|
|
|
Sergeant
lies that he is not a police officer
Singapore
Democrats
30 Nov 07
On the fourth day of Dr Chee Soon
Juan's and Mr Yap Keng Ho's trial, police witness Sgt Lam Tien
Chiang gave a testimony with so many twists and turns that would
make a pretzel jealous.
The two men are are facing
multiple charges of speaking without a permit during the election
period in 2006.
Yesterday when he first took the stand,
Sgt Lam told the court that he had arrived at the scene of crime
at 3:45 pm on 8 Apr 07 where he was assigned to take photographs
and videotape SDP members selling The New Democrat.
He
said that he had emerged from the Causeway Point Shopping Centre,
walked into the crowd, called his superiors, and thereafter
started recording the SDP's activity with his video-camera.
Dr
Chee asked him to confirm if the above sequence was correct. Yes,
said the Sgt.
Dr Chee took the witness through the
sequence of movements again and asked him if he was sure
everything happened as described. Yes, said the Sgt.
"Then
how did you take this photo?" Dr Chee asked, pointing to a
photograph which Sgt Lam said he had taken at 3:45 pm (the time
he arrived at the scene of crime) but from a position "quite
far away", in the officer's own words, "from the scene
of crime."
The Sgt blinked for a moment.
"Oh,"
he offered when he recovered, "I want to clarify...I took
the picture before I arrived at the scene."
Caution:
Police integrity at work!
Dr Chee then moved on to the
Sgt's communication with his superior, Station
Inspector Charles Soon. He asked the witness what did he
and SI Soon, talk about when they first communicated with each
other over the phone.
Sgt Lam: I described to him what
I saw at the scene.
Dr Chee: Did you tell him anything
else?
Sgt Lam: No.
Dr Chee: Are you sure?
Sgt
Lam: Yes, I'm sure.
Dr Chee: When you later
met Charles Soon after you finished the video-recording, what did
you two talk about?
Sgt Lam: I briefed him on my
video-recording.
Dr Chee: Did you tell him anything
else?
Sgt Lam: No.
Dr Chee: Are you sure?
Sgt
Lam: Yes.
Dr Chee: You also said you were
sure earlier when I asked you repeatedly about the sequence of
your movement. When I showed you the photo, you then changed your
story and said you wanted to clarify. I ask you again: Are you
sure that you didn't tell SI Charles Soon anything else when you
met after the recording?
Sgt Lam: Yes.
Dr
Chee: What did Charles Soon tell you?
Sgt Lam: He directed
me to take additional photographs. (emphasis added)
(The
Sgt had earlier said the same thing when the DPP led him during
evidence-in-chief.)
Dr Chee: Was there
communication between the two of you between your call to him on
the phone and when you met up after the video-taping?
Sgt
Lam: No.
Dr Chee: Then how did SI Charles Soon know
you had already taken a photograph at 3:45 pm when he only
arrived at the scene at 3:55 pm?
Oops!
Again,
the Sgt blinked and again he offered another story when he
recovered: He had told SI Charles Soon when they met after the
video-taping that he had taken a photograph earlier at 3:45
pm.
But the lie that took the proverbial cake was when he
told SDP's Monica Kumar that he was not a police officer (he was
not in uniform) when she approached him at Woodlands MRT Station
on 8 Apr 06.
(From the police's official transcript)
Ms
Monica: Excuse me.
Sgt Lam:Yes, yes, I'm...
Ms
Monica: You are doing what? With the police or what?
Sgt
Lam: No, no, no.
Ms
Monica: Then? What? ISD?
Sgt Lam: No, No, no.
Ms
Monica: What? Then what?
Sgt Lam: This one - my...my one.
(Referring to the video-camera)
Ms Monica: Your own
ah?
Sgt Lam: Yeah.
Ms Monica: Sure uh? (Pause) You
want to buy? Read lah. You support us, need to read lah.
Sgt
Lam: Must buy one ah?
Ms Monica: We are not rich. We are
not PAP.
He had lied twice: One, denying that he was a
police officer and, two, that the video-camera was his when it
actually belonged to the police force.
When asked why he
lied, the witness said it was because he didn't want to argue
with Ms Kumar and wanted to maintain the peace.
When
pressed, he said that under certain situations such as when
lives/ property were endangered or when the peace could be
disrupted, police officers had to lie.
Did Ms Kumar look
like she was a threat to life, property, and peace when she
approached him?
No, but I didn't want her to ask me more
questions, Sgt Lam insisted.
"Did it occur to you
that you could have not lied, told her that you were carrying out
police work and warned her not to interfere?" Dr Chee
asked.
"Yes, it did occur to me," Sgt Lam.
"But
your preferred response was to lie to her."
"Yes,
that was my assessment."
There you go, folks, that's
Singapore's finest for you.
|
|
