Be reasonable in your interpretation of what I wrote. What I said is, if you have not done anything unlawful, there's no need to answer questions.
So going by your quote, if you were in a public place, minding your own business and a policeman walks up to you and ask you what you're doing, you don't have to answer him because you have not done anything unlawful? Even if you've not done anything unlawful, try it and you'll see what happen.
If there is such a thing called human rights, it's in the fact that you are innocent until proven guilty, and that you do not have to answer any questions you do not wish to. You have the right not to incriminate yourself. In the US, it's called the 5th Amendment. The Fifth Amendment protects witnesses from being forced to incriminate themselves. To "plead the Fifth" or to "take the Fifth" is to refuse to answer a question because the response could form incriminating evidence. This is meant to ensure that cases are tried on hard evidence, not on "confessions" or "statements".
First, this is Singapore not the US.
2nd, the point is the need, or not, to answer to anyone when questioned, esp so when you're in a public place. Not about your right not to answer so as not to incriminate yourself ( one is not answering because you
have not done anything wrong, while the other, is not answering because you
have done something and may incriminate yourself by answering ), that would be in a court case, in the US, where the 5th Admenment is use because you want to hide info so as not to incriminate your elf. Does not apply here. Please see your earlier posting below.
It's not that difficult if you stand your ground. I doubt they will manhandle you. And most security "guards" in Singapore are not armed. You don't have to explain your actions to anyone, esp. if you're in a public place.
Although there is no 5th Amendment here, the police still have to show reasonable cause.
1st, they must have a reason to approch you to ask you what you're doing and what you're shooting. Maybe someone call them about a guy with a bag hang around the area and look suspicious? So they have reasonable cause to approch you with a question.
2nd, when you insist on not answering their question, they have reasonable cause to hold you for further questioning.
By your actions of not co-operating with them and giving them the impression that you're hidding something, you have given them reasonable cause.
They are not all-powerful, as many in Singapore think they are. They can't hold you beyond 48 hours without producing you in court. If they seize your camera, and all they can prove to the court is that you took pictures of pretty women in Raffles Place when you were standing in the middle of a public road, there is nothing they can charge you with, whether or not you answer questions.
At 48 hour, they can apply to the court to hold you for a longer period of time because you have refused to answer their questions and as such they suspect that you have done something and is hiding it so they "need your assistance" or just simply suspect that you're of unsound mind and need to have kopi at Woodbridge instate. After all, if someone is still not willing to talk after 48 hours of questioning by the police, something could very well be wrong. The judge will most likly ask you the same question and if you don't answer, you may jolly well be away from home for a few more days.
If they can't charge you with anything, they won't bring you to court. The PP's don't like to lose cases because you would raise the defence that there is no case to answer. The judges also like to scold PP's who bring frivolous cases. There's also wrongful arrest, for which you can get compensation.
As said earlier, they can apply to the court to sent you to Woodbridge as no sound minded person will keep quite for 48 hours while being questioned by the police, either that or they got something to hide.
Somewhere along the line, if they found out that you've really not done anything unlawful, but because you've refused to answer their questions, you could be charge for "refusual to co-operate with an officer of the law" or "obstructing an officer from carrying out his duty" and because the judge have ask you a direct question at 48 hours, and you refuse to answer, you can be charge with contempt of court.
No case to answer? The case now is not just you holding to your right not to answer because you have not done anything wrong. It is the rolling effect of your actions of not co-operating with the police during questioning. The PP will love this kind of case, it is clear cut ( at least in their opinion ) that you're trying to be funny and is challangeing them ( I've done nothing wrong so why must I answer your question. There's nothing you can do to me even if I don't co-operate with you so long as I've not broken the law ). And when a judge ask you " what were you doing there and why have you not co-operate with the police? " and you don't answer ( you did post that you don't have to answer to anybody ) it is a clear cut case of contempt of court which don't even need the PP to handle as the judge will find you guilty himself.
Wrongful arrest? Well they were holding you because you refused co-operate with them, in other words, you ask for it.
Compensation? I woun't hold my breath. Few years back, there was a case of this businessman who was jail for molesting/raping his maid. After spending time in jail, a lot of money ( he even have to sell his house to fund the case ) and the downfall of his business ( no one around to run the business and the bad rap. cause all his clients to stay away from him ), his name was cleared and was released on the spot. He got nothing.
Just this year the Min. of Home Affairs reject the notion of even making the AG chambers responsible for failed cases. Maybe in the US but not in Singapore.
Of course, if your pictures show all kinds of military facilities, then they will certainly apply to the court to hold you for investigations, and any reasonable judge will allow it. And you probably won't be asked any questions at this stage from the judge, it's just a formality the police have to go through if they want to hold you beyond 48 hours.
If that's the case, does it matter whether or not you answer any questions? If you denied you are a terrorist, would it matter? If you said you took these pix because you are a military enthusiast, would it matter? No matter what answers you give, I think it wouldn't matter. Because they have enough evidence to suspect that either you are a spy, a terrorist or wannabe. And they would probably use the ISA on you.
I think of the JI detainees who took videos of Yishun MRT and the US Navy facilities here and ask myself, would it matter if they denied being part of JI. Did it matter whether they answered questions in court. Not a single iota. Because the evidence against them-- the narrated video-- was so strong, how could it matter?
This is getting way OT.
Well at least this I do agreed with you.
Yes, this is getting too much OT think we better stop here.
