SINGAPORE: Former police officer Iskandar Rahmat, 36, was sentenced to death on Friday (Dec 4) over the “cruel” murders of a father and son in July 2013.
Justice Tay Yong Kwang found “no doubt” that Iskandar intended to kill Tan Boon Sin as part of his plan to rob him and make away with Mr Tan’s valuables. When Mr Tan’s son, Tan Chee Heong, appeared at “the most inopportune moment” at his father’s house, “he quickly became collateral damage”, Justice Tay said.
On Jul 10, 2013, the body of the younger Tan, 42, was found outside Kovan MRT station. He had been dragged nearly 1km under the getaway car driven by Iskandar, leaving a trail of blood that led police to his father’s house at 14J Hillside Drive, where the body of the elder Tan, 67, was found.
After disposing of the murder weapon and his bloody clothes into a canal at East Coast Park, Iskandar fled to Johor Bahru the same evening. He was arrested by the Malaysian police after a 54-hour manhunt and extradited to Singapore the following day, and charged with two counts of murder. The murder weapon, a knife, has not been found.
While Iskandar has never denied that he killed both Tans, he has maintained that he did it out of self-defence, when his plan to rob the elder Tan unravelled.
ISKANDAR’S GRAB-AND-RUN PLAN “FOOLISH”
During his nine-day trial, Iskandar testified that his plan was to grab the elder Tan’s bag of money and flee. Justice Tay called this plan “foolish” and refused to accept that Iskandar would come up with such an “inane” plan that left much to chance. This “stood in stark contrast to the meticulous planning" surrounding Iskandar’s initial encounter with Mr Tan, the Justice said. “Only a very foolish thief would adopt (such a plan) … the accused did not appear to me to be such a foolish person”, Justice Tay added.
It is unlikely that Iskandar’s plan was as simple as he claimed, the Justice said, since his escape without being identified was “crucial” to his plans. As a former investigation officer, he must have known that it would only be a matter of time before he was caught, said the Justice.
NUMBER, SEVERITY OF WOUNDS SHOW A FEROCIOUS, VICIOUS ATTACK
Iskandar had also claimed that the elder Tan “flew into a rage” when he found out he had been lied to, and attacked Iskandar with a knife. However, Justice Tay was unconvinced. “I cannot accept that (Mr Tan) would want to hurt (Iskandar) with a dangerous weapon in his own house just because he found out that he had been tricked. After all, his money was still with him and the police was only a telephone call away”, he said.
Orthopedic doctors called to give evidence during the trial had also explained to the court the extent of Mr Tan’s knee problems, which would not have allowed him to move so fast as to take Iskandar by surprise such that he had no time to avoid the alleged attack.
Justice Tay also made mention of Iskandar’s allegation that Mr Tan had bitten him when he had tried to cover his mouth to prevent him from shouting. “(Iskandar’s) anxiety in trying to prevent (Mr Tan) from shouting showed that in truth it was he who was attacking the hapless (man) with the knife”, the Justice said.
Justice Tay also cited the “overwhelming” number and severity of the wounds inflicted by Iskandar on the men on “very vulnerable” parts of the body such as the head, neck and chest. This in contrast to “relatively minor injuries” on the arms and hands of Iskandar, showing “beyond all doubt” that it was he who "ruthlessly" attacked the men.
The Justice also pondered over the question of why Iskandar needed so many strokes to kill “a wobbly old man”. “It was certainly not an efficient killing … although (Iskandar) was a police officer trained in unarmed combat and in the use of firearms, he was not an accomplished assassin”. The multiple deep wounds inflicted on the Tans just goes to show the “ferocity and viciousness” of the killings, the Justice concluded.
Calling the younger Tan’s murder “collateral damage”, the Justice accepted that the younger Tan never featured in Iskandar’s original plan. However, after arriving at his father’s house “at the most inopportune moment” to realise what Iskandar had done to his father, he was similarly murdered.
The Justice then turned to another aspect of the case: That the younger Tan’s body had been run over and dragged under the car driven by Iskandar. Justice Tay said although Iskandar knew the car would run over the younger Tan’s body, “that was not his purpose … he would be anxious to drive away from (the house) and there was no other way to do that except to run over (the younger Tan's) body as it was in the path of the car”.
Forensic pathologist Dr Gilbert Lau had also testified during the trial that the younger Tan was likely already dead from the knife wounds before being run over by the car.
ISKANDAR "SEEMED TO KNOW" KNIFE DESPITE DENYING IT WAS HIS
Finally, the Justice considered the origins of the murder weapon. While the defence maintained that the knife was not Iskandar’s, Justice Tay said the detail with which Iskandar was able to describe the knife showed otherwise.
Iskandar “seemed to know the knife’s details despite it being covered with blood as it must have been after the horrific stabbings and slashings”, and was even able to provide police with a sketch of the knife, Justice Tay said. "The clear inference is that (he) had time to observe the knife before he became bloody. That could only happen if the knife (was his)".
After finding Iskandar guilty on both counts of murder, the court was ordered to rise as the Justice sentenced him to death by hanging.
His lawyer Shashi Nathan said Iskandar will appeal the sentence.
Iskandar’s family was then allowed to spend twenty minutes with him. Although family members were seen sobbing, Iskandar put on a brave face and was seen smiling and reassuring his tearful family.
- CNA/cy
Justice Tay Yong Kwang found “no doubt” that Iskandar intended to kill Tan Boon Sin as part of his plan to rob him and make away with Mr Tan’s valuables. When Mr Tan’s son, Tan Chee Heong, appeared at “the most inopportune moment” at his father’s house, “he quickly became collateral damage”, Justice Tay said.
On Jul 10, 2013, the body of the younger Tan, 42, was found outside Kovan MRT station. He had been dragged nearly 1km under the getaway car driven by Iskandar, leaving a trail of blood that led police to his father’s house at 14J Hillside Drive, where the body of the elder Tan, 67, was found.
After disposing of the murder weapon and his bloody clothes into a canal at East Coast Park, Iskandar fled to Johor Bahru the same evening. He was arrested by the Malaysian police after a 54-hour manhunt and extradited to Singapore the following day, and charged with two counts of murder. The murder weapon, a knife, has not been found.
While Iskandar has never denied that he killed both Tans, he has maintained that he did it out of self-defence, when his plan to rob the elder Tan unravelled.
ISKANDAR’S GRAB-AND-RUN PLAN “FOOLISH”
During his nine-day trial, Iskandar testified that his plan was to grab the elder Tan’s bag of money and flee. Justice Tay called this plan “foolish” and refused to accept that Iskandar would come up with such an “inane” plan that left much to chance. This “stood in stark contrast to the meticulous planning" surrounding Iskandar’s initial encounter with Mr Tan, the Justice said. “Only a very foolish thief would adopt (such a plan) … the accused did not appear to me to be such a foolish person”, Justice Tay added.
It is unlikely that Iskandar’s plan was as simple as he claimed, the Justice said, since his escape without being identified was “crucial” to his plans. As a former investigation officer, he must have known that it would only be a matter of time before he was caught, said the Justice.
NUMBER, SEVERITY OF WOUNDS SHOW A FEROCIOUS, VICIOUS ATTACK
Iskandar had also claimed that the elder Tan “flew into a rage” when he found out he had been lied to, and attacked Iskandar with a knife. However, Justice Tay was unconvinced. “I cannot accept that (Mr Tan) would want to hurt (Iskandar) with a dangerous weapon in his own house just because he found out that he had been tricked. After all, his money was still with him and the police was only a telephone call away”, he said.
Orthopedic doctors called to give evidence during the trial had also explained to the court the extent of Mr Tan’s knee problems, which would not have allowed him to move so fast as to take Iskandar by surprise such that he had no time to avoid the alleged attack.
Justice Tay also made mention of Iskandar’s allegation that Mr Tan had bitten him when he had tried to cover his mouth to prevent him from shouting. “(Iskandar’s) anxiety in trying to prevent (Mr Tan) from shouting showed that in truth it was he who was attacking the hapless (man) with the knife”, the Justice said.
Justice Tay also cited the “overwhelming” number and severity of the wounds inflicted by Iskandar on the men on “very vulnerable” parts of the body such as the head, neck and chest. This in contrast to “relatively minor injuries” on the arms and hands of Iskandar, showing “beyond all doubt” that it was he who "ruthlessly" attacked the men.
The Justice also pondered over the question of why Iskandar needed so many strokes to kill “a wobbly old man”. “It was certainly not an efficient killing … although (Iskandar) was a police officer trained in unarmed combat and in the use of firearms, he was not an accomplished assassin”. The multiple deep wounds inflicted on the Tans just goes to show the “ferocity and viciousness” of the killings, the Justice concluded.
Calling the younger Tan’s murder “collateral damage”, the Justice accepted that the younger Tan never featured in Iskandar’s original plan. However, after arriving at his father’s house “at the most inopportune moment” to realise what Iskandar had done to his father, he was similarly murdered.
The Justice then turned to another aspect of the case: That the younger Tan’s body had been run over and dragged under the car driven by Iskandar. Justice Tay said although Iskandar knew the car would run over the younger Tan’s body, “that was not his purpose … he would be anxious to drive away from (the house) and there was no other way to do that except to run over (the younger Tan's) body as it was in the path of the car”.
Forensic pathologist Dr Gilbert Lau had also testified during the trial that the younger Tan was likely already dead from the knife wounds before being run over by the car.
ISKANDAR "SEEMED TO KNOW" KNIFE DESPITE DENYING IT WAS HIS
Finally, the Justice considered the origins of the murder weapon. While the defence maintained that the knife was not Iskandar’s, Justice Tay said the detail with which Iskandar was able to describe the knife showed otherwise.
Iskandar “seemed to know the knife’s details despite it being covered with blood as it must have been after the horrific stabbings and slashings”, and was even able to provide police with a sketch of the knife, Justice Tay said. "The clear inference is that (he) had time to observe the knife before he became bloody. That could only happen if the knife (was his)".
After finding Iskandar guilty on both counts of murder, the court was ordered to rise as the Justice sentenced him to death by hanging.
His lawyer Shashi Nathan said Iskandar will appeal the sentence.
Iskandar’s family was then allowed to spend twenty minutes with him. Although family members were seen sobbing, Iskandar put on a brave face and was seen smiling and reassuring his tearful family.
- CNA/cy
No comments:
Post a Comment