An image for illustrative purposes [123RF]
An image for illustrative purposes [123RF]

Attention is turning to whether prosecutors will launch a direct investigation into a police officer who smashed his son's phone — the key piece of evidence — after the son came under police investigation for allegedly attempting to secretly film a female teacher.

Prosecutors, who hold direct investigative authority over police misconduct cases, had already opened a probe into alleged collusion between the father of convicted killer Jang Yun-gi (23) and an investigative team at the Gwangju Gwangsan Police Station.

According to Yonhap, the Jeonju District Prosecutors Office is reviewing whether to indict an 18-year-old suspect, identified only as A, whose case police forwarded last month on charges of illegal filming using a camera or similar device.

A, a high school student, is accused of attempting to secretly film part of his homeroom teacher's body using his phone in May.

The teacher noticed, confronted A and filed a police complaint. A's father, a police inspector identified only as B, was also notified.

Inspector B then smashed the phone — believed to be the device used in the alleged offense — while questioning his son about the incident.

The North Jeolla Province Police Agency detected signs that Inspector B and his spouse had destroyed evidence and has been conducting a search and seizure at their home as part of an ongoing investigation.

Even if the police investigation proceeds, Inspector B is unlikely to face punishment. A legal provision exempts family members from criminal liability for concealing a suspect or destroying evidence on their behalf.

Inspector B, an active-duty officer who appears to be aware of this, posted on the police internal network: "I couldn't help but laugh when I saw the search warrant written as if they could punish me for finding someone who instructed my child's accomplice and the destruction of evidence. Even if I did destroy evidence, this is not something I can be punished for — I feel deeply wronged and angry that I'm being investigated in the same breath as cases like Cho Ju-bin or Jang Yun-gi."

Many fellow officers, however, criticized the remarks as inappropriate.

The post also said, "I sincerely hope that going forward, as police investigative authority expands, you will pay attention to the human rights of suspects and become fair and just officers — tough on the powerful and kind to the vulnerable."

Police said they plan to focus their investigation on whether Inspector B destroyed the evidence on the advice of colleagues and whether there was any organized collusion within certain units.

A police official said, "There is a family exemption for evidence destruction, but we can still refer the case for prosecution, so we will continue the investigation."

Prosecutors said they are not currently considering a direct investigation into the case but are examining whether there were any deficiencies in the police investigation of A's case before indictment.

The remarks were also seen as drawing a distinction between the Jang Yun-gi case — in which police are suspected of having systematically covered up sex crime allegations — and the Inspector B case involving the destruction of his son's evidence.

A prosecutors official said only, "The case is currently under investigation, so it is difficult to disclose specific details."


husn7@heraldcorp.com