YOURSAY 'This was a chance lost to tell other marauding police officers that crime or no crime, a life is worth saving.'

Cpl Jenain acquitted on culpable homicide charge

Sa Tombs: If a motorist was to kill someone as a result of accident (with no intention to kill), he is convicted. Likewise, this action of the police officer was reckless enough to cause the death of a young boy.

This was an unnecessary use of force and discharge of firearms. If Minister in the PM's Department Nazri Abdul Aziz's son had been shot like this, do you think Nazri would have kept quiet?

All Malaysians are equal, but some are more equal than others.

Anonymous #52720663: Discharging 21 bullets to stop a car - have we no sense of what is reasonable force and what is not? Where a life is lost so carelessly by the actions of a gun-carrying police officer, should we not ask where was the threat to the cop coming from?

Is it the philosophy of shoot first and ask questions later? This was a chance lost to tell other marauding police officers that crime or no crime, a life is worth saving.

But our learned folks in the chambers of justice don't see it that way. Here there is the question of motive answered. Where a foreign woman's life was blown to smithereens, no question on the motive was raised.

We have handed our justice to those that may not measure up to it. Sad indeed. Sad.

YF: Well done, Malu-sian justice. Just make sure the same is not done to your own kids who we all know are driving their corruption-paid expensive cars with utter disregard to traffic rules.

Righteous: The life of an ordinary rakyat is worth two sen here. The angle of penetration of the bullet never look accidental. The judgment after appeal was not unexpected. My sympathies to Aminulrasyid Amzah's parents and family. Wasalaam.

Timothy: Fired the shot merely to stop the car? Is that not suppose to be a warning shot? Why aim at the driver of the car then? Why not into the air or at the tires?

Or are they also trained to fired blind shots? I am no lawyer nor an investigator, I just sense the justifications given just do not make sense.

Swipenter: Maybe there was no intention to shoot to kill but why the story of the parang found in the car to justify the discharge of firearms and cast aspersions on the deceased? Where is the parang now?

Mushiro: "The driver of the vehicle suddenly reversed the car and tried to ram into the police personnel - who had by then been joined by officers from another patrol unit.

"Surprised by the action of the suspect and (trying) to defend himself, the police officer shot in the direction of the suspect in the car,' said Khalid Abu Bakar , the Selangor police chief.

"A long machete was found in the Iswara by police personnel, Khalid said."

Did the driver reversed the car when he was already dead? Was there a long machete as alleged by the Selangor police chief?

And the judge believed that the police shot because they were trying to stop the car - a trained police officer should have shot the tyre.

Joker: Just the other day I hailed an empty cab but it did not stop. In a fit of rage, I threw rocks at the windscreen, deployed tacks on the road and finally dropped a 10-tonne tree right in front of the cab.

After crashing into the tree, it finally stopped. Unfortunately, the driver died and I was filled with remorse. I had no intention of killing him. I was just trying to get the cab to stop. After reading this news report, I felt much better.

MY Kee: I think the parents should make sure their children do not have access to their vehicles. These children do not have a licence and they are also putting other drivers at risk by being on the road.

As for this particular case, how reckless was the boy, we don't know. Is there really a parang in the car? We don't know.

Then again, if you are the police officer's family, do you want your husband to be safe? I don't think the police officer knew it was a kid in the car. Besides he was driving so recklessly and not stopping.

Disgusted: From now on, our police will be trigger-happy knowing that the kangaroo courts of 1Malaysia will protect them from prosecution. So watch out.

I wonder what happened to the cops who shot dead the doctor who was with a Malay girl in a car some years ago. Indians will be the highest percent of the population at the receiving end.

Maplesyrup: With this kind of judgment, no wonder we have rapes being carried out in a police station lock-up and such other crimes being committed by police personnel.

Under such circumstances, it is a miracle to expect law and order to be upheld in this country.

SdnJF36784: It is a good decision. People must stop when ordered to do so and not continue running.

If, after they stop running, the cops still shoot with no provocation, as they sometimes do, then the cops have to face the music.

Stop Lynas now: Forget the Automated Enforcement System (AES), that is the least you have to worry about.

Cops spray you with bullets but do not intend to kill you, if you die, that's your problem. Anyone heard of the word "manslaughter" before? Or is that word not yet invented in Malaysia?

Anonymous_40a7: There are many ways a police officer can do to stop a car. You got spike strips to blow the tyres, rubber bullets or bean bags to immobilise the driver, or the Pursuit Intervention Technique (PIT) to stop the cars from going further.

But the police chose live rounds instead, and this resulted in tragic consequences. The police force must now seriously reconsider their standard operating procedure with regards to a high-speed pursuit, and start to adopt ways to stop a vehicle without the loss of life.

Think about it - if the police have used any of the procedures above and not live rounds, will we be talking about the death of a 15-year-old right now?

Ourvotesdecide!: This is the reason why Malaysians want an independent body to carry out investigation of cases like this.

If the investigation officer is a cop and the person investigated is also a cop, suspicion on whether the investigation was carried out fully and correctly naturally arises.

In this case, why the need for the police officer to fire at the boy (driver) and not at the tyre of the car to disable the vehicle?

There seems to be no threat to the life of the police officer at the time, so why the need to aim and fired at the boy?

Sabahan: If this corporal fired just to stop the car, his aim must be very bad, as the driver and the car tyres are far apart. This police officer must not be allowed to carry a gun anymore. His warning shots may just go straight to the head of the poor suspect.

Lionking: If a proper investigation is done, then it fair. We should not blame the entire police force as they too put their lives at risk. Recently we had a few police officers being shot.

We have to also consider the plight of our officers who do risk their lives but as we know, crime is just rising partly due to our lax laws and too much justice for criminals instead of victims.

Ferdtan: Tell me, what is new? It looks from past experience that justice invariably gets blocked at the higher courts.

In Malaysia, it is the lower courts that has earned the respect of the rakyat. The apex of judiciary, to use the local analogy, is a ‘rotten fish head'. If unchecked, it will spread to the whole fish.

Changeagent: The High Court decision to acquit Corporal Jenain Subi for killing the then 15-year-old Aminulrasyid was absolutely correct.

The good corporal didn't kill the boy. It was the HK MP5 sub-machine gun that fired the shots, and ultimately, the 15 bullets that took the boy's life.

I hope that the High Court would pass heavier sentences on the MP5 and the 15 bullets to deter other guns and bullets from killing more juvenile delinquents in the future.

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 .