SAF suspends smoke grenade training

[Kusje]

But when you make negligible or Negative contribution, wouldn't the negative part change the way you behave? Then you must make sure it's doesn't become a part of your habit in personal & work life.

 

Lol, it meant the moment you need to put on green uniform, you change from Scientist Bruce Banner to Incredible Hulk.

 

Don't think that will happen. Reservist is just a few days a year.

 

Many successful people are number 1 kengsters during NS time.... Sometimes keng also not easy - might take more effort than actually doing the work.

Edited March 25, 2016 by Kusje

[Duckduck]

so just know that your son's life is worth about $60K while serving NSF, so up to u to advice your son if chionging for best soldier, or chao... sorry ownself take care ownself is better.

Edited March 25, 2016 by Duckduck

[Aukang]

If keng by yourself and affect only yourself,,,maybe still ok. But if you keng and the rest of your mates suffer...then maybe not good to keng ...

[Atonchia]

Don't think that will happen. Reservist is just a few days a year.

 

Many successful people are number 1 kengsters during NS time.... Sometimes keng also not easy - might take more effort than actually doing the work.

Those are nothing compared to research scientist level.

Handpicked b4 enlistment age, so good that the research will cover all NS duties.

 

But I still did my best during those phases. Just to ensure I don't sabo others or get sabo.

[Atonchia]

If keng by yourself and affect only yourself,,,maybe still ok. But if you keng and the rest of your mates suffer...then maybe not good to keng ...

Yes, agree.

Those with "medical condition" type, at least they won't hold back majority.

 

Worst is those really blur type. Like whole company stay back to search bayonet is real sabo.

[Wishcumstrue]

I wish you had read the latest article before issuing a correction to me.

 

You said that "both officers were charged for negligence under military law." This is not true. You might be confused because of earlier reports that quoted the SAF propaganda officer, BG Chan, as saying that they were summarily tried and convicted for negligence.

 

 

This however was proven to be not the case if you read what Def Minister revealed in parliament just this wed.

 

 

Which is true? Were they or were they not charged with negligence? I really can't decipher their snake talk - what is your opinion?

 

Thanks for pointing that out.

 

I notice you focus on this sad incident is overly anti-gov and anti-institution that seems to cloud your judgement with intense distrust that was attempted cover up by authorities and govnt while cherry-pick information that suits your perception.

 

I am not saying you are wrong in your view, indignation and since of justice. What I am saying is don't allow your emotion override other publicly available facts and the legal process.

 

To let's work to decipher all these "snake talk" -

 

2012 Apr 17  - Accident and death.

 

2012 Nov - Committee of Inquiry found rules and regulations not followed during exercise.

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/inquiry-finds-training-sa/515254.html

 

2013 Apr - Coroner’s Inquiry found combat med not sufficiently trained (later corrected as med confirm he lost nerve and forget the asthma-attack training) and other medical findings of Pte Lee.

Parents of Pte Lee were in attendance given full access to the reports and investigations.

http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/coroners-inquiry-into-nsfs-death-combat-medic-did-not-have-enough-training

http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/nsfs-death-mum-still-trying-to-come-to-terms-with-loss

 

2013 Jun - Coroner’s Inquiry found Pte Lee’s allergic reaction was “not reasonably foreseeable” since was an "allergic reaction", not an asthma attack.

http://news.asiaone.com/news/singapore/allergic-reaction-smoke-grenade-killed-soldier

 

2013 Sep - Based above both inquires, AGC cannot press criminal charges against both Officers.

http://news.asiaone.com/news/singapore/allergic-reaction-smoke-grenade-killed-soldier

 

2013 Nov - SAF conducts its own military proceedings against both officers and all were charged for negligence (See 24 Mar Parliament speech by Mr Ng)

http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/smoke-grenade-case-duo-convicted-of-negligence

 

2015 Dec - Lee family file civil suit against SAF and 2 officers

 

2016 Mar - High Court  threw out case because all defendants apply provisional law against the civil sue (not a criminal case)

 

2016 Mar 24 -  Defence minister Ng further clarify in Parliament

http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/press_room/official_releases/ps/2016/24mar15_ps2.html

Following the AGC's decision not to prosecute, the two SAF officers were charged under military law in November 2013 for breaching safety regulations. They were also punished with penalties consistent with other servicemen who have committed similar offences, through fines and delay in promotion.

 

What next?

Lee family can proof Pte Lee death was caused by intentional act of malice to harm the trainee.

But as in any military operation, training and exercise, how can one ensure no "harm" is committed when the activities involved will always involved some form of risk ?

 

This is where many has failed to understand why the Provisional law came into play:

http://www.singaporelawwatch.sg/slw/headlinesnews/78526-saf-personnel-not-immune-to-being-charged-for-rash-criminal-acts.html

"..High Court judge ruled that the duo’s (both officers) actions fell within a provision under Section 14 of the Government Proceedings Act, which indemnifies against negligence suits for deaths and injuries because of military duty. Lawyers interviewed said the Act can be invoked as a defence in civil cases, but not criminal cases.

 

 

You also said that military personnel are "indemnified from civilian law". This is again not the case. They are only protected from being sued by "private persons" under the GP Act. They can still be prosecuted under civilian criminal law. Ng Eng Hen confirms it here.

 

 

I've also encountered an army mate who was sent to prison (not DB) for selling pirated DVDs so I can confirm this as well.

 

No problem. A lot of conflicting information from our "leaders". I don't know what is true and what isn't anymore either.

 

All I can say is that I will do everything in my power to avoid NS and to ensure that my children will never have to serve NS in the future.

 

If I am unable to avoid NS, I will ensure that my contributions are negligible or negative.

 

Again, nothing wrong being emotional and wanting to be self-preserving. But the fact is due processes had been carried out, and continue to be so. We know Military operation is inherently dangerous, no  matter how much safety net being put out in the field, death and injury will happen.

Since Pte Lee's passing, there had been several other fatal SAF cases and will continue to happen..

 

That was why I supported Turboflat4  earlier suggestion of some of remembering our fallen NS men during peace time.

 

http://www.mycarforum.com/topic/2682620-saf-suspends-smoke-grenade-training/?p=5764254

 

[Wishcumstrue]

http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/courts-crime/master-sergeant-jailed-for-rash-act-to-endanger-life-over-fatal-jeep-incident

 

Notice in this case, one sent to Changi while another kenna DB.

 

Know why different punishment ?

[Aukang]

 

That was why I supported Turboflat4 earlier suggestion of some of remembering our fallen NS men during peace time.

 

http://www.mycarforum.com/topic/2682620-saf-suspends-smoke-grenade-training/?p=5764254

I think it's already done... In a small way... Every 1 July on SAF Day, the fallen comrades are remembered with one minute silence during the SAF Day parade.

[Vid]

Notice in this case, one sent to Changi while another kenna DB.

 

Know why different punishment ?

 

The MSG ordered the NSF to drive. NSF drove and cause accident resulting in death to another NSF.

 

MSG was prosecuted and jailed because he knew NSF didn't have valid SAF driving license yet ordered him to drive. NSF was sent to DB for reckless driving without a valid license and blindly following orders.

 

Go watch A Few Good Men by Tom Cruise and Jack Nicholson. My fav movie.

[Forte3737]

Actually I want to know how come it seems no time in DB for these 2... Have seen people go in for much less...

Cos they high ranking

[Playtime]

It would be a mistake. .. a fatal mistake, to focus on legalistic arguments. It is no different to saying white horse is to prevent preferential treatment, defence scientist is fair case. .. while the little guys. . Well. .. just a digit la.

THEY JUST DON'T GET IT.

 

Justice was NOT seen to be served. More importantly, Dominique was a no body to the SAF. Mindef and the govt screwed this up big time. The need to protect egos, institutional reputation, careers etc forgot that is the NSF who should be the VIP.

 

It's like the transport minister saying DTL2 doing well. .. BTW 2 young chaps died. .

 

a little sincere humility goes a long way.

[Playtime]

https://m.facebook.com/DomSarronLee/posts/1119314584779805

 

Let's see how mindef reacts. .. I really pity the family. . Everyone one should think long and hard about this sad saga.

But I feel they are fighting a losing battle. ..

[Vid]

https://m.facebook.com/DomSarronLee/posts/1119314584779805

 

Let's see how mindef reacts. .. I really pity the family. . Everyone one should think long and hard about this sad saga.

But I feel they are fighting a losing battle. ..

 

With no seeming legal recourse available to them, I'm afraid they have nowhere to seek their grievances.

 

SAF, as always, would just brush off their letter as noise.

[Othello]

With no seeming legal recourse available to them, I'm afraid they have nowhere to seek their grievances.

 

SAF, as always, would just brush off their letter as noise.

 

up to this point of time, I really feel for the family. They should just move away if they have the means. Justice will never be served, cos they have already build an unbreakable iron wall. 

 

I'm really sad to say this, but they just have to move on. 

[Mikelcy1963]

What goes through the officer's mind when he throws 6 smoke grenades in a confined space ? What was his objective and motive ? If it is a training need, what is it ? The motive determines the adequacy of the punishment. If you know how much smoke one grenade produces, to "need" 6 to effectively simulate a training scenario boggles the mind. if the intention is other than a valid training need, then the motive has to be explained. Cannot count maybe ? :)

[Spinelli_ck]

this regrettable incident is certainly not an accident. just to put things into perspective, here's an excerpt of what the Minister for Defense said on 14 November 2012 in the parliament:

 

"First on PTE Lee Rui Feng Dominique Sarron. The main substantive findings from the COI report on PTE Lee. On 17 April 2012, PTE Lee participated in an exercise at the Murai Urban Training Facility at Lim Chu Kang. Smoke grenades were thrown outside a building. PTE Lee entered one of the rooms of that building, and experienced breathing difficulties after exposure to the smoke. He was immediately accompanied away from the smoke but lost consciousness outside the building. He received Cardio Pulmonary Resuscitation on the spot and was evacuated in a safety vehicle to the Sungei Gedong Medical Centre, before being sent to the National University Hospital (NUH) in an SAF ambulance. Resuscitative efforts by an SAF medical officer continued throughout the journey and at NUH. The COI found that “the medical aid rendered was timely, adequate and proper”. Regrettably, however, PTE Lee was pronounced dead after these attempts failed.

 

The cause of death was certified by the forensic pathologist of the Health Sciences Authority (HSA) to be due to an “acute allergic reaction to zinc chloride due to inhalation of zinc chloride fumes”. Zinc chloride is a primary component of smoke grenades currently used in the SAF.

 

The COI found that the number of smoke grenades used in the exercise exceeded the limit specified in training safety regulations. The Training Safety Regulations (TSR) stipulate that the minimum distance between each thrown smoke grenade should be not less than 20 metres and that the minimum distance between troops and the thrown smoke grenade should not be less than 10 metres. Based on the exercise layout, not more than two smoke grenades should have been used, but the Platoon Commander had thrown six grenades instead. The COI opined that “if the TSR had been complied with, PTE Lee and his platoon mates would not have been subjected to smoke that was as dense as that during the incident, and for as long as they were during the incident” and that “reduced exposure to smoke would have reduced the risks of any adverse reactions to the smoke.” The COI concluded that “the cause of death of PTE Lee resulted from inhalation of the fumes from the smoke grenades used in the incident”.

 

The COI is of the opinion that the actions of the Platoon Commander, a Regular Captain, were negligent as he was aware of the specific TSR but did not comply with it.

 

PTE Lee’s pre-enlistment medical screening records revealed that he had a history of asthma. The COI found that PTE Lee’s medical classification and vocational assignment were appropriate, based on the severity and control of his asthma condition. The COI was unable to establish with certainty if PTE Lee’s history of asthma was a contributory factor to his death. First, the COI noted that the specific effects of zinc chloride fumes on asthmatics had not been reported in medical literature. Second, adverse reactions to zinc chloride can occur even in individuals without asthma. Third, the other platoon mates with asthma had developed only mild symptoms after the exposure to the zinc chloride fumes in the same exercise.

 

To prevent a recurrence, the COI recommended measures to ensure compliance with TSRs through strengthening the role of the Safety Officer and educating commanders and troops on the Training Safety Regulations."

 

https://sprs.parl.gov.sg/search/topic.jsp?currentTopicID=00078234-WA&currentPubID=00078241-WA&topicKey=00078241-WA.00078234-WA_1+ministerial-statement+

[Kusje]

this regrettable incident is certainly not an accident. just to put things into perspective, here's an excerpt of what the Minister for Defense said on 14 November 2012 in the parliament:

 

 

 

The COI found that the number of smoke grenades used in the exercise exceeded the limit specified in training safety regulations. The Training Safety Regulations (TSR) stipulate that the minimum distance between each thrown smoke grenade should be not less than 20 metres and that the minimum distance between troops and the thrown smoke grenade should not be less than 10 metres. Based on the exercise layout, not more than two smoke grenades should have been used, but the Platoon Commander had thrown six grenades instead. The COI opined that “if the TSR had been complied with, PTE Lee and his platoon mates would not have been subjected to smoke that was as dense as that during the incident, and for as long as they were during the incident” and that “reduced exposure to smoke would have reduced the risks of any adverse reactions to the smoke.” The COI concluded that “the cause of death of PTE Lee resulted from inhalation of the fumes from the smoke grenades used in the incident”.

 

The COI is of the opinion that the actions of the Platoon Commander, a Regular Captain, were negligent as he was aware of the specific TSR but did not comply with it.

 

PTE Lee’s pre-enlistment medical screening records revealed that he had a history of asthma. The COI found that PTE Lee’s medical classification and vocational assignment were appropriate, based on the severity and control of his asthma condition. The COI was unable to establish with certainty if PTE Lee’s history of asthma was a contributory factor to his death. First, the COI noted that the specific effects of zinc chloride fumes on asthmatics had not been reported in medical literature. Second, adverse reactions to zinc chloride can occur even in individuals without asthma. Third, the other platoon mates with asthma had developed only mild symptoms after the exposure to the zinc chloride fumes in the same exercise.

 

https://sprs.parl.gov.sg/search/topic.jsp?currentTopicID=00078234-WA&currentPubID=00078241-WA&topicKey=00078241-WA.00078234-WA_1+ministerial-statement+

 

 

Is this the same defence minister speaking just a few days ago in 2016? Is it a sudden prata flip? Because GE is over?

 

 

Ng said SAF servicemen can be, and have been charged and punished in the criminal courts for acts committed in the course of their duties.

 

But in this case, the Attorney-General decided not to prosecute the two officers as the Coroner had found they were not reckless or negligent, he said.

http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/parliament-officers-punished-by-setbacks-in-careers-fines-over-nsf-dominique-sarron-lees

 

Oh. I understand now why he can say such stuff and not be a prata flip. He is right to say that the coroner did not find the 2 folks reckless or negligent but since when is it the coroner's job to do that? Isn't their job just to determine how a fellow died?

 

His own COI found them guilty of negligence.

Edited March 27, 2016 by Kusje

[Aukang]

I am no lawyer, but I think for coroner, is to determine whether there is criminal negligence i.e. Can charge in court and go to jail...

COI is to determine what happened, make recommendations so that there is no future occurrence and whether those involved were negligent in carrying out their duties.

Similar to case when a person is killed... Road accident or pre meditated murder etc.