Man in 30s Seen Standing Like 'Zombie' Found With Methamphetamine at Home After Release

Criticism is mounting over a botched police investigation into a man in his 30s featured in the so-called "Suwon drug video," as it was revealed that police failed to conduct a search and seizure despite emergency arresting him at the time.

While police discovered methamphetamine through a belated search and seizure some 10 days after the suspect's release, critics point out that they had already missed the golden window for the investigation.

On the 7th, the Suwon Gwonseon Police Station in Gyeonggi Province announced that it had requested a pre-trial detention warrant for a man identified as A on charges of violating the Narcotics Control Act (possession of narcotics and administration of psychotropic substances).

Securing custody of A took nearly two months due to the police's sloppy investigation.

Previously on June 22, a video went viral on social media showing a man staggering with a curved back and dangling arms near a bus stop in Gwonseon-gu, Suwon, appearing to have used fentanyl, often dubbed a "zombie drug."

Upon learning of the incident, the police launched an investigation, tracked down CCTV footage near the filming location to identify the man as A, and located him within a day.

Police then conducted a preliminary drug test on A, which yielded a positive result for methamphetamine, leading to his emergency arrest.

Although A vehemently denied the charges, police judged that the probability of him using narcotics was very high given his past criminal record for similar offenses.

However, the situation took a sharp turn the next day, June 24, when the National Forensic Service (NFS) delivered a preliminary negative result for methamphetamine from A's urine sample.

With the NFS test result—considered core evidence determining guilt in drug administration cases—coming back negative, police had no choice but to release A.

Nevertheless, upon releasing A, they collected hair samples that he had initially refused to submit voluntarily and requested a detailed analysis from the NFS, leaving room for a supplementary investigation.

While urine tests can only confirm drug use within the past week, hair analysis can trace past administration ranging from several months up to about a year, depending on the length of the hair.

Yet, it was revealed that police did not execute a search and seizure on the day of the incident, even after placing A under emergency arrest.

The Criminal Procedure Act stipulates that a search and seizure can be conducted without a warrant within 24 hours on the residence of a person placed under emergency arrest.

This emergency search is exceptionally recognized to prevent the destruction of evidence by accomplices after a suspect's arrest, but the police bypassed this investigative procedure altogether.

In this regard, critics point out that the police may have investigated with preconceived notions, blinded by A's abnormal behavior and criminal record.

A police official stated, "There were significant time constraints as we had to wrap up the request for an arrest warrant (to the prosecution) within 36 hours of the emergency arrest," adding, "We thought the allegations were already substantially substantiated because the preliminary drug test came back positive."

However, criticism is deemed unavoidable given that while they considered the matter serious enough to warrant an emergency arrest, they relied solely on the preliminary drug test results without securing direct physical evidence.

Since preliminary drug tests are frequently reported to yield inaccurate results, arrests of suspected drug users are generally decided by comprehensively considering all circumstances, including the acknowledgment of charges and whether they possess narcotics.

Particularly in A's case, considering that he vehemently denied the charges and stated that he was taking psychiatric medication, more attention should have been paid to securing his custody.

Psychiatric medications often share chemical structures similar to narcotics, which can sometimes cause false positives in preliminary drug tests.

Twelve days after releasing A, police found a small amount of methamphetamine inside a plastic bag during their first search of A's residence on July 6.

This leaves a sense of regret over what might have happened if they had conducted an emergency search and seizure simultaneously with A's emergency arrest.

Unable to re-arrest A—who had once been emergency arrested and then released—solely on charges of possessing methamphetamine, police had no choice but to continue supplementary investigations without detaining him.

Meanwhile, on the 18th of last month, the police received a reply from the NFS stating that A's hair sample tested positive for methamphetamine.

Because their investigation lagged behind and A denied the charges, the police failed to uncover the timing, location, and purchase route of the drug use, ultimately applying only charges of methamphetamine "possession" when requesting the pre-trial detention warrant for A.

In addition, police added charges of illegally administering psychotropic substances containing methylphenidate, which is primarily used to treat Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD).

A continues to deny the charges of administering methamphetamine.

Regarding the psychotropic substances, he partially admitted to the charges, claiming they were prescribed as psychiatric medication.

A police official said, "As this is an incident of high public interest, we continued our investigation to leave no suspicion, additionally confirming the positive hair analysis (for methamphetamine) and the psychotropic charges (illegal administration)."

(Photo: Capture from internet community, Yonhap News)
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.