-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case title: Menyerbu, Mencari Hal, Mengeluarkan Kata-kata Kesat dll
or Tresspassing or raiding neighbours house, uttering obscenities and slander, Causing trouble, damages etc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiff: Daughter of a Building Contractor representing the whole family
Defendant: A father and 3 sons who are neighbours.
Summary of Plaintiff's testimony:
At about 5 pm (date not noted) I heard the neighbours consisting of the father and 3 sons shouting, "'whoever closed the road would be killed"
The situation looked serious so prevented my father from going out, instead watch the outside from the CCTV camera.
We saw the sons overturning the washing machines outside and shouting slanders and obscenities.
( Later on outside the court the mum gave examples of such slander:
1. That the daughter is having sex with the chairman of the local JKKK and perhaps siding with the family in the road access dispute
2. That the son should go and fuck his own mother)
We then heard the mechanical shovel being started and a threat to pull down the house if they don't come out. The shovel was later found in the river.
Their passenger Hilux was also damaged with a baseball bat and stones. The CCTV camera was then pointed upwards. Later on the police arrived to cool down the situation.
My father has spent RM16K to build a new road for the neighbours because they always passed infront of our house at dangerous speed which nearly hit one of our little kid at one time.
Defendant's response:
Admitted the incident occurred because his mum was ill and the sons want to send her to hospital but found the road blocked by the mechanical shovel, the hilux and other vehicles. I phone the police but got the same answer, that everytime it is always that neighbours name.
When I arrived home I saw 6 vehicles blocking the road so I started the mechanical shovel but it moved in all direction.
He admitted having damaged the bonnet and the glasses of the hilux.
When the police arrived, they ordered all the vehicles to be moved.
We don't know who built the new road, nor do we know for whom.
I have brought the matter to the District Officer but never get any solution. Therefore we plead not guilty to all the charges.
Site Inspection on 21st March:
Present were both parties, meaning the father and sons on one side and the contractor on the other.
Also present were the Ketua Kampung of KUAI and the chairman of the local JKKK.
From the Native Court was NC Andrew S Lidaun, two village heads from other kampungs, one court clerk, one WKAN Pius and a driver.
( and reporter of course)
Well the photographs below speaks a million words, he he he
Verdict: By NC Andrew, NC Woritus and KK Rita (unanimous of course)
Summing up:
Police report was made by the daughter as plaintiff, the DO has approved the case to be heard in the native court.
On the site visit, they found that the road is not perfect but can be used however the defendant were still using the road infront of the plaintiff's house.
The new road can be used when he asked on of the sons to drive his car along the road.
(NC Andrew did ask the sons to test the road, and their sporty car was still able to drive along the road though it was rather too close to the river bank)
The distance between the two houses is only about 100 feet.
Question: why take such drastic and hasty actions including damaging properties and using abusive language? Problems should be solved via the authorities such as police, ketua kampong and chairman of JKKK.
Raiding, attacking, trespassing, slander and taking the law into your own hands are certainly wrong. We have taken into account 25 photographs and CD recordings from the CCTV as evidences.
The court orders the road infront of the plaintiff to be closed for the sole use of the plaintiff and family. The new roads can now be used by all others since we understand that added improvements have been made since the site visit. If any defects is found, the village head shall apply for allocations for their repair.
The fathers from both families are distantly related and thus both family should follow the spirit of 1 Malaysia where both should help one another in times of needs. Instead the defendant admits the incident occurred and yet say he is NOT guilty.
The Sogit will be as follows:-
1. For trespassing and threats to attack causing extreme fear ( “noiduan sunduvan” in Kadazan) the sogit was one pig or RM500 under Clause 41.
2. For uttering slanderous remarks the sogit was also one
pig or RM500 under clause 36.
3. For throwing stone at the house directed to the security
CCTV, the sogit was RM300 under Clause 45.
4. For starting the engine while not the qualified operator
of the mechanical shovel causing it to move dangerously is all direction, the
sogit was RM300 and for damaging the bonnet, plate number and the windscreen
glass of a Hilux vehicle, another RM300
under Clause 58, all of which comes under the Native Courts Enactment 1992/1995.
The defendant is given 14 days to pay the fine.
The father representing the defendant then interrupted " Saya bayar sogit sekarang" to which the court rebuked. "kamu boleh bayar diluar mahkamah, iaitu di Pejabat."
Court was then adjourned for the last time.
PHOTOS of Site Inspection:
The sons testing the new road track with their sporty sounding car
This kampung chicken was enjoying a sandbath under the plaintiff's hilux, oblivious of all the arguments and fights amongst the humans. he he he he he he he he he he h
