In reference to "Cops need public help to serve better" by RAMLI BIN DIN, Deputy Officer In Charge Of Criminal Investigation - I would like to assure En Ramli that as a law abiding citizen I am always ready to offer my assistance where needed.
However, what I would like to know is what safe-guard does the police have in ensuring the safety of the witness from being harm by the criminals as a form of revenge?
Secondly, what guaranttee does a common law abiding citizen has that the police would not lock him or her up when he or she is filing a police report - as was the case reported recently in the media. (where a sales girl reporting a crime was put in the lock up instead.)
Quoting statistics to show a decrease in one particular crime alone is not that reassuring, especially to victims of crimes, some of whom can never see their loved ones again.
Instead, the police should be proactively employing new methodology and technology as crime prevention tool.
For example, does PDRM have crime fighting software or systems akin to the "compstat" the NY City police uses, where crime stats can be churned out so that PDRM knows which area are crime proned hotspots, what type of crime is mostly committed in that area, what type of individuals commit those crime etc?
In the case of the TAR student, it was reported in the newspaper that police report have been make and when the media interviewed the campus students they voiced their concern about the criminal activities surrounding that area - shouldnt this basic information be already in the police database?
And with this basic information, shouldnt the police have proactively patrol this crime prone area employing plainclothes police as well as the regular patrol to "prevent" and "deter" criminals from terrorizing the students?
Why does the police have to wait for a national tragedy to happen before it can take action?
sent to the Star paper
