Public Restrain
-
Hi all,
Need some help from any POs. here.
Am curious of what may happen to me. Today as I was leaving my workplace at Jurong Point,got this guy tried to shoplift from the electronics shop I'm working in as a promoter. I gave chase,tackled that guy to the floor with my other colleagues. A plain clothes security officer also came while my colleagues restrained him with raffia we got from the shop. While tackling him, I had wrapped my arm around his neck before pulling him down and making him prone before sitting on him to prevent his escape.The shoplifter tried to swipe at my leg and I pressed my foot on his hand to prevent him from swiping my leg while waiting for more colleagues to arrive and assist in tying/restraining him. It took about 6-7 of us including the security guard before he was subdued.
While still proned, the shoplifter kept shouting that he can sue me for injuring him and that he wanna report police that we are illegally confining him and assaulting him. But i was concerned with my safety as well as my colleagues as he is a relative large fella, and he was also struggling to break free. Was formerly from NCC,and just reacted to training i used to had. The shoplifter was then led away by the security guard and the shop's branch manager.
Am alittle worried now,if the shoplifter presses charges, will I be prosecuted or whatever?As I am just trying to prevent him from escaping. Please PM me ur responses...thanks...am really pretty shaken about the incident as it happened so quickly and its my 1st time encountering such an incident.Thanks! -
Its very difficult to explain to you...
BUT you will not be charged, unless he did not steal...
so if he is going to sue you, you think judge will believe him which is the someone whom attempted to steal or you the one that applied "neccessary force" to restrain him?
well... confirm you are alright, but i couldnt remember the section and chapter... well let me search and tell you in due course... and i am going to sleep now!!
-
Quaz is right.
You will be required to attend a interview and the IO will take down your statement. Thats all.
Even if that guy did complained about how he was tackled and restrained, he won't be able to hold it up in court unless he was seriously injured.
Which means if anyone one of you had rained punches or kicks on him when he was defenceless then its another matter. That is maliciously using force not due to him.
But as you said, you have only try to restrained him and prevent him from doing any of you harm. Then its using necessary force. -
It happened v.quickly,one moment i was heading out the shop,the other i heard hurried footsteps and the sensors at the entrance/exit point sounding and i just reacted. By the time he was prone, one hand was under him, the other was still out, and he was trying to swipe me, so i just stepped on his hand to immobilse it.
And when my colleagues came to assist, they pulled his arm from under him quite forcefully and immediately pressed on kneeled on it.
The shoplifter also spat at the manager.We did not punch or kick him or whatever.We just pressed him even harder before some of my colleagues tied him up with the raffia.
Nonetheless,am still slightly worried.Coz i read from earlier postings that if someone attacks and u retailate,police will charge both. -
hmm just want to ask what is seriously injured? must have open wounds that require stitching or broken bones then consider? or bruises also can?Originally posted by viciouskitty74:Quaz is right.
You will be required to attend a interview and the IO will take down your statement. Thats all.
Even if that guy did complained about how he was tackled and restrained, he won't be able to hold it up in court unless he was seriously injured.
Which means if anyone one of you had rained punches or kicks on him when he was defenceless then its another matter. That is maliciously using force not due to him.
But as you said, you have only try to restrained him and prevent him from doing any of you harm. Then its using necessary force. -
the investigating officer will request you to give your statement. you may post your questions to him/her. it's not a common practice for law enforcement officers to offer advice openly, whereby he/she may be quoted and liable for lawsuit. the investigating officer will be in a better position to assist you in this aspect. hope you understand.
-
Does the shop have CCTV? If so, the suspect's actions could well be captured on video.
-
The restraint of the shoplifter occured outside shop premises where there is no form of survillance.
-
Remind me of the Rodney King incident in the USA...Originally posted by viciouskitty74:Quaz is right.
Which means if anyone one of you had rained punches or kicks on him when he was defenceless then its another matter. That is maliciously using force not due to him.
but i feel that the police should be authorised to give out all kind of punishment to subdue the shoplifter in this case...which mean raining blows on him...i dun see whats wrong with that...it weaken the shoplifter allowing him to be subdued easier....
if police are authorised to do so...i suggest they must watch WWE ECW to learn how to use simple staff like metal chairs as a weapon -
Not really, it depends on the intention for the injuries and bruises. As long as its not malicious and its meant to restrain.Originally posted by hisoka:hmm just want to ask what is seriously injured? must have open wounds that require stitching or broken bones then consider? or bruises also can? -
just put whatever you do in the statement.. then just add neccessary force was use as subject was running and was very violent...
-
Rounf up your potential witnesses too?
-
Hey, for tackling the suspect you might even get a police commendation plaque!
-
Wont get charged for your case unless its serious injuries like broken ribs etc.
"Necessary force was used to restrain/subdue subject."
U might get a plaque -
I dun think he has anything serious.Bruises confirm have...mebbe some scratches from the fall.Nothing major other then that.
-
-
Criminal Procedure Code
Arrest by private persons. Procedure in such cases.
34. —(1) Any private person may arrest any person who, in his view, commits a non-bailable and seizable offence, or who has been proclaimed under section 51, and shall, without unnecessary delay, hand over the person so arrested to the nearest police officer or, in the absence of a police officer, take that person to the nearest police station.
(2) If there is reason to believe that such person comes under section 32 a police officer shall rearrest him.
(3) If there is reason to believe that he has committed a non-seizable offence and he refuses on the demand of a police officer to give his name and residence or gives a name or residence which the officer has reason to believe to be false or gives a residence which is not within Singapore he shall be dealt with under section 33.
(4) If there is no reason to believe that he has committed any offence he shall be at once released.
(5) Any person who commits an offence on or with respect to the person or property of another may, if his name and residence are unknown, be apprehended by the person injured or by any person who is using the property to which the injury is done, or by the employee of either of those persons or by any person authorised by or acting in aid of either of those persons, and may be detained until he gives his name and address and satisfies such person that the name and address so given are correct or until he can be delivered into the custody of a police officer.
(6) If any person lawfully apprehended under subsection (5) assaults or forcibly resists the person by whom he is so apprehended or any person acting in his aid, he shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $100.
Would you say he tried to forcibly resist arrest, as in (6)? -
Whether unreasonable force is applied to subdue a person committing an offence voices down to the question on "what would a normal person react under the similar condition".Originally posted by Bamboozler:Criminal Procedure Code
Arrest by private persons. Procedure in such cases.
34. —(1) Any private person may arrest any person who, in his view, commits a non-bailable and seizable offence, or who has been proclaimed under section 51, and shall, without unnecessary delay, hand over the person so arrested to the nearest police officer or, in the absence of a police officer, take that person to the nearest police station.
(2) If there is reason to believe that such person comes under section 32 a police officer shall rearrest him.
(3) If there is reason to believe that he has committed a non-seizable offence and he refuses on the demand of a police officer to give his name and residence or gives a name or residence which the officer has reason to believe to be false or gives a residence which is not within Singapore he shall be dealt with under section 33.
(4) If there is no reason to believe that he has committed any offence he shall be at once released.
(5) Any person who commits an offence on or with respect to the person or property of another may, if his name and residence are unknown, be apprehended by the person injured or by any person who is using the property to which the injury is done, or by the employee of either of those persons or by any person authorised by or acting in aid of either of those persons, and may be detained until he gives his name and address and satisfies such person that the name and address so given are correct or until he can be delivered into the custody of a police officer.
(6) If any person lawfully apprehended under subsection (5) assaults or forcibly resists the person by whom he is so apprehended or any person acting in his aid, he shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $100.
Would you say he tried to forcibly resist arrest, as in (6)?
This is relatively similar to the case of neglience. -
Well,he was struggling and resisting apprehension. And like my 1st post,it took 6-7 of us to ensure that he was fully subdued.