标签

单亲妈妈报案投诉警方人员滥用权力强迫其13岁儿子认罪,並将不对涉案警员采采取任何行动

Mother of 13-year-old files report against police officers’ abuse of power and told no further actions would be taken

作者:《网络公民》(TOC)编辑 TERRY XU

编者按:

  1. 这起案件是继续青少年林俊辉和李瑞峰死亡事件后又一起涉及警方审问青少年程序的案件;

  2. 这起案件是发生于2015年6月30日晚上8点整到隔天早上5点之间。案发地点是在青少年住家楼下及广东民路警察局;

  3. 当事人的母亲在报案后揭发,涉嫌犯案的並不是华族青少年而是马来族青少年;

  4. 当事人于2015年7月7日向警方报案投诉。到了2016年1月7日,警方回复报案人说,投诉警方的案件已经完成调查工作,警方在咨询了总检查署后,决定不再进一步对有关的警方人员采取任何行动。

全文如下:

转载自:《网络公民》http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2016/03/mother-of-13-year-old-files-report-against-police-officers-abuse-of-power-and-told-no-further-actions-would-be-taken/

一名单亲妈妈向警方投案有关警方人员强迫她13岁儿子承认犯下刑事罪(事实上他并没有触犯任何刑事罪)以及在整个审讯过程中苛刻待遇他的儿子。六个月后,内部事务官员告诉她,警方不会对有关被投诉的警方采取任何行动。

在《网络公民》发布了有关14岁跳楼自杀身亡的林俊辉时间后,有关的家属把他在2015年7月的警方报告寄给《网络公民》。这份报告说是有位单亲妈妈通过朋友转交的。《网络公民》也有回复她的电邮副件。

单亲妈妈的朋友代表她在回复的邮件里这么写道,“谢谢您的多方帮忙和积极的关注她儿子的案件。我们只是不要见到更多的青少年受到伤害和有关当局将会更加关注我们年轻的一代。”

母亲和孩子面对的严峻考验

于2015年6月30日晚上8点,妈妈和孩子步出电梯时,一组约8-9人的便衣人员向他们走来。

其中一名便衣人员表明自己是警方人员,并出示了有关的证件。接着,他们向孩子的母亲说明来意,他们需要与她的儿子谈话,那是一起涉及发生于2015年6月12日在克罗福巷的抢劫案。在便衣人员说明来意后便把孩子带到楼梯旁。

警员告诉这位单亲妈妈,假如她在场将会影响他们对孩子的问话,所以要求她入屋等候。尽管母亲想要陪伴自己的儿子,但是,都被在场的警方人员所阻止。警方人员问了母亲涉嫌抢劫案发生的当天孩子是在哪里?母亲也投诉说,其中一些警方人员甚至劝说她去说服自己的儿子向办案的警官承认触犯了抢劫罪行。

这位母亲只是被允许离开自己的住家去说服儿子承认有关涉嫌犯罪行为。过后,他们又把她送回住家。

根据这位母亲的反映,警方人员在楼梯旁审问孩子(从晚上8点开始),后来带到警察局审问直到当天晚上11点45分。

审问楼梯口

这就是说,这个审问时间是长达3.5小时。这位单亲妈妈在报案记录说,她的儿子在这个冗长的审问中,被逼承认自己涉嫌抢劫案。

她的儿子承受不了压力,承认了涉及这起抢劫案后,警方人员告诉她,警方必须将带她儿子带回警局扣留,以便录取口供。他的儿子的朋友这时候也已经在警察局里了。这个时候是晚上11点45分。

接着在隔天早上5点,母亲接到警方的电话,告诉她到广东民路警察局担保儿子。当她抵达警察局后,她支付了担保金并把儿子从警察局的拘留所带回来。

当母子俩回到家后,母亲问儿子到底发生了什么事。孩子的眼泪立即流了出来说,在他被审问过程中。警方人员使用了粗暴的语言责骂孩子,同时恐吓孩子,如果他不承认涉嫌有关的抢劫案要送去儿童感化院。她儿子也说。一名警方人员在审问期间把它推向墙边,并戳他的胸部。

负责调查儿子案件的警官告诉母亲说,他们将会向学校汇报有关这起案件。在(孩子获得担保释放)的同一天,母亲到学校查问了学校警方人员是否来过?儿子的级任老师所,她/他并没有注意到这件事。

接着于2015年7月7日,母亲就随即到警察局投案有关警方人员了。母亲得到到了有关的讯息是,受害者是一名收买旧货者,他在克罗福巷被抢劫。肇事者是马来族不是华族。

投诉报案

母亲的朋友这么写道:

“警方的逮捕行动让孩子们感到惊吓,心灵受创。那简直是一场噩梦!”

在这起事件发生后,母亲去见自己选区的国会议员谭振辉(Mr Edwin Tong)和其他的协会组织寻求协助,但是这一切都徒劳无功。

警方内部事务署说不会对这起投诉采取进一步的行动

于2016年1月7日,警方在回复母亲有关的投诉的案件里说,他们已经完成有关她的投诉调查工作了。在谘询了总检查署之后,他们决定不对有关被投诉警方人员采取进一步的行动。

警方内部事务回信

母亲除了收到这封信外,并没有再收到警方内部事务部任何的来函。

警方完成内部调查后的的来函在提到有关14岁青少年林俊辉跳楼自杀身亡的事件时,母亲的朋友写道:

“对于这场悲剧我们感到非常的遗憾。这一场悲剧是可以避免的。我们的朋友孩子年龄只有13岁。当时,他还面对着8-9名便衣警方人员。在审问过程中强逼承认自己未曾做过的事。在警察局里,他们还使用测谎器测试孩子是否撒谎。事发至今,他们还没有对孩子及其及家属做出任何道歉。这是令人无法容忍的事情。”

“在这起事件上,我们感到非常的失望,因为我的朋友是一个单亲妈妈,那些便衣警方人员怎么可以以这样过度反应的行为对待一个瘦弱的青少年呢!”

“现在我们已经非常的怀疑当局的(逮捕)行为和(审问)程序了!”

在14岁青少年林俊辉跳楼自杀身亡事件之后,警方说,他们将会检讨有关审问青少年时的程序,让其相关的成年人在场陪伴。无论如何,他们并没有说明这个检讨审问程序将在什么时候完成。

警方对家长投诉报案的回应《网络公民》于2016年3月5日与3月17日分别已经写信给警方。但是,警方(警察总监)至今尚未给予任何的正式的回复。他们只是在电邮自动回复系统回答:

“有关信件已经收悉。”

接着,《网络公民》写信给丹绒巴葛集选区国会议员杨益才(Mr Melvin Yong)。他是前副警察总监,以征求他的意见。

杨益才

杨益才先生在国会谈到有关《网络公民》在报道有关14岁青少年林俊辉跳楼自杀身亡事件时说:

议长女士,我在警界已经服务了20年龄。公众对警方的信任和信心是至关重要的。对警方来说,这是确保警方的工作效率。部长是否可以详尽说明对《网络公民》的目的、行动和报道这起悲剧事件的评估?

杨益才先生回复《网络公民》的邮件里是怎么写的:

“我注意到您有合理的提到有关警方内部事务的问题。我已经将您信件转发给新加坡警察部队品质服务负责人ACP Maria Oh,请她注意有关的事件。”

但是《网络公民》回复他的来信,

警察内部事务已经在今年1月份完成率有关事件的调查的工作,并结案批示:不会再采取进一步的行动。《网络公民》在线咨询他是否可以给家属提供任何意见以便重新提起这起案件。至今,《网络公民》尚未收到杨先生的任何的回复。

《网络公民》随时准备接受警方提供有关这起事件的回馈。我们将会在收到他们的回复后全文刊登让社会大众细读。

 

Mother of 13-year-old files report against police officers’ abuse of power and told no further actions would be taken

 

Related link:

http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2016/03/mother-of-13-year-old-files-report-against-police-officers-abuse-of-power-and-told-no-further-actions-would-be-taken/

By Terry Xu on March 30, 2016 Social Justice

A single mother filed a police report against police officers whom she claimed to have forced her 13-year-old son to admit a crime that he did not commit and the harsh treatment that her son had to go through. Six months later, the mother was told by the Internal Affairs Office (IAO) that no actions would be taken against the officers involved.

A police report dated 7 July 2015 was sent to The Online Citizen (TOC) after it published the story of 14-year-old Benjamin Lim’s death from the perspective of his family. The report was forwarded by the mother’s friend and had copied the mother in the email loop.

The friend wrote on behalf of the mother and said, “Thanks a lot for your help and kind attention in her boy’s case.  We just don’t want more harm to minors and authorities will be more vigilant toward our young generations.”

The ordeal of the mother and her son

On 30 June, at about 8 pm, a group of 8-9 individuals in plainclothes approached the mother and her son after stepping out from the lift at their flat.

One individual from the group identified himself as a police officer by showing a warrant card and then informed the mother that he need to speak with her son regarding a robbery case on the 17 June 2015 at Crawford Lane. After saying that, her son was taken to the staircase.

The officer told the mother to return to her flat as he said that her presence there would interfere with their interrogation and did not allow the mother to accompany her son. Every attempt by the mother to leave her unit to accompany her son, was stopped by the officers. They questioned her about her son’s whereabouts on the said date of the robbery. The mother claimed that some of the officers even told her to persuade her to convince her son in admitting to the said offence.

The mother was only allowed to leave her unit to persuade her son to admit to the offence and after which, was again told to return to her unit.

审问楼梯口

According to the mother, the officers interrogated her son at the staircase till 11.40pm. This meant that the interrogation was about 3 and a half hours long. The mother said in her police report that her son was forced to admit to the offence due to the long interrogation.

After her son had admitted to the offence, she was told that her son would be brought to the lock-up and have his statement recorded at the police division.

The son and his friend, who was already with the police officers, were both brought to the police station at 11.45pm.

The following morning at around 5 am, the mother was called to bail her son out from Cantonment Police Station. Upon reaching the station, she paid the bail and had her son released from police custody.

When the two got back home, the mother asked the son what had happened, and the son broke down in tears saying that he was scolded vulgarities by the officers during the interrogation and was threatened to be sent to the Boy’s Home if he did not admit to the offence. The son also said that one of the officers pushed him to the wall and poked him in the chest during the interrogation.

On the afternoon of the same day, the mother went to check with the school if the police had informed them of the investigation as the Investigation Officer said he would be doing so. However, the form teacher of her son stated that she was not aware of the matter.

The mother subsequently filed a police report against the police officers on 7 July 2015.  The mother shared that she found out from the victim, a rag-and-bone (garang guni) man at Crawford Lane that the culprits were Malay and not Chinese.

投诉报案

The friend wrote, “Both of them were quite shaken and raumatized. It is a nightmare to them.”

After the incident, the mother even went to her Member of Parliament, Mr Edwin Tong and various association to seek help but all was in vain.

No further actions against officers concerned said IAO

When the IAO of the Police Force replied the mother on 7 January 2016 on the case, it stated that they have completed its investigation into her complaint and decided to take no further action against the officers concerned after consulting with the Attorney-General’s Chambers.

警方内部事务回信

Apart from the letter, there is no further follow-up from the IAO with the mother.

In reference to Benjamin Lim’s death, the mother’s friend wrote to TOC saying,

“We are very upset as this tragedy can be avoided if they look into an earlier case enclosed. My friend’s 13 years old boy facing 8-9 plainclothes police officers and was forced to admit theft that he never commit before. The boy has went through lie detector test at police station. Yet they are not apologetic about the allegation. This is outrageous!”

 “We are very upset over this matter because my friend is a single mother and these group of plainclothes police have (to) overreact to a short and skinny minor.”

“Now we are very doubtful of the authorities’ decision and procedures.”

said the mother’s friend.

After the death of 14-year-old Benjamin Lim, the Singapore Police Force said that it would be reviewing its procedures on the accompaniment of an appropriate adult to be present during the police interview of a minor. However, there has been no mention of the timeline for this review to be conducted.

The response by the Police on the report by the parent

TOC has written into the Police on 5 March and subsequently 17 March, but the Police (including the police commissioner) gave no response even though an automated message was sent to state that the mail was received.

TOC then wrote to Mr Melvin Yong, Member of Parliament for Tanjong Pagar GRC and former  Assistant Police Commissioner for his comments on this matter.

杨益才

Mr Melvin Yong at Parliament

Mr Yong had earlier spoke in parliament about TOC’s coverage on the death of Benjamin Lim,

 “Madam, I have been in the Police Force for 20 years and public trust and public confidence in the Police is crucial for the Police to be effective. Can the Minister elaborate on his assessment of TOC’s motivations, conduct and coverage of this tragic event?”

Mr Yong replied to TOC’s email,

“I note that you have rightly referred the matter to the IAO. I have also copied the SPF’s Quality Service Manager, ACP Maria Oh for her attention.”

However, when TOC replied saying that the IAO has concluded the investigation in Jan this year with no follow-up actions and asked what would he suggest such families to seek redress on such matters, no further reply was given from Mr Yong.

TOC is open for the Police to file their response on this story and will publish their reply in full when received.

Advertisements