http://straitstimes.asiaone.com/portal/site/STI/menuitem.c2aef3d65baca16abb31f610a06310a0/?vgnextoid=7532758920e39010VgnVCM1000000a35010aRCRD&vgnextfmt=vgnartid:1a475cc2f09ec010VgnVCM100000430a0a0aRCRD
MY YOUNGER brother is a medical doctor working in a Singapore
hospital.
On April 15 at about 11.30pm he dined alone at his favourite food
stall in Geylang Lorong 9. After his supper he was approached by a
group of six to eight youths who accused him of staring at them.
When he denied doing so, they assaulted him, beating him in the
face and abdomen.
He suffered multiple facial fractures and damage to one of his
facial nerves. He had to undergo a three-hour operation, which
included having two metal plates inserted around one of his
eyes.
He will need six months to recover fully and, even then, there will
be some deformation to his facial features.
Immediately after the assault, when the gang ran to their
motorcycles which were parked nearby, my brother gave chase and,
despite his pain and the bleeding, called 999.
While the police were on the hotline, he read out two of the
motorcycles' number plates to them from within 5m. The police came
20 minutes later and then only after a second call.
My brother told them what happened and urged them to alert police
patrol cars nearby to be on the lookout as the motorcyclists were
probably not too far away. Quite shockingly, the police declined
and instead asked him to lodge a report with the Magistrates'
Court, and left.
What is alarming is that in spite of the serious injuries that my
brother suffered which required three days' hospitalisation, the
police were unwilling to take up the case.
The police advised that this was a civil case and it was for the
magistrate to decide if any action was to be taken.
One would have thought that when anyone is assaulted by a gang of
six to eight hooligans and suffered injuries to the extent that my
brother did, the case would have been classified as causing
grievous hurt and pursued as a criminal case.
The attitude of the police, as demonstrated in this case, will only
serve to embolden hooligans to commit even more such
offences.
It was only when an appeal was made that my brother's case was
reclassified under Section 325 (from Section 323), 10 days after
the incident, by which time witnesses would have dispersed and
memories faded.
Had the police acted promptly, especially when they were at the
scene, they might have had a better chance of apprehending the
culprits as there were witnesses around.
Liew Sok Kuan (Ms)
