JUSTICE must not only be served but seen to be served.
But this certainly NOT to be the case in the high-profile murder trial involving a senior police officer who is accused of ramming into a teenage motorcyclist in Ipoh, Perak on Dec 15 last year.
To recap, 17-year-old Zaharif Affendi Zamrie died on the spot when he was purportedly rammed into and then run over by a vehicle commandeered by a senior police officer.
According to BFM news (@NewBFM), data recovered from the vehicle shows that the driver was accelerating at maximum (90.9km/h) during point of impact (as opposed to braking).
The investigating officer who opened the investigation into the death of Zaharif Affendi Zamrie last year admitted in court to deleting two dashcam videos showing the 17-year-old being hit by a vehicle.
Jong Pit Chao said the videos, sent by a witness two days after the… https://t.co/UOVRRlHajw pic.twitter.com/2tOEIRNkds
— BFM News (@NewsBFM) December 11, 2024
In the latest twist, the investigating officer (IO) who was initially in-charge admitted to deleting two dashcam videos which showed what had transpired.
Her reasoning? The case had already been transferred to another IO.
This was after there was outcry from the victim’s family that the IO was a known acquaintance of the accused.
This on top of perceived favouritism when dealing with a police officer as opposed to other civilians in a murder trial.
The case has captured the attention of the public over what is perceived to be overboard actions by a police officer and subsequent attempts of a cover-up.
More than a few counselled that any video or photographs should be copied and the originals should never be handed over to the cops.
One reckoned that this was clearly a case of taking care of one’s own kind.
Some highlighted that this amounted to tampering or destroying of evidence in a murder case no less. A few argued that the IO should also be charged and punished accordingly to send a clear message that this will not be tolerated.
One netizen asked what sort of SOPs (standard operating procedures) was the IO adhering to when she decided to delete such important evidence.
Another pointedly asked why every news report is accompanied by pictures of the victim but not the accused.
One commenter insinuated corruption in the manner in which the police was handling this case. How could evidence just be erased, he queried.
This case has many repercussions, not least the perception that the police force are untrustworthy alongside widespread corruption and ineptitude.
The very fact that an IO could just delete evidence on the flimsy excuse that the case had been transferred to another officer beggars belief.
The erosion of public confidence in the police force is clear. As few netizens put it, “who can we trust when even the police cannot be trusted?”
Something needs to be done – beginning with setting an example of the IO destroyed evidence on a whim – otherwise the rakyat will completely lose faith in the police force (if it hasn’t already). – Dec 14, 2024
