, 2016 Social Justice



Due to the public outrage over the case of the Benjamin Lim, the fourteen-year-old who was found dead on 26 January at the foot of his flat after apparently jumping down from the 14th floor, both the Singapore Police Force (SPF) and the secondary school that Benjamin studied in, have clarified that the whole process of the police visiting the school for Benjamin was discreet due to the plainclothes officers and the use of unmarked vehicles.

It is noted that Benjamin had been interviewed by the police unaccompanied for his alleged involvement in a case of molestation

The police in its statement on Monday (1 February) wrote, “In this case, a Police report was lodged about a molestation. Based on CCTV evidence, Police officers went to conduct enquiries at a school. To keep investigations discreet, the officers went in plainclothes and in unmarked cars.”

The school principal was quoted by The New Paper on 30 January to have said, “When the plainclothes police officers came to the school, we were discreet in bringing the student to the office to meet with the police.”

So based on the statements made by the police and the school, the five police officers who turned up at the secondary school were wearing plainclothes and therefore not recognisable as police officers.

At least, that is what they say.

TOC has spoken to a parent of a student studying in the same secondary school with Benjamin, and the accounts of her son gave a contrasting picture.

According to her son, he had went near the principal office on that Tuesday (26 January) and knew that there was something big happening.

The son had told her that he was aware of the incident before the news came out that night because he had gone to the principal’s office during recess and saw the police gathering there.

She asked how he knew the people were police when they wore plainclothes. The son laughed and replied, “They wearing the T-shirts with the word, ‘POLICE’ at the back what!”

The mother asked if the term ‘plainclothes’would be technically classified for such attires. The mother also said that she is aware that the school is affiliated with a community-based police subdivision, however, she is not certain if some of them were present at the time.

She added that in her son’s opinion, it was very apparent that someone was in big trouble that day.

TOC has written to the police for comments and will update when they respond.


Do you have a news tip, firsthand account, information or photos about a news story to pass along to us? Visit this page or email us at [email protected]

[kuasimi]

Case of Benjamin Lee – Schools should know that not standing the way of the law is not the same as blind compliance to police requests


http://theindependent.sg/case-of-ben...lice-requests/

By The Independent -

February 5, 2016


By: Ghui

The recent tragedy of Benjamin Lee left me pondering if we as a society have taken the concept of efficiency too far. Efficiency is no doubt important. It keeps the wheels of administration turning. It makes Singapore economically viable. It makes life convenient.

But has the quest for speed and efficacy led to a society that is so process driven that it no longer employs common sense?

The open letter penned by Benjamin’s bereaved father was a sobering read that made me realise that it wasn’t just the police who failed Benjamin. It was the entire model our society is based on that led to this untimely and needless death.

First and foremost, we have guidelines in place from MOE stating that the school is obliged to cooperate with the police and “not stand in the way of the law”. But what does “not stand in the way of the law” mean? What is the law in the first place in such investigations? It would seem that in our blind adherence to the “system” we are not thinking critically or asking any questions.

Subconsciously, we have assumed that obeying the police is tantamount to not standing in the way of the law. Surely, the police are not the law? They are simply law enforcers who enforce the law in accordance to certain standards. Have we confused the law with the enforcers?

Secondly, what is the standard that the police should follow? Are these clear enough to ensure that both the public and the police themselves understand the remit of their rights?

Have we become so conditioned to accept everything that comes from a figure of authority that we don’t even question if there are limitations to that authority?

Isn’t that what happened here with terrible consequences?

The school has not hitherto demonstrated that it questioned the basis of the police’s investigations. Nor has it been proven that the school tried to keep Benjamin in school until his parents arrived.

From the way events have been reported, it would appear that the school did everything it could to comply with police demands without due consideration for what Benjamin may be feeling or thinking. It appeared that the school gave the police the benefit of the doubt without offering the same courtesy to its own pupil.

We are so conditioned to obey the law that we don’t even stop to consider what the law actually is. Whether Benjamin should have been taken to the station or remained in the school is not a legal issue at all.

“Not standing in the way of the law” does not mean that the school has to do everything a person of authority says without question or compromise. It would seem that all the police wanted to do was to ask questions. Could the questions not have been asked in the privacy and security of an empty office or meeting room?

It seems to me that the school administration did not even stop to consider the alternatives. It simply blindly complied with what law enforcement had to say without any thought to what the law actually said or what the objectives of the investigation were.

The police were guilty of the same “one size fits all” approach. So ingrained to “follow the system” that the officers did not even stop to think of different tactics for different interviewees.

Sending five plain clothes police to pick up a school boy is surely over the top and should be reserved for a gang of hardened criminals as opposed to a lone schoolboy. While I am not dismissing the traumatic nature of an outrage of modesty, it is not a violent crime that merits a team of plain clothes police officers!

Clearly, the police wanted to unnerve Benjamin to get the truth but has it crossed their minds that there are many ways to skin a cat? Plainly, the police only have one weapon in their arsenal – that of intimidation.

They assumed that a show of force was the only way to close the case without further consideration for what methods would be best to elicit the truth from different subjects! Another example of blindly following precedents without taking the time and ownership of the task at hand to think deeper!

Another issue of concern is in relation to the ascertainment of truth. Are the police simply interested in closing the case or in finding the truth? From the statements uttered by Benjamin, it would seem that he felt coerced to confess to a crime he did not commit because the police already pre charged him as guilty.

Has our quest for efficiency at all costs increased incidences of inaccuracy?

While standard operating procedures are necessary as a framework, they do not mean that we hide behind these procedures and throw our brains away. We still need to apply our minds to ensure that the right methods are being deployed for the right situations.

In this case, neither the police nor the school in question has done this. In their attempts to follow the rules, they have disregarded common sense, compassion and logic which led to this devastating but entirely preventable outcome.

Hopefully this incident will jolt us out of the false security of the “system” and force us to employ our minds in every situation and to take ownership and initiative. From the public outcry,

I am hopeful that lessons will be learnt. It is just regrettable that someone had to die for this debate to even begin.

[sadfa]

The truth is these police aren't fit to be police.

No morals, no compassion, can't differentiate right from wrong, its no exaggeration to say some crooks are better human beings than them. Not to mention some looks so fucking unfit don't know they got pass fitness test.

Of cos these fuckers take after their equally unsuitable political overlords.

[sadfa]

Originally Posted by kuasimi

[B][SIZE="4"]Shanmugam, Minister of Law, and Home Affairs

[B][SIZE="4"]Student said plainclothes officers at school, wore T-shirts with ‘Police’ at its back 9.html[/url]

Police will say not counted.

Cos you see ppl wear full body inspector t shirt, you'll remove yr clothes n let them inspect?

[kuasimi]

Originally Posted by sadfa

The truth is these police aren't fit to be police.

No morals, no compassion, can't differentiate right from wrong, its no exaggeration to say some crooks are better human beings than them. Not to mention some looks so fucking unfit don't know they got pass fitness test.

Of cos these fuckers take after their equally unsuitable political overlords.

Singaporeans not as brave as Hong Kong people to protest at Police HQ.

[sadfa]

Originally Posted by kuasimi

Singaporeans not as brave as Hong Kong people to protest at Police HQ.


https://www.youtube.com/watcktEQ8

https://www.youtube.com/w4FCo


https://www.youtube.c6TUTNE


https://www.yCY-dDSlU

Pui la!

In Taiwan, a ns man tekan to death in db.
Taiwanese had 2 peaceful demonstration
One got 200,000 people.
This is a true country standing up for their fellow citizen who was bullied in an abuse of power n can't defend himself anymore.

In spore? How many ppl got oppressed bullied made example of like jbj, tang, chee. And sporeans did wad?
Not surprising spore will be fucked up forever.
Even prcs know wad is right n willing to stand for it.

And if people want to talk in Hong lim park about Benjamin or march in demonstration to shanmugams house, they have to get permission from the police.

Who the fuck so stupid think they'll give?

[kuasimi]

Originally Posted by kuasimi

Shanmugam, Minister of Law, and Home Affairs - your deafening silence on Benjamin Lim's death..???


http://forums.$$$$$$$$$$$$.com.sg/ea...h-5297060.html



Student said plainclothes officers at school, wore T-shirts with ‘Police’ at its back


http://forums.$$$$$$$$$$$$.com.sg/ea...k-5296744.html



If 14 yr old Benjamin was from American Sch, Tanglin Trust or United World College, would the police


http://forums.$$$$$$$$$$$$.com.sg/ea...e-5297059.html

https://www.facebook.com/35875932751...type=3&theater


Either Shanmugam's vocabulary or his intellectual capacity is severely limited, provided he has any.

[CreDitSuiSSe]

Interesting views shared here.