Man who hit wedding cars with metal ball bearings while shooting pigeons is jailed



[ad_1]

SINGAPORE: A man who didn’t like pigeons because of the droppings they left started shooting them with a catapult and metal ball bearings, but missed one morning and hit two cars at a wedding party at the foot of a block of households.

Samuel Tan Joo Soon, 53, was sentenced on Wednesday (September 9) to three weeks in jail for his actions.

He pleaded guilty to one count of reckless act that endangered the personal safety of others. A second count of possession of an offensive instrument in the form of a wooden catapult was taken into consideration.

The court heard that Tan purchased a wooden catapult in 2008 and used it to shoot rocks at birds nesting in the trees around his Woodlands apartment.

In 2016, Tan became upset with pigeons that nested near his apartment as they often defecated on his unit’s window sills or on the air conditioning compressor. He sprayed water on them with squirt guns to scare them away, but felt this was insufficient as the birds kept coming back, Deputy Prosecutor Chong Kee En said.

Tan replaced the rubber band on his catapult in 2017 and bought two 8mm metal ball bearing packages online. She tested them by shooting trees in Admiralty Park, with the aim of improving their accuracy.

He started shooting ball bearings with his catapult at the pigeons every time they flew towards his air conditioning compressor.

Instead, the pigeons gathered on a ledge in front of his block. Tan continued to shoot at them from her fifth floor apartment because she did not like having them in the area, but said she would shoot the pigeons that were against a wall so as not to damage property or injure anyone.

THE MORNING OF THE WEDDING

Between 6.44 a. M. And 7 a. M. On July 1, 2017, a convoy of five vehicles arrived at the service road next to Block 762 at Woodlands Avenue 6 for a “drive-in” wedding ceremony.

When they arrived, the drivers honked their horns to signal the arrival of the porter and two men parked their cars on the side of the service road.

Around this time, Tan woke up and went to get his catapult and ball bearings. She approached the window of her daughter’s room as she claimed to have noticed some pigeons on the ledge of the opposite block.

The groomsmen and bridesmaids were on the empty deck of Block 762 playing wedding door-breaking games, laughing and cheering loudly. Tan claimed that she was not irritated by this and that she could tolerate the noise they made.

At approximately 7.15am, some of the bridesmaids heard very loud “bang” sounds but couldn’t tell where they were coming from. Tan had fired ball bearings with her catapult, claiming it targeted the pigeons and propelled them into a tree.

He saw the two wedding party cars parked along the service road, about 5 meters from the tree, and knew that the group had gone to the void deck to play door-breaking games.

Despite this, he continued “to rain ball bearings on the pigeons from his window while claiming that he wanted to make the pigeons fly,” the prosecutor said.

While firing the ball bearings, Tan heard two loud “popping” sounds in a row. He paused briefly before continuing to shoot the ball bearings. It stopped only when the pigeons flew away, the court heard.

THE POLICE SEARCHES THE AREA

Two drivers at the wedding party returned to their cars at 7:30 a.m. and found holes in the rear windshields of their vehicles and dents in their cars.

One of them called the police, who searched several apartments in the neighborhood but could not find the attacker. It was only after a projectile analysis that the police reduced the number of floors from which the shooter could have fired the ball bearings and finally found Tan.

They told him about what happened and then discovered a toy airsoft tank and a package of 8mm metal ball bearings in his house. They seized these items and several other items, including the wooden catapult, and arrested Tan.

Repairs to one of the cars cost S $ 2,460, while the damage to the other car could not be determined as it was scrapped without repairs.

Mr. Chong called for a four-week jail time for Tan, saying there was a degree of risk as Tan knew that even plastic pellets hurt.

Mr. Chong dismissed Tan’s “excuse” that he had trained so well that he could hit the pigeons directly, saying that he had missed and hit two cars.

She added that the groom from the wedding party had written to the police asking for mercy on Tan’s behalf.

HIS CONCERN WAS PIGEONS: DEFENSE

Defense attorney Edmund Nathan asked for a community-based sentencing instead, saying his client had no intention of hurting anyone.

“His main concern or focus was the pigeons,” he said. “His concern was the pigeons and nothing else.”

It added that the two cars that were damaged were parked in a driveway that was not intended for parking, as opposed to three other cars that had parked in suitable spots.

“In a way, the damage to the cars was also caused by the victims themselves, although I certainly feel that whatever happens, my client was at fault,” Nathan said.

He said that Tan had compensated the victims and was willing to pay the full amount, but the other party had offered to pay only S $ 490 as they were covered by insurance.

District Judge Chay Yuen Fatt said the crime committed was “not only hasty but very dangerous.”

“The attorney emphasized in his point raised in mitigation that the defendant had verified and made sure that no one was around when he fired the catapult,” Judge Chay said.

“This argument, unfortunately, is not for starters. You shouldn’t have used a catapult to shoot ball bearings out your window in the first place, whether you were shooting pigeons or not. Let’s not forget that owning a catapult is an offense in the first place. place “.

However, it found that Tan had pleaded guilty, was a first-time offender, and had paid compensation. It allowed him to postpone the sentence for two weeks to solve family problems.

For a reckless act that endangered the personal safety of others, Tan could have been jailed for up to six months, fined up to S $ 2,500, or both.

[ad_2]