VOXPOP 'Clearly this action is glaringly a vendetta against the victim who dared to accuse the cops of wrongdoing.'

Bring on the molest witnesses, challenge cops

vox populi small thumbnail Swipenter: The cops are saying that they would not have taken action against Wong Bee Fong had she not complained recently, and that that was why no action was taken based on her police report against the 11 police officers for allegedly molesting her seven years ago.

What Kajang OCPD Abdul Rashid Wahab is saying is beyond belief. This is tantamount to police intimidation and harassment.

The question is, if action was taken to investigate her complaint seven years ago and if she was found to have made a false report, then why wasn't she swiftly punished?

You mean you can make a false report and get way with it, depending on the whims and fancy of the police?

Alan Goh: Kajang OCPD Abdul Rashid, you are missing the point. No one will fault you if you have done your job in accordance to the law.

The main issue is why was Wong charged for obstructing the police seven years later, and not one month or one year after the incident. Indeed, why now?

Joker: Wong was stopped for being drunk. In that case, did the police have evidence that she was drunk?

Now the allegation is that she obstructed police from doing their duty. Was there any witness aside from the police themselves?

Once you apply your so-called logic on yourself, you realise how illogical and unreasonable the police's contentions are.

Raysmond: Abdul Rashid, do you think the public will come to respect the police by actions such as yours. You are creating a ‘public versus police' atmosphere. This should not be - the police need cooperation from the public in combating crime.

Clearly this action by you is not in the public interest. It is glaringly a vendetta against the victim who dared to accuse the cops of wrongdoing.

Otherwise, why arrest her at night, when it would be equally effective to demand that she present herself in court and apply for a warrant for arrest if she does not come?

Kgen: Indeed, there is still no need to visit Wong at midnight and detain her in the lockup. This is a clear abuse of power.

If police want to charge her they could summon her to the police station or the court at a reasonable hour. Why was she given this rough treatment?

Onyourtoes: The police are playing poker, and have upped the ante, knowing that they have a royal flush in their hand.

Aussie daily issues correction on 'shopping spree' report

Thenons: Read carefully the West Australian's correction. It says only PM Najib Razak's daughter was not in Perth at the time.

It does not specifically say that the spending of the A$60,000 (RM200,000) did not take place. It only clarified it was not the daughter who made the purchase ''personally'' since she was not there personally.

But it did not deny the unnamed first lady, who spent closed to A$150,000 (RM490,000). So the ‘first lady' did go on a shopping spree and very likely she could be the one who bought some things for the daughter too.

MfM: I'll give the newspaper the benefit of doubt as Australian media stands apart from our Malaysian media.

At least when they make a mistake, they correct it. No matter how much I despise PM Najib Razak, if the report is false, we should accept it and move on.

It's not the RM200,000 I'm worried about. It's RM100 billion of rakyat's money that the government is spending that we need to worry about.

Tired: It is amazing some people just do not want to accept reality. The West Australian has said it erred, so what's the need to spin conspiracy theories that they have been paid and pressured and so on?

People have to start learning to accept it, even if it is bitter.

Nik V: Yesterday, I mentioned that I was concerned that Malaysiakini may have made a mistake by printing an article that had the makings of tabloidism and sensationalism.

Today, I retract that because I am happy to say that with this article, which contradicts the original article, goes to show that Malaysiakini is willing to print articles that while they may make it appeared that Malaysiakini had made a mistake, at least it is willing to print a correction.

Clearwater: Fair enough, I accept the West Australian report on Najib to be an error.

The quick retraction is appreciated but then who in the CHOGM (Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting) delegation spent A$60,000 in David Jones, or was that an error too?

 

The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. Over the past one year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments. Join the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda. Subscribe now .