[Updated on 14 October 2010: Through Dato’ Khalid Bin Abu Bakar’s statement on 13 October 2010, the police has responded on Facebook here. Thank you commentator PDRM for bringing it to our attention. We reproduce it in full:
Salam rakan-rakan semua, apa yg kita lihat di dalam video itu, terdapat kekurangan/kesilapan di kedua-dua pihak. Di pihak Polis, anggota tersebut bersikap kurang mesra, dan terdapat kata-kata yang tidak perlu diucapkan langsung. Apa yang perlu diucapkan ketika menahan seseorang yang melakukan kesalahan trafik, adalah mengucapkan salam/selamat pagi/petang, maklumkan apa kesalahan pemandu dan jika dia menerima alasan yg diberikan oleh pemandu, dia boleh menggunakan budi bicaranya untuk melepaskan pemandu dengan amaran atau ingatan dan jika dia tidak menerima alasan pemandu, dia terus mengeluarkan saman dan beredar.
Jika pemandu enggan menerima saman, buat catatan dan terus beredar. Kata-kata atau ucapan lain yang tidak berkenaan tidak perlu.
Di pihak pemandu, di dalam insiden ini pula seolah-olah mencabar dan membuat provokasi kepada anggota polis yang menjalankan tugasnya. Ini juga tidak perlu dilakukan. Tidak salah untuk merakam kejadian yang berlaku tetapi tidak perlu mengeluarkan kata-kata yg mencabar anggota Polis itu. Jika ada perbuatan anggota Polis itu yang tidak menyenangkan pemandu, dia boleh melaporkannya kepada Pegawai Kanan Polis di mana-mana Balai. Pemandu juga boleh hadir ke mahkamah untuk mendengar kes di hadapan Majistret, jika tidak puas hati dengan saman yang dikeluarkan. Saya telah menghubungi Rakan kita yang postkan video ini tetapi malangnya dia tidak dapat memberi saya butir-butir lanjut kejadian ini. Kita akan cuba kesan Anggota polis berkenaan dan dapatkan butiran kejadian. Terima kaseh saya ucapkan di atas pendedahan ini.]
Pamela Lim’s previous video post has attracted a record number of hits on LoyarBurok. She elaborates on her video with an account of what happened before she started filming and why she acted as she did. This was originally written (on 10 October 2010 at 8.47 pm) as a comment response to hundreds of other comments on the original post and is now reproduced for easy reference.
The video can be viewed here.
I was flagged down after turning right at the junction of Federal Highway adjoining Jalan Gasing/Jalan University. When I stopped the car to ask what I was stopped for, the policeman said I committed an offence, for using the mobile phone without hands-free. I maintained that my phone was on the hands-free speaker and I was holding the phone at a distance as I spoke but they kept saying that I did not use the hands-free. They asked for my IC and driver’s license in which I complied and gave it to them. As they were holding the summons book, they didn’t read out which Act that I had violated when I asked them what the difference was, between using a hands-free kit and the hands-free speaker.
Then they asked me how I would like to settle the matter. Then I asked them, how do you normally settle matters like this. Then they said, if I want to settle it normally, it would be a hassle for me. Then they waited for my response. I told them, I didn’t think that I have committed an offence per se, but if they say that I have, then I am willing to accept the summons as I’m obviously in the wrong by using the phone according to them. I have always used the handsfree kit but that day, I hadn’t plugged it in and my mistake was answering the phone by putting it on hands-free speaker and was flagged down before I could put the phone on my holster. Look at the video again, my phone holster is stuck on the right of my windscreen.
As they insisted that I was wrong, I insisted that they gave me the summons for it. They began to taunt me with words in Malay and if I hadn’t read the RED BOOK by the Bar Council to know what to do when confronted by the police, I would not know what to do or what to expect next.
I asked them for their names and their ID numbers in which they got defensive. Then I thought if they were going to hassle me further, I might as well record their actions on photographs. I photographed them with my phone so that I have evidence of my encounter with them should I want to challenge the summons in court. They began to yell at me for taking pictures, accusing me of “intimidating” them and that I have no rights to take pictures of their uniform as it was government property. When they began to intimidate me with their words, that was when I switched to video mode.
What followed was all recorded for you to see.
I had no idea what they were getting at except that they were trying to intimidate me to submit to their demands. When they handed me the summons to sign, I wrote on it that “I do not accept as I had handsfree,” the police went livid. There is no law that states that you can’t write anything in protest of a summons for an offence that you do not admit to. Signing the summons denotes acceptance of the summons, not the offence. All the time, I had the video on, filming with my left hand. He shouted at me. Questioning what rights do I have, implying that I should have none when dealing with the police.
He kept questioning me WHO I AM. Does it matter who I am? I am an ordinary citizen who has rights. Does it mean that if I were a “somebody” this treatment would have been different? Does it mean that if I was a somebody, I would be let off? Why was the policeman so adamant in asking me who I was? What difference would it make if they had decided already that I had committed an offence? Or would my offence be a non-offence if they had known how my family had been a close source to the family of the late Tun Razak and the father of our independence, Tunku Abdul Rahman?
When they refused to return my IC and license, beckoning and summoning me to follow them back to the station, I refused and stated my rights and that I will report them for they had “stolen” my IC. That’s when they realised I knew the law. If I had committed an offence and obstructed justice, why didn’t they arrest me? They also refused to issue me the summons until they decided that they flouted the law themselves and returned my IC, license together with the summons issued. THEY REFUSED TO HAND ME THE SUMMONS FOR ME TO GO. This probably did not even occur to you because you didn’t watch the video properly.
These policemen abused their power to talk down to a lady, threatened me by withholding my IC and license and yet demanded the respect at the same time: how is that possible? No one is allowed to hold on to your IC, not even security guards at the condo entry points.
All of you who condemned me obviously had never been in a situation like mine, where you were made to feel small and insignificant for refusing to cower under pressure for an offence that I did not consciously commit. Being a female, I would have been subjected to a lot worse if I was intimidated by them to follow them to goodness-knows-where. I was well aware of the fact that they didn’t have their ID numbers on them and had every reason to be suspicious. In a country where I’m viewed in the same light as a “pendatang” (illegal immigrant) and accused of having an ancestry of prostitutes, I ought to be wary of every encounter with anyone who come across to me in such a manner.
It’s interesting to see how many of you distort the topic of intimidation and threats when the police outnumbered me.
For those who think I shouldn’t be a citizen of Malaysia, you ought to know that I am the descendent of Malaya’s first court interpreter, Peter Lim and can trace back four generations in Malaysia. I am a law abiding citizen and a God-fearing person. I have also compounded my summons and paid the fine. I have decided to make this video public not to seek publicity but to educate the public especially women, on their rights when confronted by the police and when to exercise them. What happened to me, can happen to anybody. I have utmost respect for the police force when they arrest criminals, recover kidnapped children, clamp down on high crimes and solve murder mysteries. I never hesitate to cooperate with them whenever necessary but I will not be intimidated when I refuse to give bribes.
Thank you for your time in giving your comments and being so quick to condemn. You ought to read the RED BOOK. I acted within my rights. I was in my confined space. I had every right to defend myself from unruly behaviour. They could have been more courteous. As a tax payer, we are paying their salaries.
Now we have a clearer picture.It would appear to me that Pam was unlucky to be caught before she could place the phone on the hands free cradle. What she could have done is plead for leniency by explaining herself just as she did now and perhaps the officers might have let her off with a warning.
I believe that Pam was not sure if she had committed an offense but tried anyhow to maintain that she had committed no wrong which provoked the officers.
The officers on the other hand obviously over-reacted when she tried to write some notes on the summons. The officer's attitude can be described as 'arrogant' when he told her off for writing on the summons. Police officers should be trained to handle the public with professionalism and courtesy in order to project a good image to the public. What we see in the video is certainly negative. The officer wields the power of the law and he certainly does not need to react the way he did to put the message across. It would be suffcient for the officer to say: "Maam, there is no need to write on the summons. You may plead your innocence in court. Now will you please just sign on the summons to acknowledge receiving it…"
Is it necessary for the officer to hold her IC in order to force her to go to the police station with them? I can see in the video that they made some calls before backing down and deciding to 'negotiate' by offering to go with Pam to the police station to make her report. It would appear to me that Pam is right about the police not having the right to keep her IC.
My conclusion: We have Pam wanting to assert what she thinks is her rights and the police wanting to teach her a lesson for being disrespectful to them.
I do not know about the others here but I have learned something out of this episode. For Pam, if she thinks less of her 'rights' and more of the officer being humans who can be reasoned with then she might have avoided the entire incident. And for the officers: think less of their authority and try to educate Pam that she indeed has done wrong, they too could have avoided the embarrassment of having to back down in the end as we had witnessed in the video.
To all who condemn either Pam or the officers and use foul language: Do you think that you can commit no wrong?
pam…. i really dont undrstnd why dnt u just sign the form??? why? earlier you said… you terima saman and bullshits… but still you wanna show yr ego… and yre so naive. tak nak kalah is it? and why the hell you wrote smthng on tht paper???? its gov property. you dont have the RIGHTS…. and yes. i don see any educational content in tht video.. show it to yr kids then, let see how they intepret the so called educational content in the vid and till then they're gonna start to talk about their rights.
pendatang bukan bermaksud " illegal immigrant" which school that teach you….. you are still legal immigrant.. for "illegal immigran" we will call as "PENDATANG HARAM"… so please don't translate it WRONG just because you want it so.
Pamela acted rightly in the circumstances.
If the police wanted to summon her, they should summon her and return the IC and driving licence without engaging in such intimidating behavior. The police have no right to retain the IC or driving licence.
The police also have no right, in my opinion, to demand anyone to follow them to the police station unless a arrestable offence has been committed. The offence of using a mobile phone without handsfree whilst driving is certainly not a arrestable offence.
Pamela deserves praises for standing up to the abuse.
I had a similar experience in the early 90s and lodged a report against the policeman concerned. The policeman was later transferred out.
It is really very pleasing to see a lady bravely standing up to such abuse. Many men would hesitate to do so.
Well said. yes those policemen can't hardly understand english. but PAM, i suggest you go to Japan. you speak how good english, they WONT understand. so be proud to be a Malaysian, and be proud of our bahasa ibunda, tht's why they change from Bahasa Melayu to Bahasa Malaysia. its our language, proud of it.
A SIMPLE QUESTION OF PERCEPTION ON BOTH PARTIES INVOLVED, PAM AND THE COPS.
PAM SEE THE SITUATION AS POLICE INTIMADATION/RUDE( NOT ACCEPTING HER EXPLANATION).
THE COPS SEE HER AS ARROGANT ( SPEAKING ORANG PUTIH NOT BAHASA ), INTIMIDATION ( TAKING VIDEO LIKE SHE IS GOING TO MAKE A COMPLAINT REPORT/ NAK NAK BUAT HAL/ CARI PASAL)
you know what, i suggest. JUST SIGN THE FORM, idiot. and things would be settled. and if you so curious about the cops being fake, they give you the summon right? and you admitted tht you are wrong. just sign it. and make a police report or just to reconfirmed about the form. by posting the vid, pam has just shown her pure dumbness. pam you got brains, pick someone on yr side. i wanna see YOU, make a press conference in BAHASA MALAYSIA. its not fair for them(policemen). i dont think they knw abt the vid you posted up in youtube. think about it, and since you asked them about " do you knw wht intimidate means?" let me ask YOU. KAMU TAHU APA ITU KELAKUAN DIRI? its just about MANNERS pamela. and yeah i think im agree with the status " DATIN WANNABE DRIVING PERODUA BUT ACT LIKE A QUEEN "
I am not much of a driver, neither am I familiar with Malaysian law. So I have no idea whether it was wrong to:
1. talk on mobile phones with the load speaker on
2. take videos/photos of government property (why?)
3. write comments on summon papers
4. refuse to follow policemen to the station when asked
But I'd rather leave that discussion to those who know the law. I have a few words regarding the position of the police and the attitude of Pam.
I agree wthat Pam was being defensive and somewhat provocative. She clearly wasn't very happy for being pulled over.
Some said she was being cocky, I think that was because she started using English at one point and put on the accent. My opinion is that she was speaking English in that accent because she had decided to put that video on Youtube and that narration is for the benefit of foreigners viewing the video. We are very self conscious about our Malaysian English accent, and not everyone is proud of it. And she could be using it to intimidate the police officers, as a sort of retaliation.Her attitude was indeed problematic, as even some of her supporters would agree, which might have cause unnecessary tension. But it is not, after all, a criminal offense.
But who's to say, we cannot challenge police? I've read quite a few comments which say Pam was in the wrong the moment she started to challenge the authority of the policemen. Are we still living in the middle ages where government officials rule the country? I was under the impression that we're living in 21st century where we elected our government and all government officials are now called civil servants? I'm not implying we should treat them as subordinates, but we are EQUALs. In a democratic country, there's no reason why we should obey unconditionally and skip the fight if we believe we have the reasons to. It is true, however, how we fight is important and Pam isn't the best role model. But she did show a great deal of courage which I respect, although the rest of her characteristic might need polishing.
Having said that, I do not think the policemen are in the wrong. From what I can see, they are not bad cops. They could even be considered as polite except for one of them to have raised his voice. Again, I do not know the law, so I cannot comment on whether their behaviours are legal. But judging from the beginning of the video, contrary to what some claim, the policemen were not threatened by the camera. In fact one of them tried to laugh it off as a joke. He initially mention the photo-taking and her attitude as the signs of her denial of offense. When his partner ask Pam to sign the summon, he ask her to take photo (or video?) or herself signing the paper. He never mentioned the video/photo after that. I don't think the fact that she's taking photo or recording video bothers them that much, although it might have affected the way they chose to respond to the situation.
I think Pam misunderstood the meaning of the question "rakyat mana?". It could be the police's way of showing his authority. "You're Malaysian civilian, and I'm Malaysian police, that's why I'm in charge." IMO that's the implication of the question, not a racist thing.
In fact, the conflict gets escalated when one of the policemen found out that Pam had written on the summon paper. I think that is what upset him. His question "awak siapa?" is not meant to intimidate or threaten but to express his anger towards Pam's action. "Who are you to write on this book?" He actually say it out at one point. But I think Pam was too emotional to detect that.
The "crazy" remark was the police way of saying Pam was over reacting to the situation. Her fear and anger was overwhelming when they asked her to go to balai with them, and I think the policemen noticed it. I chose to believe they have no ill intention towards her, and that could be the reason why they let her go.
As far as I'm concerned, the policemen's attitudes were alright. I think the presence of the camera might have affected their behaviour, but that is good enough. However, to think that this is good enough is very sad, because the alternative that I have in mind is either confiscation of her phone or taking her away by force. Yes, that is how bad I think the Malaysian police might be.
A lot of commenter at Malaysia Kini uses the word "distrust". Personally I think this video is a demonstration of how Malaysian people distrust their police officers, or virtually all civil servants for that matter. Pam obviously started off with the mindset that the policemen were either looking for a bribe or looking for trouble. Is that normal for all countries? And is Pam to blame for this distrust? Sadly, it is hardly her fault because we all know how problematic the law enforcement units in Malaysia are. If the policemen were being friendly from the beginning, it could help. But why would they? They are in the position of authority and this woman that they pulled over, as far as they are concerned, is at fault. I don't remember encountering any friendly Malaysian police, I guess it just wasn't one of the requirements.
Many people have had debates about the language. Like I explained, the choice of Pam's language could be for video purposes and retaliation to the policemen's intimidation. When we feel threatened, we would either fight or flight. In Pam's case, English and Video-recording are weapons of her choice. She can, of course, speak in BM. Her BM sounded reasonably well (better than mine, at least). But for her to speak in BM would be a form of obeying which she would attempt to avoid. Besides, there's no reason why a Malaysian cannot converse with the police with language other than BM. I do not know the law but that is definitely not an criminal offense. On the other hand, isn't tourism development one of the government's top priority? What if an Australian tourist asks for help from a police? What kind of a tourism country are we if our police officers can't even communicate in English?
A final word. Please do not give in when you think you have no reason to do so. We are all equals in this country, being a policemen doesn't make you better or worse. We Asians are so used to accept our own fate that we forget by doing so we are feeding the injustice. Do not admit something if you believe you are not at fault. Please, stop obeying the authority blindly. A country where the authorities dictates the right and wrong will never be developed, because the people do not have their own mind.
much else have been touched,so i'd like to point out her poor grasp of Malay language. when the cops asked you "You sapa nak conteng kertas saman ini?". It's a rhetorical question meaning that nobody .. NOBODY has right to deface the summon paper.
it is not a question to imply that only certain certain people that could deface it. of course that does not make sense at all. only someone with poor command of Malay would interpret that as the same as saying Pamela have no right at all. no having right to 'conteng saman suka hati lu' is not the same as having no right at all. she misunderstood this statement so badly she start to go on and on about her ancestry lineage. that she comes from first court interpreter 5 generations ago. or that her ancestors were close to the founding fathers of Malaysia. if you lived here all your life, you ought to understand national language much better.
Pam- i think you were brave to do that. I read and hear a lot of comments about those who think you were rude to these policeman, i dont understand why people would think we need to kow tow to them, we pay them to uphold the law, not be bullies.
I have been stopped by the cops 3 times, and each experince was different :-
1. Stoped for not stopping at a trafic light, i really did not see the traffic light which was at a corner, i turned left only to realize a cop was trying to stop me- i didnt even know he was trying to stop me, he asked me how i want to deal with it, i said i really didnt realize i did not stop at that corner, i have never been at that place but if he thinks i beat the law, go ahead and give me a ticket..he did not, he said he will let me go- but he just waited there at the side of my car expecting me to give him something, i said- thank you very much and drove away.
2. I was stopped for using the phone while trying to get direction to a wedding in JB. The cops who stopped me, got off- greeted me, asked me if i knew what offence i commited, i said yes and he gave me a ticket and direction to where i was trying to go and apologized for the inconvenience but that he was just doing his job.
3. I was stopped at a road block and the cops wanted me to get out of the car to get the tickets where they stationed their desk- i said why do i have to do that ?, he is perfectly capable of writting the ticket and giving it to me where i was, there was a fair bit of ruckus, i protested but did not have enough courage to do what Pam did, so i ended up walking to the desk and getting my summons.
i think the equation is quite simple, if an offence was committed- there is no issue in getting the ticket, but to deal with policemen who are rude and intimidating is unacceptable.
I see a lot of these PVR's out patroling these days, its good to draw them in to reduce crime and keep law and order,however there is a need to be selective in who you recruit. I had one ex staff who wanted join the PVR so that he can sit at some corner and make some extra money from bribes- imagine the motivation to join the PVR. I of course did not approve his application from an employers perspective :).
The public needs to be educated here:
When being accused of using the hand phone while driving or not wearing the safety belt, it is one very subjective accusation. It is the policeman's words against your words (unless either party of you are supported by witnesses e.g. side passengers) Unless the cops have the hard evidence such as a photo of you commiting the offence (e.g. speed trap photo with car number plates), it will just be hearsays.
A cop's words can always be challenged in the court, whereby it will waste you more time than the PDRM's because their 'gaji' will still 'jalan' while they 'blow air-con' in the court's waiting-room, while your income for the day is gone while attending the court. Then the court hearing will be postponed again and again. You keep losing the day wages while that cop gets excused from hot-sun duties to sit in the air-conned waiting room. He is all-gained and you all-lost.
Just because of the above hassles, many people choose to KOPI rather than contest the accusations in court, whereby they will waste more financially. But if we really contest, the judge will have no choice but to throw out the case because there is no hard evidence. The cop is wasting the tax payers money.
This is the gap in the law which enables the cops to gain KOPI, whereby people pay up rather than to challenge in a lengthy court case, even though they may win eventually.
Bravo Pamela, for being assertive.
Many in this forum have condemned you for being rude to the cops but I think you were just being assertive and stood to your ground. If the readers could omit their value judgements against you, they could see that you merely used plain language throughout the video. Only that your voice could be of a higher pitch than the 2 cops, but that did not amount to being arrogant at all.
Most Malaysians are scared shit (almost to wetting their pants) whenever their are flagged down by the cops (fake/genuine) and start to utter apologies even before the window has completely rolled down. Some even already made mental-readiness to part with CASH for KOPI. Hence the god-like awe that has been ascribed to the cops by many readers here.
I believe what she tried to do was ENTRAP the cops into making it look like she was being intimidated.
Its an ATTITUDE issue. Not race!
And if she knows the law so much (passing down of knowledge thru generations ka? 4th gen descendant of an interpreter? wow! osmosis is it?), she should realise that she too could be subject to legal action. Which she rightly deserves.
Bittersweet, how old are you? You are so so naive. Can't stand these people at all.
the request is easy, You wanna settle here (RM50) or settle at station (RM300). If you didnt wanna make any fuss, you should have calmly tell the police dude you want the RM300 ticket. Done.
So next time, get a Bluetooth headset or dont pick up your phone while driving. You get distracted and become a nuisance on the road. Have you ever noticed, anyone driving with a phone will inexplicably slow down to a stupid 40 / 60 kmph on the road?
1 word: Bodoh.
Pam you have my support. For those who think you should do something else are out of this world. These are ostrich who prefer to bury their heads in the sand.
To klusener on 12 October, 2010 at 11:54 am:
How do you equate 4 generations to speaking Bahasa Malaysia? 4 generations have a longer history than Bahasa Malaysia, which was only 'born' after 1957. Anybody is free to speak in any language. If the cops could not understand English, it is their own shortcomings, for not studying hard enough during their school days. Don't blame others for speaking in a language where they now cannot comprehend plainly because they didn't put in the effort to learn when given the opportunity to do so in school.
Pam, if you still insist you had been intimidate by the police, why not you bring this to the court and sue the police? You have said you had made police report against the two, can you show us the report? Also, you are holding the phone and was caught red-handed, right? You claim they stole your IC in your video, but then didn't you hand it to them in the first place? Please, I have seen quite a number of bad police, and the ones you meet is just doing their job. Just a kind advice, you can choose refuse to sign the summon ?i always did) but not write on their summon book in protest. You should feel lucky because the officer did not take further action by charge you for intimating them.
Of course, if you ask the police for their ID in arrogant way, they will not give you. I got no problem in asking them to show their ID. I told them:"Encik, you betul polis ke? kenapa motor bukan polis motor? Boleh tengok ID sekejap? Tengok aja, tak sentuh. Encik pun tahu sekarang banyak orang cakap dia polis tapi dia bukan… sori ya… tengok aja, encik pun mintak IC saya juga kan?"
i support Pam.. she exercised her rights and we all know the Malaysian police too well. the first question always is "do you want to settle this here or at the station?" thats intimidation, for all of you who think Pam was not acting in an appropriate manner, you guys are seriously wrong or are in denial. if she was totally wrong then the police should have not asked her to follow them to the station. they should have just called for the police car to transport her. the shock and confusion on their face was enough to tell me that they were at a lost. she is not one ditzy chinese girl that does not know anything. BRAVO
A cursory look at the overlong video would give the impression that the videograper is intimidating the Police, not the other way around.
A little bit like a courtroom drama with a lawyer punching from the law , or something like that-
conclusion : aggressive and offensive aftertaste
Bravo Pam. You are 1000% right. You rock. I would like to buy ya a beer or a chilled chardonnay.
To all the insipid naysayers: I hope you will all be guests of the PDRM oneofthesedays. That would be the best thing for your personal and spiritual growth.
And what's up with all the Chinese bros whacking poor Pam. Are you really intimidated by a strong and savvy woman that much?
The police fault or the government?
It's about attitude – we must make it a point to exercise basic good manners and civility in our everyday dealings, no matter how bad a hair-day it has been, no matter how bad-ass the other party is.
On an assumption that we are far more ‘educated’ than those 2 guys, we should know better than to bait, antagonize or provoke the situation.
I never argue just for the sake of arguing for it will surely reveal that I am arrogant, petulant, cantankerous.
MHO of this incident is that the 2 policemen exercised greater restraint than you Pamela.
And I feel that this second posting of yours shows that YOU are the one having issues!
Is there anywhere in the Red Book that you are so proud of stated that you have the rights to intimidate a police officer or anyone for that matter? And please, please DO NOT put the blame on gender or race-biased in this case. This is just a case of a person showing off, boasting tho the world that they have rights. "Don't pray, pray with me, ahh!! I know my rights. I got rights!"
Why didn't you just admit your mistakes, whether conscious or unconsciously and say sorry. A mistake is a mistake from whatever angle you may look it at. And with those "kurang ajar" attitude plus your photographing activities will surely invited those "kurang cerdik" behaviour.
Do you really think that with your RIGHTS to have the right to question everything. Question the government, the Agong, the politicians. Questions, questions, questions.
They served you right!
Pamela, I support you too. Why make so much fuss about Pam's remark when the worse remark by the HMs were treated as a non case?
Pam I support you. That's all I am going to say as I do not want racist people making a lot of noise about it. I have been stopped by cops in Australia and I can tell you that they are a million times more professional. The bloody cops here are very intimidating that's why many succumb to giving them coffee-O. Anyway just want to let you know you got a supporter here. Keep up the good work. Regards, Bimmerman.
No matter what, I can say that you are at the wrong. Read Police Act 1967 (google on it) and you will know. You can claim 1001 reasons from the Redbook but dont forget, police have the rights to ask you to follow them to the station. You can drive to another station to make a report. PJ Police HQ is just about 10 mins drive from your location, why not you just drive there straight?
If now the 2 police office wanted to charge you, you could be charge under the Police Act 1967.
You had even admitted your mistake, why not just ask for the summons and carry on rather than filming. A simple apology will do.
'I hadn’t plugged it in & my mistake was answering the phone by putting it on hands-free speaker' and was flagged down before I could put the phone on my holster. Look at the video again, my phone holster is stuck on the right of my windscreen'
I read with amusement at all the comments posted today. There were lots more yesterday but it seems that nearly all individuals that commented on how boorish Pamela was, acted no better themselves. Many even commented that Pamela has no right in bringing up the race issue and for uttering the words "pendatang"! Well and good if you think this way! This is your right to think so! However, what amuses me is that why can't you just say that she was wrong in doing so without using more racial comments yourselves in putting your points across? This is a case of the pot calling the kettle black.
The usage of vulgarity for instance just simply points out to many of us that you are uneducated and uncouth yourselves. Do you have to call some a b**ch just to put forth your points or if you disagree strongly?
There are two sides to a coin in any argument. There are those who are for her and those against. Just put forth your views and be done with it. There is no need for name calling. Anyone from outside Malaysia would probably laugh in amusement seeing how we can't even agree to disagree among ourselves! Shame on us!
We have seen a lot of cases of police abuse and behaviours like those of hooligans. Pamela did admit that if she was in the wrong, the police could just issue her the summons and if she felt that the summons is not fair, she has every right to reserve her right to challenge it. Just because she speaks the way she does should not conclude that she is arrogant. Is there any rule in Malaysia that all Malaysians must speak to police in Malay only? Why are our police personnel not trained to speak or understand english which is an international language? If Pamela is deemed to be arrogant, so were the police. Why do they kept asking her who she is? They can see from her IC that she is a citizen of Malaysia and that is enough. No need to find out if she is any VIP. With so many cases that had gone wrong where the police choose to act or not to act, one can't blame Pamela from being defensive. I would too. How do one know where one would end up after going to the police station?
Pamela,
I was with you when you posted the first video and am still with you on this.
For one our police are all rogues. I don't trust them all the way down from the IGP to the recruit constable.
When they ask "mahu selesai" they want money.
I am only afraid they will now use all crooked means to punish and penalize you further… like writing on the summons, preventing cops from carrying out their duty etc.
They are vindictive. They are 'bandits' in government uniform. Raja Petra once said bandits and cops here ear the same uniform.
I for one never trust them with a 2 sen coin. They are worth lower than that.
like i said before and repeat again.
all enforcement agencies should be videotaped at all times as in many countries. if there was no ill intention, why get angry? if you are doing your job,why get angry? if she deserves the summons, why get angry? do your job well, smile, get commended, get promoted.
hallo. law enforcers are supposed to be trained la in handling all situations of stress. if woman in car can provoke such reaction, how about other more stressful situations?
@reena
" @agreetodisagree
why the hell you said they’re some kind of fake police? "
Heres why :
SamNo Gravatar on 11 October, 2010 at 12:24 pm
Amateur CopsNo Gravatar on 11 October, 2010 at 2:38 pm
Aris AhmadNo Gravatar on 11 October, 2010 at 2:46 am
DanielNo Gravatar on 11 October, 2010 at 12:29 am
Go read the above comments to find out why they appeared fake.
THE POLICE HAVE NO RIGHT TO TAKE YOUR IC NOR YOUR DRIVERS LICENCE. I FAIL TO UNDERSTAND WHY THE OTHER COMMENTATORS WANT YOU TO BE APOLOGETIC TOWARDS THEM POLICE. They werent following the law either, so why do you think I thought they were fake?
But as earlier replied at 12 October, 2010 at 10:02 am., there were 'some people' confirming to me later 'indirectly' that the police were real. They should have posted a reply video on this site instead of 'confirming' through me in this strange and ungovernment-like manner.
A government should do things in an above board manner via open handed and upright methods like press statements, not by unrecognizable proxy channels on the road. Why is is BN behaving like it has no official methods of communication? This is a very unhealthy government/national culture.
Could they behave like the good guys they are supposed to be instead of being so Machiavellian about making things clear?
Well sorry for jumping the gun but you should have told the whole story before in the first posting. Can't blame people who criticize you as you did not explain the whole situation before the video. Judging SOLELY by the video you were clearly at fault.
Can you please put up the pictures taken when they were abusing you?
By the way, talking through the speaker phone is an offense anyway. I think.
4 generations in Malaysia and yet still cannot speak Bahasa Malaysia properly.
Any publicity is good publicity…
some of u equate 'cockiness' to govt officers as being anti-malay. remember aminulrasyid? so, where's perkasa ibrahim katak in that case?
would you arguments here be any different if the police officers were indians and pamela was malay? i bet some of u have two or more sets of reasoning depending on the race of the players in the video. i thought the fed consti guarantees equality before the laws of the land.
when will u learn to see beyond the racial angle in EVERYTHING?
case in point – namewee. he clearly showed his displeasure towards one creature by the name of siti something. so, that siti something felt aggrieved? well, go ahead and file a civil libel suit against namewee. why was sedition act even mentioned by some of u bigots? or refer to an earlier video by namewee re tnb. why the brou-ha-ha? again, if tnb felt it has been wronged by namewee, please proceed to sue namewee. civil case. never ever a criminal case as suggested by nimwit ministers and perkosa ibrahim katak.
freaking hyper-sensitive and low-brained.
4RAKYAT
The matter of whether Pam committed an offence or not is irrelevant. People commit offences – and in the video, it is quite clear that she is willing to accept the summons, but that she will exercise her RIGHT to challenge it.
The questions are whether the police bantuan overstepped their authority and whether she had the right to film them.
As someone who was once stopped by a 'policeman', while on my own, late at night (as I was leaving work), I researched a bit about what my rights were – because I sure as hell that night was not going to wind down my window, and talk to him. I drove straight to a brightly lit area. He didn't follow, there was no follow-up of any kind – and I lodged a police report, finding out that there were no police patrols in the area at the time. Anyway, the police HAVE to show you ID if you ask to see it. If they refused to do that, Pamela was well within her rights to refuse to cooperate. And, as pointed out, being a woman on her on facing two armed men on motorbikes (no police numbers on their shirts, just their first names), in her situation I'd have been worried and concerned.
And if they had been acting correctly, and intending to act within the limits of the law, why shouldn't she video them? She was in a public place, they were acting in a public capacity. They had ALREADY refused to show her ID – it was both brave and precautionary to take the video.
If they had shown ID, it might be a bit more of a grey area – she would be violating a direct order by a police officer. But, the police often tell media people to not take photos when they are assaulting people at demonstrations. I've always felt that it is incumbent on the police to behave as if they're on TV all the time – they uphold our laws, the basis for society. IF anything they do is not worthy of being filmed, they shouldn't be doing it. I've yet to hear of a journo being prosecuted for disobeying a police order (though equipment has been seized) in similar circumstance.
What amazes me is both the sexism and the racism that have dominated this thread. It is a real shame that we have to resort to these non-issues when taking part in a public forum.
if pamela was being "racist" in the manner suggested by reena 10.33am and umar razak 10.31an, perhaps she was wrong morally. still that is NOT against the law.
someone suggested that it is an offence to scribble on the summons book. i think this is correct. if that's the case, pamela was liable for arrest just for that alone.
by why did the cops let her go? i/we are not getting the whole picture. the before-present-after thingy. come on…
4RAKYAT
After watching this video 3 times I came to conclusion that pamela is baiting the coppers for bribery but failed.Even though those coppers weren't the brightest person on earth but they know enough common sense not to ask for bribe when you're on camera.
After the bribery plan failed,pamela then try to anger those coppers by putting on remarks(not guilty) at their summon book even though earlier she did admit guilty.WTH
As many pamela supporters said being cocky & arrogant & using fake accent is not a crime.I have to agree with that.But take this example if pamela goes to any goverment agencies to let's say pay her taxes and the people at LHDN being cocky & doesn't treat her with respect,will she accept their behaviour??
Of course not she will cried out on her twitter/blog/whatever to said that goverment agencies staff were being rude & so on.But she will also claim that they HAVE to treat her with respect because she paid taxes which then used to paid their salaries,right?..now let's think,she mentioned in her twitter that she represent(ed) our country with some diving activities,surely she got some fund/payment for her effort right?..and where do this fund/payment come from?..of course out of taxes(which she,me & others paid).So she's also a servent of goverment which makes her on the same level as those coppers & every other goverment official/staff.So again what's up with her high-horse?
She claim that she are scared,yet all I heard is sarcasm remarked by saying "I'm scareddddddd".Then let's discuss about why she is wrong for not using Bahasa Malaysia in her defense.Some of her supporter give the example,let's say if the foreigner(s) were stop by our copper for traffic offense how will our copper comunicate with them?..Now let's see in this case pamela is a Malaysian citizen born & raised on Malaysia(My bet is she lived at least 3 quater of her life on Malaysian soil).She's not some foreigner who migrate to this country so why can't she at least understand what the copper is saying.WTF
After seeing so many negative comment about her action WHY can't she look back & reflect on all her action.Let's take this as a learning ground for all.All it takes is give some respect to others.
Lastly she said the reason she publish this video is to educate public about their rights.Honestly I don't saw any form of education from all her action/words in those recording.Is she trying to teaches public how to be cameramen/women??..or is she trying to teaches public to do vandalism(by scribbling on summons book)???..or is she trying to teaches public how to spoke english in broken accent(hahaha the last one is a joke)???
Hope she & all her supporters get my meaning.There's no learning value at all in this instead it's all backfire on her more lauder than my ducati exhaust ever did.ROFL…pam pam pam pam pam the sound of my ducati backfire after I realeased the throttle.
even though english is not my primary language & I may have make many mistake in my writting above but i feel i need to use this language since pamela can only understand english.Sorry for all that I've said & I will repent after this.
Bubbye.
sooo….where's the punch line?
from the redbook –
"2.3 When you are under arrest
You are arrested if the Police:
• tell you "yes";
• do not allow you to leave/want to take you to the Police
Station; or
• handcuff you."
at one point in the video, it appeared that pamela was under arrest. so shy did the police just let her go? was she or was she not in any point in time, under arrest?
4RAKYAT
@ agreetodisagree
why the hell you said they're some kind of fake police? -.- if they are fake. they shouldnt be given the summon form. and pam should have just sign it and let it be. things could have settled by then. if she did not tape it and jot down anything on tht paper. how would the police let her go just like tht. she's being a retarded there by irritating them with her bombastic words. " do you know what intimidate means?" oh wht the hell, theyre just young malay policemen who rides a motor kapcais with a broken english. common pam wht's the point being a malaysian, if you bring someone down because theyre weak in english. and show yr face to the nationwide DATIN WANNABE.
the video showed otherwise.all i can see an arrogant lady was trying to converse in a language to a police officer who clearly did not understand/able to converse well in the language and again continuing to speak in that language (maybe just to show off or something?).
simple rule pam, MANNERS.
I have two things to say.
One, from my understanding, LoyarBurok is a platform for everyone to voice out. It does not "blindly support" anyone but it supports freedom of expression. Writers may be right or wrong or even somewhere in between – that's for us, the reader to decide.
Two, about this incident – Yes, we all have rights. But we have to choose our battles well. Pam was in the wrong using the handsfree set in the first place and comes across someone brash and arrogant. Yes, the red book tells us our rights but we have to come across civilly and rationally and not risk alienating anyone. Being combative all the time, is, with respect, well being a blunt tool. Sometimes a soft approach is needed and yes, there are bad eggs in the police force but respect begets respect.
From the video, the police officers seem to be exercising restraint on a combative/aggresive road-user who is in the wrong. Were they asking for a bribe? (sidenote: i have been in such a situation) It does not seem here so from the video. What leaves a very sour taste in the mouth is the fact that the person in the wrong seems to be acting unreasonable, maybe even arrogant and irrational.
While our perception of the police may be negative (understandably too – don't get me started on this!), they dont deserve such treatment from you or anyone. They're human too, no?
@Gest & @Red & PDRM,
I will leave this issue alone – due to the efforts I just began to noticed were being communicated since yesterday. Amazing amount of resources you have.
My sympathy is with the underdog but it is no more than that. When I said that policy was apartheid, I was not being racist. I have no agenda against anyone, only expecting what is fair and just in a modern hopefully better world in 1 of near 200 nations.
Don't retaliate against Pam, and have a open discussion with PDRM and the 'police' on video with someone or a few people accompanying her instead. Normalise the situation in the best way you can, there is no sense of chivalry or fostering love for/from the people if you or PDRM does anything else.
You cannot deny that there have been severe structural problems with our enforcement and should not be upset when concerned citizens communicate or respond on events that shape the nation's direction.
Best wishes to PDRM on a good video response on this matter.
Bigotry. Pure and simple.
@Agreetodisagree
people like you have other hidden agenda by supporting pam in this incident. u will twist every point u can grab and also would use the race card. sad .
if pam is really a good person she would try to review her video and try to understand what makes majority of the comments are againts her action. but sadly no.
not even an apology for her rudeness. will she educate her kids to be like her? wonder how will she react when their kids talk back to her with their "rights"
Pamela Lim has kick start a nationwide campaign
"Exercise your rights to videotape the police on duty"
Loyar Burok hit by dark cybertroopers big time!
Pam acted like an ass in the situation i reckon, talking with such an arrogant swagger.
but hey, if the cops were, indeed, genuine and were performing their duties, I would believe they would have the legal power to legal actions against an insolent citizen like Pam.
Seeing no further actions were taken puts the cops in a very suspicious light.