Aminulrasyid Amzah
Details about the shooting incident.
The deceased: Aminulrasyid Amzah
Cause of death: Possible trauma from head shot by police
Time: About 2 am
Date : 26 April 2010
Last location: Section 11 (100 m from deceased home)
Chronology of the shooting incident.
- 2 policemen detected a Proton Iswara at Section 14, Shah Alam in a suspicious manner.
- Police gave signal for the car to stop but was ignored and the driver sped off.
- This triggered the two policemen to start a chase with the aid of another 2 policemen with another patrol car.
- Police had successfully stopped the car after the drive run against several traffic lights.
- Police maintained they opened fire after Aminulrasyid attempted to reverse the car into them in Section 11 which caused them to shoot in self defence.
- They also claimed that a parang was found in the car.
Key witness: Azamuddin Omar statement:
Azamuddin giving a press conference after giving statement to the police.
- He and the deceased were watching a late-night football match at a restaurant.
- They then intended to go Ali Corner at Section 7 to give a hand to a friend whose motorcycle tyre was punctured.
- While on the way, the car drove by the deceased was involved in slight accident with a car parked along the road.
- They fled the scene of the accident and were in panic state.
- Several motorcyclists apparently the friends of the car owner gave a chase and the deceased intended to go back straight to his home at Section 11.
- At Kayangan Roundabout Section12, a motorcyclist hit the car from the back and fell down and stop giving a chase.
- Upon spotted by the policemen at Section 14, they were chased till Caltex petrol Station at Section 11 and shooting began targeted ar the car tyre when they entered into Jalan Tarian junction.
- He claimed that the deceased was shot in the head and his body fell in his lap before it the car crashed into a wall of a house at Section 11.
- He was unsure on how many shot the police fired but believed to be at least 15 shots.
- He said that though the deceased fell in his lap, his foot was still on the accelerator and the car was still moving.
- He managed to crawl out of the car and wanted to surrender himself but he was kicked in the head and assaulted by no fewer than five policemen.
- He denied strongly of presence of any parang inside the car,
Video clip of the press conference
Highlights: This statement is in contrary with police statement that the car had reversed and tried to ram the police car which then triggered the police to start shooting. If Azamuddin statement is true, it is then clearly that the police had misled the public to believe that the deceased had bad intention to cause harm to the police and thus justified their shooting. In addition, there was no parang as claimed by the police.
Powerless panel: Special Panel
Lim Kit Siang claimed that the Special Panel set up into Aminulrasyid’s police killing is neither fish nor fowl. This panel is headed by Deputy Home Minister Datuk Abu Seman Yusup with other members including:
- Former Inspector-General of Police Tun Haniff Omar
- Deputy Chief Secretary of Home Ministry, Datuk Ahmad Fuad Abdul Aziz.
- Former Suhakam commissioner Denison Jayasooria
- Crime analyst Kamal Affendi Hashim
- Lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah
- Asian Strategy and Leadership Institute (Asli) chief executive officer Dr Michael Yeoh
- UiTM deputy vice-chancellor Prof Abdul Halim Sidek.
Uncle Kit proposed that a royal commission of inquiry shall be set up instead to probe the shooting and such commission to be chaired by Tun Haniff Omar. The family of the deceased had also backed up to call to set a royal commission as the special panel is powerless and has no implications at all.
Home Minister, Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein
He reminded that the Special Panel will not interfere with the proceeding of the investigation but instead will oversee the every aspect of the investigations to ensure it is conducted in a proper manner. This Special Panel will evaluate the police’s standard operating procedure especially on the use of firearms.
Inspector-General of Police, Tan Sri Musa Hassan
IGP, Tan Si Musa Hassan
- He was saying that he is ready to call of his men off the street if the people do not want them to enforce the law.
- He also asked the public not to undermine the duties of the police as they have the responsibility to ensure the safety of the country.
Your blogger say.
WE the MALAYSIAN have never underestimate or put doubts into the responsibility of the police in taking care the safety of the citizens and the country, We truly appreciate the hard works of the police especially during the festival seasons when they have to be on duties. Thus, the statement made by IGP, Tan Sri Musa had been made out of the context of this issue. We had not at anytime put doubts to the responsibilities of the police.
The ISSUE now is about the use of firearms among the police. As for Aminulrasyid Amzah case, as we can see from the chronology of the incident, the police had acted correctly to start a chase after initial signal to stop the car was ignored and the fact that the car was driven in high speed.
In my opinion, the police are correct in classifying the car to possess a danger when the car did not stop the machine despite a high speed chase by the police. It may be also correct if they police resorted to shoot when they car did not stop after a long chase. A high speed car can possess danger to anyone especially to the pedestrians. However, the shooting should be limited to the extent to attempt to stop the car of which limited to shooting to the tyre of the car only.
The biggest issue now is that the police had killed a suspect of which they believed to be highly dangerous without giving the chance to the suspect to enter trial. It is also correct to name the deceased as suspect because they were unaware of the background of the deceased and the deceased had ignored the signal to stop their car. In fact, the deceased had committed an offence under the law that is driving a car without licence. In addition, he had caused 2 counts of accidents and run away from the scene.
However, which SOP or guidelines or provision in the law that allows to police to shoot a suspect into death? In my opinion, the police may do so if and only if they are aware that the suspects are carrying any heavy weapons. As such, back to this case, shooting is correct in the attempt to stop the car. However, shooting to death of the deceased was unlawful as the police had unable to determine whether the suspect is carrying any heavy weapons and throughout the chase and shooting, the suspect had not returned any shooting back to the police. In another words, the suspect may be just another ordinary citizens who was guilty with some unknown offences at that point of time and was too panic to stop the car.
At any time when comes to shooting, the police should always try not to cause death to any of suspects. The police should be trained to target their firearms towards upper or lower limbs instead of head or the upper abdomen where most of the vital organs are located. I always believe that every suspect regardless of any offences they made shall be entered into trial at the court and let the court to decide whether he or she had convicted offences under the law. The famous quote ‘nobody shall be found guilty unless proven so’ shall be applied. It is only logical and rational to shoot the suspect into death should the suspect was carrying heavy weapons and did not surrender despite being shoot at his body but continue to shoot at the police.
(Image: Google)
As such, Aminulrasyid Amzah had been killed unlawfully and was not given a chance to enter into trial. In fact, he was not known to the police on the offences he had made earlier before the incident. What he had done was simply ignoring the police order to stop the car. It is also a questionable issue when the police maintained that the suspect was trying to reverse his car and rammed into the police.
From the key witness, Azamuddin Omar’s statement, it is in logical sense that the car had never stopped at all and even after the deceased was shot to death, his foot was in the accelerator pedal and how can the car made a reverse? Imaging in a high speed chase incident, should the suspect’s car was attempting to stop and made a reverse, by the time the car attempted to stop, the police might have reach to the suspect car before the suspect is able to reverse his machine. This is because the logical sense that the police car was driven in high speed too and was tailing closely from behind.
From the key witness, Azamuddin Omar’s statement, it is in logical sense that the car had never stopped at all and even after the deceased was shot to death, his foot was in the accelerator pedal and how can the car made a reverse? Imaging in a high speed chase incident, should the suspect’s car was attempting to stop and made a reverse, by the time the car attempted to stop, the police might have reach to the suspect car before the suspect is able to reverse his machine. This is because the logical sense that the police car was driven in high speed too and was tailing closely from behind.
Progress of the case
- The case has been classified as murder and four policemen have been transferred to desk duty pending the outcome of investigations.
- Karpal Singh will represent the family of the deceased.
- The car owner and the motorcyclist involved in the second accident had testified to the police and the testimonial were consistent with the statement by Azamuddin and not the police version.
Your blogger say:
Let wait and see the outcome of the investigations. Should the police are found guilty in opening their firearms unlawfully and causing death of a suspect, he or she shall be charged according to the law of Malaysia.
This case had triggered the public anger on the conduct of the police. The reason is that they felt the deceased has been killed without a solid reason. There are no grounds that the suspect is highly dangerous, carrying any weapons or had done any big offences that posses harm to the safety of the public.
At the same, it causes trauma to the family of the deceased and also the deceased friend's Azamuddin. I hope adik Azamuddin can carry out his life normally and will not be traumatised with this incident. Try imaging a good friend of yours was lying death on you with his head shot and blood oozing out all over the place. It is not just sounds scary but very disturbing as well.
Whatever it is, everyone shall remain calm and let the course of law to take place in order to find the truth behind the incident. We hope that the police will be more careful in releasing their firearms. At the same time, the public should not overlooked this case as well. As a neutral party, may I remind you that:
- The deceased had actually committed offences that were to drive without a valid licence and to run away after causing 2 accidents.
- The issue that causes the public outcry is the use of firearms to shoot the deceased to death without a valid justifications.
May the truth be revealed. Condolences to the family of Aminulrasyid Amzah.
Lastly, a short video clip on Aminulrasyid Amzah.
A tribute to Aminulrasyid Amzah
*Picture and info sources:
- Malaysiakini.
- Malaysia insider
17 comments:
alamak. ruginye. budak ni kalo dah besar mesti hensem kan.
of cos they did not ram the car. cos if they did, the car would not be in the drain. even the stupidest ppl could have guess that.
>>>At any time when comes to shooting, the police should always try not to cause death to any of suspects. The police should be trained to target their firearms towards upper or lower limbs instead of head or the upper abdomen where most of the vital organs are located.
are you kidding me??? you think it's easy kah, at the point in which your life is in danger, u nak hati-hati dan sebegitu cermat sekali aim one small part of the human body holding and flinging parang panjang to cut your head off????
@Dinah: thanks~
@pompuancun: hmm no comment on dat..
@kudos: agreed
@gerry: DISAGREE..
first of all, it depends on the distance. Police dun shoot if the distance is near bro! If you at a point to shoot, it mean that you have the sufficient distance to aim and shoot. if the distance is too near, of course you have no choice. I had never mentioned police can't shoot to death at that point of close distance. That's what we called as danger zone. If the police have sufficient distance, they should have aim at parts other than vital organs.
second, all the Unit tindakan khas or STU team are trained to AIM accurately. You can check this out.
third, depend on situation. if you are alone and you can able to avoid dat parang if the suspect swing to you, then why not shoot at the lower limb? if you are alone and you cant do so, it's no choice to shoot at the body. In fact, as i had mentioned, shooting is allowed when your suspects is carrying a heavy weapon in front of you. if you are with a team of 2 or more, one will act as distractor while another one aim at shooting. While if and only if the suspect swing at you, immediately your collegues should had fired at him alrdy.
in my perspective, if the boy didn't drive illegally at such hours, he could have avoided all these FIRST..
oh dear, what a huge story it is!
If he wants to watch football, he should better let the elders drive them there safely. Why he can drive the car without a valid license? We didn't even know whether he drove the car without his parents' knowledge or they allowed him to do so, trusted him that he will be driving home safely. But in the end, incident happens.
Rest In Peace, adik Aminulrasyid.
My condolences to the boy's family.
@kenwooi
your argument is invalid.
that is the same as saying,
"if the car was not invented, then the shit won't happen."
"if the police did not patrolled, then the shit won't happen."
the "what if" talk is irrelevant.
Policeman shouldn't be trigger happy,shot to stop the car not kill the driver,arrest without killing.There have been too many incident with other races now it happen to a young malay boy and yet the police are so arrogant.
Come on you are paid to protect us not kill us!
i think gerry made a very foolish comment. proves that he has no brains whatsoever.
kwongfei, your stand is very strong. admire u on this.
@kenwooi: dats another concern which is not addressed in public. The issues are
1. driving without license and whether the parents are aware of it
2. watching football late night (occasionally will be ok but what if everyday especially for coming worldcup?)
however, it is utmost difficult to prevent any growing kids to go outside and perhaps a family curfew time shall be imposed.
@SonnyKazu: agreed. it have never been mentioned that the parents are aware of the kid driving his sister car. Not even to our knowledge whether the sister knew it. All these need to be taken into consideration.
@kudos: partially agree.. well, accident happened anytime and anywhere. At the same time, we cant stuck inside our house 24 h without going out. But when we are allowed to go out, till which extent can it be? That's the dilemma of parent.
if the young boy are only allowed to go out and return before 12 am, dat also doesnt mean at that particular time, it is safer than going out after 12 am.
towards the end, is all about dilemma. Of course, the parents would like to see their kids sitting and studying at home 24 H per day.
@thomas: and the newest incident is a policemen shoot to the hip of a young mat rempit as they called. Luckily, thank GOD he survived from that incident. However, the good side of this event is that the POLICE had APOLOGISED and make public statement that it was their men fault. As contrast to Aminul case, it was sad to link him with robberies and God knows why a parang was claimed to be found in the car.
@Anonymous: well, anyone is free to make their comment and there is no right or wrong. However, let the comment be justified. Thanks for compliment.
good job dude! i like ur article..he's a very good n an active boy in school..minul is my schoolmate, everyone miss him.. :(
bro. very informative indeed. i posted this case, in my blog. and after doing some research, there is another key elements left out during the press conference by azamuddin.
there were 3 police patrol cars chasing the car, driven by aminulrasyid.
people tend to look this matter solely from one view. don't the public think that after all, the very basic issue, teenagers, 15 years old are not allowed to drive. do not blame solely on the police, they are merely doing their jobs. they follow SOP. unfortunately, the one they were chasing which fitted the 'criminal suspects', were actually 15 years old boys.
the police only did their job, then this unfortunate event happen.
the parents told the media, their son, was an obedient son, a good son. does that justify, that their son could drive a car then? NO. anak yang berbudi bahasa, etc. it's nothing to do with rules and laws. admit it uncle and aunty, it started way back at home. if they didnt give permission for the late aminulrasyid to drive, then this won't happen.
what if there was no police car at that time? we will never know, 15 year old kids, nowadays are actually driving their parents car to go to mamak! yes, my view is, the kids' parents have portion of faults in this case.
police are the authorized people in this country, which uphold rules and laws. they are only doing their job. do not blame them if they do their jobs by following SOP.
for parents out there, please do not let your children to drive your cars!
I salute the police action.
@anomynous: may his soul rest in peace..if the police is found guilty, he will receive the consequences.. let's wait what will happen through the court proceedings
@Mr_abs: i do agree with your view. If the police patrol car wasn't there, the hit and run of 2 count of accidents will be just left in such a way. I wonder how serious is the motorcyclist involved in 2nd accident. A fall from motorcycle can really hurt.
Parents indirectly are part of the problem which was not highlighted in the media. I think the whole malaysianhad overlooked the case. Those who mentioned such thing might be considered as intolerate? not sense of pity? bla bla bla
@ziza: erm salute in terms of which action???
the police did their job in maintaining the public peace and safety.
the police did correctly to chase a car which did not stop despite being warned.
the police may be correct to use gun after long trial of sopping the car.
but the police may not so correct to release so many shots and aiming at the driver.
yes the deceased is wrong for:
1. sneaking out from his house without permission
2. driving without license
3. not stopping the vehicle when ordered by the police.
My question is under which penal code does it allow the police to kill the poor boy. Mind everyone, he is only 14! I would imagine that the only thing he wanted to do that night was to get his family to talk and settle with police...whatever happen and least he or anyone who is not a criminal would expect was to be gunned down by the police. I think he was dead even before he could turn into the lane leading to his house and hit the palm tree not far after the junction to his house. Use the law to sue the family for whatever offence the boy did but please also make sure the policeman is sentenced to death for murder. As I mentioned, which penal code allowed him to kill the boy!!!
if this fellow without license drove out and kill your relatives, then you will say otherwise. Stop being selfish, look at the situation in totality. The fellow driving so fast could have knock on any pedestrian and danger others road user especially motorcyclist.
If some fellow dress in a mess with a parang approached you and your family and tell u he got no intention to hurt anyone. I think you will shoot him if you have a gun if he tries to approach nearer to you or your family.
My comment is simple. The boy is at fault. Sneaking out late, stealing his fathers car. He us under 18 and going to mamak stall late at night to watch football match. This boy is shit. He should be home asleep. He can do the mamak stall thing when he is in his university years. The cops are right. People who drive dangerously should be shot. My brother in law bang a car and ran away, and should be shot. A person who bangs someones car and ran away is not a responsible person and should be shot. Someone driving without a license should be shot. I agree with the police motto nowadays, shoot first ask questions later. I am also glad to die in the hands of the police if I turn bad. The police of malaysia should also capture those politians who are corrupted stealing the rakyats money and shot them in the head too.
Post a Comment