Case 5
Neglect of Duty – Substantiated
Neglect of Duty – Substantiated Other Than Reported
Neglect of Duty – Substantiated Other Than Reported
   
7.34
 The complainant (COM) found a black-colour private car KZ XXX of the same model and peculiarities as his stolen vehicle at a car show.  He made a report to the Police, and two uniformed police officers, PCs A and B, attended the scene for enquiries.  They first checked the registration, chassis and engine numbers of KZ XXX with the Police Console and confirmed that it was not a stolen vehicle.  They then inspected the vehicle and found the peculiarities mentioned by COM on it.  During the enquiry, PC A and COM also located another private car of the same make at the car show.  After comparison, they found that the thickness of the metal plate of the engine number of KZ XXX was obviously thinner.  The case was considered suspicious and crime investigation detectives, DPC C and DSGT D, were requested to attend the scene for further enquiries.  In the presence of COM, PC A briefed DPC C and DSGT D about the initial findings, including the observation pertaining to the thickness of the engine number plate of KZ XXX.  PC A also reported to DSGT D that COM had earlier checked with the sole agent of the vehicles of the same make, who indicated that KZ XXX was white in colour when it was first registered.  DPC C and DSGT D then took over the case for further investigation.
   
7.35
 After inspection, DPC C and DSGT D considered that the peculiarities as mentioned by COM were not unique to prove conclusively that KZ XXX was COM's stolen vehicle.  They considered that since COM had examined KZ XXX in detail at the car show prior to his report to the Police, this might explain why he could point out those peculiarities.  Moreover, DPC C and DSGT D could not find any sign of alteration on the chassis and engine numbers of the vehicle, and the numbers were also found to be consistent with those recorded in the vehicle licence.  They therefore concluded that there was insufficient evidence to impound KZ XXX immediately for forensic examination, particularly when the car owner, Mr Y, did not consent to have his vehicle impounded immediately at the scene, but agreed to leave the vehicle at the car show, pending forensic examination.
   
7.36
 DSGT D then reported his investigation result to DWSIP E, who agreed with his assessment.  DWSIP E had also examined the initial findings of PCs A and B as recorded in the investigation report (Pol. 155), but found no suspicion in the case.  Although she noted from DPC C's checks that Mr Y and the previous owner of KZ XXX had numerous criminal records, including vehicle crime, she did not consider it justified to impound the vehicle immediately for forensic examination.  However, to ease COM's suspicion, she directed DSGT D to arrange for a forensic examination of KZ XXX as soon as possible.
   
7.37
 Five days later, COM was informed by DWSIP E that KZ XXX was reported missing and then recovered, with some parts of the vehicle found stolen and its chassis number defaced, on the day when the forensic examination was scheduled.  After consulting the Government Chemist, DWSIP E told COM that the severe damage to the chassis number of KZ XXX had rendered it impossible to trace its true identity through forensic examination.  COM then lodged a complaint to CAPO against DPC C, DSGT D and DWSIP E for their failure to take instant action to impound KZ XXX for forensic examination, resulting in the loss of material evidence in the investigation of his report ('Neglect of Duty').
   
7.38
 CAPO's investigation revealed that the vehicle bearing the registration number KZ XXX was originally white in colour according to the registration record in the Transport Department.  The record showed that the colour of the vehicle was changed to black four days after COM's vehicle was stolen, with the registered owner changed subsequently to Mr Y.  Both DPC C and DSGT D, when interviewed by CAPO, denied that COM, PCs A or B had mentioned to them the original colour of the vehicle bearing the registration number KZ XXX.  For DWSIP E, she only learnt that the original colour of the vehicle was white when she was interviewed by CAPO.  However, before any further action was taken by the Police to impound the vehicle for examination,  Mr Y had successfully applied to re-stamp a new chassis number on KZ XXX with the Transport Department and then resold the vehicle to a bona fide purchaser.
   
7.39
 With CAPO's intervention, KZ XXX was eventually examined by the Government Chemist regarding its original colour.  It was confirmed that KZ XXX, contrary to its registration history, had never been white in colour.  Although it could not be ascertained that KZ XXX was indeed COM's stolen vehicle, it was almost certain that KZ XXX was not the original vehicle bearing the registration number KZ XXX, which should be white in colour when it was first registered.  Judging from the whole circumstances, CAPO considered that reasonable inference could be drawn that COM's vehicle was purposely stolen, converted and laundered to become the vehicle bearing the registration number KZ XXX, which was reported to have been totally damaged in an earlier incident according to the record of the sole agent.  CAPO then referred the information to the relevant police district for crime investigation, as the case was suspected to be related to a professional vehicle laundering syndicate.
   
7.40
 In connection with the complaint, CAPO was of the view that there were three occasions when the vehicle laundering process could have been stopped by the Police, viz. –
   
(a) when COM found KZ XXX at the car show and reported the matter to the Police;
   
(b) when KZ XXX was coincidentally reported missing and then recovered on the day of the scheduled forensic examination; and
   
(c) when DWSIP E learnt from CAPO that the original colour of the vehicle bearing the registration number KZ XXX was white.
   
7.41
 On the first occasion, although DPC C and DSGT D claimed that they had conducted a thorough investigation at the scene to erase the suspicion, CAPO considered that they were reasonably expected to attach sufficient weight to COM's report and his suspicion, since there appeared no other convincing reason to justify why COM was so eager to report the matter to the Police after he had been compensated in full by his insurer for his stolen vehicle.  While it might not be desirable to immediately impound KZ XXX in view of Mr Y's objection, DPC C and DSGT D could have put the vehicle on guard to facilitate subsequent forensic examination as early as possible.  DPC C and DSGT D apparently had not considered this option and imprudently left KZ XXX in the hands of Mr Y, the prime suspect.  This eventually resulted in the coincidental missing of the vehicle shortly before the scheduled forensic examination, and the defacement of the chassis number, which rendered it impossible to trace its true identity through further examination in this aspect.
   
7.42
 Moreover, CAPO advised that there are dedicated teams in the Hong Kong Police Force who are specialized in handling vehicle laundering cases, but DPC C and DSGT D did not consider that the case was suspicious and hence did not seek advice from the specialists concerned.  As DPC C and DSGT D's decision of not impounding KZ XXX at the material time had attributed to the successful laundering of the vehicle in question, the 'Neglect of Duty' allegation against them was classified as 'Substantiated'.  DSGT D was the most senior officer who decided not to impound KZ XXX immediately at the scene and DPC C only followed his instruction.  DPC C was therefore advised without an entry in his divisional record file, while a recorded warning with an entry in his divisional record file was given to DSGT D having regard to the serious nature of the matter.
   
7.43
 On the second occasion, DWSIP E claimed that she found the case suspicious when KZ XXX was coincidentally reported missing and then recovered on the day of the scheduled forensic examination with its chassis number defaced.  However, due to her inadequate experience and training in handling similar vehicle laundering cases, she only sought advice from the Government Chemist on the possibility of further examining the chassis number to trace the true identity of the vehicle.  As the chassis number had been severely damaged, the Government Chemist advised that further examination in this area was impracticable.
   
7.44
 On the third occasion, CAPO considered that a reasonable officer in the rank and experience of DWSIP E should have been prudent enough to seek advice from her seniors, from specialists in the Hong Kong Police Force, or from the Government Chemist on what possible actions she could take to trace the true identity of the suspect vehicle.  However, DWSIP E failed to take any prompt action.  Two months later, KZ XXX was re-stamped with a new chassis number and resold to a bona fide purchaser.  Had DWSIP E taken instant action to seize KZ XXX for further examination when she learnt about the original colour of the vehicle, the vehicle laundering process could have been stopped and the prime suspect, Mr Y, could not have reaped the profit from the laundering process.  The 'Neglect of Duty' allegation against DWSIP E was hence classified as 'Substantiated'. In addition, a 'Substantiated Other Than Reported' count of 'Neglect of Duty' was also registered against DWSIP E as she failed to make any file record regarding her communications with the officer-in-charge of the case on the recovery of KZ XXX on the day of the scheduled forensic examination, her bringing the matter to the attention of her supervising officer, and her subsequent communication with the Government Chemist on the possibility of tracing the true identity of KZ XXX by further examination when its chassis number was defaced.  She was given a recorded warning with an entry in her divisional record file relating to these two substantiated counts of 'Neglect of Duty'.
   
7.45
 In the course of examining the complaint, CAPO also found that PCs A and B had failed to make proper records in their notebooks and the investigation report (Pol. 155) regarding their observations pertaining to the thickness of the engine number plate of KZ XXX, as well as COM's finding from the sole agent that the vehicle bearing the registration number KZ XXX was white in colour when it was first registered.  The omission had partly affected the initial decision of DWSIP E to concur with the assessment of DPC C and DSGT D in not impounding KZ XXX immediately as she was not given full details of the information unveiled at the scene.  PCs A and B were advised without an entry in their divisional record files to be more prudent in making proper and detailed records of their investigation findings in their notebooks and in Pol. 155.  
   
7.46
 The Council endorsed CAPO's investigation result of the case.
   
Page Top
Copyright | Important notices | Privacy policy Last revision date: