Thursday, December 15, 2005

Have A Break, Have A Cop Apologist

Jeff's 'best friend's' media has another cop apologist in its column. Check out the article here.

It has now been established that the woman is a Malay, and the incident happened nearly six months ago. But there is already a suggestion that the woman who appeared before the commission yesterday may not be the woman in the video clip at all, as the police are involved in a massive cover-up over this diplomatic mess. My answer to that is that conspiracy theorists should get a life.

Now, who was the one covering up the real fact in the first place-Noh or the conspiracy theorist?

And part of the 'scripted' testimony...

“After the test, I was taken to a room with many lockers and was told to strip. Then I was told to do ear squats to make sure that nothing was hidden on my body. I did that facing the policewoman who was standing at the closed door.

“I did less than 10 squats. I felt shamed and angry. Then I was told to put on my clothes. My hair was tied up in a ponytail,” she said.

She said that while putting on her clothes, she faced away from the policewoman and was not aware if there was a window nearby.

Asked by Dzaiddin when she had started wearing the tudung, the woman replied: “Today.”

Dzaiddin: “At the time you were arrested until today, were you wearing it?”

Woman: “No.”

Dzaiddin: “Did you cut your hair?”

Woman: “Yes, a little bit.”

Dzaiddin: “I want to see your hair, if possible. It’s all covered in black.”

The woman then unveiled her head, revealing shoulder-length straight hair held up by a ponytail.

In addition to the detailed analysis by another possible above-mentioned 'conspiracy theorist' which includes a 'lie' such as the number of squats, may I add these following:

1. Why was the video being zoomed at time-frame 00:20? And it just happened immediately after Puan 'X' finished the 10 squats.

From this...

to this....

You don't need to be a rocket scientist to make this deduction: You want to see something clearer, you definitely will try to zoom in, in which this case, the filmer wants a better view of Puan 'X''s mammary glands (in addition to the 'no crossing hands' directive when performing the ear squats).

2. Immediately after the zoom and the finishing of squats, at time frame 00:22, I am very sure that Puan Wan Zawati said something. And then Puan 'X' peeped into the direction of the filmer. And then she continued to release her hair band.

The actual thing said has not been ascertained. It could be a permission to allow Puan 'X' to release her hair back; probably after a previous directive to tie her hair for 'better viewing'. This made me ponder: Isn't it should be the other way around if you intend to search for any hiding contraband?

Carbon Copy has a brilliant analysis of the video posted not too long ago. Check it out here.

If it is wrong to put in place a procedure that is not sanctioned by the law, then we must demand a solution. Either we change the way we investigate suspects or we change the law to accommodate the current practice. There is no option of doing nothing. At the end of the day, it is the integrity of the police force — the men and women who are charged with upholding the law — that is at stake.

Someone asked me why I have kind words for the force in the face of allegations of police abuse in detention centres or corruption. To me, these are separate issues and need to be addressed accordingly. We should not tolerate them. Punish the guilty, but do not tar and feather all with the broad stroke of our righteousness. As the Malay proverb goes "do not burn the mosquito net just because a few mosquitoes sneaked in".

Hmm...'separate issues and need to be addressed accordingly', huh? Correct me if I'm wrong (as my England is not powderful) but just look at the 'Drug bust jails 22 innocents' Quite separated, huh? Oh, and have you heard of another Peribahasa: Kerana nila setitik, rosak susu sebelanga? (A drop of blue ink? spoils the whole pot of milk)

I still value the contributions of the police and what their members have done to keep the country safe — from the unseen to the obvious. I have been to places where going out at night is a high-stakes gamble, and a trip to the bank could be the last one you ever make, where the police are helpless in the face of a rising tide of crime.

I have heard enough of these claims like above and 'police are working 24 hours a day protecting our citizens' (in the Noh 'Keluar Malaysia statement), portraying them as Superman or Spiderman. Get real, matey. Ask any Malaysians out there. Correct me if I'm wrong, do you really see police patrols around your friendly neighbourhood? Or even if you do see cops in the middle of the night at secluded areas (like traffic junctions), frankly lar, are they protecting us know, I know enough lar...

Give 'em a break? We had given ample of breaks before the Royal Police Commission and even after that...

So, does 'giving 'em a break' means continue giving 'em 'K*t K*ts'? If you know what I mean...

No comments: