Owner of motorcycle in C10 found

(pic removed by blog owner)
This was the Honda EX5 parked inside the C10 building last weekend during the suspected BK lobby break-in.

(pic removed by blog owner)
This is the owner of the bike

I wish to clarify that the group of Persuasive Communication students supposedly implied for the cause of the BK lobby 'break-in' last week was not what it appeared to be. I also wish to apologize if anyone or any group of people who were mislead into the 'implication' and was offended.

Yes, it was a misleading implication, but it was not a false alarm. There were 'signs' of break-ins although nothing was stolen. The door lock was damaged and we believed (me, Ming Hock and Azmi) that it was deliberated.

On Monday, 14 December the Dean called for a meeting with the relevant staff to look into the matter. The two students stated in the last post were also summoned. We found that they had abide to security procedures as mentioned earlier.

The Dean also made some improvements to the operation procedures on the running (or manning) of the building. Security measures were beefed up.

Meanwhile, the mystery surrounding the damaged lock remains. At first we thought it could be due to wear and tear as the quality of lock is questionable. But I checked with the only person who regularly use the door to go up his room - Abdul Rahman - who said the last time he used it (Friday 11 Dec), the lock was okay.

To some others, it might be a false alarm, but to me the episode was a blessing in disguise.

Berita Kampus lobby broken into - 12 Dec 09

On Friday, 11 Dec 09, two Persuasive Communication students (Rishven and Joyce Quek) came to me to ask permission to use the lecture room 109 at the C10 building on Saturday, 12 Dec 09 around 10am. I told them to get another colleague, Abdul Razak or Azmi to come open it for them instead.

As the students couldn't find Abdul Razak nor Azmi as they were not around (busy with the conference at Parkroyal Hotel, I guess), I obliged and told them to use the same procedure as was implemented all this while - that I will come and open the main door for them, and they would exit the back door and lock it before leaving.

The back door can be opened and unlocked from inside without any keys, but once latched from inside, you can only open it from outside using a key. So this is the procedure that I have agreed with the students when they wanted to stay off late during weekdays. So far there was no problem.

On Saturday at exactly 10am, I came and opened the front door for the students - Joyce Quek and about a dozen other PR students were there too. As they wanted to use the room 109, I made sure it was opened and everything in the room was intact.

At around 11am, I left C10 before checking everything was locked, including the main door, my room door and the door to both entrance to the BK Lobby. I left through the back door, as I always did - before locking the front doors and exiting through the back door to make sure the both the back exit/entrance are locked.

So, no problem. The students request was only to use room 109 - nothing else. Now why do they have to break in the BK Lobby (to relax, use the pantry and watch Astro I assume). Now, if that's what they want, why not ask my permission. I would gladly allow them as long as they keep everything tidy and not bring in any outsiders.

Now, they have broken in the BK Lobby, and the locks are broken. Who else would want to break in the BK Lobby and not steal anything?

This was the door they broke into.

Now the lock is damaged.

They wanted to look as if nothing was touched, but hook on the doors were not latched

They didn't even bother to latch on the upper lock too.

Nothing was stolen, but it is still a case of breaking and entering without permission