What happened to Singapore? Are we getting lawless?

[westman]

We have heard enough juicy comical court hearings all over the world but Sg...

However, the recent two days has been entertaining enough to watch the soap opera right in Singapore involving Ravi and LSS.....If you have been following non-MSM news reporting with insider news... I've never expect Sungapore to be this lawless or righteous (depending which camp you support) right inside the court chamber!

It involve doctor, AGC, LSS, auntie, KJ, judges, lawyers, PM, interpretation of constitution, election etc..

Statement was issued but then retracted, witness detailing what was happened, MSM barely touch on surface without giving much detail

This soap opera very juicy...

故事剧情精彩过无间道！

[howgozit]

More drama than Ch8 TV...

LSS over-reacted, jumped the gun.

But then this Ravi character also one kind.... chasing after inconsequential matters wasting court's time and taxpayer's money... for his own good he should get some help... normal people don't barge into temples or mosques and make troble for no reason.

[howgozit]

deleted--- double post

[Regulators]

Ravi has always been against the death penalty and with the recent changes in the death penalty law against drug offenses, he is making headway in his fight against death penalty. Initially I find the plaintiff a bit bo liao to challenge pm, but if it is a constitutional matter, it needs to be addressed coz there are future elections and by elections to come.

More drama than Ch8 TV...

LSS over-reacted, jumped the gun.

But then this Ravi character also one kind.... chasing after inconsequential matters wasting court's time and taxpayer's money... for his own good he should get some help... normal people don't barge into temples or mosques and make troble for no reason.

[howgozit]

I don't think you can credit the recent death penalty laxation to Ravi.

Challenging the PM is one thing, but going to the temple to stir up trouble for no reason is another matter.

I would think Ravi does need some help

Ravi has always been against the death penalty and with the recent changes in the death penalty law against drug offenses, he is making headway in his fight against death penalty. Initially I find the plaintiff a bit bo liao to challenge pm, but if it is a constitutional matter, it needs to be addressed coz there are future elections and by elections to come.

[Regulators]

So are you saying that woffles is not suited to be a surgeon just because he commits a traffic violation? Which is more serious, killing someone on the road or creating a scene at a temple?

I don't think you can credit the recent death penalty laxation to Ravi.

Challenging the PM is one thing, but going to the temple to stir up trouble for no reason is another matter.

I would think Ravi does need some help

[howgozit]

All I am saying is that Ravi clearly has a psychiatric issue... he has a recorded history of this and his own friends themselves think so too. His outbursts are indicative that this issue is not fully under control.

If he has a cause and something as high profile as what he is doing, it would be more prudent if he seeks some help. He is damaging his own credibility. If you are rooting for him and supporting his cause, you would want him to be more stable wouldn't you?

I don't understand how the Woffles case is similar to this case...

So are you saying that woffles is not suited to be a surgeon just because he commits a traffic violation? Which is more serious, killing someone on the road or creating a scene at a temple?

[Regulators]

I think mental health is sometimes very subjective. Ppl that show their frustration are sometimes more sane than those who do not show. It is not uncommon for ppl to have a delinquent side to them, even ppl high up in society, so one has to segregate.

All I am saying is that Ravi clearly has a psychiatric issue... he has a recorded history of this and his own friends themselves think so too. His outbursts are indicative that this issue is not fully under control.

If he has a cause and something as high profile as what he is doing, it would be more prudent if he seeks some help. He is damaging his own credibility. If you are rooting for him and supporting his cause, you would want him to be more stable wouldn't you?

I don't understand how the Woffles case is similar to this case...

[Regulators]

Moreover, just to illustrate my point, are you going to say that teachers should never use the f word in their lives and should never curse and swear n basically be an angel otherwise they are not fit to teach? I think just becoz news of somebody's wrongdoing goes public, the public tend to take the moral high ground and judge the person like they are saints. Also to me, smokers are all insane, does that really make them insane to the community of smokers?

All I am saying is that Ravi clearly has a psychiatric issue... he has a recorded history of this and his own friends themselves think so too. His outbursts are indicative that this issue is not fully under control.

If he has a cause and something as high profile as what he is doing, it would be more prudent if he seeks some help. He is damaging his own credibility. If you are rooting for him and supporting his cause, you would want him to be more stable wouldn't you?

I don't understand how the Woffles case is similar to this case...

[westman]

Relax guys.. Chill...

Make love, no war!

[howgozit]

What a person does in their private lives is none of anybody's business, whether they use the F- word, smoke, engage in extra-marital affairs
or even find prostitutes as long as they do not hurt anybody else in the process. These things are ongoing as we write in this forum. As long as nobody finds out and since most of us are not public figures, why would the media even be interested.

It is common sense that when Ravi decided to take on this case, it is clear he is thrusting himself into the limelight. In fact, that is the intention is it not? To make it high profile to get notice of the public.

If so, then it is very poor judgement of him to create a fracas the way he did because it is almost certain the media will bite onto it and possibly blow it out of proportion.

Unless of course, he couldn't help it... if he couldn't help it, then it is highly possible that he does have a psychiatric problem. The problem must be bad enough for his doctor(of his own choosing) which he went to consult on the advice of his (own) friends to take the drastic action of reporting him to the LSS.

Ravi would be better off if he had controlled his condition a bit better, don't you think? Like take medication...etc. It would make him more credible, better fight his cause, don't you think?

Anyway, you seem very worked up about this... so I apologise if you feel offended, but I think you are allowing your anti-government sentiment to over-ride your logic.

Moreover, just to illustrate my point, are you going to say that teachers should never use the f word in their lives and should never curse and swear n basically be an angel otherwise they are not fit to teach? I think just becoz news of somebody's wrongdoing goes public, the public tend to take the moral high ground and judge the person like they are saints. Also to me, smokers are all insane, does that really make them insane to the community of smokers?

[august]

So are you saying that woffles is not suited to be a surgeon just because he commits a traffic violation? Which is more serious, killing someone on the road or creating a scene at a temple?

perverting the course of justice is more dangerous.

[Regulators]

i am not worked up, just airing my views for the sake of discussion. I am definitely not condoning ravi's actions at the temple, but i still think he is a lawyer with a heart and serves as a voice for the minority. In fact a lot of work he does is pro bono, and if he is out for money, he would not have taken up those cases. i don't think singaporeans generally give a shit about constitutional matters and at least i am glad he and the cleaner lady cares, coz if you think about it, it is really something very fundamental. If ravi is really not of a sound mind, i do not think he would in the first place be representing a client in such a complicated area of the law, which is not as clear cut as it seems. There seems to be a reason behind why the media would want to report him in this light and who controls the media?

What a person does in their private lives is none of anybody's business, whether they use the F- word, smoke, engage in extra-marital affairs
or even find prostitutes as long as they do not hurt anybody else in the process. These things are ongoing as we write in this forum. As long as nobody finds out and since most of us are not public figures, why would the media even be interested.

It is common sense that when Ravi decided to take on this case, it is clear he is thrusting himself into the limelight. In fact, that is the intention is it not? To make it high profile to get notice of the public.

If so, then it is very poor judgement of him to create a fracas the way he did because it is almost certain the media will bite onto it and possibly blow it out of proportion.

Unless of course, he couldn't help it... if he couldn't help it, then it is highly possible that he does have a psychiatric problem. The problem must be bad enough for his doctor(of his own choosing) which he went to consult on the advice of his (own) friends to take the drastic action of reporting him to the LSS.

Ravi would be better off if he had controlled his condition a bit better, don't you think? Like take medication...etc. It would make him more credible, better fight his cause, don't you think?

Anyway, you seem very worked up about this... so I apologise if you feel offended, but I think you are allowing your anti-government sentiment to over-ride your logic.

[Regulators]

the powers of the pm has to be clearly defined, this is not perverting the course of justice, this is an important aspect of constitutional law governing the pm's powers. no doubt nobody has lost anything to provoke such a case, but ravi and the cleaner are standing at the forefront to define the boundaries of the pm's freedom to act under constitutional law. If you ask me, this is such a fundamental aspect that affects every singaporean that i believe whethr or not a by-election is over, this question still has to be raised.

perverting the course of justice is more dangerous.

[Regulators]

hear from the man himself better

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJjqx...layer_embedded

What a person does in their private lives is none of anybody's business, whether they use the F- word, smoke, engage in extra-marital affairs
or even find prostitutes as long as they do not hurt anybody else in the process. These things are ongoing as we write in this forum. As long as nobody finds out and since most of us are not public figures, why would the media even be interested.

It is common sense that when Ravi decided to take on this case, it is clear he is thrusting himself into the limelight. In fact, that is the intention is it not? To make it high profile to get notice of the public.

If so, then it is very poor judgement of him to create a fracas the way he did because it is almost certain the media will bite onto it and possibly blow it out of proportion.

Unless of course, he couldn't help it... if he couldn't help it, then it is highly possible that he does have a psychiatric problem. The problem must be bad enough for his doctor(of his own choosing) which he went to consult on the advice of his (own) friends to take the drastic action of reporting him to the LSS.

Ravi would be better off if he had controlled his condition a bit better, don't you think? Like take medication...etc. It would make him more credible, better fight his cause, don't you think?

Anyway, you seem very worked up about this... so I apologise if you feel offended, but I think you are allowing your anti-government sentiment to over-ride your logic.

[howgozit]

I agree with this point of view and Ravi certainly deserves credit for his courage to fight the cause and what he believes in.

I expect that he would be competent in law as any certified lawyer would be. But mental state is another thing. There are many professionals with all kinds of mental disorders in varying degrees of severity... mental illness is just another kind of illness.. just needs to be properly treated to control it.

Btw, do you really think the cleaner lady (on her own) has awareness of constitutional issues? ....Just thinking aloud..

i am not worked up, just airing my views for the sake of discussion. I am definitely not condoning ravi's actions at the temple, but i still think he is a lawyer with a heart and serves as a voice for the minority. In fact a lot of work he does is pro bono, and if he is out for money, he would not have taken up those cases. i don't think singaporeans generally give a shit about constitutional matters and at least i am glad he and the cleaner lady cares, coz if you think about it, it is really something very fundamental. If ravi is really not of a sound mind, i do not think he would in the first place be representing a client in such a complicated area of the law, which is not as clear cut as it seems. There seems to be a reason behind why the media would want to report him in this light and who controls the media?

[teddybear]

Is "persuading" (regardless of whatever ways) somebody (who may happen to be my employee or subordinate) to take the blame for my crime or after I breaking the law and then keeping quiet considered perverting the course of justice?

Usually, after I committed a traffic offence, I will receive a letter from traffic police. I am required to declare whether I am the driver or furnish the information of the person who was driving my car at that time. If I keep quiet, don't return the letter as requested by the traffic police and quietly persuade somebody to to go the traffic police and declare that he is the driver and the traffic police didn't get any signed declaration from me (and they didn't bother as in Wu's case (from what I read since he didn't give any statement to the police)), means I am not perverting the course of justice since I didn't give any under-taking / statement to the traffic police?

Food for thoughts on the above.

perverting the course of justice is more dangerous.

[Regulators]

understand where you are coming from, but it is not for us to speculate. Just like when we break the law, we can't plead ignorance no matter how complicated the law is, can we? i may be wrong, but i think being in the opposition ward, the people would be well trained in certain aspects of constitutional law that other constituencies tend to take for granted lol

I agree with this point of view and Ravi certainly deserves credit for his courage to fight the cause and what he believes in.

I expect that he would be competent in law as any certified lawyer would be. But mental state is another thing. There are many professionals with all kinds of mental disorders in varying degrees of severity... mental illness is just another kind of illness.. just needs to be properly treated to control it.

Btw, do you really think the cleaner lady (on her own) has awareness of constitutional issues? ....Just thinking aloud..

[gfoo]

wouldn't mind Lawless-ness

[august]

Is "persuading" (regardless of whatever ways) somebody (who may happen to be my employee or subordinate) to take the blame for my crime or after I breaking the law and then keeping quiet considered perverting the course of justice?

yes it is.

[howgozit]

yes it is.

Ok... I am not defending Woffles but there is more than meets the eye in his case. I am afraid I can't divulge much as it is in the hands of the police.

It has something to do with a criminal case involving a trusted employee embezzling huge sums of money on several occasions from his clinic some years ago.

Remember, this driving incident happened in 2005/6... how would such a charge materialise when the old employee and Woffles himself kept quiet about it

Like I said, there is more than meets the eye in this incident. Don't be too quick to judge or witch hunt.

Btw, the offence was carried out before the penal code tightening in 2008. Prior to 2008, this was a Road Traffic offence rather than a penal offence.

[teddybear]

Prior to 2008, if a person perverts the cause of justice related to a traffic offence, does it mean he also can be fined only?

Why the traffic police didn't find anything strange about car owner not wanting to make any statement and return the form he is supposed to sign and declare who drive the car and then suddenly somebody just jump out to so eagerly announce that he is the culprit driver who committed the traffic offence especially when he happen to be an employee of the person whose rice bowl depend on that person? Did they try to extract any statement after the person blow the whistle to see whether he is willing to tell the truth? Whose fault?

Ok... I am not defending Woffles but there is more than meets the eye in his case. I am afraid I can't divulge much as it is in the hands of the police.

It has something to do with a criminal case involving a trusted employee embezzling huge sums of money on several occasions from his clinic some years ago.

Remember, this driving incident happened in 2005/6... how would such a charge materialise when the old employee and Woffles himself kept quiet about it

Like I said, there is more than meets the eye in this incident. Don't be too quick to judge or witch hunt.

Btw, the offence was carried out before the penal code tightening in 2008. Prior to 2008, this was a Road Traffic offence rather than a penal offence.

[maisonjai]

http://justwoman.asiaone.com/print/Just%2BWoman/News/Women%2BIn%2BThe%2BNews/Story/A1Story20080917-88285.html

'Woffles is always, to some, eccentric. But to me, he is just different,' she says. 'He is so full of energy that you feel you are constantly being challenged. Actually, I kind of like challenges.'

Was it intimidating marrying a former Tatler's Most Eligible Bachelor, whose relatives include the late President Ong Teng Cheong and Ms Tina Tan-Leo, owner of high-end boutique The Link?

She worked as the press secretary for the then-Minister for Health George Yeo, and at Singapore General Hospital and the National Medical Research Council before joining A*Star in 2003.

Has she ever regretted not doing clinical work?

'No. What I do is rewarding as you really have an impact on health care in the country. On top of it, you have better working hours,' she says.

Law Minister explains Woffles Wu sentencing
Jun 17, 2012

......As for why it took six years for Dr Wu to be prosecuted, Mr Shanmugam said the police were unaware of the offences at that time.

成功的男人背后都有一个女人 ....wah my chinese improving. haha

[Regulators]

A pastor got two weeks jail term just for breaching the 3/4 tank rule and woffles got away with $1000 for getting someone to take the rap for a traffic offence. Which is more serious, the 3/4 tank rule or impeding the course of justice by getting someone to take the rap?

[gn108]

Woffles is no Paster ...and with Kong Hee...pasters are the hunted.
Comestic surgeons are still worshipped esp with by the public-facing segements of society...

A pastor got two weeks jail term just for breaching the 3/4 tank rule and woffles got away with $1000 for getting someone to take the rap for a traffic offence. Which is more serious, the 3/4 tank rule or impeding the course of justice by getting someone to take the rap?

[Regulators]

we are talking about offense and punishment, not occupation.

Woffles is no Paster ...and with Kong Hee...pasters are the hunted.
Comestic surgeons are still worshipped esp with by the public-facing segements of society...

[hopeful]

A pastor got two weeks jail term just for breaching the 3/4 tank rule and woffles got away with $1000 for getting someone to take the rap for a traffic offence. Which is more serious, the 3/4 tank rule or impeding the course of justice by getting someone to take the rap?

3/4 tank rule more serious la.
government losing tax revenue from oil companies.


because no matter who drive, still kena sentence and fined. whether person A or person B kena fined and/or jailed, doesnt matter as long as govt earn money from the offence committed.

And why do you say impede he impede the course of justice.
didnt you know that the old man take the keys without permission?
just like this case
http://singaporeseen.stomp.com.sg/st...er_jailed.html
"At 1am on Dec 6, See, his friend Sow Zhi Hao, 23, and Mr Heng had met in the void deck of See’s block in Tampines Street 11 for alcoholic drinks and to chat. Mr Heng drove there in the car.

About 31/2 hours later, he felt that he had had too much to drink and decided against driving. He left the void deck with his wallet and house keys but accidentally left the key to the car in a bag, which was how See came to have it."

so you see, that's how old man can have the keys to the car.
too bad woffles story break out first before this, if not, can use this story. how come AG and woffles have no imagination?

if woffles jailed, government lose a lot of income tax and more importantly the elite have to wait long long for their plastic surgery.
if old man kena jailed, government lose very little income tax.

[gn108]

Bro, you get it ...

3/4 tank rule more serious la.
government losing tax revenue from oil companies.

if woffles jailed, government lose a lot of income tax and more importantly the elite have to wait long long for their plastic surgery.
if old man kena jailed, government lose very little income tax.

[gn108]

I wasn't talking of occupation ...more of status.

High status can committ offence but punishment is limited to fine (which you can afford). Reason: As a business owner, you are more valuable to society.

So why talk abt offence and punishment? Wrong tree...

we are talking about offense and punishment, not occupation.

[hopeful]

I wasn't talking of occupation ...more of status.

High status can committ offence but punishment is limited to fine (which you can afford). Reason: As a business owner, you are more valuable to society.

So why talk abt offence and punishment? Wrong tree...

1) ya, just look at south korea. chaebol owners very rarely go to jail.
2) just look at reservist system. very few high salary workers ever got called up for reservist right?