By Tiffany Gwee
A red spray-paint graffiti with profanities targeted towards the People’s Action Party (PAP) was found on the rooftop of a 22-storey Housing Development Board (HDB) flat located in Toa Payoh yesterday. The Police were notified about the graffiti at 6.47am in the morning and the mess was quickly painted over by 11.30am.
The police have classified this case as “vandalism” and investigations are still ongoing.
How did it happen?
One major question to ask regarding this incident is, “How exactly did it happen?” Could it be the work of tools, the fact that the previous person who opened the access left it unlocked or that the person who vandalised had the keys?
According to local news sources, the access hatch to the block’s rooftop was locked when police entered the site yesterday morning. From this, the possibility of the person breaking the lock is minimal, considering the fact that the lock did not seem to be broken or tampered with.
The Town Council confirmed that no one requested for the keys to the trapdoor. According to them, the keys would only be given to authorised personnel that are accompanied by an auxiliary police officer.
If the person did not break the lock nor have the keys, there seems to be a high chance that the lock was not properly locked in the first place.
Since the incident of a dead body being found in the water tank back in 2011 at Woodlands, the Town Councils had increased vigilance and tightened security regarding the access to rooftops.
This incident will once again open the questions centred around this supposedly more strict and secure rooftop access method.
Visit to the Site

I visited the access hatch yesterday afternoon to find out more about how the hatch looked like and where the ladder was located.

Roof Access
Roof Access
Ladder along Corridor
Ladder along Corridor
It seemed like the hatch was located in the middle of a row of houses. However, when asked by the news as to whether they heard noises in the midst of the night, a resident told the media that when she went to sleep at 1am, “it was quiet”.
View of the Rooftop
View of the Rooftop
I also managed to get a clear view of the parapet from another flat nearby – the ledge leading to the affected wall was extremely small and narrow. It would have been even more difficult to walk along that path in the darkness.
A few men were seen walking along the rooftop when I was looking over from the other block – most likely to scour the area after the incident.
There are no CCTVs or any form of cameras in the lift lobby or near the access – this will probably add on to the level of difficulty in apprehending the person/ people involved in this act of vandalizing.
Residents’ Reactions

The general feeling I got when I asked some of the shopowners and residents about the issue was that not everyone knew about it and most of them did not really care about the issue either.
A shopkeeper of a provision shop just under the block itself told me that he did not know about it until one of his customers informed him about the graffiti. “I don’t really care much about it,” he said, “but the person quite clever to be able to do it in the dark. It is not easy and it must have been dangerous also.” The shopkeeper was also adamant that the person who vandalised was “probably not living around the neighbourhood”.
One of residents who was also near the shop told me that he did see the graffiti in the morning. “A lot of people walked by and saw it as well. After that, there were many policemen and journalists who came here too.”
When I asked them as to why they think it happened, the shopowner said that the person probably was “not happy with the policies” due to the “high living standards in Singapore”.
However, he added that Singapore is a “peaceful country” and expressed contentment living here. He agreed that “no country is perfect” but “it might be time for the government to review some policies” before he gave a slight chuckle.
Coincidentally, yesterday marked the 3rd year anniversary since the General Elections back in 2011.

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

费雷拉脸书因违反社群守则遭移除 另开账户续反击指控

根据本地英语媒体《今日报》报导,被指控泄漏1.42万艾滋病患资料的费雷拉,其脸书账户因违反脸书政策、分享私人医疗记录可能对他人构成伤害,而被脸书管理层移除。 脸书管理层在昨日告知《今日报》,强调应让用户在感到安全的情况下使用脸书,为此设下社群守则规范,在该政策下,回移除掉那些涉及分享私密健康资讯、可能对他人构成伤害的内容或账户。 不过,显然费雷拉仍“不死心”,在原先的“Mikhy Brochez”和“Michael Brochez”账户被删除后,他在约三小时前,又另开“Mikhy Farrera-Brochez”的账号,申诉账号被脸书删除,也继续反驳早前我国政府对他的指控。 ”如今我被称为病态骗子,但是他们(新加坡政府)的指控是毫无根据的。“他也挑战,为何总理李显龙不请求美国政府和总统川普引渡罪犯? 与此同时,他也申诉从未对母亲身份撒谎,反之是当局把肯德基大学(University of Kentucky)误当成英国(UK);也未在护照身份上撒谎。 反之,在新的帖文中,他表示他的脸书头像,是在新加坡驻华盛顿使馆前拍摄,他向使馆提交信函,要求立即释放被不实控诉的丈夫吕德祥,以及要求废除艾滋数据收集以及对性少数群体的压迫,不过遭到拒绝。他对此也表示,如果新加坡当局有和美方合作,何以他仍能自由前往大使馆和会见一些美国议员? 不过,在他的声明中,并没有直接回应有关因上载医疗记录而导致账号被删除一事。…

Thousands of Burmese flee into China

Ethnic Chinese refugees camp on the border with Myanmar to escape fighting…

梁实轩代表律师林鼎:继续抗争

时评人梁实轩申请反告总理李显龙滥用司法程序,在上周被高庭法官驳回,同时也被谕令为诉讼传票支付共2.1万元的庭费。 不过,梁实轩的代表律师林鼎,今早(19日)在脸书发文表态将“继续抗争”,透过其CARSON 律师楼的声明,表示将针对上述反告总理申请被驳回的初期判决,作出上诉。 总理李显龙是在去年11月提告梁实轩诽谤,指梁在脸书分享的一则贴文,诋毁总理人格和声誉。 虽然梁实轩在去年12月底反诉总理滥用法庭程序,但在上周法官Aedit Abdullah裁决,驳回梁实轩的反诉,指后者“没有合理的诉讼理由”。 高庭法官Aedit Abdullah引用Lee Tat发展公司诉讼案例,阐述类似案例未出现滥用程序。 不过,林鼎在声明中指出,上诉庭将发现Lee Tat案例和梁的案例有差别,且滥用司法程序的侵权行为,也会出现在特定案例,何况他们面对的是恶意的诉讼。 他认为有必要打击这种滥用程序,以保障言论自由。…

为救雇主儿女佣车祸丧命 家庭佣工中心发起筹款助家属

印度籍女佣为了救雇主两岁大的儿子而遭撞,不幸丧命,遗留下一名7岁的女儿、两名弟弟和年迈的母亲。本地家庭佣工中心在意外发生后,为已故女佣之家属筹款,协助他们度过艰难时刻。 29岁的印度籍女佣卡尔(Jaspreet Kaur)于本月5日,在伦多道(Lentor Avenue)推着雇主两岁大的儿子时,遇上死亡车祸,为了救男婴她即时把男婴推开,但却不及自救,最后送院不治 家庭佣工中心在得知意外发生后,便试图联系其家属,了解他们在意外发生后的生活是否陷入窘迫。同时,也到众筹网站giving.sg发起筹款活动 此外,他们也正与雇主合作,同时也准备好了家庭佣工福利基金让家属先暂时度过。 家庭佣工中心表示,针对本次意外,许多民众也表示相当痛心,也想为卡尔尽一分力,因此才会有了这次的筹款活动。 截至今日下午,筹款活动已达1560元,而筹款活动将会在12月12日终止。欲知更多详情 ,可前往网页giving.sg 了解详情。