Man alleged to have been abused at Cantonment Police Complex, ask for full video footage of his ordeal to be shown

In the latest email sent to local media outlets in Singapore, Mr See Kian Peng asks for the police to release the full video footage of his experience at the Cantonment Police Complex, following his earlier public statement in response to Singapore Police Force’s statement on its Facebook page.

He wrote, “Lastly, police have outrightly published my full name to intimidate me and my family. I respectfully ask that the police show the public and my family the full video footage, as many members of public have assumed that I had been uncooperative and violent in the lockup which justified the use of force by the police officers at the lockup. I maintain that I was never told that I have been arrested by the police” or told that he had failed the initial breath test at the roadblock.

Following TOC’s interview with a man who was allegedly abused by police officers at Cantonment Police Station in February last year despite passing his breathalyser test, Singapore Police Force (SPF) issued a statement on the issue on 29 June which was then reported word-for-word by local media outlets.

The man was publicly named by the police in its Facebook post despite TOC’s attempt to preserve his anonymity in our previous report and video interview.

In his email on evening of 30 June, he further clarified on an earlier point that he had made in his public statement that he did not refuse to enter the temporary holding area when requested by the police officers at the complex.

Quoting SPF statement,

“However, See refused to enter the temporary holding area as he told officers to the effect that he was claustrophobic and would harm himself if put into the temporary holding area again. See insisted on waiting along a common corridor, which would affect the movement of persons, including other persons-in-custody, within the facilities. Officers explained that he could not wait there, but he refused to move. See continued to disregard officers’ repeated instructions to move into the temporary holding area and warned officers that he might cause harm to himself.”

He wrote that the police essentially acknowledged that he had already entered the temporary holding area when he subsequently refuse to enter the holding area again.

“After entering the temporary holding area for around 5 mins, I told the officers that I cannot take it, as I could not breathe properly and have to leave the area. The officers then told me that if I cannot enter the temporary holding area, they will have to put me in the lockup cell. I told the officers that if I go into the lockup cell, I might injure myself.” wrote Mr See.

He went on to state, “This is where they then said that they would put me in the padded cell instead to prevent injuring myself. At that moment, my whole body was freeze. In the lockup, I was not handcuffed for the whole event as I wasn’t violent at all. Even when they handcuffed me to the wheelchair, I still cooperated with the officers.”

“However, I started to resist as I was frightened at the sight of the padded cell. I begged them not to treat me in such manner but they became more violent towards me in the process of getting me into the padded cell.”

He pointed out that the lock-up area is large enough for him to sit at a corner, and he had already voiced his concern about his claustrophobia which is medically certified.

“So, given the fact that I was not arrested and had passed my BEA test, why was there a need to detain me in the padded cell?” asks Mr See.