SPF Provides More Details About Man Who Claimed to be Abused by Officers

By
Rae Woo
-

In the latest saga to strike our small island home, the Singapore Police Force (SPF) and a man who had previously been arrested by them are currently at loggerheads.

Just in case you haven’t been keeping up, the man in question, See Kian Beng, had accused some SPF officers of abusing him physically and mentally when he was in custody for suspected drunk driving through an interview with The Online Citizen.

This follows another incident last month where The Online Citizen also got on the police’s bad side after sharing an interview with an elderly woman who claimed to have been abused by their officers – which was later debunked.

Of course, the police didn’t take this case lying down either, and had bombed See back with additional facts of the case, saying that they failed to find evidence of any wrongdoing on their part.

So, once again through The Online Citizen (TOC), See responded that he was not informed that he was going to be arrested, and accused the SPF of several false claims.

You can read more about all the juicy details about their back-and-forth match thus far in this very comprehensive article we’ve fleshed out earlier.

However, it’s far from over.

Of course, neither side would want to let the other have the last word now, would they?

SPF Releases New Statement

Well, the SPF took to their Facebook page once again to provide a more detailed explanation of what transpired and debunked some more of See’s accusations.

See had said in his latest statement that the police did not inform him that he had failed the breathalyser test nor that he was being arrested, adding that he was not handcuffed.

However, the SPF held that he had indeed failed the test which preliminary indicated the level of alcohol in his body and thus gave them the grounds to arrest him and administer extra Breath Evidential Analyser (BEA) tests.

They also said that it was possible for someone to fail the breathalyser test and pass the BEA tests after a few rounds like See, as the body would process the alcohol in one’s bloodstream after a while.

Not being handcuffed also doesn’t equal to not being under arrest – for it’s up to the police’s discretion if they want to handcuff people who are being cooperative.

Additionally, they refuted See’s claims of not knowing he failed the breath analyser test, saying it contradicted his original accounts to the police.

“He had acknowledged that he had ‘failed’ his breath analyser test at the roadblock, and hence had to be brought to the lock-up for a further test,” they wrote.

No Grounds To Prove He Had Claustrophobia

The other bulk of See’s arguments stemmed from the fact that he claimed to be claustrophobic, which made the lock-up in the cell that much more distressing for him.

Stating that they had offered See the opportunity to declare any medical conditions he had while processing his admission into the lock-up, they assessed him fit for detention thereafter as he did not declare having claustrophobia.

They also explained that they detained him in a Temporary Holding Area, which wasn’t a small space at all, standing at almost double the height of the ceiling of an HDB flat and half the size of a three-room one.

Officers also had a full view of him as the room had almost floor-to-ceiling transparent panels overlooking the corridor outside.

See eventually had to be taken to the padded cell when he refused to stay there, threatening to harm himself.

Furthermore, the letter from a medical officer produced by TOC as proof of his claustrophobia only indicated that See had failed to take an MRI test as a result of him claiming to have claustrophobia.

Which actually isn’t proof that he was diagnosed with it in the first place.

The SPF also reiterated that See had rejected their offer for an interview prior to the online postings.

In their closing statement, they also said that this was the second time they have had to “debunk two sets of false allegations which were published by the same social media platform” within the past two months.

“We hope to be able to devote our resources to keeping the public safe from crime and security threats, rather than having to debunk false allegations against our officers who are just trying their best to do their job,” they wrote.

Will this finally be the end of their feud?

Featured Image: YouTube (theonlinecitizen toc)

Watch this for a complete summary of what REALLY happened to Qoo10, and why it's like a K-drama:

Read Also:

Advertisements
 
Rae Woo
Email: [email protected]