SINGAPORE — The Singapore Police Force (SPF) on Tuesday (June 29) addressed claims of police mistreatment made by a man who was arrested and held in police custody for drink-driving in February 2020.

The man, See Kian Beng, made his allegations in a video interview posted on The Online Citizen Asia's Facebook page on Monday.

In the video, See claimed that he was held in the police lock-up for longer than necessary, and that he was assigned a padded cell despite mentioning that he had claustrophobia, said SPF.

He alleged that the police "pinned him down and used excessive force in moving him into the padded cell", causing him to sustain injuries, said SPF.

See also claimed that the police ignored his request to use the toilet such that he ended up urinating inside his cell, said SPF. He also said that no food was given to him.

He further alleged that the police refused to let him call his family members, that medical personnel at the lock-up ignored his concerns about his high heart rate and that his car was returned to him only after a long time, said SPF.

"See's statements give a misleading impression, because he has not set out the full facts," said SPF in a news release.

POLICE RECOUNT ARREST

See was arrested for drink-driving after failing a breath analyser test at a police roadblock along Boon Keng Road at around 3.40am on Feb 14 last year, said the police.

He was taken to the lock-up facility at Police Cantonment Complex at about 4am. There, he was processed for detention pending a further breath analyser test through the Breath Evidential Analyser (BEA) machine, said SPF.

At the lock-up, nursing officers attended to See on two occasions and assessed him to be fit for detention, said SPF.

"At about 4.40am, after a few attempts to provide a BEA test sample, See passed the BEA test taken in the lock-up with a recorded result of 31 micrograms of alcohol in 100ml of breath," said the police.

This result was just below the legal limit of 35 micrograms of alcohol in 100 ml of breath.

TAKEN INTO CUSTODY

As See was legally arrested — having failed his initial breath analyser test — he was processed in accordance with the rules for people arrested and brought into police custody, said SPF.

Among other procedures, this included a medical examination and assessment of See's condition to determine if he was fit for detention.

While in custody, See was brought to wait in a temporary holding area in between his BEA test attempts. He was brought to another temporary holding area after the BEA test was completed, to await the processing of his release, said SPF.

However, See refused to enter the second holding area, telling officers that he was claustrophobic and "would harm himself if put into the temporary holding area again", said SPF.

He insisted on waiting along a common corridor instead, said SPF. As this would affect the movement of people, officers explained to See that he could not wait there but he refused to move, said SPF.

MOVEMENT INTO PADDED CELL

See continued to disregard officers' repeated instructions to move into the temporary holding area and warned officers that he might cause harm to himself, said SPF.

In view of his threat to harm himself and "out of concern for his safety", officers decided to transfer See to a padded cell using a wheelchair, said the police.

"See put up a strong resistance entering into the padded cell and struggled with officers. Despite repeated advice by the officers, See refused to comply with officers' instruction. Officers therefore had to apply necessary force to physically move him into the padded cell."

In See's account of this in the video interview, he alleged that six or seven officers had "pinned (him) down" and were "using their force" on him. He claimed that one person used an elbow on his neck, causing him to be unable to breathe. He also alleged that the officers kicked him and used "unnecessary force".

NO TOILET, NO FOOD, NO PHONE CALL

Responding to See's claim that his request to use the toilet was ignored, the police said that at about 6am, See asked to use the toilet. Due to his earlier struggle, arrangements were made for more officers to escort him.

However, when they reached his cell, they saw that he was sleeping and did not wake him, said SPF. Prior to that, See had been allowed to use the toilet on two occasions, police added.

As for See's claim that he was not given food, SPF said that when breakfast was served at about 6.25am, See was found to be asleep. Breakfast was therefore not served to him.

"In our review, we did not find records of See's request to make any phone calls," said SPF, referring to See's claim that he was not allowed to call family members.

Requests for calls to external parties made by people who are in police custody are assessed on a case-by-case basis, added SPF.

"CCTV footage showed that there were no signs of See limping or exhibiting discomfort when he eventually left the padded cell. He was able to walk normally and was escorted by officers," said police.

UNCONDITIONAL RELEASE

See was released unconditionally from police custody at about 7.40am, around four hours after his arrest. He was told to collect his vehicle later in the evening for safety considerations.

"The police do not typically release vehicles back to persons arrested for drink driving straight after their release from custody as they may still have alcohol in their body, which could affect their faculties and cause them to pose a risk to themselves and other road users if they are allowed to operate the vehicle too soon," said SPF.

See subsequently collected his vehicle on the night of Feb 14, 2020.

SPF also acknowledged that shortly after his release, See lodged a complaint and wrote in to provide his feedback on his custodial experience. Following this complaint, the police asked him to seek medical assessment.

"The medical form provided by See indicated that he had sustained some minor injuries, which included abrasions on his right knee, and a two cm laceration on his right knee.

These injuries appeared to be consistent with the struggles he put up when officers attempted to place him inside the padded cell," said SPF.

INTERNAL INVESTIGATIONS

SPF added that it had conducted internal investigations, including reviewing the CCTV recordings of See's custody.

"We did not find any abuse or wrongdoing," said the police.

These findings were conveyed to See in June last year. A year later on June 2, See again wrote in to SPF to enquire about this case.

"The police had tried to contact him on two separate occasions and offered to arrange a further interview with him to hear his concerns. However, he declined to be interviewed," said SPF. CNA

For more stories like this, visit cna.asia.