Neighbour from Hell

[Nebbermind]

I suspect she may just get away if she can get a favourable IMH report

[mummy OnABudget]

so unfair right lets hope she gets a hefy fine then since she assaulted a public servant

[Dora1]

Actually a bigger question would be, what was the police doing? I followed the above links given, and it was reported that this is the 3rd time this old lady was being assaulted, just that the previous 2x was not so serious. Police came many times already, and when I watched the 10pm news, it was reported that many other neighbours have also made police report against this violent woman before. But the police claim that they can’t do anything because there is no evidence. That’s why the family spent $2K to install the CCTV, and apparently had to jump through some red tape in order to do so.

Why didn’t the police do something about this violent woman? Whether or not she is an IMH case is a separate issue which should only determine where she is locked up in - jail or IMH. And what is this thing about no evidence? Witnesses from the other neighbours are not enough? If the law is really so weak, I think it’s high time it is changed. Must really wait until somebody lands in hospital then it’s considered evidence? And what if the family has no means to spend the $2K to install the CCTV, or if it’s just a single lonely old woman staying alone, other than calling the police, what else are they able to do?
I think my good impression of the SPF is really affected by this case, hopefully the SPF can explain to the public what they can/should do if they encounter similar cases.

[Harlequin]

I will be more worry if our law enforcement officers start to penalize civilian with witness accounts alone… imagine this, a group of people give an correlated rehearsed witness account against someone that they hold grudge to! That will be dark age of law.


Yes, there’ll always be a grey area whereby the law can’t protect without the admissible evident, but that’s what law is, impartial – we can’t convict people based on other(s) account alone.

[Nebbermind]

http://singaporelegaladvice.com/what-if-my-neighbour-creates-a-disturbance-or-deliberately-tries-to-annoy-me/

[janet88]

if she gets away with it, then it’s utterly unfair.

she beat up a neighbour so badly and then if IMH finds her mentally ill…that’s really hard to accept…damn suay if that’s the case.

[vinegar]

she even continued to beat the poor woman while she was carrying the child.how would the child think of her?

[Dora1]

Harlequin:

I will be more worry if our law enforcement officers start to penalize civilian with witness accounts alone... imagine this, a group of people give an correlated rehearsed witness account against someone that they hold grudge to! That will be dark age of law.


Yes, there'll always be a grey area whereby the law can't protect without the admissible evident, but that's what law is, impartial -- we can't convict people based on other(s) account alone.

Thanks Nebbermind for the link. So there are laws against harressment - good to know that.
Harlequin, you may be right, but what is the chance that all the neighbours from different ages and background come together to gang up against a person with statements that can stand up to the court. And I am sure the police will know how to interrogate such that they will be able to pick up loopholes should there be pre-rehearsed statements - they are the professionals here.
I am not a law expert, but if a group of people saw a man push someone off the buidling, would he get convicted from witness accounts alone if there are no other material evidence? Or he can go scot free?

[Harlequin]

Dora1:

Harlequin:

I will be more worry if our law enforcement officers start to penalize civilian with witness accounts alone... imagine this, a group of people give an correlated rehearsed witness account against someone that they hold grudge to! That will be dark age of law.


Yes, there'll always be a grey area whereby the law can't protect without the admissible evident, but that's what law is, impartial -- we can't convict people based on other(s) account alone.

Thanks Nebbermind for the link. So there are laws against harressment - good to know that.
Harlequin, you may be right, but what is the chance that all the neighbours from different ages and background come together to gang up against a person with statements that can stand up to the court. And I am sure the police will know how to interrogate such that they will be able to pick up loopholes should there be pre-rehearsed statements - they are the professionals here.
I am not a law expert, but if a group of people saw a man push someone off the buidling, would he get convicted from witness accounts alone if there are no other material evidence? Or he can go scot free?

I guess it also depends on whether the witness has interest in the case, a more creditable witness account is one that's from someone that has no interest.

In any crime, the witness shall be the first suspect, until he/she is proven to be otherwise, and eliminated from the suspect list..... This, many do not aware.

If a husband reports his wife's murder, the husband would be the prime suspect (in any country's law), because he has an interest in his wife's death.

Common law are also about common sense, it assumed everybody do things out of their own interest.