Another Jumps

Questions from the incident:

1) SMRT promised to keep the public informed after found severely failing to do so during the previous COI. Yet this time, we are getting dodgy and ambiguous statements such as "Due to a customer-related incident" and "Train disruption due to "one-under" incident. Is this a display of their commitment to keep to their promise?

In previous MRT incidents, commuters were not given accurate information to decide their next course of actions. Affected commuters simply waited as other uninformed continued to compound into the overcrowding. Did we not learn from mistakes?

2) We cannot confirm at this stage whether the motivation of the deceased is suicide. But do take a look at the alleged point of entry of the victim.

The boundary wall abutting the track is high enough to prevent any possible accidental entry to the track or tunnel. The wall is adequate to stop pranksters or children with the sudden impulse to do this for the thrill of it. Clearly, this isn't an accident or a prankster-gone-wrong. This is a carefully planned suicide. A man making a statement before his death. Instead of spending multiple millions on further barricading points of entries which was evidently served its purpose for the last 3 decades, shouldn't we be looking at why a young Singaporean at age 28 is crying out for attention with his likely planned death? Or is the government going to sweep this aside as another 'isolated case'?

3) Should we be continuing to throw money into barricade possible modes of access or rethink about it. No barricade system of reasonable cost is foolproof. I hope we don't have to go into electric fences. We can expect to see the tunnel of Redhill-Tiong Bahru to be heavily barricaded in weeks to come. Perhaps SMRT can prepare their contracts for the following spots as well.


  1. Me thinks commuters' and the Publics' convenience is treated less importantly than the image of SMRT, the Rail Transpory System and even the Country itself.

    It was oni months ago, that the Transport Minister Lui Tuck Yew and at the COI, convened due to frequent breakdowns and disruptions, promised to inform and update the people. But, tis Case proved that they are not honouring their PROMISE to the People.

    They got to explain.

    What do You think?


  2. Well written post. I think they shld get you as consultant to beef up security and prevent more "incidents!" I wonder why they still not aware of those points if entry? It makes one wonder what are they doing after more than 20 yrs?

  3. Let us be frank that it is near impossible to prevent suicide.
    In fact Singaporeans have yet to resort to painless way of killing themselves with charcoal, car exhaust and excessive drinking of water etc.
    However, there must be reason for people to want to kill themselves, terminal and painful sickness, financial difficulty, loveless life and fallout of relationship, joblessness etc.

    In the Case of this Incident, it was the failure to inform and update in real time to the Public that is the Crux of the Matter. The Real Issue is why was the Necessary Measure not activated as promised?


  4. Well, if the case is under investigation, it is only fair for SMRT to issue a very general statement. What statement do we expect SMRT to make? A case suicide? A person died inside the tunnel? When the case is not fully investigated, it is defintely wise for SMRT to shut up.

    Let's not see devil in everything. Wait for the police investigations.

  5. Commuters are treated as cash cows not humans in Sgp.

  6. Er, -asingaporeanson- , in Point 3) you mentioned electric fences as accident/suicide barriers, which are a BAD idea.

    It might only encourage would-be individuals to lean against them and not let go in this lifetime.