Man who Refused to Accept Rejection and Hounded “Lover” Found Tied Up and Killed

Posted on Jul 10 2016 - 5:33pm by Redwire Singapore

redwire-singapore-yishun-man-tied-up-killed-3A dead man was outside an apartment unit on the 6th floor of Block 279 Yishun St 22 at about 8pm last night.

The hands and legs of the 26-year-old deceased were bound.

He was pronounced dead at scene by paramedics.

Police have arrested a 20-year-old man in connection with the case.

The deceased has been identified as Shawn Ignatius Rodrigues, an ITE graduate who was serving his national service.

The deceased is believed to have fallen in love with the murder suspect, and was at his apartment unit that night looking for him.

Rodrigues reportedly professed his love two years ago but was rejected.

He reportedly continued to hound him despite constantly being rebuffed, and even looked him up at his home on many occasions.

redwire-singapore-yishun-man-tied-up-killed-1

The suspect is believed to have gotten into a quarrel with the deceased in the moments leading up to his death.

Residents say they heard a loud “thump” and subsequently, one resident stumbled upon the body and called the police.

redwire-singapore-yishun-man-tied-up-killed-2

One 6th floor resident said she had been attacked by the deceased two nights before he was killed, and she ran away and shouted for help.

Another neighbor said the deceased seldom spoke and usually carried a blank stare when he walked around the neighbourhood.

 

 

1 Comment so far. Feel free to join this conversation.

  1. Kwang July 11, 2016 at 3:56 am - Reply

    Injustice in Singapore Judiciary System

    Refer to this link:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVF6mCAKSHo

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-T0T8Gt7-E

    https://www.facebook.com/358759327518739/videos/vb.358759327518739/1126046274123370/?type=2&theatre

    I referred to the above case about the complainant Richard who was seeking justice online.

    I would like to support Richard as I felt that Richard was indeed treated unfairly. As such, I would like to give my account of what happened from a neutral party’s perspective.

    I was engaged by Richard as his handyman during May 2015 to remove his camera as instructed by the Town Council.

    While I was removing the camera, Koh Wei Li overheard the noise and came out from his unit to observe and took pictures.

    I stopped for a while and approached Koh Wei Li nicely and advised him to live in harmony with his neighbour and avoid looking for trouble.

    Koh Wei Li responded that he was fearless to create troubles as knew many government officials including Town Council and Police to back him up.

    He also threatened me that he will fabricate a report to frame me as well for damaging the HDB trunking situated at the corridor and warned me to lay his hands off Richard’s issues.

    Koh Wei Li further added that he could do whatever it takes in order to seek revenge against Richard using his camera and Town Council turned a blind eye on it.

    Upon hearing this, I felt infuriated by Koh Wei Li’s cocky comments. Moreover, I felt that someone like Koh Wei Li used the government to supress the innocent was unjust and decide to come forward to act as a witness.

    In addition, Koh Wei Li also assaulted his tenant in Jan 2015. His tenant claimed that Koh Wei Li was unhappy that his wife was spending too much time showering. His tenant lodged a police report and went for medical examination after the incident. Yet, Koh Wei Li was not called up for any investigations and got away scotch free.

    After this incident, the Town Council perpetually turned a blind eye on his cctv. It was clear that Koh Wei Li deliberately installed his cctv in order to malign Richard and avenge his past feud with him. On many occasions, Koh Wei Li was seen to provoke Richard whenever he saw Richard. However, Richard always avoid him to stay away from trouble.

    During the incident, the scene happened at a distance away from the cctv surveillance range. As usual, Koh Wei Li was seen to initiate the provocation but Richard avoided him by going down the stairs. Koh Wei Li then make use of the blind spot to frame Richard that he pushed Koh Wei Li down and injured him. In fact, Koh Wei Li was seen to come after Richard. In reality, he could have fell when he lost his balance. As a result, Richard was arrested.

    Koh Wei Li could not explained the importance to inform the investigating officer he had a cctv that captured the incident when he was hospitalised.

    He further mentioned that, he was unable to recall the password to extract the footage and handed over the hard disc recorder to the Police after he was discharged from the hospital. As such, he could not ascertain why there were two different recordings with one clearly was doctored by removing his provocation against Richard. Koh Wei Li further implied that the Police was the mastermind responsible on the editing of the video instead of him as he was not a know-how person. As a result, Koh Wei Li failed to explain why there was a 5 secs lapse in the video recording.

    On the same vein, the Police allowed Koh Wei Li to edit his video unlawfully after he was discharged from the hospital. Hence, the Police performed their duties with significant prejudice.

    As such, the video evidence is the most important in this case yet the DPP could tender this doctored video evidence during trial.

    Not only the DPP had no concrete evidence, he even threatened Richard to admit on one charge if not all 3 charges will be meted out against him. The question here is, if Richard had committed the offences, why the DPP would offer such condition? Explicitly, the DPP was taking his chance hoping whether Richard would fall into his entrapment.

    Next, I would like to bring out some points based on my observations during the trial.

    The judge disallowed Richard’s lawyer to question Koh Wei Li’s past criminal records which is crucial to prove his notorious behaviour and dishonesty in relation to this case.
    Koh Wei Li gave false statements in order to frame Richard and he changed his statements subsequently resulting to the charges amendment. However, the judge allowed such flip flopping amendments. Is such wilful amendments acceptable in our judiciary system?
    Koh Wei Li waffled on all his answers during cross examination and the judge did not remind him or warned him for not answering the questions properly. It was obvious that the judge seemed to cover and sympathise him.
    Koh Wei Li twisted the story on how he doctored the video evidence. The judge allowed such evidence that lacked credibility to be admissible in court.
    I felt that our Singapore Judiciary System is unfair in which the judgement is based on the Judge without the Jury involvement.
    I felt unjust for Richard where emotional influences will affect the female Judge tremendously in her decision making. We should re-exam and reinstate the jury system in our Singapore Court.
    After that incident, Koh Wei Li continued to stalk and harassed Richard’s wife to her workplace. He also insulted Richard’s wife with vulgarities on these two occasions. Koh Wei Li went further to assault her subsequently. He was undeterred and called many government agencies to pressure and harassed Richard over trivial matters.
    As you can see, Koh Wei Li is an odd job labourer. He is very free and has nothing better to do but to create trouble for Richard.
    I would like to take this opportunities to raise the question why Richard’s genuine case was not allowed to install cctv to protect himself and his properties. In contrast, other grass root members have the right to install cctv without legitimate reasons related to crime prevention. It seemed that these grass root members are self-serving people in cahoots with the Town Council. Town Council abused authority and misused funds to benefit their grass root members instead of the residents in need. They also promised Richard to install the corridor lights but they failed to follow up and ignored their promises completely.
    Also, from my observations, our Ministers failed perform their duties professionally and often abused the Singapore Judiciary System. For instance, when I posted my comments on Richard’s case in Dr Lee Bee Wah’s Facebook page, it was deleted 3 times subsequently. This showed that our MP turned a blind eye on Richard’s case without showing concern and allowed her subordinates (Town Council) abused their authorities in Richard’s case.
    It becomes clear that this MPs are just self-serving persons. They simply are more concern over small matters in order to decorate themselves in public. In contrast, they are unable to solve residents’ issue and tend to ignore all of them.
    Please see the comments related to Richard’s case to prove that there are many residents who had the same experience like Richard to prove how bad Nee Soon Town Council is.
    I could not understand why Koh Wei Li can get away easily despite having long history of multiple Police reports lodged against him. In contrast, he did not have any concrete evidences yet Richard was arrested and charged for the crime he didn’t commit.
    As a matter of fact, Nee Soon Town Council is fully responsible for the entire saga. If not because of their perpetual double standards and prejudice, Richard won’t have to resort for justice through media.

    For those who are interested to witness the trial can come over to State Court, Court 34 on 20th, 21th and 28th July, 9:30am. I shall let you guys see for yourself the unfair and substandard of the trial proceedings in order to prove my point.

    From: Kwang
    Hp: 97627078
    10-7-2016

Leave A Response