Why was no help given to retarded molester?
-
i read with mixed feelings of sadness and bewilderment the report, 'Sentence upped for man seeking trade-off for caning' (ST, Aug 3).
Let's look at the facts of the case:
Iskandar Muhamad Nordin, an 18-yr-old with a low IQ, was sentenced to nine month's jail and 3 strokes of the cane for touching a woman's breast.
Unrepresented, he appealed, asking for a longer jail sentence in lieu of caning.
CJ obliged by extending his jail sentence to 2 years and increasing the caning to 9 strokes.
i have a few questions:
how did he come to be unrepresented? did anyone in our law-enforcement agency brief him on his rights?
did the state give him access to a lawyer who could have explained to him the consequences of a failed appeal?
being diagnosed as "educationally subnormal" and suffering from "conduct disorder" and "attention deficit hyperactive disorder", how was he deemed fit to conduct his own appeal - and, in this connection,
was a professional engaged to help in this assessment?
the court scene couldnt have been more heart-rending: there stood the mentally-disturbed and retarded iskandar, helplessly alone and hoping for mercy from a learned judge not know for his munificience. he didnt have a chance.
everyone connected with the case, except iskandar, probably saw it coming. but how could he with his troubled mind and diminished intelligence, and with absolutely no one to help him?
the eventual punishment of two years and 9 strokes was no doubt to teach iskandar "so you will remember" never to touch women's breasts again. and this supposed to be appropriate for a man with an IQ of 58?
surely, there is a more humane approach to helping wayward young people with mental disability.
but what did give the case a bad aftertaste was the remark by the CJ that iskandar probably wouldnt mind the longer jail term. considering iskandar's mental state, such a derision was quite unnecessary.
i cant help wondering if the molested woman feels that justice has finally been served.
Lee Seck Kay
the above appeared in the forum of The Straits Times, 6 august. -
The "sentence upped" have been common practise 4 a long time, probably to discourage criminals to appeal, also to "warn" the people that the law/system is above all & don't try to challenge it.
Normal singaporeans are oriedi deep under tonnes of "system", not to mention any1 who commit offence. How much help can be given to these criminals, I like to know 2.
Personally I agree he must be punished & the most CJ can reject his appeal but no need to increase the sentence. This is a bit too harsh for his case as a low IQ person or with mental disability. -
Hmm, I think you guys can continue the discussion over here. This thread's also about YPH, isn't it?
-
the CJ has to be careful when dealing with those "claim" to have low IQ and mental retard.
The molester probably knew what he is doing is wrong but do it anyway.
is 58 low? what is mentally retard? these may be blown out of proportion.
i think most of us has seen a mentally retard and a low IQ person. and we can recognise immediately. no need to take test to prove.
i have seen many so called low IQ and mental retard doing well in life and able to function just like anyone of us and earn theri $$$ as good as any one of us and among us in our evryday lives.
The CI and the rest in the court will know a really mentally retard when they talk to him in the court. -
in life ,all kinds of people commit offences, some smart, some damn very smart, some really stupid, some damn stupid. but they all get punishment.
however i agree , up his caning is too much. we are not there, maybe it could be how this guy attitude towards the system.
is he remorseful, shameful or think he did no wrong, and argue.
the later deserve bigger punishment as it concerns public safety to release unrepentant offender.
the other time CJ even upped the man who punch his wife's lawyer to ten years.
but surprise that the indian man lorry driver who dragged taxi driver 800m to death gets only 4 years. -
Society frown upon people like him.
I read in the news there was this murderer who didnt have to be executed in the USA cos he's declared insane/retarded for having an IQ of below 70 .. I think. But a few years later the prosecuters are reviewing his case to see if he should be executed or not...reason: His IQ went above 70..maybe 72? 75?
The reason is because wen he was in prison he hav regular contact n interactions with his lawyers...something he ddnt have while he was growing up. I mean..wth.. they just kept him alive, educate him just to be executed. -
The IQ thing is very unreliable.
some people in singapore failed so badly in primary six but,
can be no.1 4D and football runner, the brain super powerful. can remember how much and when. can even calculate the interest in his head.
even NS so blur become do nothing in camp except sleep grass.
just look around hawkers centres, and every where. ordinary people but damn smart, can memorise 4D , bet football and so on. even horse also can analyse.
take IQ test , immediately diagnose stupid. -
do a person needs to be educated inorder to take IQ test.
some people just hate books and words. but strong in energy.
our top ex footballer fandi is an example, never was into books, but made singapore proud in football and also earns himself good money. -
Beacuse we are selfish stingy bastards even though we portray ourselves not to be.
-
In the first place, was Fandi Ahmed educated @ MINDS?Originally posted by AF2005:our top ex footballer fandi is an example, never was into books, but made singapore proud in football and also earns himself good money. -
IQ tests have a mean of 100 and standard deviation of 15.Originally posted by AF2005:the CJ has to be careful when dealing with those "claim" to have low IQ and mental retard.
The molester probably knew what he is doing is wrong but do it anyway.
is 58 low? what is mentally retard? these may be blown out of proportion.
i think most of us has seen a mentally retard and a low IQ person. and we can recognise immediately. no need to take test to prove.
i have seen many so called low IQ and mental retard doing well in life and able to function just like anyone of us and earn theri $$$ as good as any one of us and among us in our evryday lives.
The CI and the rest in the court will know a really mentally retard when they talk to him in the court.
If someone scored 58, he's effectively 3 standard deviation away from the mean.
IQ is distributed on a normal curve (a bell shaped curve). There are only 1% of the population falling under the 2 extreme ends (extremely intelligent/ extremely retarded). Hence, he's only more intelligent that only 0.5% of the overall population.
The next important question is "Is this IQ test taken independently?" It's easier to fake bad than to fake good on an IQ test. If he had taken this IQ test much earlier before the court case, this piece of information should be used to send him to IMH, under the principle that such a person should not be able to function properly in the real world and should require help from the mental professionals.
But you ask "Is IQ test a reflection of acedemic performance?" No, even though academic achievement might slightly influence how a person perform in a test. An IQ test usually has 2 components to it. A numerical components and a verbal components. For both components, there are many different tests falling under these categories. Most of these tests would be written in a language as simple as possible to ensure that language would play a small part in determining the overall intelligence. These tests tried to examine an individual's understanding of the concepts behind the language.
But last and most important question of all. WHY IS HE NOT REPRESENTED? Any psychological undergraduate will be able to help CJ to understand the IQ scores. Unless CJ himself is so sure that he could understand the IQ scores by himself. Something wrong with our legal system here? -
hahahahahaha I hope all stupid people get caned. dont you just hate them.
-
because he's a fucking molester and should be whipped regardless of his IQ level.. i bet you if your gf was the one who got touched by him you'd be shouting to have him get his nuts chopped off.
-
i feel the original sentence is enough.
need not upped it just because he appealed. -
Originally posted by earthlings73:
The criminal legal aid scheme applies only if you have been charged in Court for an offence for which you do not admit to and cannot afford to pay a lawyer to help you fight the case. In this case, legal aid will probably not apply; so presumably he and his family couldn't afford a lawyer.
But last and most important question of all. [b]WHY IS HE NOT REPRESENTED? Any psychological undergraduate will be able to help CJ to understand the IQ scores. Unless CJ himself is so sure that he could understand the IQ scores by himself. Something wrong with our legal system here?
[/b]
This is an appeal and appeals are only allowed on point of law. The defendant's case seems to be that the original sentence was excessive but it clearly wasn't if you compare it with judgments in previous cases. The CJ's policy has always been to up the sentence if you appeal for no valid reasons.
The defence of diminished responsibility is only operative in homicide cases, so that's not applicable here. Is the low IQ sufficient as a mitigating factor? If one can successfully use low IQ as a mitigating factor in a criminal case, the public naturally would want greater protection from all persons with a low IQ. Should they all be institutionalized like psychopaths then? -
i think most of you are missing the point. the intellectually challenged person was guilty and rightly punished. the question was why wasn't he represented or properly advised. period...
-
ya i agreed that stupid ppl like CJ should be caned...never heard of him making any correct judgement at all.. cb kia...sighz... too much power in the hand of one stupid old manOriginally posted by the.raven:hahahahahaha I hope all stupid people get caned. dont you just hate them.
seriously.. who he think he is?? GOD? saint??? never make a mistake b4???????????????? -
Well said...tell molester dun act stupid act blurOriginally posted by AF2005:The IQ thing is very unreliable.
some people in singapore failed so badly in primary six but,
can be no.1 4D and football runner, the brain super powerful. can remember how much and when. can even calculate the interest in his head.
even NS so blur become do nothing in camp except sleep grass.
just look around hawkers centres, and every where. ordinary people but damn smart, can memorise 4D , bet football and so on. even horse also can analyse.
take IQ test , immediately diagnose stupid.
-
hmmm and the CJ does it again!
Ass-hole! -
Taken from wikipedia:Originally posted by oxford mushroom:The criminal legal aid scheme applies only if you have been charged in Court for an offence for which you do not admit to and cannot afford to pay a lawyer to help you fight the case. In this case, legal aid will probably not apply; so presumably he and his family couldn't afford a lawyer.
This is an appeal and appeals are only allowed on point of law. The defendant's case seems to be that the original sentence was excessive but it clearly wasn't if you compare it with judgments in previous cases. The CJ's policy has always been to up the sentence if you appeal for no valid reasons.
The defence of diminished responsibility is only operative in homicide cases, so that's not applicable here. Is the low IQ sufficient as a mitigating factor? If one can successfully use low IQ as a mitigating factor in a criminal case, the public naturally would want greater protection from all persons with a low IQ. Should they all be institutionalized like psychopaths then?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_retardation
The limitations of cognitive function will cause a child to learn and develop more slowly than a typical child. Children may take longer to learn to speak, walk, and take care of their personal needs such as dressing or eating. They will have trouble learning in school. Learning will take them longer, require more repetition, and there may be some things they cannot learn. The extent of the limits of learning is a function of the severity of the disability.
There are three criteria before a person is considered to have a developmental disability: an IQ below 70, significant limitations in two or more areas of adaptive behavior (i.e., ability to function at age level in an ordinary environment), and evidence that the limitations became apparent in childhood. Down syndrome, fetal alcohol syndrome and fragile X are the three most common inborn causes.
In fact, I believe the severly retards are institutionalised. But the bigger problem is whether this ELITIST society of ours are doing enough to take care of those less fortunate.
But of course, his score of 58 on the IQ test need to be verified to be accurate. If he's really retarded, what he needs is help, not punishment. -
He was punished, no doubt. But was justice served? Was he 'rightly punished'? How a person is punished is based on whether the sentence correlates to the crime committed. This is where the book is thrown.Originally posted by countdracula:i think most of you are missing the point. the intellectually challenged person was guilty and rightly punished. the question was why wasn't he represented or properly advised. period...
About the representation and proper conseiling, i'm waiting with breathless anticipation for the judiciary's answer.
Perhaps CJ might take it as a personal affront and do the honours himself? -
i was wondering can IQ 58 know that his sentence is too much or too little. but he sure knows he has right to appeal. and understood why he is arrested and charge in court. so does he need advice?
not really,
then again, if he has advised , and was advised to appeal , then how, even more severed punishment.
i think if he is so blur cannot understand what he did wrong by touching women breasts and why he is being punished, the police has a duty that he been instituitionlise if not he may go around touching every women he sees or meet and cannot be punished. the victim could be anyone we know.
I believe the police would have done all background checks to determine his behaviour from childhood to current age. -
He does not know since he's not train in Law.Originally posted by AF2005:i was wondering can IQ 58 know that his sentence is too much or too little. but he sure knows he has right to appeal. and understood why he is arrested and charge in court. so does he need advice?
not really,
then again, if he has advised , and was advised to appeal , then how, even more severed punishment.
i think if he is so blur cannot understand what he did wrong by touching women breasts and why he is being punished, the police has a duty that he been instituitionlise if not he may go around touching every women he sees or meet and cannot be punished. the victim could be anyone we know.
I believe the police would have done all background checks to determine his behaviour from childhood to current age.
But then, to reverse the question the other way, does CJ or police knows the implication of someone with a score of 58 on a IQ test. Shouldnt a psychologist be helping to provide Informed Decision?
Btw, I felt pity for him, just based on the report shared by dragg. He's as much a victim of this elitist society as the victim he molested. -
If people are truly retarded , their mind wouldn't be perverted enough to molest others...
anyone agree? -
thats why investigation always include background check. They will interview those he knew.Originally posted by SMAPLionHeart:If people are truly retarded , their mind wouldn't be perverted enough to molest others...
anyone agree?
or unless the police did not do background check.
very simply with IQ 58, how much can a person know and engage in conversation with others. is he able to talk dirty with others and so on?
to be exact with IQ 58, he will not be able to even think about asking for an appeal.
The judges and police had conversation or interrogation and probably his family members were there throughout the case so they know his ability and situation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_retardation says 50 to 69 is mild mental retardation.
but offence still carries some punishment , if not all the big papaya ladies will be punching back at any man that stare their chest.