Assault 'a civil case', so no police action
-
There can be a thin line between civil wrong doing and act committed with criminal intent. When either one cannot be proven on the spot, by referring the case to the Magistrates' Court cannot be faulted.
-
Please... you're making me puke all over my keyboard.....Originally posted by TooFree:There can be a thin line between civil wrong doing and act committed with criminal intent. When either one cannot be proven on the spot, by referring the case to the Magistrates' Court cannot be faulted. 
Exactly how does ganging up on an innocent bystander and beating him to within an inch of his life constitute a civil wrongdoing?
If it is a civil wrongdoing, then why is posting white elephant cutouts an act committed with criminal intent?
Answer these two questions convincingly, and perhaps I'll forgive you for trying to make me laugh to death and damaging my keyboard. And for goodness' sake, stop trying to act cute by ending every post with that dumb 'disappointed' smiley. It totally wrecks whatever credibility you have left. -
Can I have some of whatever it is that you're smoking? It's obviously good stuff.Originally posted by TooFree:There can be a thin line between civil wrong doing and act committed with criminal intent. When either one cannot be proven on the spot, by referring the case to the Magistrates' Court cannot be faulted. -
Originally posted by av98m:Can I have some of whatever it is that you're smoking? It's obviously good stuff.
nowadays police v ez job huh....
getting alot of similar complains recently. -
The Singapore Police Force better give a proper explanation to every single Singaporeans, but I think no matter how good their explanation is, they have screwed it up big time man. They have betrayed the trust of the people. Bloody hell, probe so much into those harmless protests, 'white elephants', etc. Then when people kenna assualt, simply not interested. What the f_u_c_k?!! What on earth were the policemen thinking man?!!
-
Btw.. there is no classification such as "Assault".
Examples as follows:
A punch B = Voluntary Causing Hurt ( Civil Case )
A attacks and breaks bones of B = Voluntary Causing Grevious Hurt ( Arrest Case )
If the article suggests that there were 6-7 assailants, the case is then Rioting, an arrest case.
And obviously i do not understand what TooFree is referring to.
-
We are Singapore..Originally posted by LazerLordz:This is Uniquely Singapore.
Happy Birthday Singapore!!!!
woo-fcuking-hoo.
We are Singapore..
We shall stand together...
But still money talks... -
Law of Torts - Specific TortsOriginally posted by fudgester:Please... you're making me puke all over my keyboard.....
1. Exactly how does ganging up on an innocent bystander and beating him to within an inch of his life constitute a civil wrongdoing?
2. If it is a civil wrongdoing, then why is posting white elephant cutouts an act committed with criminal intent?
Answer these two questions convincingly, and perhaps I'll forgive you for trying to make me laugh to death and damaging my keyboard. And for goodness' sake, stop trying to act cute by ending every post with that dumb 'disappointed' smiley. It totally wrecks whatever credibility you have left.
1. An assault is an attempt or offer to apply unlawful force to the person of another.
Assault is a crime as well as a civil wrong. If the wrongdoer is prosecuted, and summary proceedings are taken and the accused is convicted and punished, or the case is dismissed and the magistrates award a dismissal, no further action or civil proceedings may be taken in respect of the wrong.
The police officers on the ground should have the benefit of the doubt to refer the case to the Magistrate Court since the distinction between crimes and civil wrongs does not lie in the nature of the act itself but does depend on the legal consequences which follow the act.
2. A crime is a different category but hard to define specifically. However, it is a public offence against the state, and the object of the charge is to punish the offender, not to compensate the victim. -
If a fight occurs, and people are hurt, and there is potential for more trouble, the police should just arrest the chaps first.
There is something called causing a public nuisance, and if one party decides to press charges, that should be the first stage...
Oh yeah, the weed is very fresh this year..
-
Originally posted by TooFree:
Ah I see... so you do agree that assault IS a crime on top of being a civil wrong.
Law of Torts - Specific Torts
1. An assault is an attempt or offer to apply unlawful force to the person of another.
Assault is a crime as well as a civil wrong. If the wrongdoer is prosecuted, and summary proceedings are taken and the accused is convicted and punished, or the case is dismissed and the magistrates award a dismissal, no further action or civil proceedings may be taken in respect of the wrong.
And at the same time, you've confirm my suspicions: that in Singapore, placing cardboard cutouts of white elephants is a more serious crime than assault. To the point that if you do get assaulted to the point of disfigurement, you must complain to the magistrate's court before the police takes action. Oh dear.
Read Sagara's post - they were rioting, and since there were 6-7 assailants, it was an illegal assembly. So gathering more than five people to wear brown T-shirts is more serious than gathering more than five people to bash up an innocent bystander? The police officers on the ground should have the benefit of the doubt to refer the case to the Magistrate Court since the distinction between crimes and civil wrongs does not lie in the nature of the act itself but does depend on the legal consequences which follow the act.
So if I do get bashed up in the presence of policemen, they will not haul those pricks away and simply tell me to report to the magistrate's court? Okay.
So what's your point here? That the victim's brother was asking for compensation when he called the police to report the assault?
2. A crime is a different category but hard to define specifically. However, it is a public offence against the state, and the object of the charge is to punish the offender, not to compensate the victim.
I'm done with you. You're not worth the effort.
There are other far more intelligent lifeforms out there worth sparring with. -
-
Well, they did call the riot team when we had four people holding placards and shouting slogans in front of the CPF building. Ostensibly, those four people could start a riot and all hell would break loose..... supposedly.Originally posted by LazerLordz:If a fight occurs, and people are hurt, and there is potential for more trouble, the police should just arrest the chaps first.
There is something called causing a public nuisance, and if one party decides to press charges, that should be the first stage...
Oh yeah, the weed is very fresh this year..
But of course, I suppose 6-7 people physically assaulting a young innocent bystander in a hawker center don't count for much. After all, it's just a 'civil wrong', right? After all, a few broken bones and a permanent facial disfigurement isn't all that bad.... right?
P.S. I'm trying not to be too cynical.... but you can't really blame me for that. -
Anyone with a ounce of intelligence would figure out that a gang fight is more violent than three activists standing outside the CPF building..Originally posted by fudgester:Well, they did call the riot team when we had four people holding placards and shouting slogans in front of the CPF building. Ostensibly, those four people could start a riot and all hell would break loose..... supposedly.
But of course, I suppose 6-7 people physically assaulting a young innocent bystander in a hawker center don't count for much. After all, it's just a 'civil wrong', right? After all, a few broken bones and a permanent facial disfigurement isn't all that bad.... right?
P.S. I'm trying not to be too cynical.... but you can't really blame me for that.
But then again, if someone's influence is threatened.. it's so much more important than an actual beating?
We've got to be the world's master of double-speak. -
I seriously wonder what the police spokesperson has to say about this - if they even bother to say anything, that is.Originally posted by LazerLordz:Anyone with a ounce of intelligence would figure out that a gang fight is more violent than three activists standing outside the CPF building..
But then again, if someone's influence is threatened.. it's so much more important than an actual beating?
We've got to be the world's master of double-speak.
Ought to be good for a laugh.
Of infinitely smaller laughing matter is the fact that the police are unwilling to nab assailants on the grounds that it is a 'civil matter'. So now my enemies can feel free to slug me without fear, knowing that they can be out of the country by the time I go to the magistrate's court.
I can't say this fills me with a whole lot of confidence in our judicial system. -
You are making no sense whatsoever. DUH - As I said, many acts give rise to both civil and criminal liabilities.Originally posted by TooFree:There can be a thin line between civil wrong doing and act committed with criminal intent. When either one cannot be proven on the spot, by referring the case to the Magistrates' Court cannot be faulted.
You say that when we cannot prove on the spot if something is either a civil wrong or a crime, it is OK to refer it to the Mag Court as if it somehow vindicates the police in this case.
Do you know what you are saying? NOTHING can be proven on the spot because there is a legal process to go through, regardless if the wrong is civil or criminal; after all a man who bludgeons another to death in front of 20 witnesses might not have committed a crime because he might have been acting in self-defence, or he might be a soldier/policeman using reasonable force to apprehend a criminal. Should the case therefore be referred to the mag court for a decision before police action is taken?
Silly. -
Sigh.
-
I think someone must have given this moron a lobotomy.Originally posted by TooFree:Law of Torts - Specific Torts
1. An assault is an attempt or offer to apply unlawful force to the person of another.
Assault is a crime as well as a civil wrong. If the wrongdoer is prosecuted, and summary proceedings are taken and the accused is convicted and punished, or the case is dismissed and the magistrates award a dismissal, no further action or civil proceedings may be taken in respect of the wrong. The police officers on the ground should have the benefit of the doubt to refer the case to the Magistrate Court since the distinction between crimes and civil wrongs does not lie in the nature of the act itself but does depend on the legal consequences which follow the act.
2. A crime is a different category but hard to define specifically. However, it is a public offence against the state, and the object of the charge is to punish the offender, not to compensate the victim. -
it make sense if u know they are basically serving the elitesOriginally posted by redstone:If it's logical to send a fully armed 12 men riot police squad to break up a 4 person peaceful demonstration....
If it's logical to have full scale investigation into paper cut outs...
If it's logical to have immediate intensive investigation into someone who forgot to submit minority race form...
I can't get the logic of why a victim of gang asualt with serious injuries isn't investigated immediately. -
In fact, Illegal Assembly will amount to Rioting when there is an intent to overawe, either by actions or show of force.
Of course, Rioting carries a heavier sentence.
I'm surprised how come a Rioting case can be downgraded by such a huge extent to VCH. Not the standard practice as far as i know... No reasons to do so too...
By the way, why is TooFree still harping on his "Assault" classification ?
Tell me what aspects of "Assault" are not covered by Voluntary Causing Hurt / Grevious Hurt and Criminal Force ? -
Out of Rioting, Voluntary causing of hurt, Voluntary causing of grevious hurt...
Still isn't as important as cardboard cut outs in this case? -
Can i beat the hell out of somebody in front of police and tell them they got no jurisdiction to interfere as it is a Civil case.
If police not happy, tell them to go Magistrate court first before arresting me. -
wow, our streets are very safe indeed. well done spf. the police are so smart they can't differentiate between a criminal case and an civil case. or maybe its just the brilliance of the singapore legal system.
-
Godfather, can send some of your men to make streets safer since spf is like this?Originally posted by vito_corleone:wow, our streets are very safe indeed. well done spf. the police are so smart they can't differentiate between a criminal case and an civil case. or maybe its just the brilliance of the singapore legal system. 
hahah... -
I havent met one who can't differentiate between the 2. Obviously something's gone wrong.Originally posted by vito_corleone:wow, our streets are very safe indeed. well done spf. the police are so smart they can't differentiate between a criminal case and an civil case. or maybe its just the brilliance of the singapore legal system. -
U dun get monkeys when u pay peanuts. u get ppl like durai and those guys in white when u pay them peanutsOriginally posted by I-like-flings(m):that mean we are not paying our police enough lah!!!!! when u pay peanuts u get monkey what... becareful ar.. better increase their pay by 1000% ar if not will be like m'sia police soon ar!!!