 |
| |
Case 3
Assault – Unsubstantiated |
| |
| 6.19 |
The complainant (COM), a taxi driver, was ticketed by Police Constable A (PC A) for stopping at the lay-by of a bus stop. At the material time, a number of police officers, including PC A and Inspector B (IP B) were at the scene to deal with taxis suspected of illegal parking. COM claimed that he was upset with PC A’s demand for his identity card for inspection when he had already produced his driving licence to PC A. However, on PC A’s explanation that COM had to produce his identity card as well because his driving licence did not have a photograph, he offered his identity card to PC A. COM became agitated when he heard the conversation between PC A and IP B that he might be prosecuted for other offences. COM then got out of his taxi and exchanged angry words with IP B. At that time, the other taxis left the scene. COM alleged that when he was standing at the offside of his taxi, IP B suddenly walked up to him and kicked COM’s left kneecap with the front part of his (IP B’s) right foot (‘Assault’). COM dialed ‘999’ to report that he was kicked by a police officer and requested an ambulance. He was subsequently admitted to a hospital for treatment. Medical examination showed an abrasion on COM’s left knee. |
| |
| 6.20 |
IP B denied having kicked COM. He stated that COM produced his identity card together with his driving licence for examination only after the Police issued a warning to him. When PC A filled out the fixed penalty ticket at the front nearside of COM’s taxi, COM got off his taxi and scolded PC A. As COM refused to accept the ticket and get back his documents from PC A, IP B further warned COM that he would be arrested for obstructing the Police in the execution of duties if he refused to cooperate. IP B alleged that COM became annoyed and kicked with his left leg onto the taxi at a position near the offside front wing and bumper to the front of the driver’s seat. On seeing this, he grabbed COM’s right arm and pulled him away from his taxi. COM then shouted that he was beaten by the Police. |
| |
| 6.21 |
CAPO’s investigation revealed that other than PC A, the police officers and taxi drivers at the scene did not witness the incident. PC A stated in his initial statement that COM kicked the front offside bumper of his taxi with his left leg, but he subsequently clarified that he did not know how COM sustained his injury as he (PC A) was not facing COM at the time. Police officers escorting COM to the hospital and the ambulance staff stated that COM did not tell them the cause of his injury. The Government Chemist’s examination did not establish any contact evidence to support either COM’s or IP B’s version. |
| |
| 6.22 |
The Forensic Pathologist, whose expert opinion was sought, advised that COM’s injury was of no diagnostic value, as the injury might support the assault as alleged by COM but a kick by COM himself with sufficient force onto the curved edge at the back end of the bumper and/or the adjacent edge of the wheel arch could have produced a linear band of abrasion similar to the injury found on COM. As such, there was no conclusive evidence to prove either COM’s or IP B’s version of the incident. |
| |
| 6.23 |
CAPO sought legal advice on the sufficiency of evidence in respect of a charge of ‘Common Assault’ against IP B. Legal opinion was that there was insufficient evidence to proceed with a charge of assault against IP B. After reviewing all the available evidence, CAPO concluded that there was no independent witness or corroboration to support either COM’s or IP B’s story. As such, the ‘Assault’ allegation was classified as ‘Unsubstantiated’. |
| |
| 6.24 |
The IPCC endorsed the investigation result of this case. |
| |
 |
|
| 
