Whose heads will roll now???

[User12343]

Shock over court escape bids

 

Escapees were caught but details point to complacency and breach of procedure

 

MEMBERS of Parliament, security experts and ordinary Singaporeans said they were shocked at Wednesday's double escape attempt at the Subordinate Courts, coming just four months after the break-out of Jemaah Islamiah detainee Mas Selamat Kastari.

 

Details of the escape bid which emerged yesterday pointed to a false sense of security on the part of some police officers. This led MPs to ask if the lessons learnt in the wake of the Mas Selamat episode had filtered down to all levels.

 

The two men had been in court to face charges relating to robbery with hurt. They had asked for water, then knocked down and beat up a police officer when he opened the cell, in what was a breach of procedure.

 

The mistake was compounded by that of a second officer, who unlocked the main gate to the lock-up area without verifying the men's identities on closed-circuit television.

 

When contacted by The Straits Times, the chairman of the Government Parliamentary Committee for Home Affairs and Law Teo Ho Pin said: 'When Mas Selamat escaped, that was a wake-up call. But I'm not very sure how many people have woken up.

 

'There must be checks and balances that the message is conveyed down effectively to the last man in the force. Things mentioned at the management level or in the media may not go down to the last man.'

 

He added: 'Every moment, it must be in each person's mind that (a detainee) can cause hurt or escape. This is basic due diligence.' He said he would 'definitely query the Home Affairs Ministry' at next month's parliamentary sitting.

 

MP Michael Palmer, who is also a lawyer, called the escape attempt something out of Hollywood. 'You can't imagine that climbing out of a toilet or asking for water and then pouncing on the guards actually happens here,' he said. 'I think we were just lucky this time that neither accused managed to escape.'

 

Ms Indranee Rajah, another MP and a lawyer, said the sombre environment of the courts may have contributed to a false sense of security: 'That is a concern because any security agency must have the operating mindset that if something can go wrong, it will.'

 

Agreeing, Security Association (Singapore) president T. Mogan, 49, said: 'Incidents can happen to anybody and good systems should train us to be on our toes all the time.'

 

Although he said the police were doing a good job in general and 'should not be judged on one or two incidents', he added that more on-the-job and mock-up situational training is needed.

 

Other experts said more stringent and frequent security audits are needed. Internal third parties should make spot checks 'as often as you can', said the managing director of security consulting at Certis Cisco, Mr Charles Loh, 45, whose officers are responsible for screening members of the public entering the courts.

 

External parties should review safety procedures at least once a year, he added.

 

In online forums and interviews, Singaporeans were amazed another escape, though botched, had occurred. Concierge Ali Alsagoff, 36, was concerned that Singapore's reputation had taken another hit: 'It's pretty embarrassing... If I were (the authorities), what kind of explanation can I give now?'

 

=======================

EARLIER LESSON UNHEEDED

 

'When Mas Selamat escaped, that was a wake-up call. But I'm not very sure how many people have woken up. There must be checks and balances that the message is conveyed down effectively to the last man in the force.'

 

DR TEO HO PIN, chairman of the Government Parliamentary Committee for Home Affairs and Law

=======================

[User12343]

Stringent procedures not heeded

 

EACH time a detainee at the Subordinate Courts leaves his cell in the lock-up area, he has to put his hands through a small opening at the side of the cell door so that he can be handcuffed first.

 

Officers from the Central Police Division, who are assigned to perform duty in the courts' basement lock-up area, have to go through five days of training before they are deployed there.

 

The area is also under constant watch via security cameras. An officer is tasked to monitor the footage but, because of the sheer volume of the cameras, not all the images can be viewed at the same time.

 

Details of Wednesday's escape attempt, which were released by the police yesterday, showed that some of these procedures had not been followed, allowing two suspects to make a run for it.

 

An officer had opened the cell door to give the detainees water when he should have passed it to them through an opening in the gate.

 

Also, a second policeman unlocked the main door to the lock-up area without first checking who was behind it.

 

After similar breaches in the past - there have been at least seven reported cases since 1989 - various measures have been implemented to beef up security at the Subordinate Courts.

 

In 2005, the escape of two men led to changes in the way prisoners are taken to and from the courts.

 

Suspects are now ferried to the courts in vans rather than buses so that the vehicles can be parked in a secure area inside the courts' compound.

 

Detainees are also 'colour-coded' according to flight risk. Those facing capital charges, for instance, wear a bright red T-shirt and blue pants. An ex-convict said that those who have attempted escape before have three stripes across their uniform's shirt.

 

Lawyers told The Straits Times of other changes that have been made over the years.

 

Following a suspect's daring escape in July 1993 - the man sneaked into the public gallery before leaving the courtroom by the main entrance - bars were installed in the docks of some courtrooms.

 

Added lawyer Indranee Rajah, an MP for Tanjong Pagar GRC: 'The other visible change is that suspects are all chained to one another now.'

 

Former senior police officers and ex-convicts revealed a series of security measures that kick in once detainees arrive in court. First, the van they are in has to pass two metal doors and they are not allowed to leave the vehicle until the second door closes.

 

A former senior cop said that both the reception room and the lock-up are crawling with policemen.

 

He added that there was no reason for the officer who was overpowered in Wednesday's escape bid to open the cell door to give the detainees water.

 

And why did no one go to his rescue, he asked.

 

'Usually, there are quite a number of policemen in the lock-up. Because the detainees come from different prisons, there are different officers checking on them.

 

'Where were they when he was assaulted? Did they hear or see anything at the lock-up?'

[Silver_blade]

Definitely not the Home Affair Minister's.

[Rncw]

the mata and his immediate supervisor's heads will roll

[User12343]

right on. the buck-passing stops way below the big shots.

 

"this should never have happened. i'm sorry it has. let's move on..."

Edited June 13, 2008 by User12343

[Kungfu]

Side tracked a bit

 

When is this MSK search gg to end,1 car take near 10 seconds,the causeway is gg to jam like nobody's biz,somemore I can c the SCDF chaps all gg thru motion only

 

Lucky last am went into pump,news said Kg Baru(dun know where),may have protest today.Is it near JB,scared they target S'pore cars only

 

Fuel prices in JB also jialat for s'poearn,let alone JB,last nite topped rm93

[Kingcopa]

Obviously not Mr Wong. This show how pathetic our Home Team is. Another slap on Wong already swollen face. But dun worry folks, he will still get his bonus. He will still remain as MHA.

[Yuan]

Super slack....I remember a couple of years ago at one roadblock, my wife and I were stopped for checks after we had our dinner and on the way back. No alcohol drinks and we were surprised that we were stopped. More so, my wife was a lady and there was no female officer at the roadblock check. I was just waiting to snap at the first police officer who dare to ask my wife to open up her handbag because it was not allowed and police officers are taught that male officers are not supposed to even check ladies' handbags. It should be done by a female officer. Anyway, that did not happen. The police took my NRIC number and completely forget about my wife. During our check, we saw a foreign saloon car across the causeway and they were allowed to go through the roadblock without being stopped. Our opinion is that we look more decent than the two chinese young driver and passenger with long hair in that vehicle. Candidly, I ask the officer why he did not stop that vehicle and he just replied me "Oh, Malaysian car....We don't check foreign vehicles..."

 

I was totally stunned and aghast to hear that. Next time someone wants to do something illegal, they will know what to do.

[Scoots]

Definitely not the Home Affair Minister's.

 

Hmm... did they walk with a limp?

[David]

If there were no WPC around or was busy, and if the PC asked if he can check your wife belongings - its obvious he wants to check, what would you have replied? It could be a 10sec look and that is it. Else you might have to wait for a WPC available.

 

The car picked at these roadblock are randomly pick, there's nothing about local or foreign.

[Blue2]

bro..there was similar post yesterday liao

[Pentium]

Who say cannot check handbag ?? There is no need for a female officer , unless wanna body search female suspects. Male officer also can search female if he believe that a weapon is concealed. Mata can also order your wife to pour out the contents of her hand bag. Maybe your face very KL, that's why kenna check.

 

 

Mata could have ordered the suspects to drink from the toilet bowl if want water next time.

Edited June 13, 2008 by Pentium

[Chris80]

Actually cannot blamed the mata la.

Anyone wonder why did the mata open the gate and let the detainees drink water???

If he don't open the gate and let him drink water, what will happened????

Later, the detainee go court, the lawyer will complain and the mata will kena left, right, center.

Follow the procedure to let him drink water???

What is the procedure???

2 mata must be present??? Not sure.

But are there enough mata around to be presence or not???

Either way, mata will still kena left, right, center.....

Poor mata.

[Kingcopa]

Civil Servant mindset. From how they behave, we know how good is their boss liao

[David]

The 2 mata will face the consequences of the CID investigation. Can say bye bye. They did not follow procedure. As for the Supervisor, unless he was there, to be fair he is not directly involved. Most is he get a reprimand.

[Damienic]

Obviously not Mr Wong. This show how pathetic our Home Team is. Another slap on Wong already swollen face. But dun worry folks, he will still get his bonus. He will still remain as MHA.

 

They really have the best job in the world...high salary but low on responsibility and accountability...fumble dunno how many times alr and yet the head is not asked to go.. continue to enjoy great perks but no need to show accountability..there is really no justice on our small island..

[Yuan]

The mata is in a fix...Yah...Agreed with you.

[Yuan]

Who say cannot check handbag ?? There is no need for a female officer , unless wanna body search female suspects. Male officer also can search female if he believe that a weapon is concealed. Mata can also order your wife to pour out the contents of her hand bag. Maybe your face very KL, that's why kenna check.

 

 

Mata could have ordered the suspects to drink from the toilet bowl if want water next time.

 

Drink water from toilet bowl? Very the sadist......

 

My face is my avatar.