Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 23

Thread: Police: Shooting of teen: Don't cover up, MP tells police

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Re: Police: Shooting of teen: Fast-draw cops emerge from shoot-first culture

    Fast-draw cops emerge from shoot-first culture

    Terence Netto
    May 3, 10

    COMMENT The latest outrage concerning the shooting death of Aminulrasyid Amzah and the petulant response of inspector-general of police Musa Hassan harkens back to a similar episode in 1996.

    This had to do with alarming reports from NGOs that deaths in shootouts with police over the preceding 18 months was something like 35 which prompted senior member of the Bar and president of Human Rights Society (Hakam) Raja Aziz Addruse (right), to suggest that cops had become “trigger-happy”.

    Raja Aziz's stricture drew a feisty response from then IGP Abdul Rahim Noor.

    The police chief just about told the Hakam president that if he expected his men to read their dangerous quarries a bill of rights in life-and-death situations, he was expecting what never was and never will be.

    In short, Rahim Noor was intent on telling effete guardians of our civil liberties that in the serious business of putting out of business denizens of the underworld, there is little time for the men in blue to pause to consider shades of grey.

    To Rahim Noor at least, matters concerning the seedier members of society were very much black and white. You have no business to be caught in between; heaven help you if you were.

    One cannot make inferences about the extent to which this worldview of Rahim's led to his failure to differentiate between hardened criminals and an ex-deputy prime minister whom he punched barely two years after his revealing exchange with Raja Aziz, except to say that that failure cost him dear.

    It led to his conviction for assault and jailing.

    This was a pity, more so in hindsight which found Rahim to have been a more effective IGP at crime prevention, officer training and provisioning, than his successors - Norian Mai, Bakri Ismail and the present Musa Hassan.

    It's 1996 all over again

    Nine shootout deaths – six in one incident in Kedah in February last year, two in another incident in Taiping last month, followed by the shooting death of Aminulrasyid last week have put the glare of adverse publicity back on the police force once again. It's 1996 all over again.

    It didn't help matters that the present IGP aped the petulance of his predecessor Rahim Noor vis-a-vis Raja Aziz's criticism by threatening to take his men off the streets in response to the furor over the shooting of Aminulrasyid.

    In the latter vein, would Musa quit before his contract is up in September if it is established that Aminulrasyid's death was due to 'trigger happy' cops?

    The present figures on custodial deaths and deaths from shootouts with police make it imperative that the government shake off the dust that has collected on the recommendations of the 2003 royal commission on the management of the force, released in March 2005.

    Senior officers mounted a successful filibuster against the implementation of its central recommendation which was the creation of a panel to adjudicate public complaints of abuse by the police.

    That stiff-arming of a royal commission, composed of eminent persons including a former IGP, Haniff Omar, was something that should not have been tolerated.

    The entire episode provided disquieting evidence that the force is an actor of its own accord, not an entity responsible to the state, something a parliamentary democracy ought not to tolerate.

    TERENCE NETTO has been a journalist for close on four decades. He likes the occupation because it puts him in contact with the eminent without being under the necessity to admire them.
    Malaysiakini. Please support by subscribing as a reader.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Re: Police: Shooting of teen: The Malaysian MSM’s Bullet In Aminul’s Head

    The MSM is culpable in the boy's death because of their prolonged condonance of the Ruling Class and the UMNO War Machine's abuse of human rights and freedom. Aminul's death is a symptom of a breakdown of our system. When people with power are allowed to run wild without fear of punishment, they really go over the top because they don't know when to stop.

    The Malaysian MSM’s Bullet In Aminul’s Head

    April 30, 2010

    by Eyes Wide Open

    Reading this news report in the Sun, it sounds like our IGP is basically saying young Aminul brought his killing upon himself.


    Musa blames situation for student’s fatal shooting
    by Charles Ramendran The Malaysian MSM’s Bullet In Aminul’s Head.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Re: Police: Shooting of teen: BN Mampu Berubah?

    "BN mampu berubah". That's Najib's tagline in Hulu Selangor.

    BN won the by-election 25th Apr.

    Promptly, the next day, a 14-year-old kid, Aminulrasyid Amzah, was shot dead like a common criminal by the police.

    Mampu Berubah? More like "Same old, same old".

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Re: Police: Shooting of teen: Facebook

    There are already a few Facebooks dedicated to Aminulrasyid. The one below has more than 64,000 members already


  5. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Re: Police: Shooting of teen: Don't cover up, MP tells police

    Khir Toyo thinks we are stupid or what. It is reported that Khir lauded the Home Ministry’s suggestion in setting up a panel for an inquest, adding that the government could also start up a fund to pay for the fees of an “independent” lawyer.

    So we have the Govt paying for an independent lawyer to fight the Govt over the police case. Can we trust this "independent" lawyer to act independently, given the strong public anger over this issue?

    Next, he throws an implied threat to the family of the victim - “The family should think carefully before engaging a politician as a lawyer to represent them. I believe that PR will be more involved in politics than justice. They will politicise it for their own gains. Look at what they did for the Kugan case and Teoh Beng Hock,” said former Selangor mentri besar-turned state opposition leader Datuk Seri Dr Mohamed Khir Toyo.

    These Bodoh Sombongs are soooo insensitive.

    The Malaysian Insider

    With young boy’s death, Pakatan seen pushing multiracial platform

    By Shazwan Mustafa Kamal
    May 05, 2010

    KUALA LUMPUR, May 5 — Pakatan Rakyat is trying to burnish its credentials as a multiracial platform with DAP chairman Karpal Singh’s appointment as legal counsel for the family of dead schoolboy, Aminulrasyid Amzah.

    Both Barisan Nasional and PR have been locked in a tussle over the past week to offer help as well as legal aid to Aminulrasyid’s family, with PR now seen victorious in that aspect after the family gave them the nod to represent their interests and concerns in court.

    BN appears to be in a tough spot as public hatred and outcry towards the police have steadily risen since the 14-year old was shot dead on April 26.

    The police have traditionally been associated with the BN federal government, and now, Umno is on the defensive and has demanded Karpal be dropped as lead counsel for the family, claiming his appointment was a “political farce” for PR to remain relevant in Selangor. TheMalaysiaInsider....

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Re: Police: Shooting of teen: Panel retraces last steps of Aminulrasyid’s life

    Govt panel - Can we trust them? Even Royal Commissions can be ignored. SUHAKAM can be ignored. Judges can be ignored.

    Anything that can result in a reduction of UMNO's power will be ignored.

    Let's not waste our time with them.

    Panel retraces last steps of Aminulrasyid’s life
    By Neville Spykerman
    May 05, 2010

    SHAH ALAM, May 5 — The government panel overseeing investigations into the fatal police shooting of Aminulrasyid Amzah visited the scene of the incident last night.

    Deputy Home Minister Datuk Wira Abu Seman Yusop, who heads the eight-man panel, said the visit was for them to gain a better understanding of what transpired in the early hours of April 26 when the 14-year-old died.

    The panel arrived in the quiet Section 11 suburb here on a bus along with a large police entourage at about 11.15pm.

    Investigating officers were seen showing the men where the Proton Iswara, which Aminulrasyid was driving when he was shot dead, hit a tree prior to landing in a drain.

    Abu Seman was also seen speaking to Wan Rahim Tajuddin, 54, who knew the dead schoolboy and who was among the first few neighbours at the scene.

    Prior to arriving at the scene in Jalan 11/2, they retraced the route Aminulrasyid and a friend had taken while being pursued by police.

    The panel, said Abu Seman, may revisit the scene during the day if necessary.

    Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein had set up the panel was to quell rising resentment towards the police following the shooting.

    The panel includes former Inspector-General of Police Tun Haniff Omar; Associate Prof Datuk Abdul Halim Sidek; Datuk Dr Dennison Jayasooria;, Datuk Ahmad Fuad Abdul Aziz; Datuk Dr Michael Yeoh; Datuk Seri Muhammad Shafee; and Kamal Affendi Hashim. TheMalaysiaInsider....

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Re: Police: Shooting of teen:Who will police our policemen?

    Who will protect us from the Police?

    Who will police our policemen?
    Wed, 28 Apr 2010 16:38

    Public outrage is rightfully getting louder and more visible after the 2am death in a police shooting this week of 15-year-old schoolboy Aminulrasyid Amzah.

    The home minister has quickly made himself prominent by ordering an internal inquiry to be headed by his deputy, supposedly an "open and transparent inquiry without any cover-up or bias". That's what he says. We hope he holds to it.

    The public are likely to remember that ministers and others in high places loudly insisting they did no wrong were later found to have lied, as in the royal commission into the VK Lingam videos.

    And the public will also remember that the commission recommended action be taken to bring those held responsible to trial. And that where the royal commission proposed, the Attorney-General disposed.

    Then there is the continuing high-visibility inquest into the death of Teoh Beng Hock at the offices of a law-enforcement agency.

    Going by such past experiences, home minister Hishamuddin Tun Hussein's inquiry will please few except fellow politicians and those concerned merely with upholding a favourable public image of the police force. Unless, of course, it uncovers the truth and firm action results.

    So, too, with the Selangor police chief's promise of a "thorough, fair and open" investigation. But it is conducted by the police themselves, behind closed doors.

    Another minister, Noh Omar, as deputy Selangor Umno leader, intends to bring the matter up to the Cabinet.

    Scepticism over the government's ability to control its own agencies stems from the government's own inadequacies, shown in a variety of events in the past year.

    An open question of leadership

    Among those that come to mind are the home minister's supine response to a visible threat to public order in the cow's-head demonstration at a mosque in 2009; his feeble responses to events arising from the Allah controversy which were a clear threat to public order; and his near total lack of response to police action against critical publications that pose absolutely no threat to public order.

    The Selangor police chief himself has been notorious for finding no wrong in policemen who harrass the public and politicians trying to exercise their god-given right to express themselves freely.

    Such government actions clearly smack of seeking political advantage for the ruling administration. They do not provide confidence that the Home Ministry or the police force will uphold as their foremost consideration the interests of the public at large or those of the ordinary citizen.

    Will any of these actions quell public suspicions about laxity in the police force, or the administration's lack of will, ability or muscle to bring the police force firmly under civilian control and fully responsible to the task of upholding justice? It remains an open question.

    The boy who died this week, Aminulrasyid, had gone out late in his sister's car without the family's knowledge. Depending on whose account you choose to believe, he was shot in the back of the head by police, or struck by a bullet aimed at the car's tyres.

    Aminul is only the latest in a string of ordinary people who have died at the hands of the police in suspicious circumstances.

    And that is not even taking into account others who died in suspicious circumstances during police action against suspected criminal activity, or while in police custody.

    And that is not even taking into account deaths of illegal immigrants or foreign workers.

    The death of A Kugan in police custody in January and the sordid and ugly episode of how the authorities handled the family's demands to see his body at the hospital mortuary, the subsequent dispute over post-mortem findings and the horrifying pictures of injuries he suffered are mortifyingly vivid in the public mind.

    An open question of accountability

    So, too, the accounts of single mother Norizan Salleh in October last year of how she was shot by police five times while travelling in a car with a male friend and another couple.

    Two decades ago, another schoolboy, Elmi Tahir, died in a police shooting while out with his girlfriend on his birthday in 1986. Police gave vivid accounts of a wild late-night car chase through the streets of Kuala Lumpur.

    They said he died after he was struck by a bullet during the chase. His father revealed that Elmi had been shot at close-range, in the forehead above the right eyebrow. His girlfriend said a policeman standing outside the driver's door had shot Elmi in cold blood.

    Few have been brought to account for such deaths.

    A decade after Elmi, one policeman faced trial and was later convicted for the death of government doctor Tai Eng Teck in Bandar Tasik Selatan. Tai, like Elmi, died from a police bullet, while in a car, and while out with a woman.

    Police officials usually have pat responses. The dead were criminals. They behaved in a suspicious manner. They tried to evade arrest. They resisted arrest. They drove away dangerously. Weapons were later found. Police acted by the rules. The law allows them to defend themselves. And so on and so forth.

    The continuing lack of convincing explanations and convincing action by the government will only harden public opinion of the government and its agencies and their motives.

    The crux of the matter is whether those in government are willing or able to police themselves. When politicians always seem willing to turn a blind eye to bending the rules when it suits them, what remaining value is there in the word of politicians and officials who promise to uphold law and order?

    A sceptical public will only ask: whose law, and on whose orders? FreeMalaysiaToday....

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Re: Police: Shooting of teen: Lies, Lies and Lies!

    May 4, 2010
    Lies, Lies and Lies!

    by Din Merican

    Today the mainstream media reported that the friend of 15 year old Aminulrashid who was shot dead point blank by the Police gave a press conference. In that press conference, the surviving friend, Azamuddin Omar, gave his version of the shooting incident that totally contradicts the police’s version. If the police knew he would do this, he would have been hunted down and shot dead too! And what was the police version explained by IGP Musa Hassan?

    According to IGP Musa, the dead boy tried to ram into the policemen, forcing the police to shoot. According to Musa, the boy is a criminal because a parang was found in the car, implying that the boy was a criminal, a fleeing felon who can be shot at will. According to Musa, a moving car is a dangerous weapon, obviously ignorant of the meaning of dangerous weapon/arm in the statute. According to Musa, he/the Police are telling the truth; there is no cover up and if the Malaysian public does not trust what he says, he will pull back the police from the streets and “confine to barracks”. Confine to barracks is a military term to indicate a boycott. That means Musa wants to boycott the public. That means Musa wants to boycott Malaysia, because under the Police Act and the Federal Constitution, it is the Police’s duty to maintain law and order in a civil times.

    Let us pause for a moment. Let us analyse Musa’s words, can and should the Malaysian public trust Musa Hassan, the No.1 Policeman in the country?

    Is this not the same man who climbed the ranks to become IGP after fixing up Anwar Ibrahim with his mattress carrying antics in Sodomy 1. Isn’t he the same Investigating officer who made up stories about the scene of the sodomy when the building was not even ready? Isn’t he also the one who worked hand in glove with the Along syndicate and released that criminal and twice RR detainee Goh Cheng Poh @ Tengku Goh while 6 of his officers and the Director of Commercial Crimes Dato’ Ramli Yusuff and his lawyer Rosli Dahlan got charged? Wasn’t he the one who worked with Dato Christopher Wan to create a fictitious blog to fix up Dato’ Johari Baharom. That blog is like the parang that the poice now planted in Aminulrasyid’s car. Bapa borek anak rintik.

    Isn’t he the same IGP who appeared as the 75th Witness in Dato’ Ramli’s trial in Sabah who was denounced by Judge Supang Lian as ” an incredbible witness whose evidence is not to be believed”? That is legal phraseology to say Musa is a Liar!

    Is that any surprise then that Razak Baginda go scot free while 2 rank and file officers get the hangman’s noose in the murder of Altantuya? Is there any surprise that Malaysians do not believe the police, the MACC, The AG, the judiciary and ultimately the Government? People like Musa Hassan, Gani Patail etc are cancerous cells, and more are growing to be like them because they are deemed successful for willing to do all the wrong and evil things. And we Malaysians are to be blamed for keeping mum!

    Just look at the charade in Teoh Beng Hock’s Inquest. It is most revolting to see the lies and cover ups perpetrated by all these guardians of our public institutions. They have become so bold that they will even lie to us openly. Pak Lah, that supposedly religious ex Imam-PM even lied about the two oil wells he surrendered to Brunei and in return got nothing. He lied about getting sovereignty over Limbang. If an Imam-PM like Pak Lah can lie openly, what do we expect from PM Najib whose image is much improved now although he was implicated in the Altantuya Shariibu Murder?

    I am expressing all these anger and disgust because I am just about to leave for the KL Criminal Sessions Court No.10, located at the left wing of the Jalan Duta Courts’ complex, where Judge Bakar Katar presides over the trial of Lawyer Rosli Dahlan. I have seen lies by the MACC Deputy Director of Prosecution Anthony Kevin Morais when he gave evidence previously. After 6 days, he is still on the stand. Today will be his 7th day. I expect to see and hear more lies spewing from his mouth when he is cross examined by Dato’ K Kumaraendran, Rosli Dahlan’s counsel.

    I am revolted by all these lies. They do it in the newspapers, in Parliament and even in the courts while under oath. That Kevin Morais will lie in order to do in an innocent man like Rosli Dahlan has re-affirmed my resolve to expose all their lies. I will expose all these lies until we bring about genuine reforms!” Din Merican.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Re: Police: Shooting of teen: Aminulrasyid - PDRM, the law and the United Nation

    If a group of motorbikers were chasing me in the middle of the night, I would fear for my safety and drive fast to avoid them. What do you expect a 15-year-old kid to do?

    Monday, May 17, 2010, Art Harun.

    Aminulrasyid - PDRM, the law and the United Nation's basic principles

    As of writing this article, there have been numerous statements made by the police as well as the Home Minister about the fatal shooting of Aminulrasyid.

    Essentially, the Home Minister bemoaned the fact that the people seem to only be sad when a citizen is shot dead by the police. He asked why is it that the people do not express anger when a police officer is shot dead. He cited the shooting of the guard of the Kelantan's Sultan as an example.

    I am not going to comment on the statement by the Home Minister. ...

    ...I want to comment on the statement made by Tan Sri Musa, the IGP. In refusing to apologise, he said his apology would have legal ramifications. I agree with that from a legal point of view.

    But morally, I think the police owe the family an unqualified apology. To shoot to death a 14 year old son of someone is something. And to defame his memory and compound the grief is something else. I shudder at the thought of the police being detached from any degree of humanity in this case.

    Tan Sri IGP was reported to have said that Aminulrasyid was a "suspected criminal". (Only if one has lost his sense of humanity could such words come out from a human being.)

    Under the law, a police officer cannot simply arrest any person, let alone, shoot to death any person. A police officer may only arrest a person without a warrant if:

    1. he has been concerned in any offence committed anywhere in Malaysia;
    2. that offence is a seizable offence under any law in force in that part of Malaysia;
    3. a reasonable complaint has been made against that person regarding that seizable offence;
    4. or credible information has been received about that person in relation to that seizable offence;
    5. or a reasonable suspicion exists of that person having been concerned in that seizable ofence.

    This is the law as stated in section 23 (1) (a) of the Criminal Procedure Code (revised 1999).

    Under any other circumstances, a police officer must obtain a warrant.

    Items 1-4 above do not apply in Aminulrasyid's case. That leaves us with item 5. The question then is this. Was there reasonable suspicion that Aminulrasyid was a person having been concerned in a seizable offence?

    To my mind, the only "crime" of which Aminulrasid could reasonably be suspected of by the police that night was that which is under section 279 of the Penal Code, namely, "driving or riding on a public way so rashly or negligently as to endanger human life." Under the First Schedule of the Criminal Procedure Code, that offence is seizable. The police was therefore empowered to arrest Aminulrasyid without a warrant under the aforesaid section 23 (1) (a).

    However, Aminulrasyid was not arrested. He was shot to death.

    The next question then is this. Was the police guilty of unreasonable use of force in trying to apprehend Aminulrasyid for an offence under section 279 of the Penal Code, which by the way, carries a maximum sentence of 6 months imprisonment or fine of RM2000 or both?

    Under the law, the police may use force in arresting a person. But not any kind of force. The police can only use reasonable force.

    What is reasonable force? It depends on the situation. It is subjective. How big is the person to be arrested? What was he doing? Was he carrying a weapon? Was he threatening the police? What was the offence that he was being suspected of doing? Did the police have information that he had previous record of being aggressive? Was the life or safety of the arresting officer or any member of the public in danger?

    Let's see at the events that occurred that fateful night.

    According to various reports (report 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5), Aminulrasyid's car was being chased by some motorbikes. One of the motorbikes hit his car and at this point of time, he passed a police patrol car (some reports say 2 patrol cars). The police then gave chase. Shots were fired when Aminulrasyid did not stop.

    As I had said earlier, the only offence the police could reasonably suspect Aminulrasyid of was driving recklessly and in a dangerous manner (I am just presuming that Aminulrasyid was driving fast and in a dangerous manner here). Also, clearly he had committed an offence of not stopping after being told to stop (although how he was asked to stop is unclear to all of us).

    Was he a "suspected criminal" as put by Tan Sri IGP? With all due respect, the answer is no. He could not have been reasonably suspected of being a criminal in its truest sense (unless a traffic offender could be called one. If so, a jaywalker would also be a "criminal").

    The police later issued a statement describing Aminulrasyid as a "suspected robber." On what ground was that suspicion rested on? Was there, at that time, a report describing the car he was driving as being involved in a robbery case? Was he shooting back at the police? Did his and/or the car's description fit with any description given in any information or report about any robbery in that area that night or any previous night?

    In any event, if the police saw the motorbikes chasing the car, didn't it strike the police that no one in his or her right mind would chase a dangerous (and possibly armed) robber on a motorbike?

    I admit that failing to stop when asked to stop by the police is an indication of some form of criminal culpability. That is without doubt. But what kind of criminality are we talking about here? The police could have suspected him of being any kind of criminal. He could have been suspected to be a drug pusher, a murderer, a rapist or a terrorist. But was that reasonable suspicion?

    For all we know, Aminulrasyid was just having a really bad stomach ache and had wanted to rush home to go to the toilet! But then again, would this conclusion be reasonable?

    All the police had, at that time, was a speculation and not reasonable suspicion. At the most, it was a mere suspicion (as opposed to a reasonable suspicion). The only clear thing was that he committed an offence of not stopping after being asked to and also probably driving in a dangerous manner. The police did not even know that he had no license!Art Harun.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Re: Police: Shooting of teen: Don't cover up, MP tells police

    This is a very clear sign that our political system is failing. The politicians have no control over the police and the civil service.

    Aminulrasyid lawyer issues ultimatum to cops

    UPDATED @ 06:01:24 20-05-2010
    By Neville Spykerman
    May 20, 2010

    SHAH ALAM, May 20 — The lawyer representing the family of Aminulrasyid Amzah, the schoolboy who was shot dead by police, challenged the authorities today to prosecute officers involved in what he says is a cover-up of the case.

    “Either charge the policemen involved in trying to cover up Aminulrashid Amzah’s shooting or charge me for saying this,” lawyer N. Surendran said today.

    He maintains there was a clear attempt by police to conceal what happened the night Aminulrasyid died.

    The police had claimed they acted in self-defence when they shot the Form Three student in the back of the head on April 26.

    Initial reports also said a parang was found in the car driven by Aminulrasyid and described the victim as a robber.

    Surendran pointed out these allegations could not be true because 42-year-old police Corporal Jenain Subi was charged on May 10 with shooting Aminulrasyid in the back of the head.

    Yet the police brass have refused to apologise for this “attack on the character of Aminulrasyid”. TheMalaysiaInsider....

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Visitors found this page by searching for:

dr tai eng teck

the police shoot on ordinary citizen

case of boy shot in shah alam by police

elmi tahir in 1986

monaliza mokhtar

malaysian police shoot boy shah alam

SEO Blog

Tags for this Thread


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts