PP v Ismil Kadir is a totally different situation. Ismil
actually confessed to the crime at first and then later recanted. I
also believe he was in the flat earlier to steal something before
his brother came or he took the items stolen to pawn and sell off
and committed murder later. He was also high on drugs at the point
of arrest. The accusations leading to his arrest wasn't wrong, his
DNA was found at the scene and on the items and he was found with
stolen property, you cannot expect the police to let him go at that
point until investigations were completed.
Murder charge is not bailable and hence he was detained and
later convicted so the 6 years was there. Only later it was found
that the prosecution witheld certain evidence in his favour, he was
then acquitted. Anyway he has since been arrested on another drug
charge.
In taxi driver case, it's not theft but criminal
misappropriation of property, the bar and standards of
investigation has be significantly lower than theft or Criminal
misappropriation
Still, it was sloppy investigation to begin with. The
judges had some harsh words for the investigators. Can you
imagine recording the guy's statements on a notepad? It was his
brother's DNA that was found. Ismil was linked to the crime
when he tried to sell off a stolen mobile phone. Not sure if
it was the victim's mobile phone. What if it was some other defence
lawyer who is not as thorough and insistent as Mr Thrumugan?
Point is, you may be innocent, but the hassle of going down to
the police station, recording statements, not knowing when the case
will close is enough trouble. But, it is a TD's job hazard, I
guess.
